Talk:Apophis

Untitled

If anyone knows which deities are in the pictures with Apep, that could help improve the captions. I just assume the man in the first photo is a branch off another religion.

disambiguation

There needs to be a disambigous page because the asteroid that will graze planet Earth in 2029 is named Apophis. More info at asteroid deflection strategies and in this article. User:AlMac|^(talk) 06:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree (belatedly). Three things with the same functional name are enough for a separate disambiguation page. -- nae'blis 18:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Demon/creature

Is there any particular reason why Apep can't be listed as both a legendary creature and a demon? There's not a universal agreement on how to qualify creatures as "demons", but being the embodiment of evil, it would seem reasonable to classify Apep as one.--24.255.171.220 (talk) 16:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

An Egyptian deity (Set) slays the snake-like Apep

The second picture states: "An Egyptian deity (Set) slays the snake-like Apep". What proof is there that the "deity" is Set? The Set animal is an unknown creature, yet the picture features what looks like a feline. What do others think? Lordmick 15:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Quite right - the picture is from the Book of the Dead Ch. 17 and depicts Ra as a cat overcoming Apep as a snake. I have changed the captionApepch7 (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Are there any other mentions of Ra taking the form of a cat? I would assume the depicted deity is Bastet, being Ra's daughter, slaying the serpent. This is not my area of expertise, so I will not edit it. Does anyone know if there is a source for either assessment? Emilius V (talk) 07:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes but can't give references cos I don't have my books. It is not Bastet it is Ra as a cat slaying Apep.Apepch7 (talk) 11:11, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Apep's battles with Ra

In consulting primary sources about Egyptian mythology I have never encountered the whimsical stories about how Apep's battles are described with Ra. In whatever I have seen or read Ra slays the snake in either his form as a cat or as Montu. Specific citations need to be included to justify this material, as in page numbers and direct quotations.

I've either sourced or deleted the text you tagged. Some of it I've seen before in non-expert sources (like the link between Apep and solar eclipses), but I don't yet know that it has appeared in an Egyptological source, so I left it out. See what you think. A. Parrot (talk) 21:46, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Removed from the article

I removed these passages from the article because they weren't supported by the source at the end of the paragraph they were in. Some of them are certainly or probably true, but not all:

Also, comparable hostile snakes as enemies of the sun god existed under other names (in the Pyramid Texts and Coffin Texts) already before the name Apep occurred. The etymology of his name (ꜥꜣpp) is perhaps to be sought in some west-semitic language where a word root ꜣpp meaning 'to slither' existed. A verb root ꜥꜣpp does at any rate not exist elsewhere in Ancient Egyptian. (It is not to be confused with the verb ꜥpı͗/ꜥpp: 'to fly across the sky, to travel') Apep's name much later came to be falsely connected etymologically in Egyptian with a different root meaning (he who was) spat out; the Romans referred to Apep by this translation of his name. Apophis was a large golden snake known to be miles long.

An IP editor changed "West Semitic" to "South Semitic" shortly before I removed this text, which I consider a particularly dubious claim. The Egyptians were in contact with West Semitic peoples throughout their history, and passages in West Semitic appear even in the Pyramid Texts. Any contact with speakers of South Semitic languages would have been more remote and infrequent. A. Parrot (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Clarification needed: symbol of Apep

Was Apep's main symbol just a snake, or in some cases, specifically a cobra? An unregistered user has changed this information in the infobox, but their edit has been reverted. Neither revision cites any sources. I have, for now, annotated Apep's symbol description with the "Citation needed" template. If somebody has reliable sources to back up either claim, please clarify this part of the article's infobox. TucanHolmes (talk) 23:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I've always been unsure how to use the "symbol" parameter, because I don't know if it's supposed to apply to the forms in which a god was depicted. The example at Template:Infobox deity lists "aum" and "modak" as symbols of Ganesha, but not "elephant". That's part of the reason why I removed the parameter.

