Talk:Maa Kheru

Ancient Egypt: Egyptian religion Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by Egyptian religion work group (assessed as Low-importance).

WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list:

Needed articles.

We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have.

Cleanup.

To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates?

Standardize the Chronology.

A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563)

Stub sorting

Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . .

Data sorting.

This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jplute.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

'Maat Kheru' or 'Maàt Kheru'?[edit]

There is, in the Wikipedia directory at least, a significant difference between Maat and Maàt: the former is a rank in the German military, and the latter is an Egyption truth goddess/concept and the one of significance to this article. I've recently changed a link in the article from Maat to Maàt; would it be appropriate to change the form in the title as well? (I'm really not sure; I don't know the language, so it may be correct on the basis of a rule I'm not aware of. :) ) DTM 04:43, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Better might even be to change Maàt to Ma'at throughout, since Ma'at is the spelling used by all our external sources. I'll raise the question at Talk:Maàt. --Quuxplusone 01:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maa Kheru[edit]

Gardiner's grammar says this is maa-kheru, or rather, maA-xrw (following the traditional hieroglyphic computer transliteration). Maat is truth, Maa is true. The phrase is "true of voice," not, "truth of voice." Furthermore, the hieroglyphics we've got in the corner say Maa Kheru anyway. Maat would be

Budge, furthermore, is not a good source... for anything... ever. Thanatosimii 23:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The meaning of Maat Kheru[edit]

I find the article quite confusing. I thought Maat Kheru was an adjective given to the deceased who has passed the judgement of Maat, and is thus found to be True of Voice, that is litterally not a liar (since lies make your heart heavy and thus you fail to have it balanced with Maat's feather). Iry-Hor (talk) 15:54, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the article is based on the work of Lewis Spence, an occultist from the early 20th century with no Egyptological background. The last footnote in our article on Spence notes that one of his books, on Babylonian and Assyrian myths and legends, received a harsh review in 1918 for its "totally inadequate preparation". Spence is not a reliable source in Wikipedia terms.

Spence said his interpretation on the term was taken from somebody named "Maspus", a word that may be a weird Latinization of Gaston Maspero's name. The study by Rudolf Anthes that is listed in this article indicates that Maspero interpreted m3ˤ ḫrw in a way similar to what Spence described, but Maspero is very out of date and should not be seen as a reliable source either. Anthes interprets the phrase as "the acclaim given to him is 'right'", and James Peter Allen, in Middle Egyptian, as "true of voice" or more freely, "justified". So you are entirely correct. I'll figure out a way to rewrite the offending sentence. A. Parrot (talk) 18:26, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you did a great job clarifying this point ! Iry-Hor (talk) 13:42, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]