AE29 - Robinson - Blood Is Thicker Than Water. Non-Royal Consanguineous Marriage in Ancient Egypt. An Exploration of Economic and Biological Outcomes

‘Blood is thicker than water’
Non-Royal Consanguineous
Marriage in Ancient Egypt
An exploration of economic
and biological outcomes
Archaeopress
Egyptology 29 Joanne-Marie Robinson
‘Blood Is Thicker Than Water’
Non-royal consanguineous
marriage in Ancient Egypt
An exploration of economic
and biological outcomes
Joanne-Marie Robinson
Archaeopress Egyptology 29
Archaeopress Publishing Ltd
Summertown Pavilion
18-24 Middle Way
Summertown
Oxford OX2 7LG
www.archaeopress.com
ISBN 978-1-78969-543-4
ISBN 978-1-78969-544-1 (e-Pdf)
© J-M Robinson and Archaeopress 2020
Cover image: Reproduced courtesy of the British Museum © The Trustees of the British
Museum. Fragment of painted stone tomb-wall, Anhurkhawy and son, Theban Tomb 359, Deir
el-Medina, BM EA 1329
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the
copyright owners.
This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com
To my husband, Stephen, and to the memory of my family
Contents
Acknowledgements�� x
Abbreviations�� xi
Glossary��xii
Ancient Egyptian Chronology�� xiv
Papyri and ostraca�� xv
Chapter 1 Ancient Egyptian marriage and kin terms, definitions of

consanguinity and consanguineous marriage�� 1
Introduction�� 1
Exploring non-royal consanguineous marriage: aims, limitations and hypotheses�� 2
Ancient Egyptian marriage�� 3
Age at Marriage�� 6
Ancient Egyptian kin terms�� 6
Consanguinity and consanguineous marriage�� 9
Defining consanguinity�� 9
Categories of consanguineous marriage�� 10
Definitions of incest�� 11
Incest avoidance: the incest taboo�� 12
Identifying genetic markers for consanguinity in human remains�� 13
Methodology and structure�� 15
Chapter 2 Consanguinity in historical context: evidence from select sources for

consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt, the Near East, Greece and Rome ��17
Consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt�� 18
Royal consanguineous marriages�� 18
Non-royal consanguineous marriages�� 19
Roman Period�� 19
Ptolemaic Period�� 23
The Pharaonic Period�� 25
Late Period and Third Intermediate Period�� 26
New Kingdom�� 28
Middle Kingdom�� 30
Polygyny and polyandry�� 33
i
Evidence for consanguineous marriage outside ancient Egypt�� 34
Judaism: degrees of prohibited marriage�� 34
Athens, Sparta and Rome: marriage, law, and degrees of prohibition�� 35
Christianity: degrees of prohibited marriage�� 36
Consanguineous marriage in Zoroastrianism�� 38
Consanguineous marriage in Arabia and Islam�� 39
Current religious regulation of first cousin marriage�� 39
Conclusion�� 41
Chapter 3 The use of inheritance and matrimonial goods as economic strategies

in non-royal consanguineous families��42
Terms of reference: matrimonial goods, gifts and dowry�� 43
Ancient Egyptian private property, laws of inheritance, and matrimonial goods�� 43
Ancient Egyptian inheritance law�� 44
The Will of Naunakhte�� 46
Trial at the Temple of Wepwawet in Siut�� 46
The Adoption Papyrus�� 46
Ancient Egyptian gifts at marriage�� 47
Inheritance law and dowry in Mesopotamia, classical Greece and ancient Rome�� 48
Mesopotamia�� 48
Classical Greece�� 50
Ancient Rome�� 51
Consanguineous marriage: response to, or reaction against, laws of succession?�� 54
Consanguineous marriage as an economic strategy in ancient Egypt: land
consolidation, inheritance and matrimonial goods�� 56
Protection against disintegration of land ownership: continuity, loss and acquisition�� 56
Consanguineous marriage: financial commitments, family expectations and
timing of transfers�� 58
Case study: Marriage, consanguinity and economics in Ptolemaic Pathyris�� 60
Ptolemaic Pathyris and family archives�� 60
Comparisons between marriage settlements and other economic transactions�� 61
Categories of consanguineous marriage�� 62
Requirements and financial commitments in demotic marriage settlements �� 63
John Rylands demotic marriage settlements�� 64
Comparisons between financial commitments and unusual features within them66
Potential implications in the value of marriage settlements in the Archive of
Pelaias and the Archive of Horos�� 68
ii
Consanguineous and non-consanguineous economic transactions in the Archive of
Pelaias and the Archive of Horos�� 70
Texts and transactions in the Archive of Pelaias�� 71
Texts and transactions in the Archive of Horos�� 72
Consanguineous economic transactions in the Archive of Horos�� 74
The woman’s matrimonial goods, modern dowry and the economics of
consanguinity�� 75
Case study summary�� 77
Conclusion�� 78
Chapter 4 Consanguineous marriage in Deir el-Medina and economic impacts:

family interrelationships, occupations, offspring, and expectations of altruism
and reciprocity ��80
Terms of reference: altruism and reciprocity�� 82
Number of consanguineous marriages, networks of interrelated families and types
of cousin marriages�� 83
Consanguineous families and interrelated networks�� 84
Preferences and outcomes of jural and affective ties in marriages between
parallel and cross cousins�� 85
Occupations within consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina: occupation of
husband, husband’s father, and wife’s father�� 90
Offspring of consanguineous marriages and numbers of known children in their
family trees�� 92
Economic transactions in Deir el-Medina and expectations of altruism and
reciprocity in consanguineous families�� 95
Gift-giving�� 96
Debts and credit�� 97
Informal object exchange and barter�� 99
Family transfers and expectations�� 100
What affects willingness to give and expectation to receive?�� 102
Legal bodies and regulatory mechanisms in Deir el-Medina�� 102
The local court (ḳnbt)�� 102
The oracle�� 104
Social networks and informal controls on behaviour�� 105
Trust and cooperation between families related by consanguinity and affinity �� 107
Altruism, trust and trustworthiness amongst family members �� 107
Sliding scales of altruism and reciprocity in Deir el-Medina�� 110
Reputation formation and trustworthiness in Deir el-Medina�� 111
Conclusion�� 112
iii
Chapter 5 Biological outcomes of non-royal consanguineous marriage:
prevalence, impact and perceptions of abnormality in ancient Egypt��115
Reported congenital anomalies in mummified and skeletal remains in ancient
Egypt�� 116
Consanguineous marriage: ancient evidence and modern biological outcomes�� 117
Consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt�� 117
Congenital anomalies and morbidity in infancy and childhood reported at
increased frequency in modern consanguineous families�� 117
Consanguinity and non-syndromic cleft lip/palate (CL/P) and cleft palate (CP)�� 118
Characteristics of cleft lip/palate and cleft palate and their reported incidence in
modern and ancient populations�� 119
Cleft lip/palate and cleft lip in ancient Egypt�� 121
Consanguinity and intellectual and developmental disorders�� 125
Characteristics of intellectual and developmental disorders and their reported
incidence in modern and ancient populations�� 127
Attitudes towards intellectual and developmental impairment in ancient Greece�� 128
Attitudes towards intellectual and developmental impairment in ancient Egypt 131
Functioning and adaptive ability, accommodation of impairment, and provision of
care�� 136
Infant survival and functioning and adaptive behaviour associated with non-
syndromic orofacial clefting�� 136
Infant survival and functioning and adaptive behaviour associated with
intellectual and developmental disorders�� 137
Accommodation of impairment and provision of care for non-syndromic orofacial
clefting and intellectual and developmental disorders in ancient Egypt�� 139
Cleft lip and cleft lip and palate�� 139
Intellectual and developmental disorders�� 140
Perceptions of health, sickness and disability in ancient Egypt�� 142
The medical papyri�� 143
Therapeutic dreams and ritual bathing�� 144
Cemeteries and intramural burials�� 146
Physical abnormalities in iconography �� 148
Funerary ritual: renewal, protection and sustenance�� 150
Consanguineous marriage and the provision of support networks�� 151
Conclusion�� 153
iv
Chapter 6 Conclusion��155
Appendix 1 Table of probable or possible non-royal consanguineous marriages

from select sources��158
Appendix 2 Details of consanguineous and affinal links between

consanguineously married couples in Deir el-Medina (see chapter four, table 4.3
and figure 4.1) ��175
Marriage number 1: Anhurkhawy (i) and Henutdjuu (i)�� 175
Marriage number 2: Nebmehyt (iii) and Henutmehyt (iv)�� 175
Marriage number 3: Buqentuf (i) and Iyi (iii)�� 175
Marriage number 4: Iyernutef (ii) and Tabaki (i)�� 176
Marriage number 5: Amennakht (x) and Tarekhanu (i)�� 177
Marriage number 6: Pashedu (ii) and Tanodjemethemsi (ii)/Nodjemhemsiset (i)�� 177
Marriage number 7: Nekhemmut (i) and Webkhet (vi/viii)�� 177
Marriage number 8: Khnummose (i) and Henuwati (i)/(ii)�� 178
Marriage number 9: Ipuy (viii) and Henutmire (i)�� 179
Marriage number 10: Penrennut (i) and Tadehnetemheb (i)�� 179
Marriage number 11: Khons (vi) and Taweretemheb (ii)�� 180
Appendix 3 Number of known children in the eight family trees in which there
are consanguineous marriages ��181
Notes to Appendix 3�� 182
Bibliography��184
v
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Categories of consanguineous marriage. Source: after Hamamy et al.,
Consanguineous Marriages, Pearls and Perils: Geneva International Consanguinity Workshop
Report, 2011: 844�� 11
Figure 2.1: Numbers of probable or possible non-royal consanguineous marriages
in ancient Egypt allocated to historical periods (reported in select sources, see
Appendix 1)�� 20
Figure 2.2: The seven degrees of relationship from a common ancestor based on the
civil Roman system. Source: Schwimmer, https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/
anthropology/tutor/descent/cognatic/civil.html (1998). Accessed 4.10.2016�� 36
Figure 2.3: The four degrees of relationship from a common ancestor based on canon
law. Source: after Schwimmer, https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/
tutor/descent/cognatic/canon.html (1998). Accessed 4.10.2016�� 37
Figure 2.4: Current global prevalence of consanguineous marriage. Source: Courtesy of
Global Consanguinity website (www.consang.net), copyright Alan Bittles 2015. Map
constructed by Michael Black�� 40
Figure 3.1: Comparison between the woman’s goods and the man’s gift committed in
marriage settlements in the Rylands demotic papyri. The figures at the bottom of
each column are the values in silver deben�� 67
Figure 3.2: Percentage comparison of the woman’s goods in the Archive of Pelaias and
the Archive of Horos. The figures at the bottom of each column are the values in
silver deben�� 69
Figure 3.3: Types of documents belonging to family members in the Archive of Pelaias.
The archive contains 12 demotic and 11 Greek texts (plus P. Ryl. Dem. 30 which is
linked to the archive)�� 71
Figure 3.4: Texts and transactions associated with family members in the Archive of
Pelaias.�� 71
Figure 3.5: The Archive of Horos contains 34 demotic, 25 Greek and one bilingual texts.
Nineteen of the transactions in this archive are between consanguineous family
members and/or their affines�� 73
Figure 3.6: Number of economic transactions between families or individuals related
through consanguinity, or related through affinity to consanguineous family, in the
Archive of Horos. Source for document types in the Archive of Horos: Vandorpe and
Waebens, 2008: 131�� 73
Figure 4.1: Consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina and their links through
consanguinity and affinity to other first cousin marriages, 19th–20th dynasties�� 90
Figure 4.2: Number of marriages and offspring in family trees with one or more
consanguineous marriages (gen. = generations)�� 93
vi
Figure 5.1: Cleft lip (cleft premaxilla) (young child): A normal (with dotted lines outlining
the premaxilla), B incomplete unilateral left cleft, C complete left unilateral cleft, D
bilateral cleft, E midline cleft, F agenesis of the maxilla - wide cleft. Source: Redrawn
by author after Barnes, Atlas of Developmental Field Anomalies of the Human Skeleton: A
Paleopathology Perspective, 2012: 28�� 120
Figure 5.2: Cleft lip (premaxilla) with cleft (maxillary) palate (young child): A normal
(with dotted lines outlining the premaxilla), B incomplete left cleft lip with unilateral
left cleft palate, C unilateral left cleft lip and palate, D bilateral cleft lip and palate,
E midline cleft lip and palate, F agenesis of the premaxilla with wide midline cleft
palate. Source: Redrawn by author after Barnes, Atlas of Developmental Field Anomalies
of the Human Skeleton: A Paleopathology Perspective, 2012: 29.�� 122
Figure 5.3: Large bilateral cleft of the central and posterior area of the palate, adult
female, X group, Ballana Culture, Nubia, AD 400–600. Photograph courtesy of Roger
Forshaw�� 124
Figure 5.4: Frontal view of the 25th dynasty skull with midline cleft lip and absence
of incisor teeth. The white area is the crown of the right canine lying horizontally
across the middle line below the nasal spine. Source: Derry, 1938, Two Skulls with
Absence of Premaxilla, Journal of Anatomy, 72, part 2, plate 1, figure 1. Reproduced
courtesy of the Journal of Anatomy�� 124
Figure 5.5: Profile view of the 25th dynasty skull with the mandible in position. The
upper teeth have been caught between the teeth of the mandible and have been
pushed upwards and inwards because of the reduced size of the palate. Source:
Derry, 1938, Two Skulls with Absence of Premaxilla, Journal of Anatomy, 72, part 2, plate
1, figure 3. Reproduced courtesy of the Journal of Anatomy�� 125
Figure 5.6: Axial CT scan showing bony cleft in midline (straight white arrow). A wad
of resin-soaked linen was put over the right side of the child’s nose to restore the
natural facial contours (curved white arrow). Copyright: American Roentgen Ray
Society, 2002�� 126
Figure 5.7: A volume-rendered shaded-surface-display CT image showing a midline cleft
lip. Source: Hoffman and Hudgins, Head and skull base features of nine Egyptian
mummies: evaluation with high-resolution CT and reformation techniques, American
Journal of Roentgenology, 2002, 178 (6): 1373, figure 11, A and B. Copyright: American
Roentgen Ray Society, 2002�� 126
Figure 5.8: Funerary stela of Roma the doorkeeper, dedicated to the goddess Astarte, 18th
dynasty. The depiction of Roma’s physical condition could indicate poliomyelitis,
talipes equinovarus, and/or cerebral palsy. Reproduced courtesy of Ny Carlsberg
Glyptotek. Photograph: Ole Haupt�� 149
Figure 5.9: Attendants in the tomb of Baqt I, Middle Kingdom. The feet of the figure in
the centre of the lower register suggest talipes equinovarus, while the figure to the
left appears to have kyphosis and the figure to the right may be a dwarf. Redrawn by
author after Newberry, Beni Hasan, 1894, Part 2, tomb no. 29, south wall, plate 32�� 149
vii
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Summary of basic kin terms used across historical periods, their extended
meanings using Euro-American terminology, and kin types. Sources: after Franke,
Kinship, 2001: 245-46; Lustig, Kinship, gender and age in Middle Kingdom tomb scenes and
texts, 1997: 45; Price, Archaism and filial piety: an unusual Late Period pair statue, 2016:
493, note k; Robins, The relationships specified in Egyptian kinship terms of the Middle and
New Kingdoms, 1992: 204; Willems, A description of Egyptian kin terminology of the Middle
Kingdom, c. 2000–1650 B.C., 1983: 153–65�� 7
Table 1.2 Biological relationships (using Euro-American terminology) and genetic
relationships. Source: Bittles, Consanguinity in Context, 2012: 6�� 10
Table 2.1: Incidence of consanguineous marriages in the Roman census returns in

Egypt. Sources: Bagnall and Frier, The Demography of Roman Egypt, 2006: 128; Scheidel,
Measuring Sex, Age and Death in the Roman Empire: Explorations in Ancient Demography,
1996a: 11�� 20
Table 2.2: Number of funerary stelae on which it is possible to determine genealogical
indications and where the wife is called ‘his wife’ or ‘his sister’. Source: Černý,
Consanguineous Marriage in Ancient Egypt, 1954: 25�� 26
Table 2.3: Number of funerary stelae on which it is possible to identify both parents or
mother only. Source: Černý, Consanguineous Marriage in Ancient Egypt, 1954: 27�� 30
Table 2.4: Current religious regulation of first cousin marriage. Source: Bittles and
Black, Consanguineous Marriage and Human Evolution, 2010b: 196�� 40
Table 3.1: Genetic relationships between consanguineous family members. Source: after
Bittles, Consanguinity in Context, 2012: 6�� 63
Table 3.2: Archive owners and money and goods committed in the Rylands demotic
marriage settlements from Pathyris. Sources: Vandorpe and Waebens, Reconstructing
Pathyris’ Archives: A Multicultural Community in Hellenistic Egypt, 2009: 156–58; Pestman,
Marriage and Matrimonial Property in Ancient Egypt, 1961, Chart A (deeds of type A);
Griffith, The Adler Papyri, 1909, Vol. 3: 130–63�� 64
Table 3.3: Different valuations of the man’s gift and the woman’s goods in P. Ryl. Dem.
20�� 66
Table 3.4: Money and goods committed in the marriage settlements in the Archive of
Horos, son of Nechouthes. Sources: Griffith, The Adler Papyri, 1909: 89-93, 99-101;
Pestman, Marriage and Matrimonial Property in Ancient Egypt, 1961, Chart A (deeds of
Type A)�� 69
Table 3.5: Economic transactions between consanguineous family members and their
affines in the Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes. The family relationship and
genetic relationship to Horos are listed according to each transaction�� 74
viii
Table 4.1: Number of consanguineous marriages as a percentage of the overall number
of known marriages in Deir el-Medina between the 19th–20th dynasties. Sources:
Based on family trees nos. 1–47, Davies, Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina, 1999; Bierbrier,
The Late New Kingdom in Egypt, 1975: 30�� 85
Table 4.2: Preferred cousin marriage in order of priority amongst mainly urban Muslim
and Christian Egyptians. Numbers 2 and 3 for women were often considered
interchangeable. Source: Rugh, The Family in Contemporary Egypt, 1986: 111�� 87
Table 4.3: Consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina and consanguineous and affinal
links between couples. See Appendix 2 for notes detailing the consanguineous and
affinal links illustrated in this table and figure 4.1. Sources for family trees: Davies,
Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina, 1999; Bierbrier, CdE 59, 1984: 208-10; H.T.B.M Part 10, 1982:
27; The Late New Kingdom in Egypt, 1975: 30-35. Spelling of names and the roman
numerals identifying individuals follows Davies 1999�� 89
ix
Acknowledgements
This book has evolved from doctoral research conducted at the KNH Centre for Biomedical
Egyptology at the University of Manchester. My grateful thanks to Andrew Chamberlain
and Rosalie David for their guidance, support and encouragement at all times. I have
enjoyed and been stimulated by the many constructive conversations we have had
together. I would also like to express my appreciation to Glenn Godenho and Keith White
for their time, consideration and thoughtful comments. My thanks also to Angela Thomas
and Joyce Tyldesley for their advice and support.
I am grateful to Leire Olabarria for her encouragement and valuable comments on

kinship and family. My thanks to Campbell Price for his careful reading of the Deir el-
Medina material and his constructive comments, and my thanks to Lena Tambs for her
advice on social network theory. I am grateful to Roger Forshaw and Iwona Kozieradzka-
Ogunmakin for the thoroughness of their reading on the chapter of biological outcomes of
consanguinity and for their encouragement, and to Konstantina Drosou for her guidance in
relation to ancient DNA research. My thanks to Alan Bittles for his thoughtful reading and
comments on biological and socioeconomic outcomes of contemporary consanguineous
marriage.
I am grateful to Paul John Frandsen for his support and interest in this research and to
Roberta Mazza for providing the opportunity to discuss my research on the Archives of
Pelaias and Horos at the John Rylands Research Institute. My thanks to Thomas Christiansen
for his guidance on texts now accepted as part of the Archive of Horos and for his help on
demotic and Coptic terms for ‘madness’, and also to Jonathan Featherstone for his advice
on Arabic terms for ‘madness’.
My gratitude to the KNH Centre for Biomedical Egyptology for travel and study awards and
to the current and former staff and research associates at the KNH Centre for their support
throughout this research.
The editorial staff at Archaeopress have patiently guided the production of this book and I
am especially grateful to David Davison and Ben Heaney.
Finally, my deep gratitude to my parents and family for all that they have given me.
My special thanks to my husband, Stephen, for his constant friendship, patience and
encouragement, without him I could not have carried out this research.
x
Abbreviations
BF Bagnall and Frier, The Demography of Roman Egypt, 2006, 1994, Cambridge
BM EA British Museum Egyptian Antiquities
CdE Chronique d’Égypte
CG Catalogue Général des Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire
CJ The Codex of Justinian
CTh. The Codex of Theodosius
Dig. The Digest of Justinian
Inst. The Institutes of Gaius
HTBM Hieroglyphic texts from Egyptian stelae, etc., in the British Museum, Parts
1-11, London.
IFAO Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale
JE Journal d’Entrée (Cairo Museum)
KRI Kitchen Ramesside Inscriptions, Historical and Biographical, 8 Vols, Oxford
Laws Plato, Laws
LL Laws of Lipit-Ishtar
LH Laws of Hammurabi
MK Middle Kingdom
MDAIK Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abt. Kairo
NBL Neo-Babylonian Laws
MAL Middle Assyrian Laws
OBT Old Babylonian Tablets (Tell Rimah)
OED Oxford English Dictionary
RT Rowlandson and Takahashi, Journal of Roman Studies 99, 2009:104-39
UCL University College London
xi
Glossary1
affinity: related through marriage
agnatic: see patrilineal
cognatic: related by genealogical ties without particular emphasis on patrilineal or

matrilineal connections
cross cousin: child of a father’s sister or mother’s brother
ego: the individual who forms the central reference point in a kinship diagram
endogamy: inmarriage, marriage to an individual within a defined social group, category,

or range
exogamy: outmarriage, marriage to an individual outside a defined social group, category,

or range
extended family: a unit composed of two or more nuclear families related by descent or
marriage (may be residential or a domestic group/s)
kin group: a social group based on kinship ties
kin term: a category that groups together a unique set of kinship relationships, or kin types
kin type: a unique, uncategorised kinship relationship
levirate: a rule or custom whereby a widow preferably marries a brother of her deceased
husband
matrilateral: related through a mother, mother’s side
matrilineal (uterine): related by tracing common descent exclusively through female

ancestors and descendants
matrilocal residence: a norm which requires the husband, at marriage, to leave his family to
live with, or nearby, his wife’s family
neolocal residence: establishment of an independent household
nuclear family (biological): a resident unit consisting of parent/s and offspring, as defined by
English language usage
1
Glossary sources collated from Hendry 2016, Schusky (compiled glossary) 1972, Schwimmer 2003b.
xii
parallel cousin: child of a father’s brother or mother’s sister
partible inheritance: an inheritance system which subdivides a person’s property amongst

all his/her children
patrilateral: related through a father, father’s side
patrilineal (agnatic): related by tracing common descent through male ancestors and
descendants
patrilocal residence: a norm that, upon marriage, requires the woman to leave her family to
live with, or nearby, her husband’s family
polyandry: marriage involving one woman to more than one man
polygamy: marriage of a person to more than one spouse
polygyny: marriage involving one man to more than one woman
stem family: a family formed when only one child (usually a son) remains resident with his/
her parents and the others set up new households
taboo: something prohibited, often because of association with a wider system of

classification, that may be related to ideas of pollution, or to the notion of sacred in any
society
uxorilocal residence: rule that, upon marriage, a man moves into his wife’s household
virilocal residence: rule that, upon marriage, a woman moves into her husband’s household
xiii
Ancient Egyptian Chronology
Early Dynastic Period Third Intermediate Period

3000 – 2890 1st dynasty 1069– 945 21st dynasty
2890 – 2686 2nd dynasty 945 – 715 22nd dynasty
818 – 715 23rd dynasty
Old Kingdom 727 – 715 24th dynasty
2686 – 2613 3rd dynasty 747 – 656 25th dynasty
2613 – 2494 4th dynasty
2494 – 2345 5th dynasty Late Period
2345 – 2181 6th dynasty 664 – 525 26th dynasty
2181 – 2160 7th and 8th dynasties 525 – 404 1st Persian Period
404 – 399 28th dynasty
First Intermediate Period 399 – 380 29th dynasty
2160 – 2025 9th and 10th dynasties 380 – 343 30th dynasty
2125 – 2055 11th dynasty (Thebes only) 343 – 332 2nd Persian Period

