Talk:Set (deity)/Archive 2

unknown reference

Somewhere in this article is said "The earliest known representation of Set comes from a tomb dating to the Naqada I phase of the Predynastic Period (circa 4000 BC–3500 BC)"... What tomb is that? There is an online photo of this representation? 187.105.37.149 (talk) 23:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

deleted from the conflict of Horus and set

"Eventually however, using both cunning and strength, Horus vanquished and emasculated Set. The gods punished Set by forcing him to carry Osiris on his back, or by sacrificing him as a bull for their food. In some versions of the myth, Set is given dominion over the surrounding deserts as compensation for his loss of Egypt. Generally Set, as the enemy of the legitimate line of rulers, served as a symbol for disorder, evil and trickery." Someone deleted this without giving a reason. I'd like to put it back in, unless anyone has an objection. Wyote 04:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

nothing should be added back without proper sourceing.Lasalle202 04:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Learn how to spell75.203.108.223 20:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

---

Hey go check out the horus disscusion page. The article "their is no god horus" and the "there is no god horus kind of explains that eye thing!"

I believe the Okapi was also suggested as the Set animal, but I don't have a good source for this —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pignut (talk • contribs) 06:18, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

the Set animal is a snake !

Where have you people been. The Set animal has always been a snake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.14.131.239 (talk) 17:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The Seth animal is not a snake. It is more likly a legendary beast, or perhaps derived from dinosaur skulls.Tutthoth-Ankhre (talk) 20:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

definitely. It looks like a corythosaur's head, doesn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 03:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

no it doesn't.Apepch7 (talk) 12:28, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

It is most definitely not a snake. Besides the fact that the Typhon animal has large ears (and snakes have none), the snake was the symbol of the evil Apep, who was originally Set's enemy. While the two became conflated much later, Set did not have anything to do with snakes when he was most popular. I'm personally of the mythological animal opinion, but whatever it is, it's not a serpent. The Cap'n (talk) 15:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Egyptian Seth VS. Jewish Seth

The character portrayed in this article is the Egytian Seth. The Seth that was related to a serpent was the third son of Adam which is of Jewish ascendance. There was a gnostic sect derived from it. They claim that the serpent, despicted in the creation story of Eden, was good and not evil because the serpent was the animal that lead mankind into the knowledge of good and evil, making men be more God alike. They also believed that the God of the old testament was misanthropic, so this is why the serpent was attributed as heoric. In the gnostic Gospel of the Egyptians, Jesus Christ is denoted as the encarnation of Seth who came to this world to redeem mankind from the old testament's misanthopic God. Serpents tend to be of common use in ancient history to denote deities of divine character or origin. Even the pre-Columbian cultures such as the Aztecs have this allegoric representations, like the god Quetzalcoatl who walked on water and made many miracles, or the Mayan god Kukulcan who formed part of the creation of this Earth, and also the Quiche god Gukumatz who ascend to the skies and promised to comeback in the same manner. Although the theological similarities from Jewish culture and Egyptian culture are very remarkable alike, many important qualities make a very notorious distinction between the sectarian christian god and the mythogical egyptian figure. Stratogustav (talk) 00:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC) Gustavo Avilés

Ba'al references

File:400yearStela3.jpg

400-year-stela from Tanis (certainly brought there from Avaris), depicting Ramesses II making an offering to the god Set of Avaris (top left), who is shown in his human king-like form.

Does anyone object to me removing all of these? Seeing as they keep refering to Ba'al as a specific god, whereas the article makes clear that it is a term used to refer to various gods. From my own education I can tell you it's to protect the god's name so foreigners don't get its favor and is only used while away. KV(Talk) 15:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I removed them. KV(Talk) 13:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

However, during and after the Hyksos period Set was indeed identified with the Levantine Baal. Cush (talk) 17:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