Regarding the type of snake Apophis was supposed to be, Egyptian Mythology (2004) by Geraldine Pinch suggests that Apophis may have been inspired by the African python (p. 107), though that seems questionable, as it doesn't seem to live in or near Egypt. She also says there was an Egyptian proverb that "One should welcome the uraeus and spit on Apophis" (p. 199), suggesting a distinction between the two. The uraeus was the rearing cobra with spread hood that is so common in Egyptian art, and it seems to have been associated with goddesses and not gods. Male serpent deities don't seem to be portrayed as uraei—e.g., Nehebkau as well as Apophis—and while that doesn't prove that they weren't cobras (because, of course, real cobras aren't always in rearing position), it does tend to suggest it. I think that is enough evidence to cast doubt on the idea that Apophis was a cobra, even if it doesn't prove it. In the absence of certainty, I think we should err on the side of caution and call Apophis a snake, which is certainly true, rather than a cobra. A. Parrot (talk) 01:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying! TucanHolmes (talk) 14:56, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: History of Ancient Egypt

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 January 2023 and 17 March 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Transparentv (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Ancientwonder4253, 5734hls.

— Assignment last updated by Johnstoncl (talk) 19:15, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Great Cat of Ra

The form of the cat of Ra has spotting and large ears, which to me resembles the serval. Now, servals aren't native to Egypt, but perhaps they were back when Northern Africa was more humid, so might there be a possibility that this "great cat" is a serval? Anthropophoca (talk) 02:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:FORUM. This is not a place for speculation, keep it to sourced additions to the article. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 11:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: 311_History of Ancient Egypt

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 22 March 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Honkshoo The Bird Man (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Lindsing17.

— Assignment last updated by Johnstoncl (talk) 01:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Page Image showing Apep... *not* in danger, feels inconsistent with text... which also isn't exactly accurate?

So, the article contains this quote: Fearing that even the image of Apep could give power to the demon, any rendering would always include another deity to subdue the monster. This is immediately contradicted by the accompanying images-- while there's ofc the one with Cat!Ra cutting its head off with a knife, there's also the one which was opposed by Ramesses I, and the two that show it simply being sliced/stabbed with a bunch of knives wielded by... nobody? Wielded by the scribe/artist, maybe? Clearly, it doesn't need to be a deity to subdue the monster.

On top of which, we also have... right at the top, a depiction of Apep that ISN'T being assaulted by ANY assailant. The caption notes that it's based on the Ramesses I pic, but that one... well, it had Ramesses I to oppose the snake. Granted, this is a religion that isn't practiced anymore, but it still feels... a little irreverent, but more importantly, it feels inaccurate to depict Apep in a way that the Egyptians never would. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 9 April 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved  — Amakuru (talk) 14:37, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

---

Apep → Apophis – I believe that this page should be moved to Apophis because it is the more common name, even though Apep is closer to the native Egyptian name and Apophis is the Greek name, most Egyptological material uses Apophis.PharaohCrab (talk) 18:26, 9 April 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 18:26, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Oppose We're basing on the common name in scholarly works, as this is not a pop culture article. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 19:07, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

a lot of scholarly work does use Apophis PharaohCrab (talk) 12:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Im split on this. I do agree that Apophis is the defacto English name for the god but i also think the indigenous name has presidence if it differs to this degree. Blockhaj (talk) 18:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

but it would be inconsistent, most other pages use the most common name. even when that is the Greek name, E.g. Osiris, Isis, Horus, Anubis, Nephthys, Satis, etc. PharaohCrab (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

That is a much better argument. I'm still gonna wait with my vote until more exports get on the line. Blockhaj (talk) 20:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

• Comment. A survey of some of the standard sources from the past 50 years on Egyptian deities and religion:

• Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt, Erik Hornung (1982): Apopis (note no "h")
• The Gods of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterston (1984): Apopis
• Gods and Myths of Ancient Egypt, Robert A. Armour (1986): Apophis
• Ancient Egyptian Religion, Stephen Quirke (1992): Aapep
• Daily Life of the Egyptian Gods, Dimitri Meeks & Christine Favard-Meeks (1996): Apophis
• The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, ed. Donald B. Redford (2001): Apophis
• The Gods of Egypt, Claude Traunecker (2001): Apopis
• Religion and Magic in Ancient Egypt, Rosalie David (2002): Apophis
• Egyptian Mythology, Geraldine Pinch (2002): Apophis
• The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt, Richard Wilkinson (2003): Apophis
• Gods and Men in Egypt, Franoise Dunand & Christiane Zivie-Coche (2004): Apopis
• The Routledge Dictionary of Ancient Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, rev. ed., George Hart (2005): Apophis
• The Penguin Book of Myths & Legends of Ancient Egypt, Joyce Tyldesley (2010): Apophis
• The Egyptian Myths, Garry J. Shaw (2014): Apophis