Middle Kingdom Ptolemaic Period
2055 – 1985 11th dynasty (all Egypt) 332 – 30
1985 – 1773 12th dynasty
1773 – after 1650 13th dynasty Roman Period
1773 – 1650 14th dynasty 30 – AD 395
Second Intermediate Period

1650 – 1550 15th dynasty
1650 – 1580 16th dynasty
1580 – 1550 17th dynasty
New Kingdom
1550 – 1295 18th dynasty
1295 – 1186 19th dynasty
1186 – 1069 20th dynasty
Source: Shaw, The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, 2003: 481-89 (abridged). Dates are BC
unless otherwise stated.
xiv
Papyri and ostraca
Abbreviations of Greek and demotic documentary papyri follow Duke University’s Checklist
of Editions of Greek, Latin, Coptic and Demotic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets at: https://
library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/papyrus/texts/clist.html.
Deir el-Medina ostraca and papyri are indexed in the Deir el-Medina database at: http://
dmd.wepwawet.nl. The database provides publications and a concordance for other
numbers associated with each entry.
BGU Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Königlichen (later Staatlichen) Museen zu Berlin,
Griechische Urkunden.
CPR Corpus Papyrorum Raineri
O. DeM Ostraca Deir el-Medina
O. Brit. Mus. Ostraca British Museum
P. Adl. The Adler Papyri, Greek texts ed. E.N. Adler, J.G. Tait, F.M. Heichelheim. Demotic
texts ed. F.Ll. Griffith. Oxford 1939.
P. Amh. The Amherst Papyri, Being an Account of the Greek Papyri in the Collection of the Right
Hon. Lord Amherst of Hackney, F.S.A. at Didlington Hall, Norfolk, ed. B.P. Grenfell and A.S. Hunt.
London.
P. Ashm. Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri in the Ashmolean Museum
P. Berl. Leihg. Berliner Leihgabe griechischer Papyri
P. Bib. Nat. Papyrus Bibliothèque Nationale
P. Brit. Mus. Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri in the British Museum
P. Brux. Papyri Bruxellenses Graecae
P. Cair. Service des Antiquités de l’Égypte, Catalogue Général des Antiquités Égyptiennes
du Musée du Caire. Die demotischen Denkmäler.
P. Carlsb. The Carlsberg Papyri
P. Chic. Haw. Oriental Institute Hawara Papyri: Demotic and Greek Texts from an Egyptian
Family Archive in the Fayum (Fourth to Third Century B.C.), ed. G.R. Hughes and R. Jasnow with
a contribution by J.G. Keenan. Chicago 1997.
P. Choach. Survey The Archive of the Theban Choachytes, P.W. Pestman. Leuven 1993.
P. Ehevertr. Ägyptische Eheverträge, ed. E. Lüddeckens. Wiesbaden 1960. (Äg. Abh. 1)
P. Fam. Tebt. A Family Archive from Tebtunis, ed. B.A. van Groningen. Leiden 1950. (Pap.
Lugd. Bat. VI).
xv
P. Fay. Fayum Towns and their Papyri, ed. B.P. Grenfell, A.S. Hunt and D.G. Hogarth.
London 1900.
P. Flor. Papiri greco-egizii, Papiri Fiorentini
P. Gebelen Heid. Die demotischen Gebelen-Urkunden der Heidelberger Papyrus-Sammlung, ed.
U. Kaplony-Heckel. Heidelberg 1963.
P. Gen. Les Papyrus de Genève
P. Giss. Griechische Papyri im Museum des Oberhessischen Geschichtsvereins zu Giessen, ed. O.
Eger, E. Kornemann, and P.M. Meyer. Leipzig-Berlin 1910—1912.
P. Grenf. II. New Classical Fragments and Other Greek and Latin Papyri, ed. B.P. Grenfell and
A.S. Hunt. Oxford 1897. Nos. 1—113.
P. Hausw. The Hauswaldt Papyri, ed. J. Manning. Sommerhausen 1997. (Dem.Stud. XII).
P. Hawara Demotische Urkunden aus Hawara, ed. E. Lüddeckens, with R. Wassermann and
for the Greek, R.W. Daniel. Stuttgart 1998.
P. Heid. Veröffentlichungen aus der Heidelberger Papyrussammlung
P. IFAO Papyrus Grecs de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale. Cairo. (Institut Français
d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire. Bibliothèque d’Étude).
P.Kron. L’Archivio di Kronion, ed. D. Foraboschi. Milan 1971.
P. Lips. Griechische Urkunden der Papyrussammlung zu Leipzig
P. Lond. Greek Papyri in the British Museum
P. Lonsdorfer Papyrus Lonsdorfer I, ed. H. Junker. Vienna 1921.
P. Ludg. Bat. Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 19, E. Boswinkel, E. Pestman, Textes grecs,
démotiques et bilingues. Leiden 1978.
P. Mich. Michigan Papyrus
P. Mil. Papiri Milanesi. I, fasc. I, ed. A. Calderini. Milan 1928. 2nd ed. S. Daris, 1967. (2nd
ed. is Vol. I of Pubblicazioni dell’Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Contributi, Serie
Terza, Pubbl. di “Aegyptus,” I).
P. Oxy. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Published by the Egypt Exploration Society in Graeco-
Roman Memoirs. London.
P. Phil. Dem. A Family Archive from Thebes. Demotic Papyri in the Philadelphia and Cairo
Museum from the Ptolemaic Period, M. El-Amir. Cairo 1959.
P. Ryl. Catalogue of the Greek and Latin Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester.
Manchester. I, Literary Texts, ed. A.S. Hunt. 1911. Nos. 1-61.
P. Ryl. Dem. Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester, ed. F. Ll.
Griffith. Manchester 1909.
P. Select. Papyri Selectae, ed. E. Boswinkel, P.W. Pestman and P.J. Sijpesteijn. Leiden 1965.
xvi
PSI Papiri greci e latini. (Pubblicazioni della Società Italiana per la ricerca dei papiri greci e
latini in Egitto). Florence.
P. Stras. Griechische Papyrus der Kaiserlichen Universitäts- und Landes-bibliothek zu
Strassburg, ed. F. Preisigke. Leipzig.
P. Tebt. The Tebtunis Papyri. London.
P. Vind. Worp Einige Wiener Papyri, ed. K.A. Worp. Amsterdam 1972.
SB Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus Ägypten
xvii
xviii
Chapter 1
Ancient Egyptian marriage and kin terms,

definitions of consanguinity and consanguineous
marriage
Introduction
This book aims to explore and assess the potential economic and biological outcomes of
marriage in ancient Egypt between kin biologically related beyond the level of sibling and
half-sibling. When consanguineous marriages are discussed in Egyptological literature,
studies often focus on brother-sister marriages recorded in census returns from Roman
Egypt, or on royal sibling marriages amongst the ruling Ptolemies.1 Sibling marriages in
Egypt also attracted historical attention, for example, early in the 1st century AD, Philo of
Alexandria claimed Egyptians were free ‘to marry any sister of every degree whether they
belonged to one of their brother’s parents or both’ (De specialibus legibus, 3. 23). However,
evidence is comparatively rare in ancient Egyptian sources for marriages between siblings
(genetically first-degree relatives who share fifty percent of their genes) and half-siblings
(genetically second-degree relatives who share twenty-five percent of their genes) (see
Černý 1954: 23-29). Marriages between more distant biological kin, such as first or second
cousins, were likely to be more commonplace amongst non-royal families in all historical
periods, but are difficult to identify in the historical record.
This is the first time that evidence for non-royal consanguineous marriage has been collated
from select sources from the Middle Kingdom to the Roman Period and a process created
to investigate the potential economic and biological outcomes of these unions. I argue that
for some families, and under certain conditions, consanguineous marriage was a preferred
economic strategy in terms of gifts given at marriage and in inheritance, and that families
who married consanguineously may have received greater levels of intra-familial support
without the expectation of reciprocity. Although there may have been adverse biological
outcomes arising from recessive gene disorders in the offspring of consanguineous
marriages, I propose that these physical or cognitive anomalies were not distinguished
from other medical disorders in the general health environment of ancient Egypt. This
research primarily focuses on ancient Egyptian documentary and archaeological sources,
including human remains, and is informed by research on consanguinity from a range of
disciplines including anthropology, demography, economics, genetics and pathology.
The working definition of consanguineous marriage used throughout this research is that
defined by clinical geneticists: unions contracted between cousins biologically related
as second cousins or closer biological kin (Bittles 2001b: 89; see also table 1.2). This
1
For example, Ager (2005:1-34); Bagnall and Frier (2006: 127-34); Bixler (1982: 264-73); Hopkins (1980: 303-54);
Scheidel (1996a: 9-51).
1
definition is a modern concept applied to biological relationships and used here as a tool
to categorise marriages between close family members. Ancient Egyptian kin terms have
equivalent kin types in Euro-American terminology – father, mother, son, daughter, sister,
brother, husband, wife – and Egyptians used their kin terms, or compounds of them, to
denote relationships equivalent to the biological relationships defined in clinical genetics.
However, these kin terms were more than one-to-one equivalences due to the wide fluidity
and flexibility in the use of Egyptian kin terms and the range of individuals included in
kinship groups, as well as diachronic change in their application (Franke 2001: 245-48;
with particular reference to the Middle Kingdom, see Franke 1983; Olabarria 2020a: 63-71).
The extended use of kin terms in ancient Egypt, and the flexibility of their application for
biological and non-biological kin, is one of the reasons why consanguineous marriages are
not only difficult to determine, but also open to misinterpretation to a modern reader.
While this research specifically examines the potential outcomes of consanguineous
marriage, there is no evidence to suggest that Egyptians categorised marriages as
specifically consanguineous or otherwise. However, most families are likely to have been
aware of marrying individuals with whom they had a close biological relationship.
Bureaucratic requirements sometimes dictated the naming of family and household

members and by the time of the Roman census returns the names, ages, parentage and
professions of all household residents were listed, led by the declarant, although the amount
of details given varied according to locality (Bagnall and Frier 2006: 22-25).2 In comparison,
the data in the Ptolemaic tax-lists refers back to the household-head (predominantly a
male) who is identified by his patronymic, so that the father’s relationship to the children is
attested, but a woman is named as his wife, and not as mother of the children (Clarysse and
Thompson 2006: 324, 328).3 Even though these administrative documents are potentially
valuable for constructing genealogies (albeit limited by the information requested), the
fragmentary nature of the finds still challenges the identification of consanguineous
marriage. Sometimes, there is the fortuitous survival of a family archive, such as the
Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes, who lived in Ptolemaic Pathyris, which allows the
prosopographic construction of a family and their economic transactions (see chapter
three). Beyond the administrative and legal texts, some individuals or families displayed
preferences for recording genealogies, for example, in the tombs at Deir el-Medina
discussed in chapter four, and used in combination with surviving formal and informal
documentary sources, probable biological relationships between families in the village can
be identified.
Exploring non-royal consanguineous marriage: aims, limitations and hypotheses
The idea for this research arose from the high number of consanguineous marriages
reported in the Roman census returns from Egypt. The quality of the evidence indicating
sibling marriages, the estimated scale of the unions, and their apparent social acceptability
has attracted scholarly debate since the late 19th century. Two major pieces of research
on the census returns by Hombert and Préaux (1952) and Bagnall and Frier (2006, 1994)
2
Bagnall and Frier (2006: 57) use Kertzer’s (1991: 156) definition of a household: ‘group of coresidents, people
who live under the same roof and typically share in common consumption’.
3
Clarysse and Thompson (2006: 301) found that 49 out of 427 households were headed by women.
2
Ancient Egyptian marriage and kin terms
are part of the extensive literature on this rarely documented practice.4 While sibling
marriages constitute 16.5% of 121 marriages listed in the census returns, there are also
four half sibling marriages and two first cousin marriages, although Scheidel (1996b: 322)
believes the incidence of first cousin marriage is probably ‘massively underestimated’ as
the parents of the spouses would need to live in the same house to be listed.
Surviving sources from the historical periods reviewed in this study suggest marriage
predominantly amongst first cousins, although this assessment is affected by the limitations
discussed above. However, the existence of non-royal consanguineous marriages led me to
question why marriages between close relatives were preferable amongst some families
and, in particular, what economic advantages and adverse biological outcomes may have
resulted from these unions?
The research presented in the book examines the following three hypotheses:
i. consanguineous marriage mitigates the fragmentation of moveable and immoveable

property, and alleviates pressure on families in terms of the timing and amount of
gifts given in marriage and in inheritance – examined in the context of economic
transactions in family archives from the Ptolemaic garrison town of Pathyris.
ii. families related consanguineously have more flexible terms of reciprocity and
a greater willingness to act altruistically than non-consanguineous families –
examined in the context of economic transactions in the New Kingdom workmen’s
village of Deir el-Medina.
iii. congenital anomalies and morbidity in infancy and childhood resulting from
consanguineous marriage were not distinguished from other health conditions by
the ancient Egyptians, and individuals with physical abnormalities or cognitive
disorders were neither socially excluded nor considered ‘disabled’ – examined in
the context of orofacial clefts and intellectual and developmental disorders, which
are recorded at increased frequency in consanguineous marriages.
Ancient Egyptian marriage
Much of the evidence for marriage settlements dates from the Late Period onwards in the
form of legal documents recording economic arrangements, drawn up by some families
at marriage or after marriage. Although the majority of evidence for family law appears
in demotic and Greek documents from the Late Period, Johnson (1996: 180) believes they
reflect many of the social and legal assumptions of earlier periods, commenting that even
though many scholars treat later stages of Egyptian history as ‘polluted’ by foreign contact,
Egyptian culture remained strong and became more visible through post-New Kingdom
documents. Johnson has also contributed extensively to studies on aspects of marriage and
legal arrangements, including Middle Kingdom ἰmyt-pr documents (1999: 169-72); ‘annuity
contracts’ drawn up in settlement of marriage and/or marital property (1994: 113-32);
private property envisioned in marriage and inheritance demotic documents (2015: 249-
4
For example, see Frandsen (2009: 36-60); Hopkins (1980: 303-54); Huebner (2007: 21-49); Modrzejewski (1964:
52-82); Parker (1996: 362-76); Remijsen and Clarysse (2008: 53-61); Rowlandson and Takahashi (2009: 104-39);
Scheidel (2004: 93-108, 1995: 143-55, 1996a: 319-40); Shaw (1992: 267-99); Thierfelder (1960).
3
65); sex and marriage (2003: 149-59), and the legal status of women in ancient Egypt (1996:
175-86).5
In the absence of evidence for legal processes to formalise a marital union (outside
economic arrangements) or religious sanctioning of marriage in ancient Egypt, marriage
was the cohabitation of two people with the intention of creating a household and raising
a family; it was a private matter, unrecorded by the state, although the union may have
been marked by a family celebration (see Allam LÄ: 1162-63; Johnson 1996: 179; Pestman
1961: 6-7; Théodorides 1976: 19-21; Wilfong 2001, 340-41). In relation to Deir el-Medina
in the Ramesside Period, Toivari-Viitala (2001: 84, 90) notes that marriage was likely to
be commonplace and the institution familiar enough not to require ‘elaborate written
explanations’; she does, however, remark on different ways that men and women could
live together rather than being descriptively polarised as formally married or informally
co-habiting.6 Marriage could be ended by the death of a partner, or separation initiated
by either partner and, subsequently, property was allocated according to customary law
governing separation and inheritance, both of which could be a source of family conflict
(see chapter three).
Since evidence for types of household residence for married couples is fragmentary, the
summary below draws on evidence from a range of chronological periods. Although the
Instructions of Ani (6, l. 6), a New Kingdom literary text, state: ‘Build a house or find and buy
one’ (Lichtheim 1976: 139), the advice represents an elite ideal rather than an everyday guide
for conduct. The marital home may have been neolocal, patrilocal or matrilocal depending
on family circumstances; its domestic composition may have included biological and non-
biological kin; and its structure may have been nuclear (or smaller), stem, or extended,
with an inherent fluidity subject to changing conditions (Allam LÄ: 1167; Kóthay 2001: 349-
52; Moreno Garcia 2013b: 1042-44, 2012: 4; Spence 2013: 84-86; Toivari-Viitala 2001: 86-87;
Willems 2015: 467-71). Huebner (2013a: 48) notes that documents from the Roman Period
in Egypt, particularly the census returns, indicate predominantly patrilocal residence,
although a family without a son may choose matrilocal residence to bring a male into the
household; neolocal residence appears to be the exception in this period (see also Bagnall
and Frier 2006: 121-22; Rowlandson and Takahashi 2009: 122; see Clarysse and Thompson
2006: 295-96, for predominantly patrilocal marriage in the Ptolemaic tax-registers). Terms
used to describe marriage and the creation of a household are well summarised by Toivari-
5
There are numerous other discussions on aspects of marriage and family that include Allam 1981: 116-35
(historical summary of marriage settlements and divorce terms); Allam, LÄ: 1162-81 (overviews of marriage and
divorce), LÄ: 104-13 (family structure and function); Galpaz-Feller 2008: 231-53 (widows in Biblical culture and
ancient Egypt); Huebner 2013a (family in Roman Egypt); Kanawati 1976: 149-60 (marriage and polygamy); Kóthay
2006: 151-64 (widows and orphans); Lesko 1996 (women’s private and public life); Lesko (ed.) 1989 (women’s
records from ancient Egypt and western Asia); Lesko 1988: 163-71 (perception of women in Egyptian wisdom
literature); Lippert 2013: 1-20 (overview of inheritance); Rabinowitz 1953: 91-97 (parallelisms between Egyptian
marriage contracts from 4th century BC and in Jewish sources); Simpson 1974: 100-05 (polygamy in Middle
Kingdom Egypt); Théodorides 1976: 14-55 (marriage status, adoption, divorce and adultery); Toivari-Viitala 2013:
1-17 (marriage and divorce); Wilfong 2009: 164-79 (gender in ancent Egypt); Wilfong 2001: 340-45 (marriage and
divorce); Wilfong 1997 (women and gender); Yiftach-Firanko 2003 (Greek marriage documents in Egyt). General
publications on women that cover discussions on marriage and divorce include: Graves-Brown 2010; Janssen and
Janssen 1990; Robins 1993; Tyldesley 1994; Watterson 2011.
6
Toivari-Viitala (2001: 84-85) suggests there were different types of socially recognised unions in Ramesside
Deir el-Medina, involving different rights and obligations that can be categorised as marriage.
4
Viitala for the village of Deir el-Medina (2001: 70-83, for divorce, 90-95) and Pestman (1961:
9-11, for divorce 58-79); terms for marrying or marriage include:
grg pr – to found a house (or family)

‘ḳ r pr – to enter a house
ḥms ἰrm – to sit with
ἰrἰ m ḥmt – to make as a wife
ἰw m ḥmt – to be as a wife
rdἰ n A B m ḥmt – to give A to B as a wife
ἰrἰ h3y – to make as a husband (used in later periods as proof of divorce, Pestman, 1961: 9
n.8).
Married couples had legal duties towards each other and their offspring in terms of
property brought into the marriage, acquired during marriage, and rights over its disposal.
An example of the limitations placed upon personal and shared property in marriage is
illustrated in the Will of Naunakhte from 20th dynasty Deir el-Medina. Since parents could
not alienate their children’s right to inheritance without the permission of their offspring,
Naunakhte draws up legal documentation to exclude several of her children from receiving
a share of her inheritance, although she cannot alienate the children’s rights of inheritance
to their father’s property (see Černý 1945: 29-53; Eyre 2007: 240-41; Pestman 1982: 173-81,
1961: 162-64). The economic commitment of resources at marriage, and the impact of a
man’s second marriage upon the allocation of these resources, is explored in detail by Eyre
(2007: 223-43); as is the role of adoption as a means to secure financial security and social
position in the context of the Ramesside Period Adoption Papyrus (Eyre 1992: 207-21), and
legal indictments arising out of accusations of adultery (Eyre 1984: 92-105).
Families of married couples also carried legal responsibilities towards each other; for
example, P. Leiden 373a, a demotic text dated 131 BC, documents a marriage settlement
in which the husband’s mother agrees to honour her son’s obligations in relation to the
repayment of the wife’s maintenance contract (if the son should fail to repay):
That which he will not carry out for you in respect of them in accordance with every
word which is above (and) in accordance with the documents which are above, I will
carry out for you, comp[ulsorily, without] delay.
P. Leiden 373a (P. Dem. Memphis 6) l. 7, Martin, Demotic Papyri from the Memphite
Necropolis, 2009: 139.
Pestman (1961) has produced a seminal work on marriage and matrimonial property,
which is a valuable source for analysis of demotic marriage settlements (as is Lüddekhens
(1960) classic study on these texts). Allam (1981: 116-35) provides a useful overview on the
status of marriage and divorce from the Pharaonic period to late antiquity, arguing that the
fundamental notion of marriage as ‘un acte sociale soumis seulement au driot coutumier’
was maintained in Egypt (1981: 135).7
7
See also Allam (1997a: 89-97) for civil and legal obligations of marriage.
5
Age at Marriage
Limited evidence suggests marriage from the age of 14 for women and around 20 for men
(Pestman 1961: 4–5). The Instructions of Ankhsheshonq, dated to the Ptolemaic Period, advise
a man to: ‘Take a wife when you are twenty years old, that you may have a son while you are
young (11, l. 7, Lichtheim 1980: 168). In a petition dated to the 26th dynasty, Petiese relates
how he refused to give his daughter in marriage as she was too young: ‘Her time is not yet
come; become a priest of Amonrasonter and I shall give her to you’ (P. Ryl. 9, 8.11, reign of
Psamtik I Wahibre); the following year the suitor became a priest and permission to marry
was given (Pestman 1961: 8-9). A stela in the British Museum (BM EA 147, 42 BC) details the
life of Tjaiemhotep, from which it is possible to calculate that she married at the age of
fourteen, while P. Ryl. 16 (152 BC) documents a marriage that took place when a woman was
around eighteen years of age. Based on census returns from the Roman Period in Egypt, the
median age for marriage was around 17.5 years for women and early twenties for men, with
a mean gap in age of 7.5 years (Bagnall and Frier 2006: 111-21).
Ancient Egyptian kin terms
There are six basic kin terms constituting the core of ancient Egyptian kinship terminology
used to categorise family relationships (table 1.1) and a wider set of terms designating
kin groups, many of which display diachronic development; kin terms are also used for
individuals or groups who are not biologically related (see Bierbrier 1980: 100-07; Franke
2001: 245-48, 1983: 322-24; Olabarria 2020a: 63-72, 2018: 62-63; Robins 1992: 197-217; Willems
1983: 153-65). From the position of Ego, the individual to whom the kinship categories are
referred, a set of relationships can be constructed using compounds of the basic kin terms,
for example, s3t nt s3t – daughter of the daughter, sn.f (n) mwt.f – his brother (of) his mother
(the kin terms are in juxtaposition or connected with a genitive). In addition, basic kin
terms can have extended meanings, so that a daughter (s3t) can also be a daughter of Ego’s
offspring (granddaughter) or a wife of Ego’s son (daughter-in-law); in certain contexts
that infer rank s3/s3t could also be junior to Ego (Campagno 2009: 1-3; Franke 2001: 245;
Lustig 1997: 45). In the New Kingdom, s3/t was sometimes replaced by šrἰ/t in everyday use
(Willems 1983: 153). Relations created through marriage were termed ḥmt (wife) and h3y
(husband); rarely, šm and šmt were used to denote parents-in-law, and reciprocally son- and
daughter-in-law (Franke 2001: 245, Willems 1983: 153). By the 18th dynasty the term snt
had become interchangeable for wife (and reciprocally sn for husband) (Černý 1954: 25).
There is no specific Egyptian word for parents but, as Olabarria (2018: 63) comments, the
absence of a term for parents does not indicate the absence of a concept and may instead
point to distinct maternal and paternal groups.8
Discussing the use of sn/snt during the Ramesside Period in Deir el-Medina, Bierbrier (1980:
104-06) found it had widespread use as a term for nephew/niece by blood or marriage as
well as denoting affines in the same generation without blood-ties, but remarks that the
absence of genealogical data may actually obscure blood ties. The tomb of the sculptor
Nakhtamun (ii) (TT335) is an example of a kin term’s multiple use: sn is used for a brother,
8
Price (2016: 493) describes the pairing on Late Period statues of ἰtw and mwwt with the meaning of male and
female ancestors, or forebears in general.
6
Table 1.1 Summary of basic kin terms used across historical periods, their extended meanings using
Euro-American terminology, and kin types. Sources: after Franke, Kinship, 2001: 245-46; Lustig,
Kinship, gender and age in Middle Kingdom tomb scenes and texts, 1997: 45; Price, Archaism and filial piety:
an unusual Late Period pair statue, 2016: 493, note k; Robins, The relationships specified in Egyptian kinship
terms of the Middle and New Kingdoms, 1992: 204; Willems, A description of Egyptian kin terminology of the
Middle Kingdom, c. 2000–1650 B.C., 1983: 153–65.
Extended meaning using Euro-American

