Talk:Hathor/Archive 1

Archive 1

Oversimplification

This entire sentence is not only uncited but also over simplifies the diversity of Neopaganism: "Some Neo-Pagans have recently adopted Hathor as a goddess." Now if it had mentioned Kemetic reconstructionism, or something similar with cited sources maybe it wouldn't be such a problem. Xuchilbara 02:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Would someone kindly provide a pronunciation of Hathor? Thanks! Robert K S 05:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

According to her Encyclopedia Mythica entry, it's "hat'hor". --Redeagle688 00:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

In Tutenstein and Stargate SG-1 the name is pronounced "Hah-Thor (Hah, like in Ha-ha, and Thor, like in the Norse god).Tutthoth-Ankhre (talk) 20:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it is pronounced Hat-Hor. It means "House (that is wife or family) of Horus". --75.181.67.130 (talk) 15:26, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Mining Music?

It says that Hathor is the goddess of "love, beauty, motherhood, foreign lands, mining music." Is she really the goddess of "Mining Music?" Or is it supposed to be "mining, and music"? --Brainhelljr (talk) 04:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Redirect?

Meh redirects here. Is that needed? DemonThing 06:34, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, its a name she was known under. It is one of the various transliterations of the various spellings of the Egyptian word for beloved. --Victim of signature fascism 22:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

What about the 'Meh' used as an interjection? pixels 18:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Isn't this considered vandalism?

(This has made certain readers believe that the sun god was extremley perverted, which may be true)

under Fertility Goddess.

I removed "She was beautiful i miss her vagina around my cock" from the article. This was posted from IP 76.0.31.207. This is a clear case of Vandalism. --Damnedmage 11:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Jul 12 2008 Undid a vandalism edit originating from 76.179.213.201. Same IP looked like as a prior in 2007 reverted by cluebot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.183.81 (talk) 15:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Hathor in article

Hi I would like to use certain parts of this Hathor article in an article that possibly will be published in an academic bulletin. I used certain parts, but I also found out other sources on which this article is based in Wikipedia (for instance Bleeker 1973: Hathor and Thoth and Pinch 1993: Vorive offerings to Hathor.

Should I refer to Wikipedia beside my own "official" references?

Wallis

Questionable statement

"Adherents of Ganesh at his Dublin shrine firmly believe Hathor to be the elephant god's arch enemy." Not only is this unsourced, but the whole underlying idea of it, considering that Ganesh is a Hindu god, makes me wonder if it should be treated as outright vandalism. --Redeagle688 00:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I removed a part that said that as a goddess of fertility she "readily strips naked", which seems totally innapropiate and might have come from someone who laughs nervously at the mention of "fertility".

In the article it states that Horus was belived to be the son of Hathor. In truth he was the son of Isis. This can be attribued to Hathor being idendfied with Nephysis, who was the twin sister of Isis, but is still not technically true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eternalsiara (talk • contribs) 22:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Photos

Some photo's of Hathor temple if you are interested in using them Merlin-UK 18:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• 
  Temple of Hathor,Dendera
• 
  Temple of Hathor, Dendera
• 
  Temple of Hathor, Dendera
• 
  Temple of Hathor, Dendera
• 
  Temple of Hathor, Dendera
• 
  Temple of Hathor, Dendera
• 
  Temple of Hathor, Dendera
• 
  Bes at the Temple of Hathor, Dendera

Very nicely composed article

The way this article is constructed is really nice.

Best regards, Phalanx Pursos11:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hathor in popular culture

Eternal X, one of the biggest Marathon's total conversions to date, has a major "goddess-like" AI character that goes by the name of Hathor. Is such reference acceptable for this article?

