Anna Shamory

ANTH 446
Dr. Shenk
12/9/19
Term Paper:
Marriage and Mating in Ancient Egypt

Introduction
Ancient Egypt was one of the world’s earliest civilizations, alongside other early
civilizations such as those located in Mesopotamia and the Indus River Valley. Ancient Egypt
covered the area we know today as Egypt, but controlled lands outside those borders during its
empire period in the New Kingdom. It was a state-level society controlled by divine rulers called
Pharaohs. Ancient Egyptian civilization lasted from its unification around 3100 BCE to 30 BCE
when Egypt became a Roman province at the hands of Octavian. Over this period of nearly three
thousand years, various social customs and norms likely changed through the dynasties. It is
difficult to form an impression of the everyday lives of people who lived in antiquity, with the
limited sources that have survived over the thousands of years since then. Marriage and mating
customs in ancient Egypt are especially hard to reconstruct, as they were considered private
affairs between citizens and thus not officially documented. Without those records we have
limited knowledge of say what age the ancient Egyptians got married at, or how long marriages
typically lasted, or any other questions which could be answered by analyzing state marriage
records. Instead, Egyptologists must turn to sources that leave more room for interpretation, like
tomb iconography, stories, and court documents. Every detail and nuance cannot be covered in a
short paper about marriage and mating of ancient Egypt over its existence as a civilization, but a
more general idea of their practices can be gleaned.

A General Overview of Mating and Marriage

In order to give a fair impression of mating and marriage as a whole in Egypt, it must
first be understood that there exists a divide between the elite (royalty related to or otherwise
attached to the Pharaoh) and commoners (from the poorest worker to high ranking priests or
governors). Most of the population practiced serial monogamy, while polygyny was encouraged
in royal marriages. Royal marriages often included incestuous partnerings of close family
members like brothers and sisters, but those close relationships were not always consummated.
For the common folk, marriage was of social and economic significance, and not political
(Redford, 2005). Sex and marriage were seen as relatively informal and private matters between
individuals. There was no official state documentation or legality to marriage. The exception to
that norm is that royal marriages did have political and religious significance (Redford, 2005).
Additionally, for the context of this paper, I define commoners as anyone who was not part of
the royal family by blood or marriage, as practices in royals differed vastly from non-royals
(though some elite commoners could marry into royalty). While there would have been
disparities between elite non-royals and the average laborers, they had more in common in
mating and marriage than to royals.
Marriage Between Commoners
For the common ancient Egyptian couple, marriage was between one man and one
woman. This was done in a serially monogamous fashion, as commoners had no need for
polygyny. It would have been hard for the lower to middle classes to be able to financially
support multiple wives for economic reasons. Also, there was no need for polygyny as a means
to obtain more heirs, as there was no distinction between legitimate and illegitimate offspring--
children from the union of say a slave girl and a married man had the same inheritance rights as
children of the same man and his wife (Redford, 2005). A man did not need to marry another
wife if, for instance, she was infertile. The husband could have a child with a female slave or
divorce his wife and find a new one to marry.
The ancient Egyptians likely married for childbearing reasons. The purpose of marriage
was “cohabitation with the intent to reproduce” (Redford, 2005). People could have children out
of wedlock, but marriage was the preferred means to having children. And while children were
the main focus of a marriage, love marriages did occur. They were documented in funerary
writings of deceased spouses by their living wife or husband (Redford, 2005). On the other hand,
families also probably had a role in the marriage process to some degree. Sometimes a husband
would pay bride price to the wife’s family, but this was not a prevalent custom (Redford, 2005).
There was likely some level of choice in marriage decisions, but to what degree is unknown.
Next, there is the matter of who is allowed to be married. Ancient Egypt is known for its
incestuous marriages of Pharaohs to their sisters and other close female relatives. But for the
most part, close relative marriages were left to the royals. There is documentation from Roman
Egypt of an increased percentage of brother-sister marriage, but that is after the fall of Egyptian
civilization to the Romans, and not representative of ancient Egyptian commoner’s marriage
(Redford, 2005). Writing that indicate brother-sister marriage are seen in monumental
inscriptions that use the word “sister” for wife and “brother” for husband in some cases, but the
words do not actually mean blood relations. The kinship word ​sn​ “brother” means “lover” or
“suitor” in love poetry, as well as “husband” or “equal” or “friend” in other contexts (Revez,
2003, p. 124-127). The word ​snt,​ “sister” gradually replaced ​hmt​ “wife” after the middle of the
18th dynasty (Revez, 2003, p. 124). The usage of ​sn​ and ​snt​ in the context of marriage are terms
of poetic endearment, not incest. Incestuous relationships are documented and evidenced in
ancient Egyptian royalty.
As ancient Egyptian commoners did not have political marriages, what marked the start
of a marriage? Marriage was a simple affair with perhaps a celebration thrown, then the couple
moved in together, which finalized their joint property and household (Graves-Brown, 2010, p.
42). Marriage really began with moving in together. The phrases in ancient Egyptian language
that denote marriage include “to establish a household”; “to enter a household”; “to live
together” with someone, while phrases for divorce include to “go away” or “abandon” one’s
husband/wife (Redford, 2005). These phrases are concerned with marriage as a couple living
together in a joint household, which can be dissolved into divorce simply by leaving or
separating the household.
Gender roles in families followed typical patterns of patriarchal societies. Men supported
their wife and children with work, while the wife controlled the household, did domestic work,
and cared for children (Redford, 2005). But women in general had more freedom and rights than
might have been expected, especially when compared to women’s limited rights in ancient
Greece and Rome. Women kept control of property they brought into a marriage, had the right to
divorce, and could be Pharaohs or high priestesses (Redford, 2005). Gender roles were divided
but women had some unexpected rights compared to their contemporaries.
Beyond these general observations, it is hard to find concrete evidence of marriage,
especially for the lower class who were not as heavily recorded as elites and royalty. We see
evidence of commoners’ marriages in court documents of property disputes in marriage and
divorce, but we have little descriptions of what regular marriage was like in the day-to-day sense.