Basic kin terms* Kin type**
terminology
mwt mother, grandmother, mother-in-law, ascendant M, MM, FM, WM
(also ancestor in the Late Period alongside ἰt)
ἰt father, grandfather, father-in-law, ascendant (also F, FF, MF, WF
ancestor)
s3 son, grandson, great-grandson, son-in-law, S, SS, DS, SSS, DH
descendant
s3t daughter, granddaughter, daughter-in-law, D, DD, SD, SW
descendant
sn brother (including half-brother), uncle, cousin, B, MB, FB, FBS, MZS,
nephew, brother-in-law, friend, colleague (husband MBS, FZS, BS, ZS, ZH,
from 18th dynasty) WB, WMB?
snt sister (including half-sister), aunt, cousin, niece, Z, MZ, FZ, FBD, MZD,
sister-in-law, friend (wife from 18th dynasty) MBD, FZD, ZD, BD, WZ,
SW?
ḥmt wife wife to Ego
h3y husband husband to Ego
Legend: M = mother, F = father, S = son, D = daughter, B = brother, Z = sister

W = wife, H = husband
* s3/t and sn/t are counted as two basic terms
**These are the uncategorised relationships used by anthropologists when referring to the
contents of kinship categories (Schwimmer: https://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/
tutor/kinterms/kinterms2.html Accessed 6.4.2016).
a brother-in-law, and three nephews (Naktamun (ii) is the father of the wife, and uncle of
the husband in cousin marriage number six, table 4.3; Nakhtamun (ii) also has a niece and
nephew in cousin marriage number four, table 4.3). It is not always possible to construct
kin relationships in texts, stelae or tomb inscriptions as kin terms may not be accompanied
by names, titles and scenes that help clarify relationships. Olabarria (2020a: 66) notes that
in addition to missing captions, sometimes the names and titles given might be ‘indicative
but never conclusive of a relationship’, and determining identity is further complicated by
applying possessive suffix-pronouns to several individuals in the same inscription.
7
There is a body of published research on kin terms and kinship, many of which are
period specific. Olabarria (2020a) has analysed the presentation of kinship in the First
Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom, focusing particularly on the changing dynamics
of kinship during one’s life and how forms of relatedness are communicated, with
particular reference to stelae from Abydos North Offering Chapels. Olabarria (2020a: 192)
points out the flexibility of ancient Egyptian kinship, noting that inclusion in kin groups
was not only ‘substance’ (such as blood or bodily fluids),9 but membership of a group could
be ‘actively sought and constructed’. While some aspects of the kinship system may have
been less subject to change than others, the result was a ‘complex interplay between ‘fixed’
and ‘variable’ characteristics…the balance of these two poles may shift depending on, for
example, the role played by the state’ (Olabarria 2020a: 201).
Using more than two thousand primary sources, Franke (1983) conducts a detailed
study on Middle Kingdom kin terms and kin groups (see 154-77 for application of basic
kin terms). Willems (1983: 152-68) focuses on the Middle Kingdom in his discussion of
primary kin terms and the difficulties of identifying their extended meanings. Lustig
(1997: 43-65) also focuses mainly on the Middle Kingdom in her analysis of kinship, gender
and age (First Intermediate Period sources are also included). Bierbrier (1980: 100-07)
discusses terms of relationship used in Deir el-Medina, while Toivari-Viitala (2001: 194-
201) specifically discusses terms denoting mother, daughter/female child in the context
of a study on women in this workmen’s village. Robins (1979: 197-217) examines terms
of relationship predominantly in the Middle Kingdom with evidence drawn mostly from
private monuments; her work also includes some New Kingdom material but excludes Deir
el-Medina sources. Using an analysis of mainly Theban tombs, Whale (1989) examines the
representation of family in private tombs of the 18th dynasty (in particular, see the study
on 239-75). Allen (2009) argues in favour of a matrilineal structure in the organisation of
family and society in ancient Egypt. Finally, summaries providing overviews of kin terms
and kinship groups in ancient Egypt include Campagno (2009: 1-8) and Franke (2001: 245-
48).
The changing pattern of relatedness in ancient Egypt means that groups cannot be fitted
into preconceived and static categories. Approaches to determining relatedness are
culturally specific and while biological kin are recognised and associated with certain duties
and obligations, other kin groups arise, remain or change due to specific circumstances, as
Olabarria (2020a) convincingly discusses in her work on Middle Kingdom kinship. Holy (1996:
9) points out that kinship is the differential between rights, duties, roles and statuses so
that kinship is ‘recognized as the difference that makes a difference’. Carsten’s (2004: 9) also
aptly describes kinship as more than ‘given’ with its received rights, rules and obligations,
but as a ‘realm of new possibilities’. In the debate between kinship defined by reproduction
and kinship defined by terminological space within a culture (for example, is someone
9
(i) For a discussion on bodily substance and it deployment in kinship studies, see Carsten (2011: 19-35, 2004: 131),
who argues for the mutability and transferability of substance that can change and accrue through life.
(ii) Olabarria (2018: 88-113) suggests that one of the ways of understanding ka, the vital essence of the living and
the dead, is in the context of substance. Olabarria proposes that funerary rituals, maintained by some members of
the kin group from generation to generation (traditionally by the eldest son), create and perpetuate relatedness
through the provision and sharing of food and sustain the essence of the ka amongst the kinship group.
8
called cousin purely because he/she trades specific goods?), Read (2001: 114) believes that
kinship is a question of understanding which conceptual framework is appropriate at any
given time: ‘not whether genealogically framed reference is somehow more real and the
terminologically framed reference is ‘metaphoric’’ Commenting on the interpretation of
kinship, James (2011: 8) notes that kin terminologies used by social anthropologists arise
from ethnographic research connected to a particular imagined view of society as a whole,
and that the language defining kin depends on the underlying grammar of a particular
group; the result could be that kin terms used in real life might mask genetic relationships
more than they reveal them. This range of possibilities exists within the interpretation
of kinship in ancient Egypt – in some circumstances the biological ties of kin may not be
any more real than the constructed ties of kin; duties and obligations arise, remain or
change; and the fluidity of kin terms may lead to incorrect interpretations as to who may
or may not be kin, although the context of the textual sources is constructive in suggesting
interpretations of consanguineous relationships.
Consanguinity and consanguineous marriage
This section begins with definitions of consanguinity leading into an overview of categories
of consanguineous marriage and levels of biological and genetic relationships up to the
level of second cousin (using Euro-American terminology).
Defining consanguinity
The condition of being of the same blood; relationship by descent from a common
ancestor; blood-relationship. (Opposed to affinity, i.e. relationship by marriage.)
OED, 2018
A consanguine is someone who is defined by the society as a consanguine, and ‘blood’

relationship in a genetic sense has not necessarily anything to do with it, although on
the whole these tend to coincide with most communities of the world…Once we accept
that consanguinity is a socially defined quality, the definition of kinship holds.
Fox, Kinship and Marriage: an Anthropological Perspective, 1967: 34-35.
As a working definition, unions contracted between persons biologically related as

second cousins (F ≥ 0.0156) are categorized as consanguineous.
Bittles, A Background Summary of Consanguineous Marriage, 2001a: 2.
Consanguinity can be defined as descent from a common ancestor, or a society may define
consanguinity irrespective of biological relationship, or because of biological relationship.
When it is classified from the perspective of clinical genetics, the arbitrary limit of second
cousin has been selected because the ‘genetic influence in marriages between couples
related to a lesser degree would usually be expected to differ only slightly from that
observed in the general population’ (Bittles 2001a: 2).10
A union up to the level of second cousin or closer is the most common definition equivalent to a coefficient of
10
inbreeding (F) 0.0156 in their offspring (see figure 1.2) (Bittles 2001b: 89).
9
Table 1.2 Biological relationships (using Euro-American terminology) and genetic relationships.
Source: Bittles, Consanguinity in Context, 2012: 6.
Biological Coefficient of Coefficient of

Genetic relationship
relationship relationship (r) inbreeding (F)
Parent-child First-degree 0.5 0.25
Sibling
Half-sibling Second-degree 0.25 0.125
Uncle-niece
Double first cousin
First cousin Third-degree 0.125 0.0625
First cousin once Fourth-degree 0.0625 0.0313
removed
Double second cousin
Second cousin Fifth-degree 0.0313 0.0156
Second cousin once Sixth-degree 0.0156 0.0078
removed
Double third cousin
Third cousin Seventh-degree 0.0078 0.0039
Genetic relationships are classified in terms of coefficient of relationship (r), which

measures the proportion of genes each individual has in common, and a coefficient of
inbreeding (F), which expresses an individual’s level of consanguinity and indicates the
risk of recessive gene disorder (Bittles 2012: 6-7) (table 1.2).11
Categories of consanguineous marriage
In genetic studies consanguineous marriages are traditionally classified from the husband’s
perspective. In addition to sibling and half-sibling marriages, there is a range of categories
that define cousin and uncle-niece marriage. In a first cousin marriage a man can marry
any of his four different cousins. They are his father’s brother’s daughter, his mother’s
sister’s daughter, mother’s brother’s daughter, and his father’s sister’s daughter. Further
classifications of consanguinity include marriages between double first cousins, uncles and
nieces and aunts and nephews, first cousins once removed, and second cousins (Denic et al
2010a: 741). This range of consanguineous unions is shown in figure 1.1 (for more complex
pedigrees of consanguineous marriages, see Hamamy et al. 2011: 844).
11
See Woods et al. (2006: 889-96) for examples of greater than expected levels of homozygosity in individuals with
recessive gene disorders, who are the offspring of first cousin marriages in communities where consanguineous
marriage is frequently practised.
10
Legend: mother father brother sister son daughter
cross first cross first maternal parallel paternal parallel

cousin cousin first cousin first cousin
uncle-niece
double first first cousin
second cousin
cousin once-removed
Figure 1.1: Categories of consanguineous marriage. Source: after Hamamy et al., Consanguineous
Marriages, Pearls and Perils: Geneva International Consanguinity Workshop Report, 2011: 844.
Definitions of incest
Incest: Sexual intercourse between two persons who are related by a real, assumed or
artificial bond of kinship that is regarded as a bar to sexual relations. Where sexual
relations are forbidden, but not because of kinship, they may be called mismating.
Schusky, Manual for Kinship Analysis, 1972: 91.
For the ‘grisly horror of incest’ is not a universal characteristic of all heterosexual
offences with kinswomen and the wives of kinsmen. The reactions to a breach vary
within and between societies.
Goody, A Comparative Approach to Incest and Adultery, 1956: 304.
Within anthropology, the term incest is used when a kinship bond that bars sexual
intercourse is broken; what is considered incest depends on the rules of different kinship
groups and, in turn, these laws are shaped by religion, law, politics, economics or other
aspects of the culture (Schusky 1965: 2). The term derives from incestum and was used in
11
Rome to refer generally to polluting or unchaste behaviour, including sexual intercourse

with proscribed family members and with Vestal Virgins, the Roman priestesses of Vesta
(Archibald 2001: 13, see also Shaw 1992: 269-70). In a study of pollution and purification in
early Greek religion, Parker (1996: 97) points out that the word miasma implies pollution,
but incest is never referred to as miasma. Endogamous marriage was more common in Greek
city-states and Shaw (1992: 270-71) refers to the normality of marriages between cousins,
but highlights reduced levels of acceptability with closer biological kin, finally leading
to sexual relations between siblings that were treated with revulsion. Greek sensitivities
towards first-degree sexual relations are reflected in The Laws by Plato: the Athenian argues
that unwritten laws and the force of public opinion restrain parents from sleeping with
sons or daughters, and men from intercourse with attractive siblings (Laws, 8. 838a-b) (see
pages 35-36 for further discussion on marriage prohibitions in classical Greece and ancient
Rome).
In ancient Egypt there is no evidence that the term incest existed in any legal sense, and
the term cannot be applied to the sibling unions for which evidence exists, for example,
royal 18th dynasty marriages or sibling marriages in the Roman census returns. Frandsen
(2009: 9) raises the interesting point that the category of bwt, incorporating evil, chaos and
things taboo, did not include sexual unions between immediate family members.12 If the
term incest is used within this research the nature of the relationship will be qualified, as
will the perspective from which it is being discussed. There is also no indication in ancient
Egypt for laws proscribing or prescribing specific unions; it appears, as Allam (1977: 89-97,
LÄ: 1162-63) discusses, to be a private family matter that carried civic and legal obligations.
Franke (1983: 343) also comments on the difficulty of determining rules governing marriage,
noting that the range of kin covered by the term sn/t (brother/sister) means that virtually
all collateral relatives fall into this category, thereby obscuring possible clues as to whether
there were proscribed or permitted unions.
Incest avoidance: the incest taboo
Various theories have been presented to explain behaviour that avoids, or rules that
proscribe, sexual relations between close biological kin.13 For the purposes of this section on
incest avoidance, incest refers to sexual relationships with first-degree relatives (parent/
child/sibling).
In a theory first presented by Westermarck (1891: 320-21), children reared together from
an early age express sexual indifference leading to mutual sexual aversion (also likely to
12
For a study on bwt in body in life and after death, with particular reference to Old and Middle Kingdom funerary
texts, see Frandsen (2002: 141-74).
13
(i) Darwin (1876, 1868) propounded that natural selection instinctively favours sexual liaisons outside closely
related biological groups to avoid the deleterious effects of inbreeding, while Freud (1919: 1-29) stated that the
strength and danger of desire creates prohibitions against mating with close family. See Levi-Strauss (1969
[1949]) for the ‘alliance theory’: sexual prohibitions amongst close family members require men to find marriage
partners outside their immediate family and in return women are exchanged into their group, creating alliances
to reinforce kinship systems, reduce conflict and encourage trade.
(ii)
Alvarez et al. (2015: 474-83), assess the potential impact of inbreeding on the fertility of 30 marriages in the
Darwin-Wedgewood dynasty (Charles Darwin was married to his first cousin Emma Wedgewood, and three of his
wife’s brothers were also married to cousins).
12
be exhibited between parents and offspring living in close association).14 Research carried
out by Shepher (1983: 59, 1971: 295) on 2,769 married couples in 211 kibbutzim led him to
conclude that children reared in a kibbutz developed sexual aversion from close proximity,
but his proposals have since been challenged (for example, Shor and Simchai 2012: 1509-13,
2009: 1811-37). Similar testing of the Westermarck effect was conducted in Wolf ’s (2005:
76-92, 1993: 157-75, 1970: 503-15, 1968: 864-74, 1966: 833-98) extensive research on sim–pua
(little bride) marriages in Taiwan, in which the future bride for a son is adopted into the
family – the female may range from several days to three years of age. Wolf ’s (1993: 159,
1970: 511-14) survey of demographic records reveals that sim-pua marriages were more
likely to result in divorce by a factor of 2.5 to 1, and exhibit reduced total fertility of twenty
five percent compared to marriages arranged between adult children reared separately.15
Wolf suggests that females introduced into the household under the age of three develop
sexual inhibitions, but at the time of their introduction the males were usually over three
years of age, beyond the period in which they would develop sexual aversion. A study
of the Westermarck effect by Walter and Buyske (2003: 353-65) focuses on first cousins
raised in proximity in Morocco for the first seven years of childhood and their mate choice
beyond adolescence. Their results concluded that females showed greater sexual aversion
at maturity than males with whom they had co-socialised, possibly indicating that females
display increased inbreeding avoidance because they bear greater consequences from
inbreeding depression (Walter and Buyske 2003: 363).
Theories related to the Westermarck effect and sim-pua marriages have been considered
in relation to the sibling and half-sibling marriages recorded in the Roman census returns,
with studies noting that although the indifference theory exists in many cases, it is not
always valid (for example, Hopkins 1980: 307-09; Middleton 1962: 611; Scheidel 2004: 99-
101, 2002: 42-44, 1996a: 330-31; Shaw 1992: 276).16
Identifying genetic markers for consanguinity in human remains
The recovery of, and accessibility to, uncontaminated DNA that is viable for genetic testing
could potentially determine whether the parents of one individual are consanguineously
related. However, the availability of retrievable and uncontaminated DNA in mummified
and skeletal remains is one of the main obstacles in achieving valid results.17
DNA typing can currently be used to test documentary evidence that indicates possible
consanguinity in family groups; for example, Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht are two 12th
dynasty males from Deir Rifeh cemetery who are now in the Manchester Museum. Their
coffin inscriptions indicate that they may have shared the same mother, but an alternative
14
See Fox (1962: 128-50) for discussion on incest motivations and behaviour.
15
‘Minor marriages’ were common in parts of mainland China until the mid 1940s and in Taiwan until the early
1930s (Wolf 1993: 159).
16
See Leavitt (2007: 393-419) for further debate on the Westermarck theory, arguing against close proximity as
the determining factor of sexual aversion.
17
Hawass et al. (2010: 638-47) state that genetic fingerprinting allowed the construction of a five-generation
pedigree of Tutankhamun’s immediate lineage, enabling them to identify consanguineous links. This research,
however, has drawn criticism and the reliability of the genetic data has been questioned (for example, see
Lorenzen and Willerslev 2010: 2471; Marchant 2011: 404-06).
13
hypothesis is that they were adopted and a study reported in 2014 did initially confirm
the adoption hypothesis (Matheson et al. 2014: 39-47). Following further investigation, the
first successful typing in Egyptian mummies for both mitochondrial and Y chromosomal
DNA was conducted on Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht. Using teeth extracted from
each mummy, Drousou et al. (2018: 793-97) demonstrated that the brothers belonged to
mitochondrial haplotype M1a1 and shared two private SNPs, suggesting a shared maternal
relationship; although the Y chromosome sequences were less complete, they displayed
sufficient variation to indicate that Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht had different paternal
lineages. While mitochondrial haplotype M1a1 suggests Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht
shared a maternal relationship, other degrees of relationship to each other were possible,
such as cousin or uncle-nephew through the matrilateral line. However, the combination of
DNA results with inscriptional evidence on their coffins relates them to the female Khnum-
Aa as their mother. Drousou et al.’s study achieved its aim to identify consanguineous links
between the two brothers; however, further research on their DNA would be needed to
establish the viability of determining possible consanguineal links between the two fathers
and the shared mother of Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht (without requiring the bodies of
the parents themselves).
Although DNA studies on ancient Egyptian human remains are currently limited, for
reasons described above, it is technically possible to find genetic markers of clinical
consanguinity between individuals whose union produces offspring. In 2014 a complete
genome sequence was determined from a finger phalanx found in the Denisova Cave in the
Altai Mountains of Siberia, belonging to a Neanderthal woman thought to be at least 50,000
years old (Prüfer et al. 2014: 43-49). The DNA typing established that her parents had an
inbreeding coefficient of 0.125 which suggests that they may have been half-siblings with
a common mother, or possibly uncle/niece, aunt/nephew, grandfather/granddaughter or
grandmother/grandson (Prufer et al. 2014: 45, see also table 1.2, page 10). Further texts
conducted by the study determined that close mating was common amongst this female’s
recent ancestors.
In the context of DNA testing in modern populations and reporting requirements, McGuire
et al. (2012: 1040-46) discuss methods to determine consanguineal ties between the parents
of children with congenital anomalies, including intellectual and developmental disorders.
They report that analysis of parental samples is not required to identify consanguineously
related parents. When parts of chromosome pairs are the same as each other (one copy
of each pair of chromosomes is inherited from the father and the other copy from the
mother) there are two possibilities:
If only one chromosome is involved, then the cause could either be uniparental
isodisomy (meaning the child inherited two identical copies of a chromosome from
one parent and no copy of the same chromosome from the other parent), or distant
consanguinity… If multiple chromosomes are involved, then the parents must be blood
relatives of one another.
McGuire et al. Identifying consanguinity through routine genomic analysis: reporting
requirements, 2012: 1040-41.
14
While the quality of modern DNA samples allows for genomic sequencing, as did the
specific environmental conditions in the Denisova Cave in Siberia, with advances in DNA
retrieval it may be possible in future to determine levels of clinical consanguinity within
ancient Egyptian families and communities.
Methodology and structure
An overarching theme in this research is the difficulty in securing firm evidence for
consanguineous marriage beyond the census returns from Roman Egypt. This is further
compounded by the fragmentary nature of the sources and their extensive historical
spread. Allam (LÄ: 1164) believes that examination of available documents inevitably gives
the impression that marriage among blood relatives was not uncommon. Franke (1983:
342-43), however, is more cautious in his conclusions, noting the lack of secure evidence
for consanguineous marriage and the difficulties presented by the complicated system of
kinship in determining whether certain types of kin marriages were preferred or not (with
specific reference to the Middle Kingdom). In response to this, Eyre (1992: 218 and n.68)
proposes that the scarcity of evidence for ‘marked exogamous practice’, the use of kinship
terminology for affinal relatives and application of the term ‘sister’ for ‘wife’ (from the
18th dynasty), and the bilateral pattern of inheritance, suggest that pharaonic Egypt ‘was
every bit as endogamous as mediaeval and early-modern Egypt’.
The first step in this book’s research process was to identify reported consanguineous
marriages in select sources, including legal, administrative and personal documents,
inscriptional evidence in funerary contexts, and sources drawn from family archives. The
available evidence dictated the direction of subsequent research. I chose the Ptolemaic
town of Pathyris and Ramesside Deir el-Medina not only because evidence indicated
consanguineous marriage in their communities, but also because additional evidence from
papyri and ostraca allowed an investigation of economic transactions and their associated
networks and, for Deir el-Medina in particular, evidence of personal interactions that
illustrated trust, trustworthiness and conflict.
After assessing and listing select sources for consanguineous marriages, the research
develops in three stages, each accompanied by a relevant case study and the resulting
discussion is informed, where appropriate, by studies on modern consanguineous
marriage drawn from disciplines outside Egyptology, including demography, economics,
anthropology and pathology. These studies are used to gain insight into the issues under
review and introduce theoretical possibilities; the limitations of their application are
addressed individually in each case study.
The first stage of the research evaluates laws and customary practice related to inheritance
and gifts given at marriage in ancient Egypt, and for comparative purposes in the
neighbouring regions of Greece, Rome and Mesopotamia, on the premise that partible
inheritance may be one of the factors that encourages consanguineous marriage. I have
used a bilingual family archive from Ptolemaic Pathyris as a case study in this first section
as it not only allows an evaluation of amounts agreed in demotic marriage settlements
between known consanguineous (at the level of first cousins) and non-consanguineous
15
relatives, but also allows an evaluation of preferences within consanguineous families

to conduct economic transactions between each other. The discussion on the timing and
amount given at marriage and in inheritance is informed by demographic and economic
studies on modern consanguineous marriage.
The second section uses prosopographic research from Deir el-Medina to analyse
interrelationships of marriage and affinity between couples thought to have married
consanguineously. Occupations of males within consanguineous families are explored to
examine whether status and wealth may have been consolidated within these families.
Numbers of offspring are also calculated (as far as is possible given the extant sources) to
assess whether consanguineous families may have had more or less offspring than families
not known to be consanguineous. Once the scope of probable networks of interrelated
families has been established, this section examines the participation of consanguineous
families in known economic activities within the village, such as gift-giving, ‘open credit’,
and barter, on the premise that families related consanguineously are more likely to behave
altruistically towards each other, or with reduced expectations of reciprocity. The resulting
discussion is informed by studies in anthropology and experimental economics.
The third and final research section uses clinical studies on current biological outcomes
of consanguinity to establish the most frequently reported congenital outcomes of
consanguineous marriage. Using these results, I surveyed congenital outcomes reported in
palaeopathological studies of ancient Egyptian human remains to determine if any of the
congenital anomalies identified in the ancient record are amongst those most frequently
reported in modern clinical studies. Allowing for the rarity of congenital anomalies in
skeletal or mummified remains (for reasons detailed in chapter five), cleft lip and palate,
and cleft lip, were identified as case studies from ancient Egypt.
Intellectual and developmental disorders (IDD) are also reported at increased frequency
amongst the offspring of consanguineous marriage, however, conditions included in this
category and their interpretation is debatable in a modern context, and cannot be applied as a
blanket term in ancient Egypt (or in other ancient societies). I have, however, used definitions
of conceptual, social and practical skills classified under IDD to investigate limitations that may
have been placed on an individual’s functioning and adaptive abilities. A bioarchaeology of care
methodology has been applied to determine what inputs of care, if any, might be needed or given
by families and/or communities, and to question whether families related consanguineously
had the resources and support networks to meet any increased requirements of caring.
In this work I am not arguing for consanguineous marriage to be the consistent marriage
of choice within some families or communities, or for it to have an unbroken historical
continuity as a culturally preferred practice; nor am I suggesting that powerful clans were
created through non-royal consanguineous marriage to create a ‘republic of cousins’
whose interests and influence overrode those of the state (see Tillion 1983), although at
different social levels influential interrelated families did exist. I argue that at certain
times and under certain conditions – occupational, medical, political and environmental
– consanguineous marriage was a preferred choice by some families, and within some
communities, for its economic outcomes and social support networks.
16
Chapter 2
Consanguinity in historical context: evidence from

