Talk:Isis

Isis image

The image shown at the top is that of Isis, the (New Kingdom?) Egyptian goddess. But Isis has been a goddess and then an allegorical figure for good 2000-3000 years beyond, during which time she was not represented nor thought of as the original Egyptian Isis. May I thus suggest that the picture be replaced with a composite of perhaps 4 or 6 pictures showing various representations of Isis, e.g. one or two showing the original Egyptian Isis, another for the Roman or Greek one and finally one or two more recent ones, an 18th century or modern veiled Isis as a figure of nature (see the Wiki article on World War II for the kind of composite I have in mind). This would enable the reader to immediately identify the kind of representation to expect. The Isis you can see in the fountains of Paris or US statues looks nothing like the one from the Egyptian tombs and temples after all. In this respect, Isis is pretty special, contrary to other Egyptian divinities, she not just an Egyptian goddess and so I believe she should not be exclusively presented as such in the introductory image. Iry-Hor (talk) 07:40, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

When I first read Iry-Hor's suggestion, I thought about adding a second image underneath the first, but the problem here is the infobox, which can only incorporate one image at a time. The deity infobox has been standard on Egyptian deity articles since before I joined the project, and the established format—using User:Jeff Dahl's SVG image for each deity to indicate the more or less standard iconography of each one—has always seemed sensible and appealing to me. An infobox can use a single composite image, as Iry-Hor suggests, but I don't care for composite images because they reduce the readability of each image they incorporate. And adding a lead image under an infobox seems strange and awkward to me. I'm open to other opinions, though. A. Parrot (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Problematic wording

"Thus, like Hathor, she sometimes took the form of Imentet, the goddess of the west, who welcomed the deceased soul into the afterlife as her child.[27] But for much of Egyptian history, male deities like Osiris were believed to provide the regenerative powers, including sexual potency, that were crucial for rebirth. Isis merely assisted by stimulating this power.[26] "

This wording supports a patriarchal value system that is not a necessary interpertation of the myth. Could it not be even more accurate and less biased to value the masculine if stated something more like this?

""Thus, like Hathor, she sometimes took the form of Imentet, the goddess of the west, who welcomed the deceased soul into the afterlife as her child.[27] But for much of Egyptian history, male deities like Osiris were believed to provide the regenerative powers, including sexual potency, that were crucial for rebirth while Isis was a catalyst for stimulating this power.[26] "

This language gives Isis a more empowered role. Using wording like "merely assisted" downplays Isis' role and by extension downplays the female sexual/maternal contribution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.52.143.123 (talk) 23:35, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

78.52.143.123: I worded it that way because I'm trying to convey that goddesses' role was secondary. The source that supports this passage—a scholarly paper by Kara Cooney titled "Gender Transformation in Death: A Case Study of Coffins from Ramesside Period Egypt"—says as much. Her interpretation doesn't derive from the myth itself but from how deities are characterized in funerary texts. She says:

Isis provided sexual excitement, but it was Osiris who essentially raised himself from the dead. Isis created the enclosure for Osiris's rebirth—his mummy wrappings—and she acted as the vessel for the conception of his son, Horus. But Isis was not thought to bring Osiris back to life; instead, she manifested a situation in which he could bring himself back to life… In the same Osirian-solar mythologies of rebirth and creation, the female element took on the role of aggressive protector, helper, and empty vessel. Although the goddesses Isis, Nut, and Hathor excited the male with feminine presence, provided sustenance, protected him from harm, reconstituted his shape, and contained him in a womb, they were not believed to be responsible for the spark of creation that gave new life." (pp. 227–228)

After the New Kingdom, Egyptian theology came to emphasized goddesses more than it once did, and Isis benefited from that development most of all. Late funerary texts took a slightly different angle on the myth of Horus' conception, one that emphasized that Isis was the active partner in the act. Those texts thus made her more important in the rebirth of the deceased soul than early New Kingdom texts did. The passages in the article that follow the one you quote are meant to convey that idea, although they may need tweaking to make them clearer. A. Parrot (talk) 00:23, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2018

plz accept and what is Isis the god of — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:7D30:FFD0:35F9:5576:6BFC:C24D (talk) 21:44, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

2600:1700:7D30:FFD0:35F9:5576:6BFC:C24D: Isis wasn't the goddess of a clearly defined aspect of the world, as some other Egyptian gods were. Therefore, she can't really be summed up as "goddess of such-and-such", and this article doesn't try to do so. Mourning, motherhood, and protection were her most important characteristics early on, but at the height of her popularity she was credited with—well, nearly everything positive in the world. Read the article for details. A. Parrot (talk) 00:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2019

hi i was wondering if i can edit bc i have new info on isis that no one knows about MR.HACKERZ (talk) 21:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Þjarkur (talk) 21:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Lead sentence

@TheLateDentarthurdent: The list of names and pronunciations in the lead sentence is a bit long. I think it's important to be concise with this kind of thing, as we don't want to put off readers in the first sentence they read. Moreover, the alternate transcription (jst) and the reconstructed pronunciations aren't well supported by the cited source, Quack 2018. Quack only transcribes the name as ꜣst and does not mention jst. He also says "The sound transcribed by Egyptologists as ꜣ is likely to have had an original pronunciation as r or l", which indicates that it hasn't been precisely identified, so rendering it with a specific IPA consonant, such as ʀ, is going beyond the sources. Given the uncertain nature of linguistic reconstructions, I think it safer not to include a phonetic rendering of the ancient Egyptian at all. Thus, I propose a lead sentence that begins: "Isis (Ancient Egyptian: ꜣst; Coptic: Ⲏⲥⲉ Ēse; Classical Greek: Ἶσις Isis; Meroitic:  Wusa) was a major goddess…" A. Parrot (talk) 04:13, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