Plus some studies that focus more closely on this entity or on underworld entities more broadly:

• "Apophis: On the Origin, Name, and Nature of an Ancient Egyptian Anti-God", Ludwig Morenz (JNES 2004): Apophis
• Book of the Dead 39: From Shouting to Structure, Joris Borghouts (2007): Apopis
• Ancient Egyptian Demonology, ed. Panagiotis Kousoulis (2011): Apopis
• The Ancient Egyptian Netherworld Books, John Coleman Darnell & Colleen Manassa Darnell (2018): Apep
• Daemons & Spirits in Ancient Egypt, Carolyn Graves-Brown (2018): Apep

So "Apophis" is overwhelmingly most common, and "Apopis" second. The two most recent sources use the spelling of the current title, but while that may indicate that this spelling is on the rise, it's much too small a sample size to be sure. A. Parrot (talk) 01:30, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

• Support per A. Parrot's analysis, overwhelmingly the most common name. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 10:48, 11 April 2025 (UTC)
• Support per A. Parrot's analysis. Srnec (talk) 15:33, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pronounciation

I am of the understanding that the correct pronounciation is a-paw-fis not a-po-fis. I am not truely sure but would appreciate somebody better learned than me checking this. ~2026-23373-09 (talk) 09:17, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

iv'e heard both pronunciations I assume both can be correct. PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 11:26, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. I think we are both assuming, how do we go about being sure? ~2026-23952-05 (talk) 11:51, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

It stems from Ancient Greek, pronounciation isnt that important in modern English. ᛒᛚᚮᚴᚴᚼᛆᛁ ᛭ 𝔅𝔩𝔬𝔠𝔨𝔥𝔞𝔧 17:04, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Requested move 6 July 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. There is consensus that the deity is the primary topic by long-term significance. (closed by non-admin page mover) TarnishedPath^talk 09:25, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

---

• Apophis → Apophis (mythology)
• Apophis (disambiguation) → Apophis

– No primary topic; the asteroid (which is naturally disambiguated by its number) consistently gets slightly more pageviews. Alternatively this page could be moved to Apophis (deity), there doesn't seem to be a standard disambiguator term... SevenSpheres (talk) 21:36, 6 July 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 00:15, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Oppose as mentioned in the nomination, the asteroid is naturally disambiguated and no pages on the disambiguation page have an exactly similar name. PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 23:56, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Just because it's naturally disambiguated in the title there according to pertinent scientific rules, that doesn't mean it's natural for all the readers to actually use the number in that name to reference that topic. --Joy (talk) 12:07, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Ancient Egypt, WikiProject Ancient Egypt/Religion work group, and WikiProject Mythology have been notified of this discussion. PharaohCrab speak𓀁 works𓀨 23:56, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

• Support just because another article is naturally disambiguated and this one isn't doesn't make this one primary. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:35, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. (1) Just because another article gets more pageviews than this one doesn't make it primary. (2) The asteroid was discovered and named in 2004, which is more recent than the creation of this article. Long-term significance favours the Egyptian. (3) This article was just moved from Apep last year. Srnec (talk) 20:38, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

  The move last year took over the base page title "Apophis", which previously pointed to the disambiguation page. That was not discussed then. SevenSpheres (talk) 21:16, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

  Should have been a multi-move. Amakuru should not have moved it per that discussion, I agree. Srnec (talk) 01:05, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