select sources for consanguineous marriage in
ancient Egypt, the Near East, Greece and Rome
Introduction
This chapter examines evidence for consanguineous marriages in ancient Egypt and
regions of the ancient Near East and eastern Mediterranean, and discusses rules governing
marriages between biological and affinal kin. It ends with a summary of the evolution and
diversity of prohibitions related to marriage arising from Roman rules and practice and
their later spread into Europe.
The chapter begins by listing evidence diachronically from select sources for royal and non-
royal consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt, and describes the context in which this
evidence was found. A short summary of royal consanguineous marriage is listed separately
to the more detailed evidence indicating non-royal consanguineous marriage. Since the
majority of evidence for non-royal consanguineous marriage is found in the Roman and
Ptolemaic Periods, the discussion begins with these periods and moves retrospectively
to the Middle Kingdom. Select sources for consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt
are examined since it is beyond the scope of this research to list all known or suspected
consanguineous marriages in documentary and archaeological sources (see Appendix 1 for
a list of non-royal consanguineous marriages).
The second half of the chapter introduces evidence for consanguineous marriage beyond Egypt.
It begins with a summary of Biblical incest prohibitions in the Book of Leviticus, followed by
practice and laws governing close-kin marriages in classical Greece and Rome, and the evolution
of canon and civil law related to prohibited marriages arising out of the Roman model. Types
of marriages permitted (and reportedly practised) by members of the Zoroastrian religion in
Persia are also briefly reviewed. This overview ends with the custom of close-kin marriage in
Arabia prior to the spread of Islam, and current incest prohibitions within Islam.
This summary of consanguineous marriages in regions (and religions) outside Egypt

combines an examination of the evidence for accepted sibling, half-sibling and cousin
marriage with a summary of laws related to prohibited degrees of consanguinity in marriage
(depending on authors, their preferred terms and the context of the discussion, this is
also referred to as prohibited degrees of kinship or relationship, or as incest prohibition).
When the term consanguineous is used in this second section it refers to biological kin
and the levels of relatedness it implies are clarified within the text. By placing ancient
Egyptian consanguinity into historical context, this section aims to show the cultural and
historical spread and continuity of consanguineous marriage and the associated diversity
of permissible and prohibited unions.
17
Consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt
Evidence from the Roman census returns (1st –3rd centuries AD) indicates the practice
of sibling and half-sibling marriage, however, there is scarce evidence of sibling marriage
amongst non-royals from earlier periods of Egyptian history. There is, however, limited
evidence of consanguineous marriage, outside sibling and half-sibling unions, from the
Middle Kingdom onwards, primarily in funerary contexts and documentary sources.
Royal consanguineous marriages
The greatest concentration of full and half-sibling royal marriages dates from the New
Kingdom. Pharaohs of the 18th dynasty believed to have married their sisters are Tao II,
Ahmose I, Amenhotep I, Tuthmosis II, Amenhotep II, and Tuthmosis IV; it is also thought
that Ramesses II 18 and Merenptah of the 19th dynasty may have married sisters or half-
sisters (Dodson and Hilton 2004, 124-27, 132-35, 160-61, 177). Father-daughter marriages are
more controversial with perhaps the most famous example being Ramesses II, who possibly
married three of his daughters, although they may have only fulfilled a ritual role; in the
tomb of Bintanath (QV71), however, he is represented with an adult daughter titled ‘King’s
Daughter of his Body’ (but this could be a royal grandchild) (Dodson and Hilton 2004: 169;
Robins 1993: 29; Tyldesley 2000: 134, 152).19 Sibling marriages are often the focus of academic
debate and reasons for their practice in Egypt include distancing the royal family from
ordinary subjects, thereby instilling supernatural qualities in royal rulers; sibling marriages
may also have been conducted in imitation of the myth of Osiris and Isis to consolidate divine
status (see, for example, Bixler 1982: 268-72; Middleton 1962: 608-11; Robins 1993: 27).
Following the death of Alexander of Macedonia in 323 BC, a dynasty of Macedonian kings ruled
Egypt under the family name Ptolemy; at least seven, and perhaps eight, of the thirteen ruling
Ptolemies were married to sisters or half-sisters, including Ptolemy VIII who married his sister
and the daughter of his sister/wife (Hölbl 2001: 195).20 Ager (2005: 4) remarks that sometimes we
cannot know for certain how inbred a ‘particular Ptolemy, Arsinoë or Kleopatra might be’ due
to uncertainty over his or her parentage. Following Ptolemaic tradition, the marriage between
Cleopatra VII and her younger brother, Ptolemy XIII, was probably a requirement of their father’s
will but may never have actually taken place (Hölbl 2001: 231). Pomeroy (1984: 17, 23-25) points
out that the marriages of Ptolemaic siblings secured power for women as co-rulers and led them
to be accepted as legitimate sole sovereigns, and characteristics signalling dynastic power and
exclusivity for male rulers, such as the repetition of names, was adopted by female queens through
the name Cleopatra (alongside their increasing prominence in the visual arts). In a consideration
of the complexities surrounding sibling marriage perpetuated by the Ptolemies, Ager (2005: 1)
18
Henutmire may be the sister or daughter of Ramesses II, for example, see Dodson and Hilton (2004: 161); Brand
(2000: 346).
19
(i) Tyldesley (2000: 134-36) lists four daughters who became wives of Ramesses II: Bintanath, Meritamen,
Nebettawi and Hentmire; see also Tyldesley’s discussion on pharaoh-daughter marriages as symbolic or real.
(ii) There is controversy surrounding the proposal that Akhenaten married two of his daughters (see Dodson and
Hilton 2004: 148; Reeves 2001: 161, 1999: 93-94). Allen (1991: 74-85) presents the complexities of interpretation
surrounding Akhenaten and his successor, including the possibility of Akhenaten having two sons who married
their sisters.
20
For genealogies in the Ptolemaic dynasty, see Hölbl (2001, Stemma 1-3).
18
Consanguinity in historical context
comments that although no single theory can be attributed to their incestuous pattern, it served
as a ‘dynastic signature which highlighted their singularity and, above all, their power’.21
Non-royal consanguineous marriages
This section provides evidence of non-royal consanguineous marriages drawn from select
sources; it is presented diachronically beginning with the Roman and Ptolemaic Periods
and continuing retrospectively to the Middle Kingdom.
Roman Period
The census returns documenting brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt are amongst the
clearest evidence of full- and half-sibling marriage in antiquity. Consanguineous marriages are
also recorded in, or adduced from, legal contracts, administrative papyri, wills and personal
correspondence, but as Middleton (1962: 606) points out, ‘the technical character of the census
with their indisputable precision’ remains the most reliable source. From the 1st century AD
Roman census returns required all men and women resident in each household to be listed,
thereby allowing the modern collation of genealogical data. Analysis of the Roman census returns
by Bagnall and Frier (2006: 127) has revealed that 20 out of 121 recorded ongoing marriages were
between brother and sister – one in six of all marriages – and overall one fifth were consanguineous
marriages (see table 2.1).22 Four of the census returns document full-sibling or half-sibling
marriages over two generations (145.Ar.9, 159.Ar.4, 159.Ar.11, 187.Ar.4) and one, which is not a
census return (P. Amh. 2.75), documents sibling marriage down three generations (Grenfell and
Hunt 1901: 91; Hopkins 1980: 322; Scheidel 1996a: 11 n.15 and 16). Three quarters of the census
returns are from the Arsinoite and Oxyrhynchite nomes in Middle Egypt and the majority of the
consanguineous marriages occur in the Arsinoite nome (Bagnall and Frier 2006: 6, 129-30). Almost
half the returns are from metropoleis – 149 out of 300 – and of those 86 are from Arsinoe and
36 from Oxyrhynchus; with the exception of a possible prior brother-sister marriage (71-Ox-1),
there are no attested sibling marriages in Oxyrhynchus although sibling marriages are indicated
in other documents from Oxyrhynchus (Bagnall and Frier 2006: 56, 130 n.71).23
21
Another example of the singularity of dynasty is seen in the royal sibling marriages that took place in the 4th
century BC when the Hecatomnid dynasty governed Caria; the region had been incorporated into the Achaemenid
Empire in 545 BC. The most famous member of this dynasty is Mausolus, one of the five children of Hecatomnus,
for whom the Mausoleum in Helicarnassus was built. When Mausolus came to the throne he married his full
sister, Artemesia, and their marriage was childless. Artemesia succeeded her husband briefly; at her death her
brother Idrieus ascended to the throne and married his sister Ada and their marriage was also childless. After
the death of Idrieus, Ada ruled briefly before being driven from power by her brother Pixodarus, the final son
of Hecatomnus, who married outside the family. All the sibling marriages were monogamous and Carney (2005:
84-85) believes their short-term focus was the maintenance of a prominent public profile within and beyond
their region (including the building of the Mausoleum), combined with a memorable legacy of their rule, in the
knowledge that their power would always be dependent on the will of the Persian king.
22
(i) Three hundred returns written on papyri have survived with the vast majority from the 2nd and 3rd
centuries AD. Bagnall and Frier (1994: xv) identified nearly 1100 registered persons, as well as the sex of more than
1000 and the age of more than 700. (Bagnall and Frier’s 2006 edition of The Demography of Roman Egypt contains a
supplement of new material published after the first edition.)
(ii)
In their study on the census returns in Roman Egypt, Hombert and Préaux (1952: 149-53) also discuss the
prevalence of, and possible reasons for, sibling marriage.
23
(i) See Bagnall and Frier (2006: 56-57) for the distribution of the census returns.
(ii) Scheidel (1996a: 11) also lists 173-Ar-21 (P. Stras. 8. 768, 174/5 AD) as a paternal half-sibling or possibly sibling
marriage with two sons.
19
Figure 2.1: Numbers of probable or possible non-royal consanguineous marriages in ancient Egypt
allocated to historical periods (reported in select sources, see Appendix 1).
Table 2.1: Incidence of consanguineous marriages in the Roman census returns in Egypt. Sources:
Bagnall and Frier, The Demography of Roman Egypt, 2006: 128; Scheidel, Measuring Sex, Age and Death in
the Roman Empire: Explorations in Ancient Demography, 1996a: 11.
Distribution Number from

Level of All
Percentage Arsinoite
kinship Marriages Urban Village nome
Brother/sister 20 16.5 13 7 17
Half-sibling 4 3.3 3 1 3
First cousin 2 1.7 1 1 1
Non-kin 95 78.5 26 69 59
Total 121 100.00 43 78 80
20
Where the ages of husband and wife are preserved in the census returns, there is a smaller
difference in age between consanguineous married couples – average 5.4 years in 19
marriages – compared to non-consanguineously married couples – average 8.3 years in 58
marriages where the ages of both spouses are preserved (Bagnall and Frier 2006: 131; Scheidel
1996b: 323, presents an age difference of 5.8 – 6.5 years). The majority of consanguineously
married couples had offspring; one couple of siblings had eight surviving children, amongst
whom two siblings married each other and had two infant male offspring (187.Ar.4; for
numbers of offspring, see Scheidel, 1996a: 14, table 1.4).24 Using the census returns, Bagnall
and Frier (2006: 109) estimate that Egyptian life expectancy at birth was probably between
22-25 years of age. However, taking into account high mortality at birth and in infancy,
and then in advanced years (typically 50 plus), an individual living to 20 years may expect
to survive a further 30 years or more, meaning that fewer would die between the ages of
20-30 (Chamberlain 2006: 47-49, 52-54). Hopkins (1980: 304) states that around 40 percent
of families would have had both a son and daughter surviving to marriageable age, and
applying the rates of consanguineous marriage in the census returns, this suggests that one
third of young males married sisters of marriageable age in preference to females outside
the nuclear family (Scheidel 1996b: 322). Huebner (2007: 21-94) discusses sibling marriage
in the context of adoption, arguing that some marriages considered to be biological unions
were more likely to be marriages between an adopted son or daughter, a widespread strategy
in the ancient eastern Mediterranean. However, Remijsen and Clarysse (2008: 53-61) and
Rowlandson and Takahashi (2009: 104-39) challenge this theory, arguing for biological
sibling marriages in the Roman Period. Scheidel (1995: 155) argues that the practice of
sibling marriage is not a distinct cultural trait peculiar to Greek urban settlers, since native
Egyptian names linked to sibling marriage in Thelbonthon Siptha in the Prosopite nome
(southwest Nile Delta) indicate that first degree consanguineous marriages were neither
recent colonial practices nor confined to Hellenised environments.25
Included above in the census returns are two first cousin marriages, the first is 201-
Ar-10 (P. Tebt. 2.480, AD 203) and the second is 187-An-2 (PSI 12.1227, AD 188), which
belongs to the Philosarapis archive from Tebtunis. There is possibly another first cousin
marriage in the Archive of Philosarapis between Didyme (AD b.47/48) and Herakleides
(AD 40-114), but this is dependent upon the identity of both fathers (Rowlandson 2016:
341, 334 n.55). In an analysis of the quantifiable data from Roman Egypt, Scheidel (1996b:
321-22) comments that the numbers of first cousin marriages were probably ‘massively
underestimated’ since the format of the returns required that the parents of both spouses
lived in the same house.
24
See Scheidel (1996a: 11-15) for analysis of age-specific incidence of consanguineous marriage, number of
offspring, and birth intervals between surviving offspring.
25
Three out of 12 unions were sibling marriages in Thelbonthon Siptha, but Scheidel (1995: 154-55) warns against
adding these to the Arsinoite census evidence to argue that sibling marriage was a feature of Lower Egypt;
furthermore, Scheidel advises against using non-census evidence of consanguineous marriage to evaluate a
pattern of regional distribution of sibling marriage. For Thelbonthon Siptha, Bagnall and Frier (2006: 130 n.74) list
173-Pr-5 and 173-Pr-10 as current brother-sister marriages, 173-Pr-17 as a former brother-sister marriage, 173-
Pr-10 (same household as above) as a probable former brother-sister marriage, and 173-Pr-13 as a possible former
brother-sister marriages (these latter three are listed as doubtful by Rowlandson and Takahashi 2009: 138).
21
Apart from the census returns there is a small and varied group of references to sibling
marriages dating in range from the 1st to 3rd centuries AD; they include three birth returns,
one report of a death, two claims for privileged status, two wedding invitations, two marriage
settlements, one deed of divorce, one sale of a crop, one legal petition, one petition to an
official, one administrative complaint and one epikrisis of a young man (Hopkins 1980: 321-
24; Huebner 2007: 23; Scheidel 1996a: 10-11 n.11).26 These and additional sources indicating
probable and possible full and half-sibling marriages are listed by Rowlandson and Takahashi
(2009: 131-39) in their study of brother-sister marriage and inheritance strategies in the
Graeco-Roman Period (the authors comprehensively list 95 Roman Period marriages,
including current, former, probable and doubtful unions; see Appendix 1). An important
point raised by Remijsen and Clarysse (2008: 57-58) and further discussed by Rowlandson
and Takahashi (2009: 119) is that sibling marriages occur in families with an average size of
2.53 sons and 1.63 daughters, and the same pattern is found outside the census documents,
indicating that families who married consanguineously had further children to extend the
family by marrying non-consanguineously.27 The actual biological relationship between
husbands and wives named in documents outside the census returns cannot be stated with
certainty. Dickey (2004: 154 n.42) suggests that the use of sister (snt) as a term for wife may be
an adoption by Ptolemaic Greeks of the Egyptian custom (see pages 26 and 28).
In AD 212 Roman citizenship was extended to free citizens of Egypt under the Constitutio
Antoniniana and as a result the traditional tolerance towards native customs was replaced
by the implementation of measures against brother-sister marriage.28 Bagnall and Frier
(2006: 127) point out that there are few surviving census returns from the 3rd century
AD and it is likely that sibling marriage in Egypt went into decline under Roman rule, and
when Christianity became prominent in the 4th century AD. As Scheidel (1995: 323) notes, a
decrease in sibling marriage from the early 3rd century AD is hard to test as the frequency
of census returns declines sharply. In AD 535/6 the emperor Justinian I issued edicts against
sibling and uncle-niece marriages (‘unlawful marriages’) in Mesopotamia and Osrhoene,
with edicts issued again in AD 566 by Justin II with reference to Mesopotamia, Osrhoene
and Euphratensis, but there is no mention of similar edicts being issued in Egypt (Giardina
2000: 411; see Lee 1988: 403-05 for Roman edicts).29 Giardina (2000: 412) notes that while
marriage to cousins was not considered acceptable in the west from the time of Theodosius
I (AD 379–95) (who banned the practice although his son Arcadius repealed this ruling in
26
(i) P. Oxy. 38:2858 (AD 171); P. Petaus 1-2 (AD 185); P. Oxy. 43.3137 (AD 295); PSI 9.1064.2 (AD 129); P. Amh. 2.75
(AD 161-168); P. Tebt. 2.320 (AD 181); P. Oxy. 3.524 (2nd century AD); P. Oxy. 1.111 (3rd century AD); BGU 1.183 (AD
85); P. Vindob. Warp. 5 (AD 168); P. Kron. 52 (AD 138); P. Tebt. 2.379 (AD 128); P. Tebt. 2.317 (AD 174/5); BGU 3.983
(AD 138-161); P. Oxy. 43.3096 (AD 223-4); PSI 5.457 (AD 268).
(ii) The practice of identifying the mother’s identity in Greek papyrus documents came into use in the first
century AD (Huebner 2007: 27).
(iii) See also Frandsen (2009) for a detailed discussion on evidence for sibling and close-kin marriages in ancient
Egypt and Persia.
27
Rowlandson and Takahashi (2009: 114 n.55) point out that the literary debate in the Ptolemaic story of Setne I
(P. Cairo 2.30646) suggests that families with few offspring considered the limitations presented by siblings
marrying each other.
28
See Strong (2005: 31-41) for a consideration of the response of the Roman government to sibling marriages in
Egypt, regarded as incestuous in Roman Law.
29
See Lee (1988: 403-22) for a discussion on consanguineous marriage in Late Antique Mesopotamia.
22
the east in AD 405), there was less resistance to cousin marriage in the Byzantine East and
even at the time of Justinian I marriage between cousins was legitimate in Byzantium.
Ptolemaic Period
The Egyptians also made a law, they say, contrary to the general custom of mankind,
permitting men to marry their sisters, this being due to the success attained by Isis in
this respect, for she had married her brother Osiris...
Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, 1. 27.1.
Writing in the 1st century BC, Diodorus Siculus presented sibling marriage as an Egyptian
custom rooted in the myth of Isis and Osiris, although papyrological evidence to support
the claim in the Ptolemaic Period is rare, with the exception of royal marriages. A range
of Ptolemaic papyri have been presented as possible proof of brother/sister marriage:
Huebner (2007: 23a n.15) refers to two sibling marriages recorded on a Ptolemaic tax
payment (P. Tebt. 3.1.766, 147/136 BC) and a marriage settlement (SB 12.11053.2-3, 267
BC?); Bussi (2002: 3, 20) lists the two papyri above alongside a receipt for repayment of
a debt (P. Grenf. 2.26.3-8, 14, 103 BC). Clarysse and Thompson (2006: 332) believe that P.
Tebt 3.1.766 is almost certainly a full sibling marriage, but SB 12.11053.2-3 refers to the
marriage of a nephew and niece, while reference in P. Grenf. 2.26.14 to the ‘wife and sister
Pnephis’ possibly refers to two different women. Rowlandson and Takahashi (2009: 131)
present eight probable or possible cases from the Ptolemaic Period, including those noted
above. They suggest that P. Tebt. 3.1.766 is reasonably probable as it refers to ‘my sister and
wife (ἀδελφῆς μου καὶ γυναικὸς)’ and they also include a stela from Memphis as reasonably
probable (BM EA stela 184, 50/49 BC); they categorise the remaining six examples in their
list as possible sibling or half-sibling marriages.
Although only one of the sibling marriages is linked to a tax payment (P. Tebt. 3.1.766), the
Ptolemaic census returns suggest intermarriage within families. The census information
enabled the creation of tax-lists providing demographic data for certain towns and villages,
however, only men were required to list their parentage to determine tax levies. The
census documents the adult population, their occupations and associated tax liabilities,
and the functioning of the tax system; surviving texts are mainly from the Arsinoite nome
(the Fayum), but there are also lists from the Lykopolite, Oxyrhynchite and Herakleopolite
nomes in the Nile valley (Clarysse and Thompson 2006: 3). Despite the limited listing of
parentage on the tax-lists, Clarysse and Thompson (2006: 331-32) note that the homonymy
or near-homonymy of spouses and in-laws not only indicates family naming traditions
in extended families but also points to consanguineous marriages connecting these
families. Out of 814 couples, 22 (2.6%) have near homonyms, which Clarysse and Thompson
(2006: 332) believe cannot be attributed to mere chance, arguing that ‘all this points to
intermarriage within the same family and/or occupational group, a phenomenon which is
also attested in family archives of this period’.
One of the groups of archives to which Clarysse and Thompson (2006) refer is the
Embalmers’ Archives from Hawara containing extensive papyri belonging to four families
of mainly Egyptian undertakers, revealing marriage, divorce and remarriage within the
23
same families over successive generations.30 Uytterhoeven’s (2009: 376-78) study on life
and death in Hawara during the Graeco-Roman Period details one first cousin marriage (P.
Hawara Lüdd. 12, 100 BC) and one referred to in P. Hawara Lüdd. 13 (99 BC); two possible
first cousin marriages (P. Hawara Lüdd. 15, 93 BC (possibly a half-sibling marriage); P. Cairo
3.50129 and SB 6.9297, 86 BC), and one possible half-cousin marriage (P. Chic. Haw. 9, 239
BC). There are two confirmed marriages between half-siblings (P. Chic. Haw. 1, 365/364
BC; P. Hawara Lüdd. 13, 99 BC) and one possible marriage between half-siblings (P. Hawara
Lüdd. 16a, 92 BC) – these are all from the same father and different mother. There is also
a marriage between a woman and her patrilateral half-uncle (P. Chic. Haw. 2, 331 BC)
(Uytterhoeven 2009: 373). I have included P. Chic Haw. 1 (365/364 BC), the earliest half-
sibling marriage, in this Ptolemaic section as it belongs within the Hawara Embalmers’
Archives.
Complex pedigrees of relationships were created in Hawara through intermarriage, for