Royal Marriage
Documentation about the marriages of royal family members in ancient Egypt is more
plentiful than that of the commoners. Royal marriages were polygynous, with the intent to
produce more heirs and obtain more political alliances. The Pharaoh had multiple to numerous
wives. The first wife typically held more power and held the title of Great Wife, which had
religious and ceremonial significance. The other wives were his secondary wives. Pharaoh’s
wives came from within the royal family or from the high elite. They also could be from foreign
royalty or elites who were given to Pharaoh to form diplomatic marriages. Foreign powers gave
female relatives to Egypt to form alliances, though Egypt would not send their royal females in
exchange (Schulman, 1979, p. 179). For instance, several foreign princesses came to the 18th
dynasty court of Amenhotep III and some of the women were found buried in the Valley of the
Queens (Manniche, 1997, p. 29). This happened in the New Kingdom during Egypt’s empire
period - they had the power and authority to do a one-sided exchange where they were able to
obtain daughters of foreign rulers while not losing any of their own precious royal princesses.
These diplomatic marriages are attested in the Amarna Letters, correspondence of foreign
powers with Egypt, and in the foreign names of Pharaohs’ wives in Egyptian documentation
(Schulman, 1979, p. 180). Additionally, Pharaoh would have had a number of concubines. For
example, Ramesses the Great fathered at least 100 children, and he even outlived 12 of them.
Thus, he must have had a sizeable number of women for himself, made up of wives and
concubines. Polygynous marriages allowed for Egyptian royals to keep the power in their family,
produce many heirs, and create countless alliances.
Egyptian royals kept that power in their family by incestuous marriages. Full sibling
unions were common for the royal family, especially during the 18th dynasty (King Tut’s
lineage) and Ptolemaic dynasty (Cleopatra’s lineage) (Redford, 2005). It served to keep political
power in the family, for who best to marry the living god Pharaoh than his sister who is also born
of their father who was a living god when Pharaoh. Brother-sister marriage had religious,
mythological connections to pairings of gods and goddesses who were brother and sister, like
Osiris and Isis. Tombs and monuments bear witness to royal intra-family marriages. But the
question remains whether these consanguineous marriages were also incestuous matings.
Through DNA analyses, Egyptologists have found hard evidence that at least some royals
had sex with their siblings. With the advent of the Human Genome Project completed in 2003,
we have access to DNA sequencing that can indicate genetic relatives. In September 2010, a
National Geographic magazine article written by famous archaeologist Zahi Hawass described
the process and conclusions from DNA analyses of Tut and several related mummies from the
18th dynasty (Hawass, 2010). Several unmarked royal mummies from the same dynasty were
able to be identified to known mummies by familial relations. With Tutankhamun as ego, his
grandfather was Amenhotep III, his grandmother was Queen Tiye, his father almost certainly
Akhenaten, and his mother was not one of Akhenaten’s known wives Nefertiti or Kiya. King
Tut’s family tree is not quite figured out with names, but the mummified bodies of his parents
were recognized.
More importantly, Tut was the offspring of a brother-sister union. As incestuous
interbreeding can lead to defects, especially harmful recessive disorders, this may explain why
Tut had bone disease, a clubbed foot, and overall bad health (Hawass, 2010). Additionally, it was
found that Tut (son of Akhenaten and unidentified mummy), a product of incest, married his
half-sister Ankhesenamun (daughter of Akhenaten and Queen Nefertiti). They shared the same
father. This is significant as two mummified fetuses were found in Tut’s tomb may have been
their unborn children, but only partial DNA was retrieved from the small bodies so the results are
inconclusive (Hawass, 2010). But if the children were products of double incest again this may
explain their early deaths, leaving the 18th dynasty with no heirs and a door open for a new 19th
dynasty to emerge. Incestuous relationships and marriages within the royal bloodline of Egypt
have genetic evidence to support the archaeological records. We see that royals did indeed have
sex with close relatives, at least in Tut’s lineage, and likely in other dynasties whose royal
mummies may not be genetically linked yet.