The name of Set / Seth

I don't want to sound pretentious or arrogant, but just to give background, I'm going into my second year of a PhD in Egyptology. Have been studying Egyptian language and religion for pretty much 8 years now. "Seth" is undoubtedly more commonly used than "Set". I don't think I've seen "Set" in an academic context for a while. The standard Egyptological works (Lexikon, Gardiner, OEAE) all use "Seth" as a rendering of the Greek word. Incidentally, the hieroglyphs invariably have the ḫ as well. I can't see any reason why "Set" here is preferred over the more common and correct usage. The article will be changed unless there are any valid reasons. Cheers. 122.106.209.26 (talk) 15:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

A very good idea, I've been wondering about that. Quite a few of these articles on Egyptian deities are not up to scratch. Some are written almost solely relying on Budge, eg Ra and Thoth, which represent a lot of hard work put in by a well meaning editor, but I don't know how reliable they are, I'd like your opinion.--Doug Weller (talk) 15:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad someone agrees (don't use wikipedia often, so don't know the proper ways...:(). Thoth and Ra are not great articles - I think they would be great with a bit of tweaking, though. I'm happy to tweak in my holidays. Just think that this article needs to be renamed.122.106.209.26 (talk) 03:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

However, Set is an Egyptian god, and Greek names should be avoided. The same goes for place names. Egyptologists have used Greek names only because of ancient authors (Herodotus, Josephus, etc) who wrote in Greek and who were (ab)used as a starting point for modern research. But Egyptology has moved on since then and has learned quite a lot about the native names of things. It is a shame that Waset is still referred to as Thebes, or Iunu as Heliopolis, or Djehuty as Thoth. There is no reason to continue this practice on WP. Ancient Egypt and its culture deserve to be respected in their own right without going back to the diminishing Greek. Cush (talk) 08:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Set or Seth. I think we should use the most commonly used name for those gods which are well known. e.g. Horus not Heru or whatever. But I keep coming across Seth and some Egyptologists prefer it - it would seem.Apepch7 (talk) 12:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Discrepancy in the Set article?

Hello, I read across something in this article that came across confusing to me. In the 5th paragraph of section "Conflict between Horus and Set", it states: "According to the Shabaka Stone, Geb divided Egypt into two halves, giving Upper Egypt (the desert south) to Set and Lower Egypt (the region of the delta in the north) to Horus, in order to end their feud."

Later in the article, under "Demonization of Set": "Kemet was originally split into two kingdoms: Upper ruled by Horus (and later Ra), Lower by Set."

A clarification would be greatly appreciated, thanks. Cjkasper (talk) 05:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

One is a myth, the other history? Also, they may be referring to different times? --Michael C. Price ^talk 08:55, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Tutenstein

Set is depicted as a major villain in the Discovery Kids animated series Tutenstein. Think this could be fit into the "In Popular Culture" section? DanMat6288 (talk) 22:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

What is Tutenstein? Not every dirt on tv is popular culture. Cush (talk) 12:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Formatting

Does anyone know how to fix the formatting on this page? The gaps look awful! Contaldo80 (talk) 17:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Seth#Egyptian God Seth

That chapter is a fork. Please, fix it and leave a link from there to here. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:00, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

LOST reference

The reference to Set being depicted in the TV show LOST is incorrect. The depiction is not Set, but Anubis. This reference should be flagged and removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.160.221.143 (talk) 19:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually the statue in LOST is Taweret [1] - Rolen47 (talk) 05:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Relationship with Ash

I just removed a sentence from LGBT themes in mythology about Seth having a relationship with Ash. Neither god's article mentions this, nor the two books i checked ("Encylopedia of Queer Myth" and "Gay Mythologies" both discuss Seth, but not Ash). So, can anyone find a source for this, or was it OR?YobMod 14:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

From Ape God, via Desert God to King of the Night

The middle portion of this section appears to be mixing elements from Egyptian mythology with elements from Norse mythology and what might be either Christianity or one of the Christianized flavors of Gnosticism. Aside from the mythology stew aspects, the fact that it's mainly sentence fragments and not actual sentences makes it very difficult to figure out what the author was trying to say. Could someone who knows more about the topic either delete this, or revise it into something more closely resembling standard English grammar? (Note: I've gone back and looked at it again, and the particular piece I'm objecting to might be talking about how different cultures have interpreted a constellation/asterism that the Egyptians connected with Set. If so, it's not very clear, and I'm not sure how it's relevant to the article anyway.) 68.105.71.75 (talk) 11:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I deleted this section because it was sourced by ideas from non-egyptological sources and made reference to 'starsigns' (by which I suppose they meant constellations) which have no proven connection to Set and will only serve to confuse the reader. The rest of the article is as bad to be honest. Apepch7 (talk) 16:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

