Talk:Bastet/Archive 1

Untitled

This image, copyright Encyclopedia Mythica, has been removed here. --Wetman 00:13, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have moved this page, as Bastet is a typo/overemphasis by later scribes.

Bastet is b-s-t-t in egyptian, wheras Bast is b-s-t. -t is the feminine ending in the language, so b-s-t is the feminine of b-s, but that means that b-s-t-t is the feminine of b-s-t, which is already the feminine of something - i.e. it is meaningless, and a later addition addition.

The correct form is b-s-t, i.e. Bast. ~~~~ 19:49, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

While I understand your argument, you're ultimately not correct. The writing b3stt already occurs in the Old Kingdom, so it is hardly a "a typo/overemphasis by later scribes". Moreover, it is also the form used by the Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache, R. Hannig's Großes Handwörterbuch, the Lexikon der Ägyptologie, and other authoritative sources. That the 1st /t/ is not to be taken as the feminine ending is seen in the name's transcription in other languages. In Akkadian, Greek, Coptic, and Hebrew, her name (usually contained with in the language's transcription of pr-b3stt) always has a /t/ followed by a vowel. For example, Coptic has Poubasti. Had the /t/ not been pronounced (due to it only being a feminine ending), these languages would not have recorded it. Clearly it was pronounced (unlike the /t/ in, say, 3st "Isis"). Therefore, in this light and general Egyptological practice, the article is being moved. —Nefertum17 11:04, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I am sorry to have to remind you of this, but the Egyptians didn't speak Akkadian, Greek, Coptic, or Hebrew. They spoke Egyptian. ~~~~ 12:27, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for a comment that completely misses what Nefertum17 was trying to tell you. The Akkadians, Greek, Coptics and Hebrews did know the word and put the extra sound there, which strongly implies that the original was pronounced that way as well. DreamGuy 17:30, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot to mention, Bastet would roughly mean lady of the ointment jar, which is completely unconnected to her, and really rather an odd name. Wheras Bast would mean female devourer, entirely fitting to her original position as a lion(ess)-goddess. ~~~~ 12:40, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cite? You're running through making drastic changes to all these articles and not backing them up. Your opinion on what would be fitting isn't relevant. And lots of mythological figures have odd names, there could very well be a logical explanation for an ointment jar name that you just arenpt familiar with, even asasuming your translation were accurate, but of course you provided no cite for that either. DreamGuy 17:30, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

And Per-Bast is not Per-Bastet. ~~~~ 12:46, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Myth of Bast/Bastet as protector of the living from the dead/underworld and/or vice versa?

Is this an legend which was simply picked up by Hollywood (as seen in The Mummy) or is it something that was being missed out by the main article?

The Mummy doesn't really contain any factual content whatsoever beyond copying names. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 19:08, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Move

Not moved since it looks like it was disambiguated instead. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 06:49, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup

Not sure what the Pebasti section is telling us, and the English is a bit suspect. It looks relevant though, needs an Egyptologist to verify. Likewise, a source is neede for the "I am Bast" quotation.

Its very suspect. The quotation doesn't resemble Egyptian mythology, thought, grammatical structure, or linguistic peculiarites, whatsoever. In addition, it appears to believe that Maahes, Myies, and Mihos, are entirely different gods. In fact, Maahes, Myies, and Mihos are just different modern english translations of the SAME Egyptian word, its an error that only someone with no academic knowledge whatsoever about the subject would make. --Victim of signature fascism 10:53, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Lives of Bast the Cat?

I read somewhere Bast had 9 lives. Confirm/include? Trekphiler 15:30, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Never read it. Strikes me more as supposition based on modern beliefs. --Victim of signature fascism 20:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Female devourer?

This article says that bast means "Female Devourer," yet according to this site, it's Ammit whose name means "Female Devourer". ?? --DrBat 17:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Split article

The section on Bast in pop culture is getting rather ungainly and is almost the same length as the Bast in myth section itself. I propose a split of this article into Bast (mythology) and Bast in popular culture or Bast in fiction. 24.14.198.8 18:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC) Chris G.