example, two married first cousins referred to in P. Hawara Lüdd. 13 (99 BC) dissolve their
union and then marry partners who are a brother and a sister. In another intricate set of
family relationships, the husband named in P. Hawara Lüdd. 13 (99 BC) marries his first
wife, who may be his half-sibling; when the husband marries his third wife, she is possibly
the daughter of his first wife (and half-sibling) with another man (Uytterhoeven 2009: 376).
Alongside marriages between interrelated families, the husband and the wife’s father often
shared similar occupations and status, thereby consolidating professional ties, suggesting
that marriages in the Hawara Undertakers’ community were driven by economic motives
to retain property and income within each extended family (Uytterhoeven 2009: 382).
Family archives from the garrison town of Pathyris in Upper Egypt also illustrate complex
degrees of interrelationships between families, including two first cousin demotic marriage
settlements in the Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes – two daughters of one brother
marry sons of two other brothers (P. Adl.14, 97–96 BC; P. Adl. 21, 92 BC, these marriages
are discussed in detail in chapter three). Further evidence of intermarriage is found in a
Theban archive belonging to a family of pastophóroi: an uncle-niece marriage is documented
in P. Phil. Dem. 14 (264 BC, daughter of the husband’s sister) and in P. Phil. Dem. 25 (223 BC)
a man marries his first cousin once removed (Djeho (ii) was his grandfather and her great-
grandfather) (El-Amir 1959: 61-64, 115-19, 117 figure 1; Pestman 1961, Chart A, nos 15 and
21).31 The 32 documents in this Theban archive are thought to belong to two families (317–
217 BC) connected to each other through marriage, and further connected to four families
whose texts are in the Louvre and British Museum, which extend the family history back to
the Persian Period (El-Amir 1959: 22). Intermarriage amongst families linked by occupation
is also found in the archive of the Theban Choachytes or ‘water-pourers’ (80 Greek and
demotic texts, 2nd century BC).32 Documents belonging to the family of Hasos and Horos
30
Uytterhoeven (2009: 393-94) notes that most of the undertakers were literate in demotic and some also wrote
dockets in Greek; however, not all were bilingual, for example, P. Ashm. 1.22 (106 BC) contains an appeal to a third
person for assistance as they were unable to write Greek.
31
Pastophóroi were cult officials who played a public role in the temple communities and received some form of
tax privilege in period C of the salt-tax (Clarysse and Thompson 2006: 181). El-Amir (1959: 118) comments on the
varied role played by the pastophóroi in Theban contracts, indicating that they could sell or lease tombs, organise
liturgies, be charged with funerary offerings and the general upkeep and protection of tombs.
32
After embalming, the body was handed to the choachytes for burial and the (paid) provision of food offerings
24
indicate that Omnophris, the brother of Horos, married his niece who was 17 years younger
than her husband (Pestman 1993: 20, Family B; see also Mairs and Martin 2008/9: 24-26).
Judging by membership of the choachyte association, Pestman (1993: 9) estimates the
community averaged 50 adults and an unknown number of young children, commenting
that the group members ‘painstakingly stuck together’ by usually marrying someone within
their community. Finally, a marriage settlement documenting property arrangements in
the God’s Seal-bearers’ Archive from Memphis (P. Dem. Memphis 6/P. Leiden Dem. 373A/
P. Eheverträge 37, 131 BC) was originally considered by Lüddeckens (1960: 215 n.519) to be
a possible uncle-niece marriage, but Thompson (1988: 280 n.2) rejects this suggestion (for
details of the settlement see Carey 2009: 137-42; Pestman 1961, Chart B, no. 6).33
The Pharaonic Period
There are no census returns from the Pharaonic Period comparable to those from Roman
Egypt from which to draw evidence of consanguinity, although there are rare early
examples of counting people, and sometimes animals. For example, the royal annals of the
Old Kingdom refer to numerous censuses, probably first instituted in the 2nd dynasty as a
dating system (replacing the naming of years after specific events) cataloguing the country’s
wealth (ṯnwt), including people, cattle and agricultural production (Wilkinson 2000: 64).34
A more localised household listing is found in P. Petrie 1.3-5 from 12th dynasty Kahun,
detailing the changing generational pattern in the household of the soldier Hori (Collier
and Quirke 2004: 110-15; Griffith, 1898:19-25; see Kemp 1994: 158, for a reconstruction of
three stages in the household of Sneferu-Hori). By the New Kingdom there is reference to
census activity in the self-presentation of high officials, for example, the vizier Rekhmire in
the reign of Tuthmosis III is described in his tomb (TT100) as being ‘in charge of the listing
of the people’, and Tjanouni, a scribe attached to the army in Thebes under Tuthmosis IV,
relates in his funerary biography (TT74) how he oversaw a nationwide census of people
and animals (Clarysse and Thompson 2006: 13; Demarée and Valbelle 2011: 92, 1987: 41).
The localised household lists (Stato Civile) that have survived in a fragmentary state from
the Ramesside workmen’s village of Deir el-Medina originally documented approximately
seventy households. In practice, how widespread and frequent census activity was in all
periods of Egyptian history is hard to identify, and particularly so outside urban centres
(Lacovara 2016: 205).35 The majority of evidence for non-royal consanguineous marriage
in the Pharaonic Period is adduced from genealogical references in funerary contexts and
supplemented by documentary sources, particularly the ostraca and papyri from Deir el-
Medina that aid a prosopographic reconstruction of genealogies within the village.
and libations. The choachytes had numerous tombs on the Theban west bank at their disposal, some of which
accommodated large numbers of mummies such as TT157, a New Kingdom tomb which was ‘ownerless’ when the
Theban choachytes appropriated it for burial (Pestman 1993: 7-8).
33
Cannata (2009: 57-58) observes that the title ‘god’s seal-bearer’ refers to mortuary priests taking on the
combined role of choachyte and lector-priest in the Memphite and Hawara areas; the title is not attested in the
Theban necropolis.
34
From their institution in the 2nd dynasty, the census appears to be recorded every second year until the
pattern was changed in the fifteenth year of Sneferu’s reign (Wilkinson 2000: 145).
35
See Demarée and Valbelle (2011: 88-98, 1987: 33-49) for a summary of population surveys from Pharaonic Egypt.
25
Table 2.2: Number of funerary stelae on which it is possible to determine genealogical indications
and where the wife is called ‘his wife’ or ‘his sister’. Source: Černý, Consanguineous Marriage in
Ancient Egypt, 1954: 25.
Conclusions
Total no. of based on Wife called Wife called
Source No. of stelae
marriages genealogical ḥmt.f snt.f
indications
Berlin 31 37 24 13 –
Paris, Musée Guimet 13 26 11 15 –
Louvre 37 57 28 29 –
Leyden 46 83 42 41 –
British Museum 104 135 62 67 6
Cairo 127 152 59 93 –
Total 358 490 226 258 6
In 1954 Černý assessed evidence for non-royal sibling and half-sibling marriages from 358
funerary stelae dating from the First Intermediate Period to the 18th dynasty, focusing
particularly on this timespan since proper names were often followed by parentage, usually
the mother’s name, occasionally the father’s name, and sometimes the names of both
parents. The stelae selected by Černý documented 490 marriages amongst which 226 had
genealogical indications (see table 2.2). Furthermore, the wife was referred to as ḥmt.f in
258 marriages and as snt.f (his sister) in six marriages, but indications of sibling marriages
in this latter group were discounted by Černý (1954: 28) since they belonged to the 18th
dynasty. Using Theban tomb inscriptions, Černý (1954: 28) concludes that the change in
appellation from wife to sister began during the reign of Tuthmosis III, with its first use
in TT24, although Whale (1989: 251) believes it may have been used earlier in TT127 in the
reign of Hatshepsut. Marriages considered by Černý as possible or probable sibling or half-
sibling unions are discussed diachronically below, alongside evidence for consanguineous
marriage from other sources.
Late Period and Third Intermediate Period
A family tree constructed with information from a marriage contract (P. Lonsdorfer
1, 364 BC) and a cession document (P. Cairo 50150 and 50155, 380-362 BC) presents a
consanguineous marriage in the first generation and, in a later generation, an inheritance
conflict between two half-brothers, sons of two second cousins married at some point to
the same woman. It is a useful illustration of the potential for complex interrelationships
within families: in effect, the half-brothers (who have a child each by the same mother)
share the same grandmother who is the mother of the husband in the marriage contract.
P. Lonsdorfer 1 (364 BC) from Edfu documents the consanguineous marriage between a half-
sister and half-brother born of the same father (Junker 1921: 11; see also Pestman, 1961,
Chart A, no. 10; Rowlandson and Takahashi 2009: 131, no. ii). The cession document, also
26
from Edfu, details the renunciation of rights of succession by one half-brother in favour of
the other (Cruz-Uribe 1985: 41-49).36
Frandsen (2009: 39-41) discusses a possible father-daughter marriage based on inscriptions

on the base of a statue of the Chief Doorkeeper Djedhor (Chicago Institute Oriental Museum
10589, 326 BC). While Young (1965: 69-70) believes this was a father-daughter marriage,
this is discounted by Sherman (1981: 85 n.10) not only on the grounds that the name
Djedhor was commonplace in the Late Period, but also because father-daughter unions
are unknown amongst non-royal Egyptians. Frandsen (2009: 41) raises an interesting point
that may have a bearing on the veracity of this union: the marriage took place during
the rule of the Achaemenids (Second Persian Period) when unions between parents and
children may have been acceptable within Zoroastrian religion, although evidence at this
time for parent/child marriages within Zoroastrianism comes primarily from Greek and
Roman sources whose accuracy is questioned by scholars (see page 38).
Two further possible consanguineous unions from the 26th dynasty at Bahariyah Oasis are
discussed by Frandsen (2009: 38-9). The first is that between a son and daughter – Pedisi
and N’as – of the ‘High Priest of Khonsu and Priest of Horus’ Pedastart and his wife Tanefer-
Bast (i). The marriage was first identified by Fakhry (1942: 98) after constructing a family
genealogy using inscriptions on a range of monuments at Bahariyah. Athough Fakhry
(1942: 89, 149) originally concluded that the sibling marriage of Pedisi and N’as resulted in
two offspring named Tanefer-Bast (ii) and Thaty, who also married each other, he modified
his original interpretation in the same excavation report to state that Pedisi and N’as were
only second cousins. Commenting on the family of Pedastart over thirty years later, Fakhry
(1974: 132) illustrates the family tree and again it appears that Pedisi and N’as are a sibling
marriage although Fakhry does not discuss this union, but does specifically mention that
the siblings Tanefer-Bast (ii) and Thaty are married.
Kitchen (1986: 224-25, 231) and Bierbrier (1975: 92-93, chart 22) note consanguineous
marriages amongst dignitaries and prominent members of the priestly class during
the 23rd dynasty at Thebes. One is the marriage of Hormaakheru, son of Nesamun (ii) a
prophet of Mont, to Ankhes, daughter of Hahat (ii) a prophet of Mont (these are members
of the family of Bessenmut, see Kitchen, 1986: 224-30). According to Kitchen’s (1986: 225)
genealogy these are full cousins whose fathers are brothers, but following Bierbrier’s (1975,
chart 22) genealogy their consanguineous ties fall between full and half cousins since
their grandfather married two first cousins. The next cousin marriage is in the family of
Montemhat between Pediamun (i) and Babai (i), the son and daughter of vizier Khamhor A
and his brother vizier Nesmin A (Bierbrier 1975, chart 23A; Kitchen 1986: 231); in turn, the
36
Cruz-Uribe (1985: 41-49) discusses P. Cairo 50150 and 50155 (380–362 BC) in detail and has constructed a family
tree combining the cession text and the marriage contract. From Cruz-Uribe’s translation it is evident that a
woman acting on behalf of one of the half-brothers renounces rights to a property in favour of the other half-
brother – these brothers share the same mother. What is interesting is that the man who owned the property is
the father of the son who has lost the case and Cruz-Uribe (1985: 47) suggests that the judgement may have been
decided on the basis of the mother’s marriage contract. The conflict between half-siblings is not dissimilar to that
recorded in the Siut archive (see page 46).
27
influential families in which both of these marriages appear are also linked to each other
through marriage (Bierbrier 1975: 92-95; Kitchen 1986: 230-33).37
Černý (1954: 23) considers one inscription, dated to the 22nd dynasty, a definite instance
of sibling consanguinity; this is found on a stela from the Serapeum at Memphis
belonging to the family of a Libyan mercenary chief settled in Egypt (HTBM, 1906:388). It
tells how Padeese, son of Takelot ‘the great chief of Me’, had a son whose mother Taere
was a daughter of Takelot ‘the great chief of Me’. Since this example is specifically tied
to a Libyan family in Egypt, Černý (1954: 24) questions the extent to which it can be
used as evidence of consanguineous marriage in other classes or during other Egyptian
historical periods.
New Kingdom
In a study of the representation of family in 93 private tombs dated to the 18th dynasty,
primarily from Thebes, Whale (1989: 253) believes that cousin marriage was likely to be
more widespread than evidence suggests. The lack of filiation and extended kinship terms
that may be responsible for masking cousin marriage might, according to Whale (1989:
253), also obscure that it was not uncommon for a man to marry her sister on the death
of his wife, for example TT127, El-Kab 3, TT84, TT96. The interchangeable nature of snt
and ḥmt and the circumstances in which it applies also varies within 18th dynasty tombs.
For example, Whale (1989: 253) points out that in TT100, TT96, TT29, TT17 and TT295
the wife is called snt.f while the mother of the owner, in the role of the father’s wife, was
called ḥmt.f, but in TT100 the tomb owner’s wife was both snt.f and ḥmt.f while the wives
of previous generations were called ḥmt.f. Whale (1989: 259) believes that the evolution
of the interchangeable snt/ḥmt originates in the reign of Hatshepsut–Tuthmosis III when
a sister-in-law or a cousin who was also a wife was termed snt, and thereafter it became a
common title for wife.
Although 13 probable or possible cousin marriages have been identified by Whale (1989:
253-54), she notes that, in the main, these unions depend on shared names or elements
of names; additional supporting evidence is the representation of relations on both the
maternal and paternal sides of the family (TT82), or the prominent role given to a wife
may be attributable to consanguinity (TT295, TT127). The cousin marriages listed by Whale
(1989: 253-54) are found in the following Theban Tombs: 15, 83, 127, 39, 82, 24, 18, 99, 96 and
295, suggesting that in TT82 there may have been three cases of cousin marriage, alongside
strong evidence to indicate an uncle-niece marriage (Whale 1989: 67, 254). One tentative
cousin marriage suggested by Whale (1989: 99) is in TT53, but it depends on the identity of
a shared relative of the owner and his wife.
37
See Kitchen (1986) and Bierbrier (1975) for the complex sets of interrelationships that appear amongst the
ruling families, prominent officials and priests in the Third Intermediate Period. In the context of filiation
formulae and genealogical lists, Olabarria (2020: 133) makes reference to the extensive genealogies created by
elite families on monuments of this period as a means of legitimising and attesting their power.
28
A possible 18th dynasty father-daughter marriage has been presented by Metawi (2013:
221-32) based on inscriptions related to Iryneferu and his wife Mutakhet on a pair statue
in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo (N 129), a pair statue in the British Museum (EA 29) and
a funerary cone (UCL 37516). On the Egyptian Museum statue Mutakhet is referred to as
‘beloved’ and ‘mistress of the house’ but no kin terms are given, on the British Museum
statue as ‘his daughter’ and on the UCL funerary cone as ‘his wife’. Accepting that this is
a father-daughter marriage, it would appear that the six female figures identified as s3t.s
on the side of Mutakhet’s chair (N 129) are her daughters by her father (Metawi 2013: 225,
229-30).
Bierbrier (1975: 8, 12, charts 2, 3) highlights a possible cousin marriage dated to the
19th/20th dynasty and two probable uncle-niece marriages dated to the 20th dynasty.
The tomb of Amenemopet (ii) (TT148) may record a marriage between a prophet of Mont,
himself the son of the mayor of Thebes, Paser (i), to the daughter of Paser’s sister. Both the
uncle-niece marriages are from the tomb of Setau (EK4, Porter and Moss, 1962 [1937]: 181-
82): the first is between Nesiamun (v), High Priest of Nekhbet at El-Kab, who marries his
niece Henutbener, daughter of Setau, First Prophet of Nekhbet, the second indicates that
the brother of Nesiamun (v) married Shedemsebat, the sister of Henutbener; in effect two
brothers married two nieces who were also sisters.
In his study on consanguineous marriage, Černý (1954) also reviewed the Deir el-Medina
household lists (Stato Civile), although now fragmentary, but originally documenting
approximately seventy households, beginning with the head of each household followed by
the names of each inhabitant and their parentage. Demarée and Valbelle (2011: 74) point
out that the low number of children listed in each household (1-3) contrasts with the larger
numbers of offspring known from funerary texts (see Appendix 2) and may be accounted
for primarily by child mortality, but also by the workmen’s children leaving the village in
search of employment. Out of the extant remains, 11 married couples and their respective
parents were identified by Černý (1954: 29) and all the names are different, indicating that
the married couples could not be half-brothers or half-sisters. There are an additional 10
couples where only the names of the fathers of the husband and the wife are identifiable, and
they are all different, leading Černý (1954: 29) to suggest that, at best, the couples could be
half-siblings; for the remaining couple the names of the fathers are different but the mother’s
name may be the same for both spouses, although this is difficult to ascertain. Frandsen
(2009: 38) also discusses a possible brother-sister marriage from Deir el-Medina, first raised
by Černý (1973: 138, see genealogy) although unverified by Davies (1999: 73, 171 and chart
8) who remarks that the husband, Amenwa (i), may be the son-in-law of Huy (vii) who is
married to the daughter of Huy (vii), and is not his son. Overall, Černý (1956: 29) concludes
that there is no firm evidence to support sibling or half-sibling marriage in Deir el-Medina, a
position supported by Davies (1999) in his prosopographic study of Deir el Medina.
Evidence for cousin marriage appears to be more reliable in the village of Deir el-Medina
with ten probable first cousin-marriages and an aunt-nephew (or cousin) marriage,
however, some of these unions are based on securing identities of certain individuals, an
issue addressed in chapter four. Based on the prosopography of Deir el-Medina, Davies
(1999: 117, 160) suggests two further possible marriages: one aunt-nephew (or possibly
29
cousin) and one cousin. The networks of consanguinity and affinity linking members of
consanguineous families in Deir el-Medina, details of offspring resulting from these unions
and occupations associated with their families are also analysed in chapter four. The family
trees in which these marriages appear can be found in Charts 3-5, 7-9, 11-14, 21, 22, 24, 27-
29 (Davies 1999) and Bierbrier (1984: 208-10, 1975: 30).
Middle Kingdom
Černý (1954: 27) identifies 490 marriages in his review of 358 stelae from the First
Intermediate Period to the New Kingdom and out of these marriages only four stelae provide
the names of both parents alongside the names of the husband and wife, but none share
the same name. The names only of the mothers of the husband and wife are recorded on
95 stelae (see table 2.3). Černý (1954: 27) suggests that in the absence of the father’s name,
some of the spouses in the 95 stelae naming the mother only may have been half-siblings,
but this is only a possibility. However, Louvre C44 and BM EA 363 may be evidence of half-
sibling or full-sibling marriage since the name of the mother of both spouses is the same,
but this is tempered by the common occurrence of these names in the Middle Kingdom
– Sithathor on Louvre C44 and Wahka on BM EA 363 (Černý 1954: 27). Fischer, (1957: 231
n.47) mentions another possible case of sibling marriage based on Cairo stela 20144 and BM
EA stela 236 – although these stelae may postdate the 13th dynasty – proposing that the
individual ‘Ỉg3i-ḥtp who is named on both stelae is the same ‘Ỉg3i-ḥtp who appears on earlier
13th dynasty stelae (Frandsen 2009: 38, lists this as a half-sibling marriage).
Černý (1954: 25-26) identifies two more possible Middle Kingdom sibling marriages: one
indicated on stelae Louvre C16, C17, C18 dated to the 12th–13th dynasties and the other
on stela Berlin 13675 dated to the 13th dynasty (see also Millard, 1976: 24-25). The Louvre
stelae belong to the ‘reporter of the Vizier Senwosret’ and on all three stelae Senwosret is
seated facing his wife who is variously referred to as: ‘his wife, the lady of the House Deto’
(C16), ‘the lady of the House Deto’ (C17), and ‘his sister, the lady of the house Deto’ (C18).
Table 2.3: Number of funerary stelae on which it is possible to identify both parents or mother only.
Source: Černý, Consanguineous Marriage in Ancient Egypt, 1954: 27.
Names of both Mothers only named

parents of
No. of
Source husband and
marriages Names different Same names
wife named
(different)
Berlin 37 1 7 –
Paris, Musée Guimet 26 – 3 –
Louvre 57 – 17 1
Leyden 83 1 10 –
British Museum 135 1 28 1
Cairo 152 1 30 –
Total 490 4 95 2
30
Černý concludes that Deto has to be accepted as a real sister since the scribe would have been
aware of her identity and status, believing a mistake in the inscription is unlikely, although it
is a possibility. On the Berlin stela the wa‘ab priest Efnaierson is reciting an offering formula
to ‘his daughter of his sister Bab’, who is also ‘his sister of his mother Iymeru’. Černý (1954: 26)
concludes this could be Efnaierson’s real daughter with his sister through the same mother,
Iymeru, or given the lack of terms for distant relationships the woman to whom offerings are
being made really is his niece (Franke 1983: 60 agrees that this is probably a niece rather than
a sister, although Robins 1979: 207 n.2 believes this is a daughter). There is a similar example
in which a nephew is referred to as son on stela Musée Guimet C5 l. 8: ‘his beloved son, son of
his brother of his (own) mother’ (Černý 1956: 26).
The majority of the remaining evidence for consanguineous marriage presented here is
selected from Millard (1976: 21-39), but since Middle Kingdom stelae tend to omit naming
the father of the owner’s wife, and often the name of the owner’s father, it is impossible
to draw firm conclusions. Commenting on changes in filiation formulae, particularly in
the Middle Kingdom, Olabarria (2020a: 132) points out that this has been used to express
‘changes in the social fabric’, but warns against drawing these conclusions since the listing
of the mother’s name in filiation formulae is a convention and that filiation through the
father is also commonly found. In general, Middle Kingdom stelae display an increasing
number of people whose relationship to the owner is indicated through a range of kinship
terms and filiations, and while many are not biologically related they are still considered
part of different kin networks linked to the owner (Olabarria 2020a: 29).
In an extensive study of kinship in the Middle Kingdom using source material from stelae,
graffiti, statues, papyri and grave inscriptions, Franke (1983: 342) concludes there is no
safe evidence for cousin or uncle/niece marriages, but cannot say with certainty that it
did not exist as there must have been exceptions. Franke (1983: 342) notes the difficulty
of commenting on endogamy or exogamy since we are not aware of strict rules related
to kinship groups that might define them as endogamous or otherwise. The complicated
system of kinship in which the terms sn and snt encompass a wide range of collateral kin is
the reason why Franke (1983: 343) believes it is challenging to state whether certain types
of kin marriage are permitted or not, but argues there is unlikely to be any preference
in ancient Egypt for parallel or cross cousin marriage, or even for marriage between
(biological) kin or non-kin.
In a PhD dissertation examining approximately 1500 Middle Kingdom stele, Millard (1976:
469, Excursus A) found that only 225 stelae had sufficient names and relationships listed to
include them in her analysis of names reused within Egyptian families, pointing out that in
some cases even two or more sisters shared the same name (using snt as a biological sister,
although it can apply to a wider range of female kin), or that some names were used by males
and females. Millard (1976: 487) and Robins (1979: 210, figure 1) believe that sometimes the
appearance of unusual names on stelae may suggest biological ties not otherwise indicated
by the use of kin terms. Overall, the reuse of names, the absence of names for both sets of
parents, interpretations based on the positions of figures in stelae, and the extended use
of kinship terms requires caution in assuming consanguineous marriage. However, Millard
(1976: 41) notes that there may be more first cousin marriages that have been unavoidably
31
unrecognised in her survey but, based on the evidence she collated, Millard estimates
consanguineous marriages did not exceed five percent of all marriages. I have only included
a selection of the consanguineous marriages listed by Millard, focusing on those that seem
possible and excluding those that are doubtful (or unlikely, such as parent-child marriage).
Possible half-sibling or sibling marriages presented by Millard (1976: 24-28) and