JohnnyTheWolf (talk) 18:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I too was wondering why there isn't a popular culture section on this page, since she does appear in a number of places in computer games, TV shows etc. --Dr DBW (talk) 21:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Another example is an episode of Stargate SG-1 --MikeZ (talk) 21:02, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

She with two faces

I think that "She with two faces" refers to Hathor's other form, Sekhmet. Two faces would mean two personalitys, the duel "faces" of love a creation, and terror and destruction. But is this original reasaerch? Tutthoth-Ankhre (talk) 16:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal

Removed this

"In time, more evidence may be uncovered, but it is a strong enough theory that it should be mentioned here. Archaeologist Marija Gimbutas is an important pioneer in the advances made in understanding history of matriarchal cultures."

Because it doesn't add to the article and isn't in an encycleopedic tone.--24.255.171.220 (talk) 20:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hathor, Venus and Aphrodite

There is a line in the opening section which states: "The Ancient Greeks identified Hathor with the goddess Aphrodite, while in Roman mythology she corresponds to Venus." Although this is cited, it raises the general problem of inconsistency across all these related pages. For example, take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar or the same for Inanna.

There is (larger) widespread agreement that the Ancient Greeks and Romans identified Aphrodite and Venus with Ishtar and Inanna. But the assertion that Hathor is connected to them too just doesn't hold, even if cited. I'll explain: Hathor is the daughter of Ra, who is identified with Marduk. Marduk is the son of Enki. His half brother in Enlil, whose son is Nanna, who's daughter is... Inanna. So Hathor cannot be the same person as Inanna. They are cousins at best.

This whole gambit of connecting assorted Pantheons is complicated at best, but we have to be careful about this. My suggestion (as yet not enacted) is to qualify the assertion above that Hathor was identified with these two. Maybe just to say 'seems to have been sometimes identified with..., although there are discrepancies (see Inanna and Ishtar)."

Thoughts? Guy.shrimpton (talk) 15:11, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

(For future reference, new sections should be started at the bottom.) Greco–Roman syncretism was complicated and is still not fully understood. I don't know of any Greek or Roman thinkers who tried to systematically related each god from their pantheon with one from every other pantheon they knew. Gods from different pantheons could be linked because they shared some traits, even if other traits didn't jibe. And individual thinkers could disagree on which gods matched each other. Herodotus equated Hathor with Aphrodite, whereas a couple of centuries later, it was more common to equate Isis with Aphrodite. (Source: Stephanie Budin, "A Reconsideration of the Aphrodite-Ashtart Syncretism" Numen 51 (2), 2004, p. 127.) There's no reason to bring the Mesopotamian pantheon into it; I don't know that the Greeks ever did.

I added "sometimes" to the sentence. I wouldn't bring up Inanna and Ishtar, because it's original research. Of course, this article should explain the complications in more detail, and I hope to improve it sometime this year, but I have a big queue of other obligations first. A. Parrot (talk) 22:59, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Hathor

I heard about a Hathor in the Bible. Ancient Man of before the pyramids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talanum (talk • contribs) 19:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Upcoming rewrite

I've been working on a rewrite of this article, similar to the one I made to Isis last December, for the past few years. The rewritten version would cover all the points now mentioned in the article, as well as many others, but it would do so in a more organized and coherent way and with much better sourcing. I'm now close to completing it, but at the moment I'm keeping it offline because some sections of it are still messy. In the past I've generally rewritten articles wholesale when I wanted to treat their topics thoroughly. That's partly because articles on ancient Egyptian religion are usually very poor and disorganized, and partly because I'm not mentally well suited to rewriting an entire article piecemeal. However, the practice of wholesale rewriting recently came under scrutiny because of a controversy at FAC. One of the pieces of advice that emerged from that discussion is that anyone contemplating this kind of rewrite is to leave a note on the talk page to inform anyone watching of the proposed change.

I intend to upload the rewrite sometime before Isis runs as TFA on September 12 (because that article links here and I'd like a better description of Hathor to greet anyone who clicks through the link), but I don't know exactly when I'll be ready. If anyone has comments or objections or wants to see exactly what I intend to upload, while the gaps and messy notes-to-self are still sitting in it, please reply here. A. Parrot (talk) 21:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

Seven Hathors

The seven Hathors seems to be one every 100 years because Venus shifts 5 dates less than 584-day calendar date.

