User:Coloured words/sandbox

Assignment #2

BASTET Wiki-article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastet

The Wikipedia article discusses the ancient Egyptian goddess know as Bastet who was worshiped as part of the Egyptian pantheon starting around the time of the Second Dynasty. The goddesses name is spelt as b3stt, the second t giving the name a feminine ending. Different spellings in languages such as Aramaic would have changed her name considerably, pronouncing it as ‘obest’ or ‘ubesti.’   The town which held Bastet’s cult was known as Boubastit (Βουβαστισ in Greek and Pi-beset (House of Bastet) in Hebrew.  There was a temple built here to the goddess with a typical lake or isheru surrounding it.  It was here that the festival to Bastet was held.  Women would engage in music and dance, performing sacrifices and drank.

The origin and exact meaning of the goddesses’ name remains undetermined, but the most common meaning is taken to be “She of the ointment jars,” tying her to protective ointments. Though her representation changed during Egyptian history Bastet was first recorded within the Egyptian pantheon as a lioness, or anthropomorphasized as a woman with a lion’s head. She was also depicted holding a ceremonial instrument known as a sistrum in one hand and an aegis or collar in the other.

Her original function within the polytheistic religion was as the protector of Lower Egypt, the defender of the pharaoh and therefore the chief male deity Ra. This role shrank however with the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt and the growing role of a similar deity known as Sekhmet. It was during the first millennium BCE, when domestic cats were a popular pet that she began to be associated with the smaller feline.

It is estimated that during the Twenty-second Dynasty (c. 945-715BCE) the worship of Bastet changed from the lioness to a minor cat deity. It was around this time that domestic house cats began to be mummified en-mass, and her cult reach its peak. Due to her name, Bastet became known as the goddess of perfumes later identified as the wife of the god Anubis, god of embalming. Her ties with domestic house cats also brought her into the realm of motherhood. Later, with the merging of several deities led to confusion regarding her role in the pantheon and she was also linked to the lunar goddess Mut.

Britannica Online http://www.britannica.com.rap.ocls.ca/EBchecked/topic/55595/Bastet

Bastet, also known as Bast, is the ancient Egyptian goddess who was worshiped as a lioness, and later as a domestic cat. Within the pantheon she was given the role of daughter to the sun god Re. Her ferocity as a lioness-goddess was diminished around 1500BCE after the domestication of the cat. Her cult was located in Bubastis along the Nile River delta as well as the city of Memphis. In the Late and Ptolemaic (Greek) periods large collections of mummified cats were placed at her temples along with votive offerings. These were left in the form of cat figures and amulets originally worn by women. The goddess Bastet was represented in iconography as a woman with a cat’s head and carrying an instrument known as a sistrum in her right hand. In her left hand she holds an aegis or breastplate and a small bag over her left arm. Her cult was carried into Italy by the Romans, traces of which can be found in Rome, Ostia, Nemi and Pompeii.

Compare and Contrast

While appraising both the Wikipedia article and the one posted on Britannica online it was immediately apparent that they were both quite different articles. On the surface the Wikipedia article appears quite a lot longer in length than that of the Britannica online article. The Britannica online article appears to be written in a more academic tone, and unlike the wiki article it does not appear to repeat information previous stated under a different heading such as ties to other gods and cult activity. Rather, the article about mainly about her role as an Ancient Egyptian goddess and her various forms throughout history.

In contrast the Wikipedia article is longer and written in a language that anyone can understand. There are also a lot more supplemental images compared to the Britannica article where there is only one main image attached to the article. There also appears to be a lot of repeated information, or re-worked information from heading to heading. An example of this is information found under the From Lion to Cat Goddess tab and History and Connection to Other Gods tab which both discuss her role and iconographical change from Lioness to domestic cat. The wiki article also uses far more headings than the Britannica online page. It breaks all of the information on one specific page under subject headings whereas the Britannica online article uses tabs at the left side of the article in order to orient and direct people to other information on different pages, and also on different web-sites. The Wikipedia article also uses footnotes to link the information presented to citations and references provided. This type of reference does not appear anywhere on the Britannica online article.

Both articles have hyperlinks to other articles on other pages within the database. Some examples of these hyperlinks are subjects such as Ancient Egypt, Sekhmet, and Ra. Both articles also have references and external links to further resources such as e-books, videos, web-links, and articles. There are lists of editors and contributors affiliated with both article pages and article histories of when and by whom it was edited.