Extramarital Relations
In ancient Egypt, some mating did occur outside the bounds of marriage. But it was
biased against women, as ancient Egypt was inherently sexist as a patriarchal society. Though
women had a more liberated sexual life, a dichotomy existed as “women’s sexuality was both
celebrated and feared [, represented in t]he dichotomy between the femme fatale and the faithful
wife and mother.” (Graves-Brown, 2010, p. 5). There was a double standard: men could have
extramarital liaisons to conceive heirs, but it was frowned upon for a married woman to be
involved with anyone besides her husband.
For the ancient Egyptians, extramarital relationships were more complex in how they
were perceived and defined than in modern Western cultural views. Today, the concept of
adultery is nearly synonymous with extramarital relationships; that is, any sexual relations
outside of a binding marriage are considered to be cheating. But in ancient Egypt, evidence
shows that the Egyptians distinguished between extramarital relationships and adultery. For
them, adultery was when a man had intercourse with a married female. Adultery was a
wrongdoing that focused on how a husband was cheated by another man in regards to his
possession, his wife (Graves-Brown, 2010, p. 42). For example, it was not considered adultery if
the extramarital relationship involved a woman who was unmarried-- it relied solely on the fact
that another man was being wronged if his wife was having sex with another male. Thus,
extramarital relationships which were not considered adultery were homosexual relations,
relations with unmarried women, rare cases of polygyny and expectations regarding to relations
with gods.
First, it was not considered adultery for a married man to have sex with another man,
even though same-sex relationships were frowned upon (Dowson, 2008, p. 38). A passage in ​The
Book of the Dead​ deems it virtuous that a man did not commit a homosexual act in his life
(Manniche, 1997, p. 22). The most famous example of male homosexuality is in the story of Old
Kingdom Pharaoh Pepi II and his unmarried lover, general Sisene (Graves-Brown, 2010, p. 104).
The homosexual relationship is depicted as negative and used to create a negative narrative about
a past ruler. But homosexual relationships were not condemned as adultery, even if there was a
married man involved, there was no married female involved in the relations.
 In addition to homosexual relationships, it was acceptable for a married man to have
sexual relations with an unmarried female, as evidenced in records of female prostitution and
mistresses/concubines. Prostitutes were a part of ancient Egyptian civilization, but it was
condemned if married persons had intercourse with them (Manniche, 1997, p. 20). Documents
from the workmen’s village at Deir el-Medina show that prostitution did exist. These sources
describe women who were “neither wives nor mothers, but belonged with ‘the others’”
(Manniche, 1997, p. 15). These unmarried women were not condemned for their relations with
the workmen, of whom some would have likely been married men, as adultery was when a
married woman was involved. Married women were not involved in prostitution; therefore,
prostitution was an extramarital institution not considered adultery to the Egyptians. Few other
concrete information exists about prostitution, as even though it was legal, it was still frowned
upon. Prostitution was considered a part of the ancient peoples’ private life, and therefore was a
topic rarely recorded.
In a similar manner, it was okay for a married man to have a mistress. For example, in
the early Middle Kingdom, Hekanakhte wrote a letter to his family about his wife and mistress.
The letter details that his concubine was to be respected just as his wife was respected while he
was away on a business trip (Manniche, 1997, p. 20-21). Another document from around the
same time tells of a governor in Middle Egypt who had a concubine who bore him children and
later married him, presumably after his first wife died (Manniche, 1997, p. 21). At least for the
elites that could afford mistresses, the practice was documented without shame.
In regards to marriages outside of one man and one woman, polygynous relationships
were allowed, but are only evidenced in relationships of royals. Outside of the royal family,
non-royal men could have several wives over their lives, but there is no evidence to suggest the
wives overlapped with each other. But for the royal family, having concubines and many wives
were fairly common. Many foreign princesses had diplomatic marriages with the royal family for
political alliances to strengthen their respective lands with ancient Egypt. Additionally, adultery
involving the royal family had another exception to the rule, as gods could have extramarital
relations with royals. There are monumental inscriptions concerning divine conceptions, such as
that of Queen Hatshepsut. In order to prove that she had a legitimate right to the throne, she
proclaimed that her father was the god Amun through the act of divine conception. The text
engraving on her mortuary temple wall at Deir el-Bahari tells the story of how the god Amun
disguises himself as Pharaoh Tuthmosis I, in order to impregnate his wife, Queen Ahmosis,
mother of Hatshepsut (Manniche, 1997, p. 59-60). She was the first to use this narrative of divine
conception (Graves-Brown, 2010, p. 149). Later, Pharaoh Amenhotep III uses the same tale to
assert his right to rule. The gods are celebrated for cuckolding human men, even those as highly
ranked as Pharaoh. Divine conception is an exception to the rule, where a married woman is not
looked down upon or punished for having sexual relations outside of her marriage. It was
actually a respectable form of propaganda.