In Popular Culture

What is the point of this very long list? Does it serve any useful purpose given that the article is about the Egyptian deity? I can't see a way to edit it and would suggest it is deleted.Apepch7 (talk) 15:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Also the sections on the conflict of Horus and Set and his role as defender of Ra are so bad that they are making me weep. Sorry I had to get this off my chest. lol Apepch7 (talk) 18:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Too much content in the Popular Culture section

The contents of this section are not irrelevant but are rather too Unorthodox and do not observe the strict discipline of Egyptology - our FOCAL TOPIC. This is not a General Knowledge article. Remove! Retain only those that has a significant impact on the modern society and Egyptology. 203.87.203.190 (talk) 04:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Set per the Book of AM-TUAT

Perhaps the article should mention, per the Book of AM-TUAT, that Set is also considered a member of the company of Seker. His status as "good" or "evil" most likely varied as the upper and lower kingdoms united and divided - and who was scribing the history. Lazzara399 (talk) 23:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Something missing from the article

To the best of my knowledge, the Egyptian god Set was known to have red hair, and that detail seems to be missing from the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.187.244.250 (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

People with red hair were associated with Set and his Cult, but Set was never said to have red hair AvRand (talk) 23:34, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

NPOV or... something?

A lot of this article is written... I don't know, but it definitely doesn't seem NPOV/encyclopedic, i.e. "Perhaps most intriguing..." or "It would be interesting to learn..."

These are opinions, and the article is riddled with them. I understand the passion, but it detracts from the factual information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.249.6.212 (talk) 03:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2016

Please change the "and in some accounts he had relationships with other goddesses: Hathor, Neith and the foreign goddesses Anat, and Astarte" into "and in some accounts he had relationships with the foreign goddesses Anat and Astarte" because I didn't find that he had any kind of connection with Hathor anywhere. It is also illogical for him to have any relationship with Neith because according to myth it was Neith who eventually said that Horus would be king of Upper and Lower Egypt instead of Set. In compensation she gave Set land the two foreign goddeses Anat and Astarte.Her family relationships were typically confusing. During the Old Kingdom, she was regarded as the wife of Set (making it unlikely she would be called to rule against him and grant him extra wives!) but it was dropped later on. (as it should since it would have made any sense) Mararuxandra (talk) 15:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

 Done. There may be texts somewhere that link Set with Neith and Hathor, but if such a tradition existed I doubt it was ever prominent. Best to leave this claim out. A. Parrot (talk) 19:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2016

Please change "Consort Nephthys, Anat, Astarte, Tawaret"

to 

"Consort Nephthys and sometimes Anat, Astarte" because it is very little known that Tawaret has any kind of link with Set. Their only connection was when Plutarch called her once "concubine of Set", which is a very vague association regarding the myths. And even if it did, concubine would not equal wife. To make a summary, this detail is not proeminent and it might lead readers to confusion.

109.97.129.68 (talk) 09:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Because it's your opinion and per WP:OR (as well as thousands of other reasons) we don't allow opinions on here. –Davey2010^Talk 14:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Set (deity)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

talk::set(mythology) - It looks a bit being used for generic discussion bbs purpose. In terms of wikipedia this can not be. If there is no ancient aspect then it can not be. Article is readable/understandable. "Set became associated with things that were red, including people with red hair, which is not an attribute that Egyptians generally had, and so he became considered to also be a god of foreigners." This formulation does not say if it means old native egyptians, or the later people of egypt, which were a group of tribes indeed. Red hair was not uncommon in egypt; however it looks orange and red is not the same. Such a formulation does not offer much help to clear up questions like this one. Probably it is possible to rework sections for not-information? User:Yy-bo 15:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Substituted at 21:58, 26 June 2016 (UTC)