I'm working on prosifying this section for now, and may shrink it later; we don't need to mention every single occasion in popular culture where Bast is referred to. It shouldn't be a list of occurances and I'm working on making it into more of an article; perhaps it could be one in its own right, though most referrals in pop culture to Bast are related to the mythology surrounding her (and thus fit into this article). I think for now prosifying and then shrinking is fine, we can always split it later. -- Editor at Large • talk 15:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Baby Phat reference

The following question was asked and answered on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous on the 16th July. You may or may not want to amend the article. --Tagishsimon (talk)

It your articles under Bast and Bastet, there is a link made from the mythological cat goddess to the Baby Phat clothing line marker. Is there a source for this or is this based only on a commonality in the appearances of the images?

No reference was given. The "fact" was added by User:Pinkleboo on the 13 June 2006, in this edit. I've copied your question and this answer to the article: someone who cares may want to amend the article. There's no information on the Baby Phat page to substantiate the assertion. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Opening comment

I belive that Bastet means "the tearer" <http://inanna.virtualave.net/bastet.html>

Daughter of?

A bit of editing disagreement as to rather it is Ra or Osiris, and I see sources for both. Anyone here who can help? 21:36, 5 December 2008 (UTC)dougweller (talk)

In antiquity, Bast is the daughter of Ra. When the Greek syncrenization began her father became Osiris. So technically, both are true. -- 204.112.158.22 (talk) 02:27, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

No. Bast is the original Goddess and the religious following of Bast was huge. At some a faction in Egypt decided to get themselves a lot of followers and the way they did this was to play down Bast's more useful aspects (originally a lioness headed war goddess) by associating her with the domestic cat, then creating a new Lion Headed War Goddess (Sekhmet) designed to contain just those aspects. Interestingly enough it did not seem to fool the military who were still busy carving inscriptions to Bast on their shields right up to the end of the dynastic period! Bast is indeed the Daughter of Ra, and it is guessed that this was the reason she was downgraded and replaced by Sekhmet. When Akhenaton forced the country to turn its back on Ra then how could he tolerate the fact that Ra was still recorded as the Father of its second most popular goddess? 86.173.70.125 (talk) 15:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Renaming

This should be renamed to Bastet. This is the main meaning of the word (and as far as I know it doesn't have any other meaning). – Alensha ^talk 18:13, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that her name should stay the same as the ancient egyptions called her. 97.120.115.179 (talk) 00:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of trivia section

In line with WP policy I have deleted this section. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Handling_trivia

"Trivia usually appears on Wikipedia as bulleted lists of miscellaneous information. Such lists can appear within an article, usually in a trivia section. The style guideline at Wikipedia:Trivia sections suggests that trivia sections should be avoided". None of the deleted info is adding value to the subject of the article. Spanglej (talk) 03:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I think that before they choose to put this in the article is to find out if that is really true or not. We need to keep everything on this site true down to every word.

sources!

everyone needs to make their sources about what they find out. PLEASE DO THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.115.179 (talk) 00:44, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Move requested

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

---

Bastet (mythology) → Bastet — Unnecessary disambiguation. With a quick Google search I found basically nothing else by this name, only the goddess. – Alensha ^talk 09:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree, given that Bastet already redirects here, there is no purpose in keeping the disambiguator. Quantpole (talk) 13:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree, imho it's uncontroversial and should be done with CSD G6 for Bastet. Skarebo (talk) 04:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Support. Clear as can be. Cavila (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

---

Bast rather than the deliberately corrupted name

Hi 83d40m. You've recently moved Bastet to Bast (mythology) simply by copying and pasting its contents. I don't know if you're new to this sort of thing, but performing a copy/paste move is not done around here as it messes up the edit history. Further advice can be read at Help:Moving a page. Also, you may not be aware that the page had recently been moved from Bastet (mythology) to Bastet, following a request and a discussion at its talk page. I've reverted your edits, but if you're under the impression that Bast is the commonly preferred name in reliable sources, you're free to propose a move at the same talk page. Thank you, Cavila (talk) 14:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up and notice, Cavila.