Literary Tales and Wisdom Literature Concerning Adultery

Stories and texts written by the ancient Egyptians can be analyzed to see how adultery
differed from extramarital relations. There are literary tales of adultery that end in death for the
adulterer, though there is not sufficient evidence adultery was punished in real life, beyond being
a reason for divorce. Two such tales that document adultery with married women are
Webaoner’s Wife and the Townsman​ and ​The Tale of the Two Brothers​. In the first tale, a wife
takes on a townsman as a lover and is found out by her husband. It ends with a crocodile killing
the townsman, and the wife was set fire and her ashes scattered into the Nile (Manniche, 1997, p.
60-62). In the second tale, the wife of the older brother starts to lust after and tries to seduce the
younger brother, who rebukes her advances. The wife falsely tells her husband that the younger
brother tried to have sex with her. The husband attacks his younger brother, then is convinced his
wife was the liar. He kills her, dismembers her, and throws the pieces to the dogs (Manniche,
1997, p. 62-65). In the two stories, it is married women as evil seductresses who cause the
downfalls of their male lovers. In both tales, the women are not just killed, but their bodies are
destroyed. Bodily destruction is worse than death for the Egyptians -- their bodies are not
preserved, so they will not be able to live on in the afterlife. Sex with married women is
vehemently written against in literature.
In addition, works called wisdom literature give warnings against having sex with
married women, for fear of unpleasant consequences. In the Ptolemaic Period, the ​Instruction of
Ankhsheshonq​ warns men to not copulate with married women or they will be killed on the
threshold of their homes: “Do not marry a woman whose husband is alive, or he will become
your enemy… He who rapes a married woman on the bed will have his own wife raped on the
ground… Do not make love to a married woman. He who makes love to a married woman is
killed on her doorstep” (Manniche, 1997, p. 98-99). In both literary tales and wisdom literature,
we again see how the ancient Egyptians considered adultery as involving a married woman for it
to be considered adultery and not just as an extramarital relationship.