• I’m cool with that. As long as we leave the links to wiktionary, where you find the reconstructed pronunciation and the alternate spelling jst (used by Allen, Reintges, and others). Btw the symbol ʀ is a placeholder for the realization of the vulture consonant (some kind of rhotic, probably back) before it disappeared in Egyptian phonetics. The wiktionary appendix on Ancient Egyptian explains this, so we can either link that or make the amendments you propose and let people click on the Egyptian words for more info. TheLateDentarthurdent (talk) 18:38, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

@TheLateDentarthurdent: I've made the change, while keeping the Wiktionary link in ꜣst. A. Parrot (talk) 23:03, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Meroitic spelling

@TheLateDentarthurdent: I keep meaning to ask this. What is the source for the Meroitic spellings used in the infobox and the lead sentence? A. Parrot (talk) 04:35, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

@A. Parrot: Meroitic spelling of Isis as <w-o-sa> pronounced /(w)u:sa/ or /(w)uːɕa/ comes from Rilly and de Voogt's book and the Hintze-based transcriptions of Meroitic hieroglyphic/Meroitic script therein. I'll add the source and more info in the name section.

Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2019

Could you add a comma after "Texts" in the phrase "In many spells in the Pyramid Texts Isis and Nephthys help the deceased king reach the afterlife"? 208.95.51.53 (talk) 14:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

 Done –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:27, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

was a big cat person — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.75.64.210 (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Vulture

I think the relation between Isis and the vulture as a sacred bird should be addressed; it's mentioned elsewhere on Wikipedia so it's strange to find no mention of it here.

Aside from her vulture crown, which is mentioned in the article, not many sources seem to mention the vulture as part of Isis's iconography, and she was more closely connected with the kite. Apparently there is a suggestion that the vulture and cobra on Tutankhamun's funeral mask, which are traditionally interpreted as Wadjet and Nekhbet, represented Isis and Nephthys instead. I've been able to find the source for the suggestion: "Vulture and Cobra at the King's Brow" by Edna R. Russmann, in Chief of Seers: Egyptian Studies in Memory of Cyril Aldred (1997). But I don't have access that paper and can't find a full version of it in Google Books previews. If I can obtain it, I will add it to the article. A. Parrot (talk) 23:59, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2021

In the introduction, please remove

slain husband, the divine king Osiris

and add

slain brother-husband, the divine king Osiris

Since her relationship with Osiris is highly important, it seems important to mention in the intro that they're depicted as siblings as well as as spouses. No source is needed because this is covered by a sourced statement in the "Wife and mourner" section. 2600:1003:B84E:309D:10AD:5B55:ABD8:1A6F (talk) 21:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done A. Parrot (talk) 21:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Where are the Negroid features?

This picture is inaccurate!! She was a black woman! 2600:1700:1240:13A0:C863:21C2:2FD:9588 (talk) 21:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Deities are not historical figures, so it makes little sense to say that Isis had one particular appearance. This article gives a sample of how she was portrayed by various cultures that worshipped her, most obviously ancient Egypt. If you're objecting to the image at the top of the article (the lead image), it's based on images the Egyptians themselves made of Isis, particularly her portrayal in the tomb of Horemheb (see this image, where she is the figure on the far left) and the tomb of Nefertari (see this image, where she's the one on the right). All other images in the article are photos of artworks, mostly ancient artworks, that reflect how Isis was portrayed by the cultures in question. If there is an ancient artwork that better fits how you think Isis should look, feel free to suggest adding an image of it. A. Parrot (talk) 00:48, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2024

Interestingly, I've noticed some hesitation around embracing the well-documented connection between Isis and what's popularly referred to as her 'equivalent,' Inanna. It's almost as if this enlightening piece of information is waiting patiently on the sidelines, eager for its turn to be acknowledged. Now, I wouldn't want to disrupt the status quo or ruffle any feathers by pointing out what seems to be an open secret among those who have done their homework. But, wouldn't it be something if we all arrived at this understanding, unambiguously clear, yet seemingly elusive to some? Of course, the readiness to embrace such insights varies, and it’s utterly fascinating to see who’s up for a deeper dive and who prefers the comfort of the surface. It's all in good faith, though—sharing, learning, and sometimes, gently nudging our collective awareness towards the richer nuances of our shared heritage. After all, it's only a matter of time before these connections become impossible to ignore. Until then, let's enjoy the dance of disclosure at its own pace, shall we?

| equivalent1 = Ishtar | equivalent1_type = Mesopotamian | equivalent2 = Inanna | equivalent2_type = Sumerian | equivalent3 = Ishara | equivalent3_type = Hurrian | equivalent4 = Astarte | equivalent4_type = Egyptian | equivalent5 = Astarte | equivalent5_type = Egyptian/Canaanite | equivalent6 = Freya | equivalent6_type = Norse