I have made such changes previously without it being a problem... but, notice that some topics are more sensitive than others for such changes. Sorry, but I did not look at the discussion page as I should have before making the move.

Yes, I would like to change the page over to Bast since the term "Bastet" was a diminutive applied in the eighteenth dynasty by the scribes of the temple of Amun as they promoted their deity in an assent culturally at the expense of other deities that had to be diminished in order to effect the changes.

The change to the diminutive form marginalized a deity that had a long history under another name, who could not be suppressed (as they would have pleased). I question choosing the late change of the name intended to suppress other deities, as the name by which Wikipedia identifies the ancient deity. I encourage adopting the authentic name of the deity from before being marginalized -- as the best characterization of the deity. Using the diminutive Bastet for an article about Bast is taking a "fierce lioness" and identifying her as a "pussycat"!

Bast was one of the most significant deities in Ancient Egypt, being similar in importance to Sekhmet in the other region of the eventually united culture. Even when reduced to the level of the domestic cat "Bastet" is represented as holding a mask at hand, always ready to demonstrate the fierceness that abides in all felines, no matter how tolerant and loving -- the mask reminded all that none could deny the potential that the original deity exemplified -- nor the original and long standing identity of the deity, Bast.

The name "Bastet" did not exist at the time the article asserts, from the third millennium B.C., when Bastet begins to appear in our record... this simply, is incorrect.

The location of the cult center was Per-Bast because that was the name of the deity. Trace the antiquity of that name and note that it is never "Per-Bastet". The Greek interpretations of the name of the city exist from the last five hundred years of the ancient culture -- after three thousand years of traditions. We need to stress facts that are accurate and meaningful.

Our article clearly reflects the historical differences, but previous editors have used the name of marginalization as the appellation from the beginning of the article instead of naming the article to reflect the original and long lasting name, and changing to the marginalized name after the historical change during the eighteenth dynasty. This is not a short period of time. It is a significant period, involving many centuries of time, indeed, a couple of thousand years into historical records -- surely Bast deserves recognition as it was at the beginning and full development of the cult rather than as it was being corrupted, so to speak.

One image of the deity -- clearly depicted as lioness -- is labeled "Bastet" the pussycat name... this simply, is incorrect.

If others support the change to the most ancient and longest used name, let me know and I will follow what ever process is necessary.

I am dragging all of this to the article page for further discussion, please respond there to keep all on one page and I will watch for your reply. ----83d40m (talk) 01:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us. The thing is that per WP:Article titles, we are expected to stick with "usage in reliable English-language sources" and this is something which stands apart from any considerations whether or not it faithfully represents her name in Ancient Egypt. To the very limited extent that I've been able to glimpse from such sources, it appears that "Bastet" rather than "Bast" is the convention favoured by modern reliable sources. In fact, H. te Velde states quite unambiguously that "the writing and pronunciation of the name of the goddess as Bastet is a generally accepted convention in Egyptological literature" (p. 165). Just to clarify matters, I had included a section on her name, explaining that bȝstt is how we find her name, the extra t there possibly being an orthographic strategy to denote a feminine ending but not usually pronounced. If you know of any reliable sources which argue that a diminutive form of her name was purposely devised by the 18th dynasty to belittle her status or whatever, then that is surely worth citing, though it does not affect the title of the article. Remember that any theories, whether they are right or wrong in our personal opinions, should be attributed to reliable sources, or else they fall into that shady area of original research. Cavila (talk) 10:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

It was not a diminutive (as far as I know Egyptian language did not have any, except for adding sheri(t), which means "little one" or khred, "child" after a name). I was curious about these differences and looked it up; seems that when in the Late Egyptian stage the final t of the words disappeared, the t was added in writing to show that it is to be pronounced.

I don't know about any attempts of the Amun priesthood to belittle other gods; their strategy was to identify all male gods with Amun and the female ones with his consort Mut, which is what happened to Bastet. So, in a way, Egyptian religion was slowly evolving into a kind of monotheism.