2029bc May 10 = Hathor 30 west last heliacal-set

1929bc Mar 13 = Hathor 25 east last heliacal-rise

1829bc Feb 12 = Hathor 20 west last heliacal-set

1729bc Jan 13 = Hathor 15 east last heliacal-rise

1630bc Dec 14 = Hathor 10 west last heliacal-set

1530bc Nov 14 = Hathor 5 east last heliacal-rise

1430bc Oct 15 = Hathor 1 west last heliacal-set

This is the only way i know how to divide 600 years by 7 dates. It alternates inferior conjunction and superior conjunction because 8-year Venus is 94 years and 104 years and only is even as 200 years. The dates are about 49 days BEFORE horizontal set with the sun, and 55 days BEFORE horizontal rise with the sun. The greatest brilliancy is 72 days before inferior conjunction, but the Hathor 1 date of a setting Venus does not waiver until the AD centuries when some vanish conjunctions before Hathor 1. One thing to note about this drift is that the month Hathor did not stay in the April Taurus bull or cow. Venus was the female cow with the Taurus bull. This can happen at any phase, so different months other than the month Hathor for different phases. 75.86.64.46 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:38, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

75.86.64.46: In the future, please add your comments at the bottom of the talk page. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but it's pretty clearly your original research, which does not belong in Wikipedia articles. Article text has to be based on reliable sources, as Wikipedia defines that term. And the Egyptians did not recognize zodiac constellations like Taurus (they drew entirely different constellations in the sky), so it's unlikely that any reliable source will support whatever hypothesis you're arguing for. A. Parrot (talk) 06:59, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Your comment on the word Taurus has as much value as it does on the word Hathor itself because Hathor or Hathyr is the Greek name. That is like saying Greek Memphis Egypt cannot be used in WikiPedia articles for Noph Mizraim, yet it is used, Greek, for Egypt. Even Sothis is a Greek name and NOT Egyptian. The Egyptians most definitely had the bull in the sky. But then we can all lose there too when you say bull is an English word. And the 30-day month of Hathor most definitely exists and you have no mention of it. It is not original research; to say so is like saying 30-day April is original research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.86.64.46 (talk) 18:53, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

@75.86.64.46: It's not about the name "Taurus". The Egyptians did see a bull constellation, but it represents the stars that are found in the modern constellation of Ursa Major, not Taurus. The full zodiac originated with Babylonian astronomy and did not exist in ancient Egypt until Ptolemaic times. (Source: Donald V. Etz, "A New Look at the Constellation Figures in the Celestial Diagram", Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, 1997, pp. 145, 150).

But that is tangential to your more significant problems. You don't make clear what you're trying to argue, and you don't make clear how it's relevant to Hathor the goddess as opposed to Hathor (month). And it's questionable whether your arguments, whatever they are, would be of any value even there. You seem to be them same person who has been posting original research about correlations between astronomy and world mythologies for more than a decade. Your recent comments certainly indicate that you've been around here a long time. You know that Wikipedia is based on academic knowledge and will not incorporate your ideas into article unless they're backed up by academic sources, so why are you here? A. Parrot (talk) 20:37, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

A paragraph that I think needs clarification.

In the Section "Popular worship" we can read: "... while phalli represented a prayer for fertility, as shown by an inscription found on one example."