References, Contributors, and Further Reading

The Wikipedia references are broken down into primary and secondary sources. The main primary source used for the article is Herodotus who is a major ancient writer for scholars studying Ancient Greece and Egypt. The secondary sources that are supplied are relatively current, although I would question the bias in the book Dictionary of Demons and Deities in the Bible. It may not be the best source for unbiased information depending on what it is being used for.

Underneath the sources provided is a list of further reading where five books and two external links are provided. The books are slightly outdated in terms of academic schooling, with the exception of the last book published in 2010. All of them are relevant to the article and pertain to cats, cat cults, Bastet and Ancient Egyptian religion. Some of the examples given are in different languages including French and German. Others are publications released by the British Museum which would be an excellent source to consult. The external links are comprised of an article released by the BBC, and an academic essay posted on-line.

When viewing the posting history, seems to conclude that the contributors to this article spend a lot of time repairing vandalism to the article, and correcting information. The main content of the article does not change, or is not added to frequently which may be one of the reasons that it continues to need more sources and references in some sections.

The Britannica online article does not appear to have any references that were used in the creation of the article. This could be because Encyclopedia Britannica views itself as its own source and repository of scholarly information. There also appears to be quite a lot less external information provided by the site than that of Wikipedia. Under the tab for “web links” there are two secondary tabs. The first one is an internet guide that provides three external links, while the other is linked to an external web search, powered by Google, based on the topic of the article you are viewing.

The three external links provided are current, but appear to be unrelated or un-creditable. The first is a travel Egypt website that has posted information on the ancient religion, while the second is a link to a secondary encyclopedia that deals specifically with mythology. The last external link is a website which calls itself an “encyclopedia,” but when you start looking at it, it is not. The website is run by a Norwegian media house that operates the website along with a traveler’s guide to North African countries and a basic language course in Arabic.

There are two related articles under the tab that are very current (2009 and 2010 respectively). The first article is copyright of Weekly Reader News while the second was published by the Canadian Medical Association Journal. This article appears to be the only credible source in the entire collection.

There is one contributor listed for the article; Laura Etheredge, who is listed as a general Britannica Online editor, and the article history states that it has not been updated or edited since July 10, 2008.

Personal Assessment

When looking at the Wikipedia page on the Ancient Egyptian goddess Bastet, it appears to be a good source of basic information on the topic. The information is laid out in such a way that it is easy to read, or skim for the information you are looking for. It also presents the information in a language and manner that can be accessible for everyone of any skill level. The headings are easily recognizable for orientation within the article and all of the hyperlinks and footnotes are well identified. There is a good selection of comprehensive information, however it does repeat in several places where new information could be added.

The article presented on Britannica Online also has a lot of these strengths however; I think that the information is provided in a slightly higher language that may prove troublesome for some people. The page that the article is present on also appears harder to navigate in terms of the reference material and additional resources. The tabs at the side of the page are easily recognizable, but there are tabs within tabs that pose the problem, especially when not all of the tabs hold content, or accessible content. This makes the navigation of the page frustrating and a poorer resource overall, especially compared to Wikipedia’s easy use format.

In contrast, I think that one thing that articles posed on Wikipedia do very well is present information that is accessible to everyone. Because the information provided is, for the most part, posted and edited by people who are not scholars or academic people in the field the written language of the articles is more highly accessible to people doing rudimentary research on the web.

One of the issues that I found increasingly troubling the more I looked at the Britannica Online site was its hidden corporate agenda. Because the articles on Wikipedia are far more public oriented than other ‘encyclopedia’ based websites such as Britannica Online there is no corporate agenda or underlying sponsorship, which to some degree improves the validity of the article. This concept is quite evident in the external links provided by the Wikipedia article vs. the one posted by Britannica Online. The ones posted on the public wiki article are both relatively current and directly related to the article. Although some of them are not necessarily the best resources that can be found online or in a library, they provide appropriate information and back-up the research posted on the article’s main page. In contrast those provided by more corporate sites such as Britannica Online serve a hidden corporate agenda. All of the links provided with the exception of perhaps one are other sites that provide specific services or secondary items that can be purchased for a monetary value. They are not directly related to the content of the main article and hold only secondary information as a by-product or coincidence.

It is for this reason that I feel caution should be used when looking at these types of sites. There seems to be no peer-review to hold them accountable to the information they post, and although it is correct and unbiased information there is an air of superiority or pretentiousness. It feels as though the information should be believed and valued as the be-all that one should buy into their commercially driven information product.