Bastet is the most known name of this goddess now, that's why it's best to have the article at this title. BTW the original Bast (mythology) disamb was not very correct either, because mythology is only a collection of myths, Egyptian religion was more than that, so the correct disamb would have been Bast (goddess). – Alensha ^talk 21:58, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Vortonsilbe ??

Article uses the unfamiliar word Vortonsilbe without defining it or linking to article elsewhere in Wikipedia.
The word Vortonsilbe apparently does not occur elsewhere in Wikipedia. We need to fix this.
-- 189.122.83.71 (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed - but can you suggest how to change it? It appears to be German for prefix or similar.Apepch7 (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Apparently, Ter Velde couldn't come up with any suitable English translation for Vortonsilbe (pre + stress + syllable), so I haven't attempted to coin my own, but you're quite right to point up that it's hopelessly obscure. It doesn't look like a prefix, but my guess is that it refers to what precedes the accented/stressed syllable (Tonsilbe), in other words the "pre-stressed syllable" as it is commonly called in English. I see what I can do to make it clearer. Cavila (talk) 20:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

What is the Masculine version of the name?

If I wanted to name my male Egyptian Mau in honor of Bastet, what would be the masculine rendering of the name?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 05:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I think I found it... possibly... Bes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.235.214.66 (talk) 10:17, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Consider using Maahes. 24.145.157.81 (talk) 13:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Dictionary link

Someone has posted a link in this page to a pdf download of the Routledge Dictionary or Gods and Goddesses. It is from a Romanian site and is probably a copyright breach. Should this be removed?Apepch7 (talk) 16:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm no expert on that stuff; try asking at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems or Wikipedia:WikiProject External links. A. Parrot (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Concision

This article repeats itself in several instances, jumps around chronologically, and circles back to topics multiple times. (It also has a lot of assertions not supported by citations.). A complete reorganization of the existing material (I'm not saying lose anything) to make it easier to follow would be a benefit to users.The Cormac 18:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Cormac (talk • contribs)

Please clarify

>In the first millennium BC, when domesticated cats were popularly kept as pets, during the 18th dynasty Bastet began to be represented...

This needs to be rewritten which I would be happy to do, but I'm not sure what it means. Rissa, copy editor (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

The words "during the 18th dynasty" shouldn't be there. It makes better sense now. Cheers,--WANAX (talk) 21:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Dates

Could someone who knows either add dates when things were happening or else provide more links? I found this whole article confusing wrt what was happening when. Thank you. Rissa, copy editor (talk) 02:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bastet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080703204648/http://www.egyptianmuseum.gov.eg/bastet.html to http://www.egyptianmuseum.gov.eg/bastet.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:36, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

correction of name to Bast in most of our primary article

In my edit today, I retained the title of this article and the link used throughout WP for this deity with an extremely long history in Ancient Egypt, but noted the correct name and the history that drove adoption by WP of a name used diminish the status of one deity in order to advance another deity within the pantheon toward the later period of the culture. I corrected all uses of the name used in the title that I thought might not be problematic, and noted (adopting the original spelling -- not the diminutive used late in the culture -- more factual for our readers).

My edit was reversed with a suggestion as follows, A. Parrot (talk | contribs) (If you want to change the form of the name used in the article, you'll have to move the page. In this case, many of the reliable sources use the name "Bastet", and Wikipedia uses the name most commonly used by the reliable sources, so it's advisable to start a formal move discussion)

Perhaps we should discuss this as User:A._Parrot suggests, I do not object to that, but a move may not be necessary. I would be content with the edit I made being allowed to stand as a clarification. I believe WP should strive to present the most accurate information. Conflicting uses in research are not our responsibility, but providing information about that to our readers, is.

Many sources use the corrupted name because of their limitations for many years, so much exists following that name (being an effect intended by those who began using the diminutive name). I do not feel that we must continue using that confusing name now that we understand that during the greatest length of time, the name remained unchanged in the culture as "Bast".