Ends to Marriage: Divorce or Death

Divorce is one way that a marriage may end. Divorce likely only extended to nonroyal
marriages, as there is only limited evidence of commoners getting divorces. Marriages did not
begin or end in a court setting as typically thought of in the 21st century (Graves-Brown, 2010,
p. 42). Marriages were dissolved without need for intrusion from the state, because just as
marriage was a social concept, unrelated to the political or religious institution, so was divorce.
Divorce was solidified with the separation of the previously joint household created by marriage.
If the man instigated the divorce, he had to return any dowry given in marriage from his wife and
pay a fine to her, but if a woman divorced her husband, she was not paid a fee in return (Johnson,
1996, p. 183). And if one of the spouses was divorced due to adultery, the other spouse would
get both shares of the joint household and property (Johnson, 1996, p. 183). There was no stigma
to divorce, and it was actually pretty common in certain periods (Redford, 2005).
Most of the knowledge about ancient Egyptian divorce comes from exceptional cases of
marriage disputes in court cases. The nature of those documents is of atypical events, so we do
not see happier marriages or calmer divorce cases. But we do get a glimpse into the processes of
divorce through court documents recorded by scribes about property disputes, inheritance, or
other matters. Large amounts of documentation about divorce come mainly from the New
Kingdom at Deir el-Medina. Both men and women could end marriages by initiating a divorce, a
right not even given to all women in the 21st century. Though in this way the Egyptians can be
seen as ahead of their time, men still tended to be the instigators of divorce more so than women.
In the New Kingdom, texts from Deir el-Medina had a ratio of 12 males to 3 females in initiating
divorce (Graves-Brown, 2010, p. 43). Reasons were not necessary for divorce, but some were:
adultery, infertility, incompatibility, or wanting a different spouse (Robins, 1993, p. 63). After
separation of the joint household, the divorce was complete. Little is known about what happens
to the parties after divorce, especially women who would have relied on men’s work. Perhaps
they went back to their parent’s household or got remarried quickly. Another document from
Deir el-Medina, in the 19th dynasty, inscribes the promise of workman Horenwia to his
daughter, citizeness (a married woman) Tanetdjesere. He promises to give her a room in his
storehouse if her husband were to throw her out (Graves-Brown, 2010, p. 44). Not all women
may have been as lucky as her to have a backup plan in case of a failed marriage.
Another end to marriage happened when one spouse died, leaving the other a widow or
widower. From the property rights given to women in marriage, they regularly inherited at least
one-third of their husband’s property upon his death (Redford, 2005). It was common to get
remarried after divorce or death of a spouse (Redford, 2005). This would have been especially
true for women who would be unlikely to be able to economically support themselves (and any
children) on their own. It was not uncommon for a man or woman to remarry more than once,
after divorce or death, as it was rare for adults to be unmarried.

Conclusion
In ancient Egypt, marriage differed by royal status. For nonroyals, marriage was a private
affair, not a legal or political event, monogamous, and its goal was to reproduce. For royals,
marriage had political and religious ramifications, was polygynous for Pharaohs, and often
consanguineous to keep the royal bloodline pure. Royals tended to marry within their family,
which led to incestuous couplings like seen in King Tut’s lineage. Extramarital relations had a
double standard for women when it came to defining adultery in ancient Egypt, especially shown
in literary tales and wisdom literature. Marriage could end in divorce of the couple or death of
one spouse. Divorce was common and could be initiated by either men or women, for various
reasons such as adultery, infertility, and incompatibility. As in the case of the death of one
partner, remarriage was highly likely. The majority of widows remarried, most likely for
economic reasons. In general, marriage and mating in ancient Egypt allowed for more rights
given to women than some of their contemporaries, but the civilization was still patriarchal
overall. Evidence for these ancient Egyptian marriage and mating practices comes from various
sources, such as monumental inscriptions, iconography, documents, literature, DNA analysis,
and more. Sex and marriage were seen as relatively informal and private matters between
individuals and there was no official state documentation or legality to marriage. Thus, ancient
Egyptian relationships can be difficult subjects to study.
 References

Dowson, T. A. (2008). Queering sex and gender in Ancient Egypt. ​Sex and Gender in Ancient
Egypt​, ed. C. Graves-Brown. Swansea, Wales: The Classical Press of Wales, 34-38.
Graves-Brown, C. (2010). ​Dancing for Hathor: Women in Ancient Egypt. N ​ ew York, NY:
Continuum US.
Hawass, Z. (2010). (2010, September) King Tut’s Family Secrets. ​National Geographic
Magazine.​ Retrieved from
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2010/09/tut-dna/ .
Johnson, J. H. (1996). The legal status of women in ancient Egypt. ​Mistress of the House,
Mistress of Heaven: Women in Ancient Egypt,​ eds. A.K. Capel & C. E. Markoe. New
York, NY: Hudson Hills Press in association with Cincinnati Art Museum, 175-217.
Manniche, L. (1997). ​Sexual Life in Ancient Egypt.​ New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Redford, D. (2005). Marriage and Divorce. ​The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. O ​ xford:
Oxford University Press. Retrieved from
https://www-oxfordreference-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/view/10.1093/acref/978019
5102345.001.0001/acref-9780195102345-e-0430?rskey=xqA78n&result=431 .
Revez, J. (2003). “The Metaphorical Use of the Kinship Term sn “Brother” ​Journal of the
American Research Center in Egypt.​ (40), 123-131. Retrieved from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40000295 .
Robins, G. (1993). ​Women in Ancient Egypt.​ Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schulman, A. R. (1979). Diplomatic Marriage in the Egyptian New Kingdom. ​Journal of Near
Eastern Studies​ (38)3, 177-193.