The expression found on one example I think it needs clarification, because it's not clear what it means that the inscription was found in "one example". Maybe it's a problem of mine because I'm not a native English speaker, in which case I apologize. --Furado (talk) 13:17, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

@Furado: It means "found on one example of a phallus figurine", that is, there's one votive phallus that bears an inscription that indicates what it is for. There may well be a better way to say that, but it's not occurring to me. A. Parrot (talk) 03:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I am translating the text into Spanish language so that a few million more people can read this great article, and now that I understand the phrase with your clarification I can translate it without problems. Greetings from the northwest of Spain.--Furado (talk) 07:04, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Happy to help. A. Parrot (talk) 00:07, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Outside Egypt

This § currently lists places that are in greater Ancient Egypt but apparently the reach was much further as the recent gold artifact retrieved at the Pylos site recently shows it at least reached Mycenae. Also, the theme frequently features in Egyptian Revival arts. 98.4.103.219 (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Hathor may have spread more widely than is described in this article, but whether a topic is mentioned here depends on what reliable sources say about it and how much prominence they give it. The news reports about the discoveries at Pylos seem to indicate the objects bearing Hathor's image were imported from Egypt, so they don't necessarily indicate that the Mycenaeans worshipped Hathor. As for Hathor in Egyptian Revival architecture, Hathoric columns do sometimes show up, I don't know that they're necessary to mention unless they're an especially prominent feature of the style. One of the authoritative books about the style, The Egyptian Revival by James Stevens Curl, only mentions a few instances of Hathoric columns in modern times, all of them dating to the early 19th century. The only recent use of Hathoric columns that I'm aware of—and which I don't have a reliable source for—is at The Cheesecake Factory. A. Parrot (talk) 02:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I see, so be it then. 98.4.103.219 (talk) 09:15, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

However, just thought, your statement that the Pylos artefact was imported from Egypt is clearly wrong. Have you seen it? It's obvious local manufacture, similar in style to other Mycenaean artifacts and not at all reflective of New Kingdom styles, especially for an object fashioned in gold. 98.4.103.219 (talk) 02:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

I could have sworn that one of the articles I clicked on claimed it was an import from Egypt, but I can't find anything that says that now. In any case, if there are reliable sources that discuss what the Pylos artifact may mean—whether Hathor was worshipped in Greece, her iconography was adopted for some Greek goddess, or whatever else—they would certainly be worth including, but for the moment I'm reluctant to include it. A. Parrot (talk) 02:14, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

You prolly read that Hathor was an import, not the object, my point. RS, rly? Are u parroting? 98.4.103.219 (talk) 03:03, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I know I must have misread whichever article I saw. But my point is that I don't know what there is to say about Hathor in Mycenaean Greece except that at least one object from there has her face. The discovery at Pylos seems to be very recent, so the analysis of the find and what it may mean isn't out there yet. When it turns up, it will probably be worth including. A. Parrot (talk) 03:42, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Here is the suggested text: "The cult of Hathor apparently was widespread in the middle Bronze age, as a finding of a gold artifact of local manufacture in her image at Pylos on the Peleponnesus attests. <refList>ur very best list of refs, scowlerly jurnals foremost</refList>" Lycurgus (talk) 04:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

The thing is, we don't know if the cult of Hathor was present in Mycenaean Greence, only that the Mycenaeans used her image for something. A. Parrot (talk) 04:47, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Right, the tone of the comment was meant to indicate it was not even nearly the final text, which when prepared would replace "cult" by the appropriate term. Lycurgus (talk) 06:03, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I like your coinage of "scowlerly". I'll keep an eye out for sources on the Pylos find. A. Parrot (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Attribution: Issac Asimov, Second Foundation (iirc). Lycurgus (talk) 11:12, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Images in iconography section

@Neoclassicism Enthusiast: You recently changed most of the images found in the section on Hathor's iconography, saying that the ones you added were "much better images". While they may be better-quality photos, and some are well worth including, I don't think all of them are ideal for illustrating this article. When rewriting this article, I chose images to illustrate as many aspects of Hathor's iconography as possible, and to have a wide chronological range. The new set of images is particularly weighted toward sistra and toward the Late and Ptolemaic periods, and it eliminated the menat necklace. (The menat appears in artwork in a couple of images elsewhere in the article, but I'd argue that it's worth showing the physical object.) Would you agree to this set of images? A. Parrot (talk) 04:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Well, right now I just readded these pictures to the page.--Neoclassicism Enthusiast (talk) 18:41, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