Our primary article on the deity ought to reflect the more complete information known about the deity. Inexcusably, we are inserting the late corruption into data we present when discussing earlier times in the culture. Publishing incorrect information betrays our mission. At least the primary article should clarify this for our readers.

We should make corrections so our readers are fully aware of the correct information. A correction noted at this primary article should suffice for readers of other articles who check links. If a more thorough correction/notation in WP becomes consensus, I'd be willing to take on the project.

Errors found in research are not left to stand in later research, corrections are noted and correct information asserted. Why shouldn't we strive to do the same? _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 21:27, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

@83d40m: I've checked my sources to see how the name of the goddess evolved, and they don't seem to support your claims. First, the sources use "Bastet" even more overwhelmingly than I thought they did. The Cat in Ancient Egypt (1993), The Great Goddesses of Egypt (1999), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (2001), The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt (2003), The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses (2005), The Gods of Ancient Egypt (1984), and many others use "Bastet", and I'm not sure if any Egyptological sources use "Bast" in preference to it. The Lexikon der ägyptischen Götter und Götterbezeichnungen is in German and doesn't help to judge which form is most common in English usage, but its entry for this goddess lists numerous variants of her name in transliteration of the original Egyptian, and they all say BꜢstt rather than BꜢst.

More relevant to your argument, The Gods of Ancient Egypt says:

"The cult-centre of Bastet was at Bast, which lies some 6 km to the north-east of Cairo; and the name, 'Bastet', means 'She-of-Bast'… At Bast, the main temple was called Per-Bastet (The House of Bastet), and gave its name to the town in the Greek period when it was called Bubastis, the Greek pronunciation of Per-Bastet; today, it is called Tell Basta." (pp. 192–193)

In other words, it seems that Bast was the name of the town—a point confirmed by The Cat in Ancient Egypt, p. 95, and by The Complete Cities of Ancient Egypt (2014), p. 198—and the goddess was always called Bastet. I don't know how "Bast" came into use as an alternate name for the goddess. A. Parrot (talk) 22:37, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Well, having now looked at the old talk page section above, #Bast rather than the deliberately corrupted name, and the reference to te Velde's entry in the Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, it seems the situation is more complicated than that, but it doesn't seem to be certain that "Bast" was the original name, let alone that the extra t was imposed by Amun's priesthood to reduce the status of the goddess, which is just incongruous with the way things worked in ancient Egypt. Te Velde says:

"The writing and pronunciation of the name of the goddess as Bastet is a generally accepted convention in Egyptological literature, but is no more than a modem reconstruction. The second t in the word bꜢstt denotes the feminine ending and was usually not pronounced. It seems that the aleph (Ꜣ) which is found in traditional Egyptian writing changed place and became a Vortonsilbe bast(t) >ubesti (J. Osing. Die Nominalbildung des Agyptischen [Mainz 1976] 855–856 n. 1319 and 376 n. 55). An Aramaic writing of the name of the goddess was Ꜣbst (Wb I, 423). The Egyptian pronunciation of the name of the goddess was more like 'obast' or 'ubesti' than 'bastet' in the 1st millennium BCE… [details about the writing of the name in Hebrew, not relevant here] …The meaning of the name of the goddess is uncertain. The older, problematic explanation was 'She of Bubastis' (Wb I, 423); a more recent explanation is 'She of the ointment-jar' (S. Quirke. Ancient Egyptian Religion [London 1992] 31)." (p. 165)