This is not to say that the Wikipedia article is vastly superior in its member contribution or academic value. The article sites in many locations that more citations and references need to be provided for its overall improvement. There could be more references and external links provided and content edited.

Overall I think that every article whether it be on a public-edited site such as Wikipedia or a ‘trusted’ site such as Britannica online should be scrutinized and reviewed objectively before it is used and cited as the provider of information. By continuing to be critical of every source used, places such as Wikipedia can only improve in their facilitation of information and hopefully push others such as Britannica Online to strive for the same sense of accuracy and presentation.

Bibliography of Alternate Sources

Challin, Paul C. Life in Ancient Egypt. New York: Crabtree, 2005. Print.

Darnell, Coleman John. “The Apotropaic Goddess in the Eye.” Studien Zur Altagyptischen Kultur: Helmut Buske Verlag GmbH 24 (1997): 35-48. Jstor. Web. 18, Nov. 2012.

Fesko, Barbara S. The Great Goddess of Egypt. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1999. Print.

Kifaru Productions, Films Media Group. Animals as Divinities. New York: 2007. DVD

Owen, James. “Egyptian Animals were Mummified the same way as Humans.” National Geographic News. National Geographic Mag., 15 Sept. 2004. Web. 17, Nov. 2012.

Rotherford, Ian, and Jas Elsner. Pilgrimage in Greco-Roman and Early Christian Antiquity: Seeing the Gods. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print

Salima, Ikram. Divine Creatures: animal mummies in Ancient Egypt. Cairo: American University of Cairo Press, 2005. Print.

Smith, Julian. “Tomb of the Chantress: A newly discovered burial chamber in the Valley of the Kings 	provides a rare glimpse into the life of an ancient Egyptian singer.” Archaeology July/August 2012; 28-32. Print.

Wilkinson, Richard H. The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2003. Print.

Bronze Figure of a Seated Cat: The sacred representation of the goddess Bastet. British Museum. n.d. Web. 17 Nov. 2012.

Assignment #1

“Home Children.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 27 Aug. 2012. Web. 27 Sept. 2012.

“Children, Lost and Found.” The Canadian Encyclopedia/The Encyclopedia of Music in Canada. The Canadian Encyclopedia, 2012. Web. 27 Sept. 2012

“Bastet.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 21 Sept. 2012. Web. 30 Sept. 2012.

“Bastet” Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 30 Sept. 2012

“Spotted-winged Fruit Bat.” Mark McGinley. The Encyclopedia of the Earth. 7 Nov. 2011. Web. 27 Sept. 2012.

“Spotted-winged Fruit Bat.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 14 Sept. 2012. Web. 27 Sept. 2012.

“Hannibal.” Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 28 Sept. 2012

“Hannibal.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 1 Oct. 2012. Web. 28 Sept. 2012.

“Sol Invictus.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 6 Sept. 2012. Web. 28 Sept. 2012.

“Sol Invictus.” Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 28 Sept. 2012

I chose all of the topics listed above based on topics that I am interested in, or topics that I already know a lot about with the exception of the spotted-winged fruit bat. Three of the topics, Bastet, Hannibal, and Sol Invictus, I chose based on my B.A. in classical studies and archaeology while I chose Home Children because that way a large research project I undertook during my summer contract in an archive facility. I chose the spotted-wing fruit bat because I find bats interesting, and I wanted the opportunity to look through the Earth Encyclopedia. The last criteria I had for choosing these topics is that most pop-culture topics that I would have chosen are covered in Wikipedia because it is created by ‘people,’ but these types of topics are not covered in more general or academic encyclopaedias because of their cultural nature.

For both the Wikipedia searches and the encyclopedia searches I typed my topic into the search bar and looked at what types of articles were brought up from my general search. I chose the encyclopaedias based on the topics that I was looking for. So, for the Home Children it is a strictly Canadian topic, so I searched in the Canadian Encyclopedia. For the topic about nature I chose the Earth Encyclopedia. For the more general topics I found it was easier to use Encyclopedia Britannica which covers a broader base of topics.

Some of the initial differences I found were format and content. In terms of format Wikipedia is written more like an article or a string of information but the tone is more general. In contrast the encyclopaedias were more on the academic side of writing styles. For format Wikipedia articles involve a lot of pictures, headings and links. There are a lot of further reading references and bibliographic entries at the bottom of Wikipedia entries that are not found in encyclopaedias. Some encyclopaedias however generate more than one article related to the topic you choose so that there is greater information to choose from and read through.