predominantly based on recurrence of names within families include BM EA 238 (HTBM
3, plate 15), BM EA 830 and BM EA 566 (HTBM 4, plate 36-7), stela Louvre C 179 (Mus.
Louvre, 1886, plate 35), stelae Cairo CG 20025 (Lange und Schäfer 1902: 29-33) and CG 20161
(Lange und Schäfer 1902: 189-91). A further group of close unions are included in Millard’s
(1976: 23-30) study, although a cautious approach is required because of the possibilities of
interpretation and for this reason most of the tentative half-sibling or sibling marriages
presented are not listed in Appendix 1.
Millard’s (1976: 36-39) research also includes a group of possible uncle/niece and aunt/
nephew marriages as well as first and second cousin marriages. Amongst them, stelae
BM EA 131 and BM EA 129 may indicate a parallel cousin marriage in which the mothers
are sisters (Millard 1976: 39, 139-42, see also Franke, 1983: 80-81, for an interpretation
of this genealogy). The paternal and maternal grandmothers of the owner of stela
Florence 2564 share the same name possibly implying the owner’s parents were
parallel cousins, born of two sisters (Millard 1976: 38; Franke 1983: 91-92 discusses the
use of snt.f mwt.f on this stela as aunt or great-aunt). Stela Cairo CG 20051 may indicate
that the paternal grandfather and maternal grandmother of the stela’s owner were
cousins, born of two (half?) sisters. Although the names of the sisters are not unusual
(S3tr‘), the names of their children (Ḥkki and Ḥkkἰnἰ) are unusual which leads Robins
(1979: 210, figure 1) to suggest the two women named S3tr‘ were siblings, their children
were cousins, and in turn the children of these two cousins married each other. In
effect, the parents of the owner of the stela may be second cousins. Millard (1976: 38)
also supports the possibility of a second cousin marriage in stela Cairo CG 20051 and,
furthermore, suggests that the owner and his wife may have been related in some way
since the name Ỉkἰ occurs frequently in the family. Robins (1979: 210, figure1), too,
notes that although the names Ỉkἰ and S3tḥtḥr are common names, the frequency at
which they appear on stela Cairo CG 20051 might suggest a consanguineous family; in
contrast, Franke (1983: 85) is more cautious in identifying evidence for consanguineous
marriage within this family.
Combining the genealogies of stela Cairo CG 20043 and CG 20681, Millard (1976: 36-
37) proposes a marriage between an aunt, T3-ntt-nἰ, and nephew, W3ḥ-k3, in which the
wife is the half-sister of his mother, however, Willems (1983: 163) does not interpret a
consanguineous marriage in this stela (the genealogy of Stela CG 20681 only is discussed by
Franke 1983: 86, and mapped by Robins 1979: 202 n.10 and 214, figure 8). Further possible
consanguineous marriages in Middle Kingdom stelae listed by Millard (1976: 36-39) include
one aunt-nephew marriage, two uncle-niece and five cousin marriages, one of which is a
marriage between a ruler of the fourteenth nome, Ukh-hotp, and his first cousin Mersi
(Blackman 1914: 12-13; see Appendix 1 for Middle Kingdom marriages).
32
Polygyny and polyandry
Although there is no evidence to suggest polygamy within consanguineous families, I

have included below a brief summary of discussions related to polygamy. Of course, the
practice of polygyny and polyandry regardless of whether one or more wives or husbands
were consanguineous, would further divide inheritance rights to property but may also
introduce new wealth and social networks into families (as would divorce and remarriage,
see chapter three). Kanawati (1976: 149-60) presents 16 possible examples of polygyny in
the Old Kingdom, noting that polygyny seems to be the exception rather than the rule
and probably connected with a man’s financial status. Simpson (1974: 100-05) considers
13 Middle Kingdom cases of men being associated with more than one wife, but points
out that the nature of the documentation raises questions as to whether this is polygyny
or remarriage due to divorce or death. Simpson also raises the possibility of polyandry
highlighting two ‘doubtful’ cases: the lady Menkhet in stelae Louvre C 3 and C 1 in the
reign of Sesostris I, and the lady Khu in stela BM EA 571 (HTBM 2, plate 16, 12th dynasty).
Metawi (2013: 173-74) and Millard, (1976: 63) also highlight an unusual case of a husband
marrying two sisters, following the death of one sister (Cairo Museum CG 20105, late
11th/early 12th dynasty). Following his detailed study of kinship in the Middle Kingdom,
Franke (1983: 340) concludes that polygamy was probably limited to wealthy families and
there are no sources to support its practice outside these elite groups.38
It is not unusual to find evidence for men or women having married twice due to death or
divorce, for example, stela Cairo CG 20045 (Middle Kingdom) names a son and daughter
born to a current wife, and a further son and daughter born to a different mother,
indicating the husband had two wives; furthermore, the affiliation on the stela implies
that the owner’s wife had four half-sisters with whom she shared the same father (Millard
1976: 77-78). Again, in stela Carlsberg A684 (AEIN 965, Middle Kingdom) it appears
that two daughters are from the current marriage and the two daughters described
differently as s3t ḥmt.f are his wife’s children from a previous marriage (Millard 1976:
257-58). In her study of kinship in New Kingdom Theban tombs, Whale (1989: 249-50)
discusses five tombs in which more than one wife is represented with the tomb owner
(TT127, 39, 96, 88 and 295) and TT96 is unique in that three wives are represented in the
tomb, two may have been sisters, although there is no evidence to suggest they were
concurrent (see Whale 1989: 146, 150-51). Drawing from evidence in one or more tombs,
Whale (1989: 248-49) assesses a further 10 cases which may indicate the tomb owner or
a male relative had more than one wife or children by another woman. Remarriage also
occurred in the workmen’s village of Deir el-Medina and Davies (1999: 176) suggests that
one of the sculptors, Qen (ii), may have been sufficiently wealthy to have had two wives
concurrently; occasionally the sons of Qen (ii) are named with both of his wives, but it
is difficult to ascertain which of the children are affiliated to each wife and whether this
was indeed a polygynous marriage.
38
Scheidel (2009: 280-91) addresses legal and social norms requiring monogamy amongst ancient Greeks and
Romans, in contrast to men’s polygynous relationships beyond the nuclear family. For Graeco-Roman monogamy
and polygamy, see also Scheidel (2011: 108-15).
33
El-Amir (1962: 103-07) considers that the wording of certain demotic marriage contracts
allows the simultaneous existence of more than one wife, for example, wording within
P. Cairo 30601 (230 BC) could be translated as ‘and marry another woman beside thee…’
(see Pestman, 1961, Chart A, no. 17, for details of the marriage contract). El-Amir (1962:
105-06, 1959: 30) also examines five other possible indications of polygyny, including
the interpretation of ḥmtw in the Petition of Peteesi (P. Ryl. 9, 9.20, reign of Darius I)
as reference to wives and not female household members, and the case of Paret, in
the Archive of the Theban Choachytes, who may have had as many as three wives (P.
Phil. Dem. 2, 314 BC; P. Phil. Dem. 7, 287 BC; P. Phil. Dem. 9, 287 BC) (see pages 24-25 for
consanguineous marriage in this archive). In a detailed examination of marriage and
matrimonial property, Pestman (1961: 3 n.6) concludes that polygamy is rare and provides
a case of a possible example of polygyny in P. Mayer A 13c (ll. 6-7): ‘the citizeness NN,
the wife of NN (and) the citizeness NN, his other (kt) wife, in total 2’, however, Pestman
believes one woman may be divorced as the word kt is used in another marriage contract
– P. Hausw. 15 (217-6 BC, Edfu) – in the context of remarriage.
Evidence for consanguineous marriage outside ancient Egypt
This section summarises evidence for consanguineous marriage in the ancient Near
East, Greece and Rome, including the categorisation of consanguineous marriage and the
variety and development of prohibitions regulating its practice. This section ends with
an overview of current religious regulation of first cousin marriage.
Judaism: degrees of prohibited marriage
Within the Hebrew Bible, incest prohibitions are addressed to men and the Book of
Leviticus (18:6-18 and 20:10-21) forbids sexual relations with a range of female kin
including mother, step-mother, sister, sister-in-law, granddaughter, aunt, daughter-
in-law, and step-daughter. A marriage is, however, permissible with a sister-in-law if
the man’s first wife is dead (levirate marriage). Marriages are not prohibited between
cousins of any degree of relationship (the patriarchs Isaac and Jacob married their
cousins), with nieces, or with a mother’s brother’s wife (Archibald 2001: 21, 25; White
and Jorian 1992: 454-55; Prewitt 1981: 90, figure 1, 92; Encyclopaedia Judaica, 1972: 1052).
There is also no express rule forbidding marriage to a daughter, but this may be inferred
through the prohibitions preventing marriage with a step-daughter or daughter-in-
law (Catholic University of America 1967: 193a), while Ziskind (1988: 100-01) suggests this
omission, which he refers to as ‘the daughter gap’, is not significant given that incest
is not addressed comprehensively in Near Eastern legal collections. Carmichael (1995:
146-47), however, allows for the permissibility of incest in the Hebrew Bible when the
ancestors of the Israelites are viewed in the light of their milieu, for example, Abraham’s
marriage to his half-sister Sarah reflected a ‘deficient’ social and cultural environment,
therefore practices related to incest prohibitions condemned by the lawgiver have to be
read in the context of harmful environments in which they may have been practised.39
39
For a discussion on the Genesis narrative of Abraham’s marriage to his half-sister Sarah, see also Hepner (2003:
143-55).
34
Athens, Sparta and Rome: marriage, law, and degrees of prohibition
In Athenian law there were few prohibited relationships: siblings could marry if they
were born of different mothers, uncles and nieces could marry, as could adoptive siblings
(Pomeroy 1997: 34-35, see also Just 1989: 76-82). In Sparta, the rule regarding the mutual
parent of half-siblings was reversed to that of Athens, so that half-siblings of the same
mother but different fathers were permitted to marry (Hopkins 1980: 331). Even though
patrilateral or matrilateral half-sibling marriages were permitted in ancient Greece,
depending on location, Huebner (2007: 43-44) believes that such marriages were rare
based on documentary evidence. In her study of incest, Archibald (2001: 13) reports that
there was no formal punishment for incest between full-siblings or parent/child unless it
injured a third party, noting that in Sophocles’s play, Oedipus, the eponymous character
is exiled for patricide and not for incest. However, Plato’s Laws (8. 838a-b) clarify that
unwritten law forbids sexual unions and marriages between siblings: 40
Whenever any man has a brother or sister who is beautiful, so too in the case of a son
or daughter, the same unwritten law is most effective in guarding men from sleeping
with them either openly or secretly, or wishing to have any connection with them, –
nay, most men never so much as feel any desire for such connection.
Laws, 8. 838a-b.
Outside unions between siblings and matrilateral half-siblings in Athens, Just (1989:
79-80) notes that there were no rules governing endogamous marriage nor apparent
preferences between different categories of biological kin, as evidenced by marriages
between patrilateral and matrilateral parallel and cross cousins, as well as more distant
relations.
In his discussion on Roman law, the writer Cicero (1st century BC) comments on the
absence of written law prohibiting incest, or ‘defilements’, in the 5th century BC, but
notes that ‘reason did not begin to be a law precisely when it was written, but when it
arose’ (De Legibus, 2. 9.22). In his writings on oratory and the orators, Cicero refers to
a case of incest being tried in court in his lifetime, implying that this is now a capital
crime (Brutus, 122). Writing in the 2nd century AD, Gaius, a Roman jurist, states that
marriages are forbidden between parents and children, grandparents and children, full
siblings, half-siblings, and adopted siblings if they have not been emancipated and were
still legally related (Inst. 1.59, 1.61), however, marriage remained illegal between an
emancipated child and a member of an older generation (Grubbs 2002: 137). Although
aunt-nephew and uncle-niece marriages had been prohibited, Roman law was changed
to accommodate the marriage of the emperor Claudius to Agrippina, the daughter of
his brother, so that a man was allowed to marry the daughter of a brother but not the
daughter of a sister (Inst. 1.62, Grubbs 2002: 138).41
40
In Laws 8.838c Plato comments on audience awareness that dramatic characters such as Oedipus inflict death
upon themselves as punishment for intercourse between family members.
41
See Grubbs (2002: 136-86) for prohibited and non-legal unions in Roman law, and Grubbs (2015: 115-41) for a
discussion specifically on illegitimacy and incest.
35
Figure 2.2: The seven degrees of relationship from a common

ancestor based on the civil Roman system. Source: Schwimmer,
https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/tutor/
descent/cognatic/civil.html (1998). Accessed 4.10.2016.
In Rome in AD 295, Diocletian and Maximian clarified

the laws on incest, defining the prohibited degrees
of relationship: a man was not permitted to marry
his daughter, his sister’s daughter or granddaughter,
his aunt, stepmother, stepdaughter, mother-in-
law, or daughter-in-law, nor could a woman marry
her equivalent male relatives (for commentary on
Diocletian’s ruling, see Grubbs 2002: 140-41).42 The fact
that the laws on close-kin marriage were clarified to
this extent might suggest that endogamy was common
in Rome. Goody (1983, for marriage prohibitions, see 48-
63) has argued that Christianity brought about a radical
change in marriage prohibitions and in the structure of
the family, however, Shaw and Saller (1984: 432) believe
that biologically close-kin marriages are not generally
regarded as a characteristic of Roman family formation.
In AD 438, legislation issued under Theodosius extended incest prohibitions further to
the seventh degree in the civil Roman system (see figure 2.2) and in AD 533, in the Digest
of Justinian, incest laws were combined with other aspects of marriage law.43 In her study
of Roman marriage, Tregiarri (1991: 38) comments on the complexity of incest in the
works of Roman jurists, with the result that ignorance of the law or the degree of kinship
constituted grounds for acquittal, although the marriage would become invalid and the
children illegitimate (1991: 38).
Christianity: degrees of prohibited marriage
In AD 692 the Council of Trullo (Quinisext Council), convoked by Justinian II, met
at Constantinople to resolve differences arising between the Eastern and Western
Christian Churches, although it was convened without papal authority. The canon law
on marriage drawn up at Trullo integrated three sources – scripture, patristic customary
law and Byzantine-Roman civil law – and included the prohibition of marriage between
cousins, which formed the law of marriage for the Eastern Churches (Heith-Stade 2010:
18).44 In the eighth century this was extended to prohibition up to the sixth degree of
42
Wagemakers (2010: 337-54) discusses the accusations of incest, infanticide and cannibalism levelled against
Christians in the early centuries AD, partially based on ignorance and partly on polemic, but using familiar topoi
that were also employed against other groups considered capable of destabilising society.
43
Marriage between first cousins was amongst the prohibitions that were introduced under the Law of Theodosius
(CTh. de incest. 3. 3.12). For incest laws in relation to marriage laws, see Justinian Dig. 23. 2.8 (marrying a sister); 23.
2.39.1 (marrying a sister’s great-granddaughter, that is marrying someone in the position of parent to her would
constitute incest); 23. 2.54 (marrying a sister); 23. 2.68 (marrying a female ascendant or descendant).
44
Heith-Stade (2010: 18-19) argues that law on marriage in the canons of the Council of Trullo – ‘the first law of
marriage independent of Byzantine-Roman jurisdiction in the Eastern Orthodox Churches’ – arose out of the need
36
Figure 2.3: The four degrees of relationship from a common

ancestor based on canon law. Source: after Schwimmer, https://
umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/tutor/descent/
cognatic/canon.html (1998). Accessed 4.10.2016.
consanguinity, following the Roman model, and not long

afterwards the seventh degree was also forbidden (Addis
et al. 1960: 214). Many Eastern Orthodox Churches still
prohibit marriage to the sixth degree in direct lineal
descent.
Canon law in the Western Church also adhered to

prohibition up to the seventh degree of consanguinity,
but this was interpreted differently to the Eastern Church
and Roman law. The prohibition on marriage to kin was
extended twice as far by counting seven steps from ego
to the common ancestor (and affinity through marriage
to the fourth degree). At the Fourth Lateran Council in
1215 this was reduced to the fourth collateral degree and
remained the principal marriage law of the West from the
13th–16th centuries (Addis et al. 1960: 214) (see figure 2.3).
Catholic canon law was revised again at the Council of Trent (1548–1563) and adopted by
Catholic countries. The Council of Trent did not change existing marriage prohibitions,
but now required the absolute separation of those who had previously married within
the prohibited degrees of kinship, and marriage by informal consent alone was no longer
permitted (Sperling 2004: 70-71).
With the rise of the Protestant movements in the 16th century, Catholic canon law was
adapted to three main Reformation models: Lutheran, Calvinist and Anglican. While all
three models acknowledged the contractual element of marriage, legal authority no
longer lay purely with the Church and to differing degrees fell under state authority
(Witte 2012: 154). Church of England (Anglican) canon law represented an abridged
version of the biblical prohibitions on marriage found in Leviticus (18:6-18 and 20:10-
21). Anglican incest prohibitions, alongside those of other Protestant churches, excluded
restrictions on cousin marriage and this Anglican biblical model is still found is some
regions of the Unites States of America (Schwimmer 2003b; see Ottenheimer 1996: 38-39
table 3, for consanguineal and affinal marriage prohitions according to state).45
to create an official ecclesiastical common law in response to political and legal conditions in the provinces that
had come under Muslim rule.
45
Ottenheimer (1996: 35-36) notes that before 1860 none of the 33 states in the Union had civil regulations
prohibiting first cousin marriage, while 21 states prohibited affinal relations from marrying before 1861, and
currently 12 of the 50 states (in addition to the District of Columbia) still maintain affinal prohibitions. Ottenheimer
(1996: 37) remarks that since the mid-19th century the prohibitions on cousin marriage have increased in contrast
to the reduction in marriage between affines; 31 states now have proscriptions against cousin marriage.
37
Consanguineous marriage in Zoroastrianism
Zoroastrianism came to prominence under the Persian dynasty of the Achaemenids (550–
331 BC), but for this period there is very little that can be drawn from Iranian evidence
for sexual relations and marriage within the nuclear family, and generally for the early
history and practice of Zoroastrianism (Bigwood 2009: 312).46 Amongst the early non-
Persian sources commenting on sexual unions between close family members is Strabo
(Geography, vol. 7, 16. 4.25) referring to the customs of the Magi in Arabia Felix: ‘One woman
is also wife for all… they also have intercourse with their mothers; and the penalty for
an adulterer is death, but only the person from another family is an adulterer’ (16. 4.25).
Caution is needed in approaching Greek and Roman testimonies in the Achaemenid era as
they may be expressions of prejudice used as a tool to highlight Persian ‘barbarity’ or pagan
immorality, and so became stories frequently repeated but rarely questioned (for example,
Bigwood 2009: 312, 320, 329; see also Wagemakers 2010: 337-54 for Roman attitudes to
groups considered destabilising elements).
Later texts from the Sassanian Period (AD 224–651) belong to a time when Zoroastrianism
exerted state influence in Iran. Pahlavi (Middle Persian) Zoroastrian religious and legal
writings clarify that khwēdōdah, or next-of-kin marriage, includes marriage to mother,
daughter, sister, or half-sister (Bigwood 2009: 312, see n.7 for texts; Frandsen 2009: 68).
In the Sassanian Period there is also evidence of khwēdōdah not only from Greek, Roman,
Syrian and Armenian sources, but also in Chinese, Indian and Tibetan Buddhist texts, as
well as non-Buddhist Indian, Arabic and Chinese sources (Bigwood 2009: 312; Frandsen
2009: 90-115; Scheidel 1996b: 325; Silk 2008: 439-46).47 Zoroastrian religious writings from
the Sassanian Period imply that incestuous unions improve purity of race, compatibility
of spouses, affection for children, and confer religious blessings and properties to the
individual and the community (Bigwood 2009: 312; Frandsen 2009: 70-81; Gelder 2005: 36-
37; Scheidel 1996b: 326; Silk 2008: 444-45). While evidence shows that close-kin marriage
was encouraged by the priesthood and was likely to have occurred, its prevalence remains
open to question and, additionally, in later Zoroastrian sources support for unions between
immediate family members appears to be treated cautiously (Bigwood 2009: 312; Gelder
2005: 37, 51; Scheidel 2002: 38-39).
Consanguineous marriage in Arabia and Islam
In a discussion of incest and inbreeding, Gelder (2012) points out that the alleged close-
kin marriage practices of Zoroastrians are a recurrent theme in Muslim texts, serving
to differentiate ‘them’ from ‘us’. There is, however, no direct evidence that Zoroastrians
practised nuclear marriage in the time of Islam, and although there may have been rare
occurrences, by the tenth century AD the closest kin that Zoroastrians married were first
46
In her discussion on consanguineous endogamy in Mesopotamia in the Neo-Babylonian Period (c.600–480 BC),
with particular reference to a family archive from Sippur, Waerzerggers (2002: 319-42) argues that consanguineous
marriage was likely to have been more widespread than previously attested.
47
For a detailed consideration of evidence for khwēdōdah in Persian and non-Persian sources, including Greek,
Roman, Armenian and Arab writers, see Frandsen (2009: 60-129); see Gelder (2005: 39-77) for discussion on
polemics between Magian and Arab sources. Gelder (2005: 37) notes that majūs was the term used by Arabs in the
Islamic Period to describe all followers of Zoroastrianism.
38
cousins (Boyce 2002: 54). In pre-Islamic Arabia the preferred union was between parallel
cousins (father’s brother’s daughter) and closer degrees of relationship were considered
improper. The marriage of the prophet Muhammad to his cousin Zainab bint Jash, the
former wife of his adopted son, is recorded in the Quran (Surah 33:37-40).
The Quran (Surah 4:23) lists laws governing marriage prohibitions for Muslims based on
consanguinity, affinity, and fosterage:
Forbidden to you (O believing men) are your mothers (including stepmothers and
grandmothers) and daughters (including granddaughters), your sisters (including full
sisters and half-sisters), your aunts paternal and maternal, your brothers’ daughters,
your sisters’ daughters, your mothers who have given suck to you, your milk-sisters (all
those as closely related to you through milk as through descent), your wives’ mothers,
your stepdaughters – who are your foster-children, born of your wives with whom you
have consummated marriage; but if you have not consummated marriage with them,
there will be no blame on you (should you marry their daughters) – and the spouses of
your sons who are of your loins, and to take two sisters together in marriage (including
a niece and her aunt, maternal or paternal) – except what has happened (of that sort)
in the past.
Female kin that fall into the prohibited categories are called mahram (mahārim, pl.), which
Gelder (2005: 4) translates as ‘unmarriageable members of the family’, noting that there
is no Persian or Arabic word for incest. In developing rules related to relationships that
were forbidden and allowed, Gelder (2012) points out that Muslim theologians were careful
to show that Quranic rules governing marriages sat comfortably within existing Arabic
tradition, except for the new prohibition that a man could not marry his father’s wife,
nor be married to two sisters simultaneously. New inclusions prohibited marriage to a
wet nurse on the grounds that the relationship created is almost the same as the blood
relationship to a mother (see Gelder 2005: 93-96).48
Current religious regulation of first cousin marriage
Due to their historical legacy, prohibitions on consanguineous marriage vary between

and within religious traditions. In practice, first cousin marriage is the most common
type of consanguineous union and recent consanguinity estimates suggest that 10.4% of
the world’s population are married consanguineously, with over 1000 million individuals
living in countries where 20-50%+ of marriages are consanguineous (Bittles and Black
2010a: 1780, 2010b: 193, 2010c: 737; Chisholm and Bittles 2015: 1-4; see Bittles 1998: 3-66 for
global estimates and figure 2.4 for global prevalence). In their overview of Consanguineous
Marriage and Human Evolution, Bittles and Black (2010b: 196) have created a table detailing
the regulation of first cousin marriage in major religious traditions (see table 2.4).
48
See Gelder (2005: 78-121) for Islamic incest regulations. Gelder (2005: 94) suggests prohibition related to the
milk-relationship may be connected to the Westermarck thesis (see pages 12-13).
39
Figure 2.4: Current global prevalence of consanguineous marriage.