The t of the feminine suffix had ceased to be pronounced by New Kingdom times, but the t hieroglyphs in feminine names stuck around in writing as silent letters. If the second t was originally there and later dropped in pronunciation, then "Bast" would reflect the later pronunciation of the name, which as te Velde says was something like "Obast" or "Ubesti" in the first millennium BC, when Ezekiel and Herodotus mentioned her and she was more commonly depicted as a cat. But I'm not sure that that's what te Velde means. A. Parrot (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into the history. I have read many accounts that support my contention. I am not surprised that all of those references you cite repeat that spelling because, from the earliest of contemporary research, the documents of the eighteenth dynasty were the sources for documentation. That drove the interpretations and established a convention. That late Egyptian period is when the Greeks were exploring the culture and drawing parallels to their own beliefs. The breakdown of the Greek name contains "bast" as a unit, not Bastet. Any Egyptian name with "-is" is of Greek origin, not Ancient Egyptian. It would be the Ancient Egyptian that would have to be referenced for periods prior to the time that the scribes at the temple of Amun began to change the spelling (which is documented often) -- in order to examine why that is asserted. I suspect that we need much better early documentation to come to a decision. My research indicates that the temple was constructed after the spelling convention for the goddess changed and that the northern lioness cult in the delta was there from long before, so her name may have been the source for the town name. I will keep looking also. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 00:06, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@83d40m: In looking for Old Kingdom inscriptions that mention Bastet, I found that the well-known statue of Hemiunu bears an inscription that mentions her. Egyptian Art in the Age of the Pyramids, translates this text on page 29, and among Hemiunu's titles are "priest of Bastet, priest of Shesmetet". Despite my limited knowledge of hieroglyphs, with a lot of flipping through the sign-list section of James P. Allen's Middle Egyptian I've managed to match this passage to a section of the text in a photo on Commons: [1]. It's near the top of the second column of the inscription (which reads right to left), just next to Hemiunu's left foot. The text reads (bꜢstt, "Bastet" although the ointment-jar sign is hard to recognize in this inscription because it's lying sideways) (ḥm-nṯr "priest") (šzmtt, "Shesmetet"; note that the first sign is a variant, S17a, that doesn't render in WikiHiero, though it's in the hieroglyphic Unicode block as 𓋦 if that's visible on your computer) (ḥm-nṯr, "priest").

Therefore the name was written as bꜢstt as early as the Fourth Dynasty, and the claim of a change of spelling in the New Kingdom would seem to be unfounded. A. Parrot (talk) 06:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Our article asserts -- In early Egyptian, her name appears to have been bꜣstt. In Egyptian writing, the second t marks a feminine ending, but was not usually pronounced, and the aleph ꜣ (Egyptian 3 symbol.png) may have moved to a position before the accented syllable, ꜣbst.[4] By the first millennium, then, bꜣstt would have been something like *Ubaste (< *Ubastat) in Egyptian speech, later becoming Coptic Oubaste.[4] Can you demonstrate the earlier form for comparison? _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 15:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@83d40m: I'm not sure what you're asking. The statue text says: where the first sign says bꜢs, the second says t, and the third says t. That's "Bastet" with two Ts. The article text you quote, which is cited to the source by te Velde that I quoted above, is talking about a change in the pronunciation of the goddess's name, which doesn't seem to have been reflected in writing, in which the second t was dropped. Hieroglyphic writing often preserved spellings that had disappeared from pronunciation. It's similar to writing in modern English, which preserves the Middle English spellings of some words like "night", in which the gh was once pronounced as a voiceless velar fricative but is simply a pair of silent letters now. Similarly, the t at the end of Egyptian words, which served as a feminine suffix, had become silent by the time Late Egyptian came into use in the New Kingdom, but hieroglyphic spellings still used the t sign in words where the feminine suffix had been. As far as I can tell, bꜢstt, "Bastet", is the original form of the name, and the second t, which was the feminine suffix, disappeared from pronunciation later. Thus, as te Velde says, Egyptians of the first millennium BC would have called the goddess something like "Ubaste", lacking the second t. Unless you can cite solid Egyptological sources that claim otherwise, the argument that "Bast" was the earlier form of the name would seem to be groundless. A. Parrot (talk) 17:20, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

In the information box, WP indicates for the name for this deity -- Name in hieroglyphs as W1 t B1 -- not what you are presenting. You seem to continue to refer to information from the first millennium although authorities indicate that she first appears during the third millennium B.C. Please let me know when you can present graphically how she was noted then, that was my request to you.

How old are the earliest cursive references to this deity? One cannot translate hieroglyphs as correlating to our alphabet, our alphabet is abstract and related to sounds of spoken language, but hieroglyphs are symbolic of concepts and associations, even when used to identify places, things, and people. The spoken name is yet another thing.