@Neoclassicism Enthusiast: Thank you. I'm also unsure about the image of the columns from Philae—the Hathoric faces are hard to see in the thumbnail. A. Parrot (talk) 22:09, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Seven Hathors

@Lira Rakshit: I'm unsure whether the section titled "Seven Hathors" should be here. The preexisting version of the article already said what little reliably sourced information I was able to find about the Seven Hathors: "Egyptian texts often speak of the manifestations of the goddess as 'Seven Hathors'" and "Like Meskhenet, another goddess who presided over birth, Hathor was connected with shai, the Egyptian concept of fate, particularly when she took the form of the Seven Hathors. In two New Kingdom works of fiction, the "Tale of Two Brothers" and the "Tale of the Doomed Prince", the Hathors appear at the births of major characters and foretell the manner of their deaths." The Roles section of this article is organized into sections based on Hathor's major traits, and the sources that were used to write the current version of the article relate the Seven Hathors to two aspects of the goddess: her multiple forms and her relationship with motherhood and fate. Therefore, the article didn't have a section about the Seven Hathors but mentioned those aspects of the Seven Hathors where they were most relevant.

The section that you added says more, but I don't know how reliable the claims are. Some of it is discussing the Egyptian concept of fate and not Hathor herself, which makes it rather off-topic. The assertion that the Seven Hathors were worshipped in seven cities is based on https://ancientegyptonline.co.uk/hathor/, which isn't an authoritative source, and if the claim is going to stay, it needs clarification. There were more than seven temples to Hathor, so where does this list come from? Does any particular Egyptian text link these seven sites with the Seven Hathors? A. Parrot (talk) 23:12, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I backed up my researchers from a couple of books, Viz. "Myths and legends of Ancient Egypt" by Joyce Tyldesley & a translated version of "Egypt : Egyptian Mythology and The Secrets Of The Gods" by Roy Jackson. The book by Joyce T. clearly mentions a line "Their (Seven Hathors') work ran alongside that of the other fate determining goddesses, Meskhenet who determined status & Renenutet who determined material wealth." Yes, I also agree with the fact that this section shouldn't be here, instead I tried to publish it as an altogether distinct article, but a reviewer mentioned to move my individual article on "Seven Hathors" to the existing article on "Hathor", because it already mentioned "Seven Hathors" at one place.

Please suggest what should be ideal in this scenario?

However, the assertion that the Seven Hathors were worshipped in seven cities, is purely based on https://ancientegyptonline.co.uk/hathor.

If this is not regarded as an authorized source, pls feel free to omit the claim. Lira Rakshit (talk) 05:27, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

@Lira Rakshit: Ancientegyptonline.co.uk is not a reliable source; much of what the site says is accurate, but its author doesn't seem to be an Egyptologist, so I don't rely on what it says unless I can find confirmation in a better source. If the site mentioned which Egyptian text is the source for the claim about the seven cities, it might be possible to find a translation of that text and cite that directly, but unfortunately the site doesn't say where that claim comes from.

As for the Seven Hathors as goddesses of fate, perhaps it should go in a section on "Fate" just below "Motherhood and queenship". It would have to be a very short section, but there is slightly more to say on the subject than the article contained before you added to it. I will see if I can write such a section later today.

Unfortunately, I see that the text you added is taken almost verbatim from Tyldesley's book, which is a definite problem. Please see Wikipedia:Copyright violations for Wikipedia's policy on the subject. I don't mean to cast blame—Wikipedia has a lot of policies and guidelines, and it's often difficult for new editors to know which ones are most important to follow—but in the future, please be very careful that any text you add is in your own words. A. Parrot (talk) 14:11, 1 July 2021 (UTC)