Source: Courtesy of Global Consanguinity website (www.consang.
net), copyright Alan Bittles 2015. Map constructed by Michael Black.
Table 2.4: Current religious regulation of first cousin marriage. Source: Bittles and Black, Consanguineous
Marriage and Human Evolution, 2010b: 196.
Religion Branch Regulation

Ashkenazi Permissive
Judaism
Sephardi Permissive
Greek and Russian Orthodox Proscribed
Coptic Orthodox Permissive
Christianity
Roman Catholic Diocesan dispensation required
Protestant Permissive
Sunni Permissive
Islam Shia Permissive
Ibadi Permissive
Indo-European Proscribed
Hinduism
Dravidian Permissive
Buddhism Permissive
Sikhism Proscribed
Confucianism/Taoism Partially permissive
Zoroastrian/Parsi Permissive
40
Conclusion
Although the full extent of consanguineous marriage in the ancient world is difficult to
gauge, extant evidence suggests that marriage involving various degrees of consanguinity
was practised and/or permitted. Where this occurs in an absence of prohibitions related to
marriage, it would appear that customary practice regulated acceptable levels of biological
kinship between a husband and wife, for example, non-royal sibling or half-sibling marriage
is rare in ancient Egypt (outside the Roman Period). While first cousin marriage may have
been more widespread in ancient Egypt, comparatively few references exist given the
range of years under review, but I would argue this is not because of its rarity, but because
it was an accepted level of kinship within marriage. There are no official requirements for
couples to name their parentage before the Roman census returns, so earlier references to
paternal and maternal parentage are more random and might occur on legal documents,
such as marriage contracts, or in funerary genealogies. The combination of bureaucratic
requirements, customary practice and limitations of kinship terms complicates the
search for evidence of consanguineous marriage, but it is possible that consanguineous
marriages were regularly interspersed with non-consanguineous marriages, or they may
have been favoured within some families or communities (bearing in mind that the term
consanguinity is being used in this context to categorise biological relatedness and that the
Egyptian understanding of kin relatedness was more variable).
The following chapter explores economic factors influencing the choice of consanguineous
marriage and the likely outcomes of these unions, focusing particularly on partible
inheritance and gifts exchanged at marriage in ancient Egypt. This leads to a case study
on consanguineous marriage as an economic transaction in the Ptolemaic garrison town
of Pathyris where there is textual evidence for marriages between first cousins. Through
examination of the demotic family archive in which these consanguineous marriages
appear, chapter three considers the impact of consanguinity on financial settlements made
at marriage. This leads to an analysis of economic transactions between families in Pathyris
related through consanguinity and affinity and a subsequent discussion on the potential
advantages of economic transactions between these related families.
41
Chapter 3
The use of inheritance and matrimonial goods

as economic strategies in non-royal
consanguineous families
Introduction
This chapter assesses the potential economic advantages of non-royal consanguineous

marriage over non-consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt in relation to family
inheritance and gifts given at marriage. It is based on the hypothesis that consanguineous
marriage mitigates the fragmentation of moveable and immoveable property, and alleviates
pressure on families in terms of the timing and amount of gifts given in marriage and
in inheritance. Using evidence from family archives in the Ptolemaic Period, this chapter
proposes that families who marry consanguineously may favour economic transactions
with relatives to whom they are related.
The chapter is divided into two parts; using documentary evidence the first section
explores and compares inheritance laws and financial transactions at marriage in
ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, classical Greece and ancient Rome (regions where there is
evidence for consanguineous marriage). The research then considers whether ancient
Egyptian inheritance laws and customary economic practice at marriage make it more
advantageous for families to marry consanguineously than in these other regions.
Documentary sources dating from the Middle Kingdom onwards are used to examine
a range of scenarios related to marriage, family wealth and inheritance, including
evidence for changed and contested wills, contracts of sale or division of family property,
and other texts from family archives. How these scenarios are, or might be affected by
consanguinity and affinity, are considered.
The second section of the chapter is a case study of demotic marriage settlements and
other economic transactions in consanguineous and non-consanguineous families in the
Ptolemaic garrison town of Pathyris in Upper Egypt. The term ‘marriage settlement’ is
used in preference to ‘marriage contract’ as these demotic documents reflect a consensus
between two parties, marking the first stage of the marriage (but not necessarily
committed in writing) (Pestman 1961: 11). Using documents from family archives, this
case study explores how consanguinity might affect goods and money committed in these
settlements, and suggests how these commitments might be influenced by marriage and
inheritance strategies. The amounts committed within ten marriage settlements, two of
them between sets of first cousins, are analysed in detail and reasons for similarities and
differences are presented. Finally, if marriage is considered an economic transaction, then
analysing the same family archives from Pathyris, texts suggest there may be preferences
amongst consanguineous families to transact economically amongst themselves, including
through marriage.
42
Terms of reference: matrimonial goods, gifts and dowry
When describing matrimonial goods listed in ancient Egyptian marriage settlements they
are termed here as ‘goods of the woman’ (nkt.w n s.ḥmt) and ‘gift of the man’ (šp n s.ḥmt)
in keeping with translations used by Pestman (1961). This chapter avoids the generalised
use of the term ‘dowry’ due to its range of cross-cultural interpretations. In their seminal
work on bridewealth and dowry, Goody and Tambiah (1973: 17-22, 62-64) use the word
‘dowry’ interchangeably to describe a range of same-direction giving: a gift to the bride,
to the new husband and wife as a conjugal unit, a pre-mortem inheritance, or a payment.
When I have used the term ‘dowry’ in relation to Greek, Roman and Mesopotamian goods,
gifts, property or payment brought by the woman into the marriage, it follows its use by
scholars who are referenced in this chapter. A transfer of assets from the man’s family
(and kin) to the woman’s family (and kin) are called bridewealth by Goody and Tambiah
(1973: 1-2, 61), but when the recipient is ultimately the bride herself, they apply the term
‘indirect dowry’.49 Bell (2008: 5) clarifies brideprice as a payment that does not involve
wealth-assets.50 Within this chapter, terms to describe matrimonial transfers by the man
to a woman in cultures outside ancient Egypt follow the terms used by the scholars who
are referenced. Finally, I have tried to clarify, where possible, concepts associated with
marriage transactions by using guidelines assigned by Bell (2008: 18) to distinguish gifts
from payments, and inheritance from gifts and payments, but available ancient Egyptian
evidence does not always make this distinction.
Ancient Egyptian private property, laws of inheritance, and matrimonial goods
Any discussion of the importance of land in terms of inheritance and goods given at marriage
is predicated upon ownership or long-term tenure of land. Evidence of legal practice in texts
indicates that private property did exist, it could be owned collectively and be transferred
by individuals (Moreno García 2013a: 258; Théodoridès 1971: 292). In addition to the
management and control of large plots of temple estates and other institutional land, often
enacted through transfer to high officials, there always existed in Egypt small privately
owned arable plots around houses, or in gardens. In theory, all the land of Egypt was under
the control of the Pharaoh, whether it was controlled by royal or temple institutions, or
by village families (to claim all land was owned by pharaoh is oversimplified, for example,
see Eyre 2015: 710; Manning 2005: 3-4). Even when land was leased from temples, such
as those leases recorded in the 20th dynasty Wilbour Papyrus, there are indications that
this was considered a hereditary practice (Kemp 1994: 310; Janssen 1986: 362, 365, see also
Jelínková 1957: 45-55, 1959: 66, for a Ptolemaic sale of inherited property to a cousin). There
is also land granted by the king and inherited by family, for example, the Inscription of
Mes, written in the reign of Ramesses II, records a family dispute and refers to a gift of land
given to a family ancestor for military service three centuries earlier (Gardiner 1905; for an
overview see Théodoridès 1971: 310-11).
49
Goody and Tambiah (1973: 3) highlight a set of distinctions within the categories of bridewealth and ‘indirect
dowry’: payments may be returned at death or divorce, they may be fixed or variable, and the timing of their
delivery may vary.
50
Bell (2008: 4-5) describes brideprice, as distinct from bridewealth, as a marriage payment made as a result of
transferring products of work; he uses the example of a poor family reducing their consumption in order to
supply a marital gift, rather than reducing the value of their estate by transferring wealth assets.
43
Moreno García (2013a: 260), however, raises an important point in relation to inheritance
rights in institutional land transferred to elite individuals; in return the individual usually
endows this land to temples or cults and receives an income from it. Mostly, texts indicate
that private property was a collective family affair, but when rights over disposal of
endowments are limited to an individual, for example KRI 3.336-41 (reign of Ramesses II),
it enhances personal interests and strengthens institutional ties. By forbidding or limiting
the involvement of collateral relatives in ownership or disposal of endowed land, the
owner and often his direct descendant (‘son to son, heir to heir’, KRI 5.227, year 2 Ramesses
III) develop powerful patronage links with state bodies rather than extended kin, thereby
increasing personal gain and enabling temples to become ‘elite building-tools’ (Moreno
García 2013a: 260).
Allowing for the exclusion of collateral kin in certain endowments, across all periods of
Egyptian history the transmission of property across or down the generations of the same
family was common and may not have required any form of written documentation. Even in
the Ptolemaic Period there are few surviving examples of property conveyance compared
to the numerous documents detailing leases, tax receipts and petitions regarding disputes
over land; as with documents recording inheritance disputes or allocations, it may be that
land transfer documents only record unusual cases (Manning 1995: 249).51 What Manning
(1995: 258, 260) does note in his exploration of land transfer documents and which has
particular bearing on the discussion within this chapter, is that available Ptolemaic texts
recording land transfers unequivocally show movement of property within families, a sign
of the wish for the rightful heirs to receive family property and therefore the relative lack
of property transfer documents may be a reflection of unwillingness to sell family property.
The level of economic transactions between family members is discussed in greater detail
in this chapter’s case study, using the example of the Ptolemaic Archive of Horos, son of
Nechouthes, in the garrison town of Pathyris.
Ancient Egyptian inheritance law
Husband and wife each have the right to independently own property and independently
inherit from their own consanguineous families, but husband and wife do not inherit from
each other according to customary laws of succession (Pestman 1969: 59; Théodoridès 1971:
292). Egyptian customary law does, however, allow spouses to inherit property or goods if
this wish is legally recorded with an ἰmyt-pr (‘that which is in the house’). First appearing
in the Old Kingdom, this document allows the transfer and disposal of private property
outside the normal laws of succession, either within or beyond the family (Logan 2000:
49-73). The ἰmyt-pr is also the method by which property is temporarily transferred to the
wife, but will eventually devolve to the children of the marriage (see, for example, P. Kahun
51
Manning has discussed private ownership of land in detail. To summarise, absolute control was theoretical and
land controlled by the Ptolemies was geographically limited; large estates were given to Greeks and Egyptians, the
latter outnumbered Greeks as landholders; temple-managed estates had been in the hands of temples for many
dynasties and were only re-donated by the Ptolemies; finally, many Egyptians took leases on cleruchic land. In
effect, the Ptolemies did not alter the ancient regime of property ownership, but created institutions to capture
tax revenue from arable production and from the leasing and selling of property (Manning 2003a: 182, 1995: 238-
39).
44
1.1 ll. 7-10, 12th dynasty, although the ἰmyt-pr could also be retracted (P. Kahun 7.1 l. 20,
12th dynasty) (Johnson 1999: 169-72; Théodoridès 1971: 304-06).52
If joint property is acquired during the marriage, two thirds belong to the husband and one
third to the wife (Pestman 1969: 73), although as Eyre (2007: 230) points out there is the
expectation that the father takes a financial responsibility within this two-third allocation.53
In principle, children have rights to three sets of inheritance: the independently owned
property of the mother and that of the father, and the joint property of the parents. On his
father’s death, the eldest son was considered the head of the family, the preferential heir,
traditionally responsible for the administration of the estate and handling of his parent’s
burial and funerary cult, although the responsibility may not necessarily be given to an
eldest son (Eyre 2007: 228, 231; Johnson 1996: 183-84; Pestman 1969: 65 and n.2).54 In the
ten demotic marriage settlements from the Rylands and Adler papyri (analysed on pages
64-70), the eldest son is named as the appointed heir in seven, administering the estate
of behalf of the other heirs: P. Ryl. Dem. 22, 27, 28 (contract invalid?), 30, 37 and P. Adl.
Dem. 14, 21 (both Adler settlements are first cousin marriages within the same family).
All the children are appointed heirs in P. Ryl. Dem. 20, and all the children born before the
marriage and during the marriage are named as heirs in P. Ryl. Dem. 16. The beginning of
the statement regarding heirs is missing from P. Ryl. Dem. 38.55
The normal lines of succession are complicated by death or divorce resulting in a second
marriage and the subsequent birth of children, but the rights of the children from the first
marriage cannot be relinquished or alienated without legal recourse; in fact, children have
rights to their parents’ property even before the death of their parents (Pestman 1969:
59-61). This is witnessed in the story of Setne I (P. Cairo 2.30646, early Ptolemaic) who
already has children but is charmed by a woman who entices his possessions from him,
but since Setne’s children have guaranteed rights of inheritance under Egyptian law he
52
(i) P. Rylands 11 (284 BC) documents a sale of a whole property by a husband to a wife in return for care during
his life and attending to his burial arrangements after death. However, the deed does not transfer property
rights to her through a statement of no-title (sẖ n wy) but serves more as an annuity of care for the husband (see
Pestman, 1961: 122-23). Nevertheless, when her husband needed to use the family house as security for a debt, his
loan was not effective until she released her claim to avoid a declared interest in the property.
(ii) Johnson (1999: 169 n.1) points out that the ἰmyt-pr documents are often regarded as wills but they do not
always relate to the transfer of property at or in relation to death, preferring to use the term ‘(land-) transfer
document’.
53
(i) The breakdown of one third to mother, father and children is clarified in O. DeM. 764, probably 19th dynasty
(Eyre 2007: 230; Toivari-Viitala 2003: 87-96). In relation to the husband’s allocation of two thirds, P. Turin 2021 +
P. Geneva D 49 (rt. 2.11) implies the husband is free to ‘do as he wishes with his possessions’, but as Toivari-Viitala
(2003: 94 n.31) points out, this freedom is limited to the choice of inheritance allocations to children.
(ii) The right of women to own property in marriage, to independently acquire property and inherit property
enabled women to become wealthy in their own right. Over a 200-year span in the Roman Period village of
Socnopaiou Nesos in the Fayum, one third of the village’s real estate may have been owned by women, although
women during this period had fewer public financial liabilities than men (Hobson 1983: 315).
54
Lippert (2013: 2) points out that in early periods of Egyptian history succession may have been granted to a sole
(male) heir, presumably with a duty to care for dependent relatives, but by the New Kingdom the eldest son, or
the main heir, is the estate’s caretaker responsible for the equitable allocation of profits.
55
In a study of the use of the term 3bt from the Old to Middle Kingdoms, Willems (2015: 463) believes 3bt can be
understood in a legal context that denotes a property owning group, consisting of a single mother and father
(not grandparents and other lineal ascendants) and consanguineal offspring, which corresponds to the pattern of
Egyptian inheritance, so while each 3bt is distinct they inevitably overlap with each generation.
45
demands that they sign a deed to alienate their rights (Lichtheim 1980: 135).56 Even though
children have the legal right to partible inheritance, unless otherwise alienated, this not
always fulfilled. For example, in P. BM 10845 (late Ptolemaic) two children, abandoned by
their father on his second marriage, pray to the gods for help since their father refuses to
support them using the matrimonial goods brought by their now deceased mother (see
Hughes 1969: 43-54).
Examples of legal intervention to change, challenge or circumvent laws of succession are