Usually, I am not inclined to extensive debate of opinion in talk pages involving editors. I do believe that WP should make articles as informative as possible. I once made the effort to rename the article, but am not pursuing that. The convention of naming articles in WP often is unrelated to the most logical or informed. It is what it is, I am not going to seek scientific or literary standards, but think that the primary article on a topic ought to at least present information authentic to the topic, not necessarily just reinforcing inauthentic conventions arising out of a lack of information in popular discussions as they unfold. We do have readers who are seeking more than the superficial. If our links go to a primary article that is thorough, sometimes that may be the best to hope for.

I appreciate your efforts, but need to see early examples for comparison. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 19:00, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@83d40m: The early example is here. I already linked it. It's the base of a statue of Hemiunu, the vizier of Khufu, in the Fourth Dynasty, and its hieroglyphs are W2-X1-X1. These glyphs are all phonetic, so they indicate how the name was pronounced; W2 is a triliteral sign meaning bꜢs, and X1 means t. This same spelling is found in The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, which handily lists hieroglyphic spellings for most deities, in Lexikon der ägyptischen Götter und Götterbezeichnungen, a comprehensive listing of Egyptian deities and their names, and in the Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache, the standard dictionary of Egyptian. Apparently the infobox of this article is in error in writing one X1 glyph (which would write "Bast", or something similar) and not two (which spells, more or less, "Bastet").

In short, all the sources I've found, along with the one example of an Old Kingdom spelling of Bastet's name that I managed to hunt down all say bꜢstt, which is transcribed as "Bastet". As far as I can tell, that was her original name. I don't know where the idea comes from that "Bast" is the original name, but it seems to be wrong. A. Parrot (talk) 01:10, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I cannot see the images at the foot of the statue, do you have anything that shows them clearly? I am glad you noted the error in the information box, shouldn't the W1 be corrected? Although this is a thousand years earlier than the eighteenth dynasty, it still cannot be considered evidence of the "original" name, hopefully some evidence that approaches her first appearance may be demonstrated. Since there is so much written about the change, it would be interesting to examine how that began and the details of those debates. _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 20:14, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

@83d40m: Bastet's name appears on the statue are in the middle column of the photograph (the one to the side of Hemiunu's foot). As I said before, the bꜢs sign in this text is lying sideways, which is unusual, but by comparing the surrounding hieroglyphs to the translation of the inscription I was able to work out that that is indeed Bastet's name. And I've now found in Early Dynastic Egypt (1999) by Toby Wilkinson a mention of a group of priests of Bastet from the reign of Nynetjer. Wilkinson transliterates their name as sꜢ ḏfꜢw bꜢstt. You're not going to find much evidence earlier than that; Wilkinson implies that the first solid evidence of her existence comes from the beginning of the Second Dynasty, and Nynetjer was the third king of that dynasty.

In sum, the goddess's name in the Early Dynastic Period and Old Kingdom was bꜢstt. Sometime after that, the spoken Egyptian language stopped pronouncing the feminine -t suffix in all words. (I thought this change took place in the transition between Middle Egyptian and Late Egyptian, but according to Allen 2000 it was between Old Egyptian and Middle.) That is how the name ended up with a single T in the first millennium BC. The sources I can find say little or nothing about the difference between the forms of her name, because that difference was part of a sound change that affected the entire language and doesn't say anything in particular about Bastet.

I tracked down the origin of the idea that "Bastet" was a later change; it was introduced to this article by User:-Ril- way back in 2005. -Ril- was a well-meaning but terribly misinformed editor. I thought I had cut all the misinformation introduced by -Ril- out of this article, but I see I was wrong. I've eliminated that passage and corrected the hieroglyphic spelling in the infobox. That should be the end of that. A. Parrot (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Shouldn't the initial image in the hieroglyphic name be W2 -- the alabaster jar? _ _ _ _ 83d40m (talk) 02:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it should. Silly me. I fixed it. A. Parrot (talk) 02:48, 23 January 2019 (UTC)