• Support. Apologies, Srnec is correct that I made an error last year with the renaming of the disambiguation page, I think I thought that aspect of it to be uncontrocersial at the time. What I should have done in retrospect is relist with a note that the Apophis page was not available without a multimove. Anyway, that aside, looking at the evidence, we definitely need to revert to having no primary topic. Per the nom, the asteroid gets higher page views, and longterm significance is pretty much equal. The asteroid has existed far longer than the mythological entity, and despite Wikipedia choosing to put a number before it, its actual name still is simply Apophis, so the above oppose arguments on significance and natural disambiguation don't apply. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 07:20, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose The deity has massive longterm significance. The asteroid has 0 longterm significance. It's just a random space rock. If it actually impacted Earth, then it would start to gain longterm significance, but even then it would take thousands of years to dethrone the deity as significant. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:21, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

  The asteroid existed for millions of years before there was ever such a thing as the deity Apophis, and will remain in existence long after the human race and all traces of the existence of such a mythological figure are gone. Its longterm significance is astronomically larger than that of the deity (pardon the pun!). And your assertion that it is "just a random space rock" is rather negated by the fact that it gets almost twice as many page views as the mythology Apophis. There's a strong case that the asteroid is primary topic here, but at the very least it should revert to being a disambiguation page.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:25, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

  Lengthy existence =/= longterm significance. The key word is significance, and the asteroid has never held any form of significance to humanity until we realized it might collide with us, unlike the Sun, planets or certain stars that had significance even in ancient times.

  While it may get more pageviews, ultimately the deity is the one with the outsize significance and the claim to primary topic. The only time the deity may not be primary is if the asteroid does actually collide with the Earth (in which case we have way bigger problems than a naming dispute). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:56, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

  The asteroid article has 100+ references and two dozen external links... even if we assume a lot of is some sort of cruft that just hasn't been properly reviewed, it's still probably quite a bit compared to the 14 references and two links in the deity article.

  The latter definitely has historical significance, but when the belief in it has been largely extinct in the real world for over a millenium, it can't be automatically weighed by its age. --Joy (talk) 15:03, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

  Even if it were purely based on the time when humans believed Apophis actually existed, the deity would still be more significant. But I'm fairly sure that the deity had cultural impacts beyond that, and the article is just underdeveloped and in need of improvement. The asteroid article, being a pop culture topic, is obviously going to draw more attention than a history topic that is "boring" to most people. This isn't really proof of much and I'm confident the Apophis article could be expanded to a featured article even longer than that of the asteroid. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:06, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

  Like I said, these conclusions can't be automatic, based on these sorts of assertions. There's far more nuance here than the rock just being recentism and let's protect boring topics. This is a general encyclopedia, it's not a specialized resource on either astronomy or ancient history. --Joy (talk) 15:10, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

• Support, no PRIMARYTOPIC by pageviews at least.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:27, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

  Pageviews are not the only metric by which primary topic is determined. Otherwise apple would go to the computer manufacturer. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:33, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. The deity is the primary topic per long-term significance. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:59, 15 July 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose. The deity is the primary topic.--ᛒᛚᚮᚴᚴᚼᛆᛁ ᛭ 𝔅𝔩𝔬𝔠𝔨𝔥𝔞𝔧 02:11, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

For what it's worth, comparing the quality of references between these two articles, I think it speaks in favor of the deity having more long-term significance. The asteroid page cites only a single book, which is One Hundred Year Star-Diary, "a workbook to be used and enjoyed by astronomers, astrologers, poets and writers alike". Most of the useful content of that article seems to be cited to database entries. There is a lot of random news articles and just random websites, like a changelog entry for some video game that mentions the asteroid, a Fox News article about Russia shooting ICBMs into space, a 2008 story about how a German 13-year-old boy didn't(!) predict the asteroid's path, to name a few. There are also a lot of scientific articles cited, but many of them seem to be mostly about incremental improvements to numerical estimates and such, although I didn't look through them in enough detail to be sure. Anyway, I'll refrain from placing a bold !vote here because I'm not familiar enough with the guidelines to be sure if the difference in long-term significance by itself makes the deity a primary topic. Jhvx (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

That's a fair point about the asteroid article needing improvement and cruft cleanup, which could be raised at its talk page. Regardless of the current state of the article, it's clearly an object of scientific and public interest, with multiple space probes planned to visit it; see OSIRIS-REx and Ramses (spacecraft). SevenSpheres (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, the deity remains the primary topic by long-term significance. Accesscrawl (talk) 06:08, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.