documented in three famous cases described briefly below: the Will of Naunakhte (P. Ash.
Mus. 1945.97; P. DeM 23, 25; P. Ash. Mus. 1945.95, 20th dynasty), the records of a trial at the
Temple of Wepwawet in Siut (P. Brit. Mus. 10591 rt., 170 BC), and the Adoption Papyrus
(P. Ash. Mus. 1945.96, reign of Rameses XI, 1107–1077 BC).
The Will of Naunakhte
The papyri detail a mother’s decision to legally exclude four of her eight children from
inheriting her personal property as they had not cared for her properly; those excluded are
three daughters and one son, although she does give a partial gift to one of these daughters.
Naunakhte inherited property from her father, acquired property through her first (childless)
marriage, and acquired rights to a third of the shared property of her second marriage. She
did not, however, have the power to exclude the rights of the eight children to two thirds of
their father’s property, or any other property owned by him (Černý 1945: 29-53; Donker van
Heel 2014; Eyre 2007: 240-41; Pestman 1982: 173-81, 1961: 162-64).
Trial at the Temple of Wepwawet in Siut
The trial records a family dispute from Siut that focuses on the land of two half-brothers
bequeathed to them by their dying father, two thirds to the elder and one-third to the
younger. The wife of the elder brother claims that all the family land belonging to her father-
in-law and his first wife had been promised to her as part of her marriage settlement – it
served as security for her maintenance. This was the land her husband had a right to through
the laws of succession and which could not be given away to the son of a different woman
without full assent. The wife’s claim was not upheld on the grounds that her husband had
legally alienated his right to one third of the inheritance due to him in favour of his half-
brother (Allam 1990a: 24-26; Donker van Heel 2014: 73-80; Eyre 2007: 227-29; Johnson 1996:
181-82; Manning 2010, Appendix: 207-16; Shore and Smith 1959: 52-60; Thompson 1934).
The Adoption Papyrus
The text is a statement by Rennefer, the wife of Nebnefer, stating that her husband has
legally adopted her as his daughter, thereby granting her rights to all that he possesses
since the couple are childless. This statement may have served as an introduction to the
56
Texts documenting legal action are witness to the fact that rights to inheritance, or claims upon inheritance,
are not easily relinquished. For example, in P. Vienna D 12003 (648 BC) and D 12004 (660 BC) a brother and sister
legally relinquish their claims to shares in an estate rightfully bequeathed to their half-brother and his young
siblings; these are all members of a choachyte family in Thebes (Malinine 1973: 192-208).
46
second part of the papyrus in which the husband and wife jointly state that they bought
a slave girl. The statement then reverts back to Rennefer’s voice as she relates how she
brought up the slave girl’s three children. We then learn that Rennefer’s younger brother
married one of the slave girl’s daughters and that Rennefer has granted freedom to this
girl and her two siblings. Furthermore, Rennefer now adopts her younger brother and the
three freed children of the slave woman. In short, this newly adopted family now have
full rights of succession according to Egyptian law (Allam 1990b: 189-91; Cruz-Uribe 1988:
220-23; Donker van Heel 2014: 80-87; Eyre 1992: 207-21; Gardiner 1941: 23-29; Johnson 1996:
183).
The question as to whether consanguineous marriage can help insulate the family from
conflict, or at least limit conflict, can be raised in relation to the Will of Naunakhte, the family
dispute from Siut and the Adoption Papyrus described above. The existence of these texts
indicates two important and interrelated factors; firstly, the cases may be the exception to
the rule by the fact they are documented and, secondly, they emphasise the importance
of partible inheritance. This chapter argues that ties created through consanguineous
marriage may help to bind a family together without access to legal recourse, and that
much legal documentation demonstrates the means by which families resolve disputes
without necessarily fragmenting their landholdings, although fragmentation is sometimes
inevitable. In his analysis of the laws of ancient Egyptian succession, Pestman (1996: 71-
75) notes that even when there are deviations in the natural progression of property
inheritance, sometimes by as much as a generation, in time property usually returns to
children within the family.
Ancient Egyptian gifts at marriage
The earliest surviving written marriage settlement, detailed by Pestman (1961: Chart A,
nos 1-4; Lüddenkens 1960: 10-11) is a demotic text dating to 879 BC (P. Berlin 3048 vs. l.
1-21/Eheverträge 1). While demotic marriage settlements from the Late Period onwards
are specific as to the goods given by the woman and the gift of the man, earlier financial
practices and agreements related to marriage are more speculative, although forms of
gift-giving at marriage are found in New Kingdom texts from Deir el-Medina (Toivari-
Viitala 2001: 61-69). A deed may be drawn up, or agreed, in view of the marriage to
confirm financial commitments, payment due to the wife in the event of repudiation, and
stipulations related to property on behalf of the wife or children.57 This deed, called sẖ
n ḥmt (wife’s deed), can be drawn up at marriage or later since its contents relate to the
law of property in connection with the marriage; it is a unilateral statement drawn up by
the husband that becomes legally effective when the wife accepts the terms of the deed
(Pestman 1961: 21-32).
In all the marriage settlements examined in this chapter’s case study the value of the goods
brought by the woman to the marriage are consistently larger than the gift brought by
(i) Up to the 26th dynasty (664–525 BC) the woman is given in marriage, usually by her father, but sometimes
57
by a widowed mother, or an uncle; in turn, the man reaches a consensus with the representative of his future
wife’s family. The first deed in which the man speaks directly to the woman is dated from 536 BC, P. Berlin 13614
(Pestman 1961: 11-13).
47
the man; however, the man’s financial costs lie in his commitment to maintain his wife
during the course of the marriage. The matrimonial goods brought by the woman remain
her property, although the man has the right to administer and dispose of these goods.58
In the event of divorce the full value of the woman’s marriage goods is returned to her, or
the full value as stated in writing, whether or not this was actually given (for example, P.
Adl. Dem. 14, 97/96 BC; for a detailed discussion on matrimonial goods, see Pestman 1961:
90-114). In earlier demotic contracts the wife has the right to administer the gift from her
husband, the šp n s.ḥmt, and dispose of it during marriage. The wife has to return part of
the šp n s.ḥmt in the event of her initiating divorce, but the husband has to pay in excess of
his original gift should he initiate the divorce (for example, P. Hausw. 16, 217/216 BC). In
later settlements the man’s gift is a fictitious amount (for example, P. Adl. Dem. 14, 97/96
BC). Its value lies in the financial commitment, as it is the amount given to the woman in
the event of her husband ‘repudiating’ or divorcing her, but the wife usually, though not
always, receives part of the value should she initiate the divorce (Pestman 1961: 110-13).
Property gained prior to marriage, that is not part of the marriage agreement, continues to
be owned independently, and the wife has a claim to one third of property acquired during
marriage (for example, P. Ryl. 37, 176–135 BC).59 It could be argued that the combination of
independent ownership, joint property ownership, the return of a woman’s matrimonial
goods and the release of the husband from maintenance allows for greater financial
freedoms of partner choice in marriage. But this must be assessed in combination with
partible inheritance that ultimately reduces land holdings with each generation, unless
moveable and immoveable property are introduced through marriage. This combination of
economic freedom and the legal divisibility of family property is considered on pages 56-60
in relation to consanguineous and non-consanguineous marriage.
Inheritance law and dowry in Mesopotamia, classical Greece and ancient Rome
Mesopotamia60
Under Mesopotamian law, only sons (or grandsons) could inherit the paternal estate and
male family members were financially responsible for women; if this was not possible,
provision was made for women in the form of a gift, or as a yearly or monthly allocation
(Stol 1995: 134-35). Women recorded as recipients of inheritance shares in the pre-Sargonic
and Old Babylonian Periods were probably unmarried and would ultimately bequeath their
shares to male family members; if there were only female offspring a man could adopt a
son as heir, or marry an adopted son to his daughter and appoint him heir (Stol 1995: 134).61
58
Depending on the type of contract they are variously described as nkt.w n s.ḥmt, ḥd n ἰr ḥmt, or s’nḫ, translated
respectively as goods of a woman, money to become a wife, and (capital) causing (a wife) to live (Pestman 1961:
91, 102, 107-08). In all types of demotic marriage agreements, whether specified in writing or not, the husband
commits to his wife’s maintenance (food and clothing), usually in money, oil and corn, although clothing is
substituted for money in P. Bryce (260 BC) (Pestman 1961: 144-50).
59
If a wife initiates a divorce, she may forfeit her right to one third of the property acquired during marriage (for
example, P. Hausw. 14, 217/216 BC).
60
Allowing for localised variations, Westbrook (2005: 1-2) argues that the underlying structure of the legal
systems of the societies of the ancient Near East are the same, drawing on the legal traditions of Mesopotamia in
the third millennium and spreading out to the cities and states of the eastern Mediterranean.
61
Lafont (2003: 544) refers to two Middle Assyrian sources (OBT 105:8-10 and OBT 2037) as evidence for daughters
48
Male heirs inherited equally although the eldest son administered the estate and received
an extra portion; sons born of parents who remarried were also considered primary heirs
and shared equally, however, by the Neo-Babylonian Period texts show that sons of the
first marriage received two thirds of the inheritance (LL 24, LH 167, c.1900 BC; NBL 15,
7th century BC; Oelsner et al. 2003: 939; Westbrook 2003: 395-96, 398).62 As in ancient
Egypt, division of an inherited estate may be left undivided with heirs as joint owners,
but as Westbrook points out (2003: 396), in Mesopotamia property might be undivided for
generations to foil creditors with claims on the whole estate, or on debts linked to one of
the heirs. Heirs also have a mutual responsibility to maintain the land and Middle Assyrian
Law (MAL B4, 1400–1000 BC) states that an heir forfeits his land rights to his brother after
taking his share of harvest but failing to cultivate the undivided land (Lafont 2003: 542).
Discussing the scarcity of direct evidence related to the occupancy of land shared by
kin, Ellickson and Thorland (1995: 356) note that the rules they generate are likely to be
informal and based on custom.
Dowry in Mesopotamia is a gift from the bride’s father to the bride, to which gifts from other
sources might be added, and could be considered a voluntary pre-mortem inheritance.63
The husband has the right to control and administer the dowry but must return its value to
the wife’s family on termination of the marriage; in the event of the woman dying only her
children could inherit or it would be restored to her father if she died childless (Westbrook
2005: 3, 2003: 942).64 Although not legally required, and before the Neo-Babylonian Period,
the husband-to-be would have secured his wife with a payment to her father, and this
betrothal payment would also be returned in the event of the marriage ending (Westbrook
2005: 2, 6 n.19; Wunsch 2005: 2).65 Girls married between the ages of 14-20, although they
may have been betrothed from a much younger age, and boys married between 26-32 years
of age (Roth 1987: 737).66 A widow could become head of household if her children were still
young and maintain control over her dowry and remarriage, in contrast to Athens where a
widow with young children was required to return to her father’s house (Stol 1995: 132-33;
Westbrook 2005: 4).
sometimes inheriting equally with sons, however, this is put into doubt by Oudshoorn (2007: 265) who believes
the necessity of documentation indicates daughters were not heirs based on intestate succession. Texts from the
city of Nuzi (14th century BC) show that a father could adopt a daughter as a son to retain family property; this
strategy also avoided the risk of an adopted son married to a daughter, transferring wealth to his original family.
For a detailed study on the legal position of daughters in ancient Near Eastern laws of succession, see Oudshoorn
(2007: 251-98).
62
In the Old Babylonian Period sons were the primary heirs, but in their absence the following order of inheritance
by default applied: grandsons, daughters, a son by a prostitute, brothers of the deceased, but not his widow
(Westbrook 2005: 395; see also Lafont 2003: 543, for order of succession in the Middle Assyrian Period). In 14th
century Nuzi, the eldest son received double shares while remaining sons received equal amounts, or allocations
according to their rank in the family, although the intestate laws of succession could be altered with a will
(Zaccagnini 2003: 600).
63
In the ancient Near East, as in classical Greece, dowry was customary and while it would help to secure an
economically good marriage it was not a legal requirement (Blundell 1995: 115; Westbrook 2005: 3).
64
A gift received from the husband during the marriage could be kept by a widow, whether or not she had
children, but retained by the husband if she should predecease him (Westbrook 2003: 398).
65
In the Old Babylonian Period the betrothal gift was paid in silver, possibly a fixed price paid in instalments, and
in preceding Sumerian times it was paid as food intended for the wedding banquet (Stol 1995: 126).
66
Most marriage contracts were oral and written agreements were probably drawn up because of particular
financial interests (Stol 1995: 125).
49
Children born of the marriage had rights of succession to the dowry, but litigation texts
show how difficult it could be to extricate the dowry of a deceased and childless wife from
her husband’s estate, a possibility that resulted in families delaying the transfer of the
dowry until the birth of children (Wunsch 2005: 4). While a widow with children acquired
usufruct on her dowry, she did not have the right to independently use the principle to
conduct personal business. Wunsch (2005: 4-7) and Stol (1995: 133) highlight other avenues
by which women could use capital to engage in business, such as a personal allocation or
‘cash box’ or ‘basket’ in her dowry, gifts received from her mother not tied to dowry, or the
gift of income from property.
It is thought that dowries consisted mostly of moveable property and were not documented,
although tablets in the ‘Nuzi texts’ (14th century BC, Kingdom of Arraphe) record land or
houses given as dowry by the woman’s father or guardian; a counter-dowry of moveable
property was given by the woman to her father or guardian. For example, Tablet HSS
5.76 lists a field given by a father to his daughter and a return gift from the daughter to
her father of a sheep, pig, piglets, one pair of shoes and one textile; this text also secures
inheritance of this dowry for the female descendants of the woman (Justel and Lion 2014:
39-41).67 Stol (1995: 127) notes that the marriage of a girl from a poor family in the texts
from Nuzi resembles a sale, while other texts from the city prove that poor families ceded
daughters to others who would eventually arrange their marriages. In Nuzi it was cheaper
to adopt a girl at a lower price than pay ‘the price of a bride’ and women transferred in this
way were often married to slaves (Postgate 1979: 95-97; Stol 2016: 308-09, 2005:127).
Classical Greece
All Greek states practised partible inheritance although the allocation of shares to sons
was usually larger than that given to daughters and women were less likely to inherit land
or houses than their male siblings but, as Foxhall (2013: 91-92) remarks, this may reflect
the preferred allocation of economic resources. For example, women are rarely named as
landowners in Athenian documents, but in 4th century BC Sparta almost two-fifths of land
was owned by women, largely acquired through dowries (Aristotle, Politics 2. 1270a). Land
is not necessarily fragmented at succession and to what extent, if any, inheritors divided
their patrimony varied according to family and estate size, urban and rural location and
custom (Caseau and Huebner 2014: 6).
There are almost no documented examples of the disinheritance of a child, suggesting this
was difficult to execute legally or socially (Foxhall 1989: 29). Generally, Greeks regarded their
property as held in trust for future households and rights of personal disposal were limited
for everyone in Athens. While Plato (Laws 6. 776b) describes Greek families transmitting
property and livelihood ‘like a torch, from one generation to another’, this is not so much
a prolonged line of purposeful consanguineous succession but what Foxhall (1989: 28 n.32)
describes as the ‘recreation’ not the ‘continuation’ of households (kinship relations were
rarely traced back beyond cousins sharing the same great-grandfather).
67
HSS 5 text in Excavations at Nuzi I: Texts of Varied Contents’, Chiera, E. 1929.
50
The timing of the delivery of inheritance for men and women varied according the
circumstances of the family. While some women received their pre-mortem inheritance in
the form of dowry committed at betrothal, they may be kept waiting until the family could
afford to transfer the gift (see Orations, 41. 3-5 ),68 while a son in Athenian society might
receive part of his inheritance at his marriage or at his father’s 60th birthday (Huebner
2014: 101; Foxhall 1989: 32-33). The obligation towards family property and household was
preserved in the status of epiklēros given to a sole heiress in Athens.69 She was expected
to marry her father’s closest male relative, thereby protecting the family estate and
transmitting it through her children; even when the only daughter inherited her father’s
debts, the male next of kin was still obliged to marry her or provide a dowry sufficient to
attract a husband (Pomeroy 1995: 60-61).70 Commenting on the likelihood of a girl becoming
epiklēros, Golden (1985: 10 and n.8) offers an estimate of one in seven fathers dying without
male heirs, although a man could adopt a son during his lifetime or by will (Roy 1999: 12).71
The proportion of a man’s estate represented by the woman’s dowry is reported to range
from under ten percent to over twenty percent, with some poorer families enlisting
financial help from the extended family (Blundell 1995: 115). The husband has the right to
administer the dowry and to spend the income it produces, but in the event of divorce the
dowry must be returned to the woman’s father or guardian, irrespective of who initiates
the separation. The dowry was the woman’s financial protection and, for some, it was a
family investment used by the father to secure a politically or financially advantageous
marriage. Even though citizen women were not given legal rights, women with sizeable
dowries could also personally wield considerable economic influence and particularly so
if a woman’s dowry was greater than her husband’s patrimony (Blundell 1995: 116; Foxhall
1989: 32-44). Immigrant Greek women in Egypt during the Ptolemaic Period benefited
from the Egyptian legal tradition giving them freedom to personally acquire and dispose
of property, and agree to marriage settlements without the authority of a kyrios (male
guardian). As Greeks and Egyptians intermarried, Rowlandson (2004: 152-53) notes how
many people were ‘bi-cultural’, moving between the two systems of law and exploiting
them to their own advantage.72
Ancient Rome
Under rules of intestacy in ancient Rome all children inherited the paternal estate, as did
women married cum manu (under the husband’s legal control) and grandchildren by sons;
68
Demosthenes, Orations, Private Cases: ‘An unknown pleader against Spudias in the matter of a marriage portion’.
69
Blundell (1995: 120) remarks that the tendency to find a spouse within the extended family, even outside the
epiklēros system, probably arose from a ‘traditional loyalty towards one’s kinsfolk’.
70
In Sparta, the laws related to epiklēroi only applied to unmarried girls, and in the city-state of Gortyn, an epiklēros
could liberate herself from the duty to marry a kinsman by relinquishing part of her inheritance (Lacey 1968: 202-
03; Pomeroy 1995 [1975]: 60-61).
71
Writing on adoption in the ancient world, Huebner (2013b: 525) notes that in eastern Mediterranean societies
the majority of adoptees were infants and young children, with male adoption being more common; in contrast,
the adoptee was usually a young man in Rome and Athens.
72
Evidence of dual Greek and Egyptian names, and use of both legal systems is demonstrated in Ptolemaic
bilingual family archives, such as the archives of Dryton and Pelaias, both resident in the garrison town of
Pathyris (Vandorpe and Waebens, 2009: 47-48, 148-58; Vandorpe 2002; Vierros 2008: 73-87). For an overview of
bilingual papyrological archives, see Clarysse (2010: 47-72).
51
in the absence of offspring the man’s closest agnatic relatives were next in succession
(Table 5, Twelve Tables, 451-–450 BC, Saller 1994: 163). While women inherited equally under
intestacy, their power as testators was restricted to ensure family property returned to
the agnatic line, but by the mid first century BC rules of succession had widened beyond
agnatic kin (Gardner 1991: 163-64; Saller 1994: 165).73 However, it was not until the second
century AD that women progressively gained freedoms to bequeath property to cognatic
kin, allowing children to make first claim if their mother died intestate and for mothers to
inherit from their deceased children (Gardner 2011: 375; Grubbs 2002: 219).74 Saller (1994:
164) observes that although most propertied Romans drew up testaments with unequal
divisions, they were expected to make responsible and equitable decisions and heirs could
legally challenge wills they deemed unfair. The expectation of equal allocation and the
reasoning for a son receiving a larger share is seen in the Digest of Justinian where a father
asks his daughter ‘not to be angry because I shall have left a more substantial inheritance
to your brother, who, as you know, will be sustaining great burdens and will be discharging
the legacies I have made above’ (Dig. 31. 34.6).
In a review of final wills, Champlin (1991: 114) highlights the preference for larger allocations
in favour of males in the Late Republic and Early Empire detailing proportions such as three-
quarters to a son and one-quarter to a daughter (Dig. 32. 27.1) or half to a son, one third to a
sister and one sixth to a mother (CJ, 3. 28.12).75 However, allocations made in wills have to be
considered in the light of daughters receiving a pre-mortem inheritance as dowry. Widows
rarely inherited from husbands, but the return of dowry and its use during her lifetime was
the most common bequest by husbands (Polenen 2002: 174). Families living in Upper and
Middle Egypt in the Roman Period, including many of Greek origin or of mixed Greek and
Egyptian marriages, followed indigenous laws of succession in which all children inherited
equally and had to agree to alienate their rights of inheritance (Huebner 2014: 101).
Drawing on epigraphic material, Saller (1987: 21-34) and Shaw (1987: 30-46) conclude that
age at first marriage is late teens for non-elite Roman women and late twenties for non-
elite men. Epigraphic study by Scheidel (2007: 389-402) supports these ages for non-elite
marriages, although he finds the late teens estimate for women more difficult to test. Earlier
ages are given by Lelis et al. (2003: 20-21) who notes that it was common in Rome for men
to first marry aged 17-20, and for women to first marry aged 12-16, but marriage customs
varied amongst regions of the Roman Empire. As the result of the death of a spouse, or
73
The laws of intestacy are based on Table Five of the Twelve Tables and in the absence of agnatic kin, clansmen of
the same nomen inherited. The Twelve Tables also made provision for written wills whereby the testators could
choose their heirs (Saller 1994: 163).
74
Second century AD senatorial decrees also allowed mothers to inherit from their deceased children, but prior
to these changes a deceased child’s property passed to the father and or the closest agnatic kin. Prior to the
second century AD, a deceased mother’s property also passed to her husband or paterfamilias (father or male
head of estate), even if she willed it to her children, and he would be trusted to transfer the property when the
children reached adulthood or on his death (Grubbs 2002: 219).
75
(i) Hopkins (1983: 77-78) points out that there is no indication in Roman literature that the younger son was
normally ‘underprivileged’ or the eldest son ‘especially privileged’.
(ii) Dig. 32. 27.1: ‘Pompeius Hermippus appointed his son Hermippus heir to three quarters and his daughter
Titiana heiress to a quarter of his estate. And he left them each legacies, to be taken in advance, of certain lands.
Besides this, he directed that if Hermippus were to die without issue, another possession should be given to his
daughter’.
52
because of divorce, second marriages were not uncommon. Champlin (1991: 105-06) notes
that life expectancy evidence supports the proposition that wills were made at an early age
and inheritance strategies developed in written wills to deal with the complex possibilities
raised by death.76 Although life expectancy is estimated from 20 years into the 30s (Frier
2001: 144-46; Frier 2000: 788-89; Hopkins 1966: 263-64; Scheidel 2012: 118), this is based on
average life expectancy at birth which takes into account high mortality in the early years
of life and in old age (typically 50 years or older), so an individual who lives to 20 years
could expect to survive a further 30 years or more (Chamberlain 2006: 47-49, 52-54, see also
Appleby 2018: 146). In addition to the death of a partner, or divorce from them, Saller (1994:
171) highlights reasons for the many strategies employed to transmit property, including
numerous legal formulae to ensure inheritance by children, the extension of succession to
non-agnatic kin, and perpetuities granted to freedmen.
In the earliest form of Roman marriage a wife was cum manu, ‘in the hand of her husband’
– her property passed to him and remained with him; in the Republican Period marriages
were increasingly sine manu, giving the woman rights to property, including her dowry as
she is part of her natal family (Mousourakis 2012: 101-03). The Roman dowry (dos), given by
the woman’s father (or paterfamilias) and intended for her maintenance,77 was transferred
to the husband and became his property to administer and use, but at divorce or death
it could be reclaimed by the wife (or her paterfamilias) (Treggiari 1991: 327, 323-24). In a
discussion on the economics of Roman marriage, Frier (2012: 7, 3) describes the dowry
as an ‘income-generating fund’ operational only during the marriage and its payment, or
return, was customarily spread out over three years (it might not only take several years to
repay, but could also take several years to initially find the agreed amount).78
The transfer and acceptance of dowry was not essential but it indicated legal marriage
(as opposed to concubinage); the status of women without dowry is uncertain and
Treggiari (1991: 323) highlights the importance of dowry as an institution when even
slaves transferred a ‘quasi-dos’ to their partners (slaves were not allowed married status).
Estimates suggest that thirty percent of married women were widows; while older women
may have married twice or more, many poorer widows without dowry would have found it
hard to remarry (Curchin 2001: 538; Krause 1994: 73, 93; Hemelrijk (1996: 509-11) suggests
thiry percent is a high estimate and should be treated cautiously). The woman’s right to
paternal inheritance, and return of dowry at divorce or widowhood, meant that many
women owned and managed property independently; also, the considerable size of dowries
given to women of wealthy families leads Saller (1994: 217) to suggest endogamy within
status groups as families created and reinforced dynastic alliances (see also Betzig 2002:
371-73).79
76
For a detailed discussion on laws of succession and dowry, see Saller (1994: 155-224).
77
The dowry could consist of any or all of the following: cash, moveable and immoveable property (Treggiari
1991: 323-24).
78
If the husband’s mismanagement endangered the dowry, the wife could demand security against its return, or
sue for its return, during the marriage (Frier 2012: 12). On death or divorce, a deduction of one sixth of the dowry
could be made on grounds of the wife’s misconduct, and one-sixth for maintenance of each child up to half of the
dowry’s value (for example, see Dillon and Garland 2015: 305). See also Frier and McGinn (2004: 73, 170-92) for
reasons under which the dowry becomes invalid and for conditions of its return.
79
The husband or wife can initiate a divorce although a wife cum manu would need her husband’s consent so that
53
Consanguineous marriage: response to, or reaction against, laws of succession?
The first part of this chapter set out to examine ancient Egyptian inheritance laws and
customary economic practice at marriage and consider whether these laws and practices
make it more advantageous for families to marry consanguineously in ancient Egypt
than in other regions. In all the historical periods and regions discussed above, the
secure transmission of property, and its associated economic outputs, across and down
generations is a common and expected feature. Women in all the regions above, subject to
conditions, receive matrimonial goods and maintain the right of their return at divorce,
while the husband has rights to administer and use them; and either through inheritance
and/or dowry women personally own, or have usufruct of, wealth that might consist of
money, moveable and immoveable assets. However, there are many degrees of difference
due to terms and freedoms applying to rank, wealth, marital status, sex, age, and even
geographical location, some of which have been mentioned above, but not all can be
assessed in the scope of this discussion. What has been presented is a summary of practices
that may have varied cross-regionally and chronologically within the historical periods
described here.
There is evidence for consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, classical

Greece and ancient Rome, but we do not know its extent. The argument here is based on
the assumption that consanguineous marriage did not happen in every family, nor did
it happen in every generation; more surviving documentary evidence would be likely if
either of these scenarios were true. However, based on the hypothesis that consanguineous
marriage was used by some families as an economic strategy, then customary tradition
either makes it more viable for families to marry consanguineously (or on a wider scale for
endogamy to be favoured) as property was traditionally shared amongst offspring, or the
opposite may apply in that consanguineous marriage may be a reaction to laws that were
more divisive in relation to property.
So much surviving documentary evidence relates to individuals or groups who are

sufficiently important to record their affairs, or of public interest to be recorded, and who
have enough wealth to afford legal documentation or lengthy legal cases. Alongside them
are the less wealthy families whose marriages and economic activities are unrecorded or
recovered in fragmentary evidence, such as the ostraca from Deir el-Medina (see chapter
four). Might some poor families be equally as motivated as more affluent families to choose
consanguineous marriage? Substantial matrimonial goods are a form of investment in the
wider family, a transfer of assets but not an economic loss to the family; a poor family’s
assets are also retained and the advantage of the marriage may not be in landholdings but
in labour. Of course, the advantages of non-consanguineous marriage include the extension
of labour networks and social contacts, and the accumulation of wealth and prestige.
I suggest that the consolidation of property for landed families, or protection from poverty
for families with few assets, were major motives for consanguineous marriage. They were
he would bring about the divorce, a wife in patria potestas would need her father’s consent and he would initiate
proceedings, and a wife whose father was dead could act unilaterally, sui iuris (Treggiari 1991: 442-44, for a detailed
discussion on divorce, see 435-82).
54
motives shaped primarily, but not exclusively, by the laws of inheritance and a frequent
subsequent outcome, the transfer of matrimonial goods. To understand why laws of
succession might favour consanguineous marriage, inheritance laws applied in the regions
discussed above need to be teased apart and briefly summarised.
Firstly, in Mesopotamia inheritance passed through the male line; women who inherited
were probably unmarried and their property bequeathed to agnatic family (Stol 1995: 134).
In Athens, direct inheritance of land by women was relatively rare, but an only daughter
was important to the transference of property (and resulting stability of the oikos – the
family, house and land); the only daughter filled the gap in the male line by ensuring her
father’s property was inherited by his grandsons (Blundell 1995: 119). In contrast, under
laws of Roman intestacy all children inherited the paternal estate, but most Romans drew
up wills allocating larger shares for sons than daughters. However, propertied Romans
were expected to draw up responsible and equitable will allocations and part of a woman’s
pre-mortem inheritance was as dowry (Saller 1994: 164-65). Under the system of partible
inheritance in ancient Egypt, children have equal rights to their parents’ property even
before the death of their parents, rights that cannot be relinquished or alienated without
their permission (Pestman 1969: 59-61).
On the basis of laws of succession, it appears that sons and daughters in Egypt have
the most secure and equitable access to property, but when succession is more tightly
controlled through the agnatic line, is it because the perceived risk of property division
and loss are greater or is it more of a reflection of female status? A simple answer might
be that the higher the number of people with inheritance rights to property the greater
its chance of fragmentation, but it presupposes that women have the right to buy, sell
and own immoveable assets. If this is the case, then consanguineous marriage is a means
by which the possibility of fragmentation becomes reduced since economic transactions
and their outcomes are contained within the family. But even when inheritance is passed
through the male line, sons may choose not to cooperate in estate management and assert
their rights to dispose of shared landholdings or houses. Laws of succession solely down
the agnatic line might also presuppose that women are passive partners in the marriage,
but for some the matrimonial gift or dowry brought substantial value to the husband’s
estate. Even though the husband’s rights to administer and use dowry existed in all the
regions discussed above, its withdrawal and reclamation by the wife (or the wife’s family)
could be economically detrimental to the husband’s income (and other members of the
household). In consanguineous marriage, the transfer of matrimonial goods or dowry
becomes a transfer of assets from one family branch to another, not a transfer that weakens
the income of the extended family.
This is a basic framework to argue for consanguineous marriage in certain contexts, but
there are many complex scenarios that affect marital choices and outcomes: families
may have little or no wealth, lines of succession are complicated by infertility, death or
remarriage, families break down through divorce and disagreements. It is not possible
to say with certainty that consanguineous marriage was used as an economic strategy in
ancient Egypt more than its neighbouring regions, but the law of partible inheritance and
the greater freedom given to own, buy and dispose of property might mean that some
55
families chose consanguineous marriage as a preferred economic strategy.80 However, the

very same economic freedoms given to women may also give them the independence to
marry outside the family networks.
Consanguineous marriage as an economic strategy in ancient Egypt:

land consolidation, inheritance and matrimonial goods
This section discusses the advantages of consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt in

relation to the consolidation of family property, in particular land, and the timing and
amount of transfers in marriage and inheritance. The financial strengths and weaknesses
inherent in marriage between and beyond consanguineous family are also considered.
Protection against disintegration of land ownership: continuity, loss and acquisition
While there are examples of land remaining within families for generations, for example, a
parcel of land in the Philosarapis archive from Tebtunis (AD 89–224),81 it would be naïve to
state that family ownership of land remains immune to social, environmental and political
change for many generations. Also, while consanguineous marriage may be used as an
economic strategy to consolidate property ownership, members of families who do not
marry consanguineously might also work cooperatively to avoid the disintegration of plots
of agricultural land.82 The Philosarapis archive reflects the rise and fall of economic assets
within a family and includes a good illustration of five auroras of family land being held
undivided down three generations – from parents to two sons and then on to five cousins.83
As far as we currently know, the majority of the marriages in the family of Philosarapis
are non-consanguineous, although there may have been two first cousin marriages, one of
which was childless (Rowlandson 2016: 341, 334 n.55).
Even the closest consanguineous unions do not guarantee family cooperation and property
consolidation. The will of Kronion (P. Kron. 50, 138 AD), a farmer from Tebtunis, reveals
the father’s anger at the squandering lifestyle of his elder son who is married to his sister,
one of two sibling marriages in this family.84 The marriage contracts, written in Greek
80
(i) For women acting as independent parties with family relatives and outside the family (as far as it is possible
to determine), see Allam (1990a: 1-34); the evidence is drawn primarily from demotic documents where women
participate in a range of legal transactions including sales and purchases of immoveable property and granting or
receiving loans.
(ii) Scheerlinck (2011-12: 165-276) examines appeals by women related to inheritance appeals and acts of violence
in the Ptolemaic Period, concluding that women may present themselves as victims, but their appeals display
apparently independent power to gain and protect property and undertake legal action.
81
See: www.trismegistos.org/archive/192. Accessed 18.5.2017.
82
For example, P. Phil. Dem. 1 (318/317 BC); the house of Pagonis is inherited by his two daughters and around
sixty years later it belongs to his granddaughters and is still undivided (P. Phil. Dem. 15, 259 BC).
83
The family archive was kept by four successive generations of archive keepers. The two sons of Philosarapis
made the land more economically viable by keeping it undivided, and in the next generation five first cousins
kept part of the estate (five auroras) undivided at Kerkesoucha Orous as evidenced by a land lease in which they
are named as owners (P. Fam. Tebt. 44 and 45, 181–190 AD) (Rowlandson 2016: 343 n.74).
84
Yiftach-Firanko (2003: 101) believes that Kronion’s divorce from his sister Taoreneuphis (in which their father
acts as his daughter’s kyrios), and their father’s subsequent disinheritance of his son Kronion, was primarily
motivated to protect Taoreneuphis’s (and her family’s) property when her brother’s creditors demanded
repayment of his debt.
56
(although the family probably spoke Egyptian), document sizeable dowries brought by
both daughters to their sibling marriages (Rowlandson 1998: 127-28; Lewis 1983: 72-73).85
The elder brother, however, recklessly used his wife’s dowry and conducted an extramarital
affair; feeling ‘wronged’ by his son, the father reduced his son’s inheritance. Two and a half
months after completion of the will, the divorce between the elder son and his sister was
finalised, with the husband agreeing to repay his sister’s dowry (P. Kron. 52, 138 AD). The
example of Kronion may be unusual as it details sibling marriages and one divorce, but is
interesting in that both daughters brought large dowries directly into their own families.
This is not a wealthy family, so the large dowries may have reflected convention, perhaps a
public sign of their assets, or a mark of the financial independence of each wife; whatever
the reason, the dowry returned directly to the family and the father took legal action to
protect the family assets from Kronion the Younger, a reckless son, brother and husband.
There is an indication from other sources that families endeavoured to protect their assets
from division or loss. One strategy, as evidenced in texts from Ptolemaic Hawara, was to
divide houses into nominal fractions as opposed to physical divisions, for example, P. Brit.
Mus. 10606 (93 BC) refers to two shares out of five in a house ‘which is without division’.
These shares are usually allocated to family members, although Muhs (2008: 189) notes that
women rarely appear, suggesting they received their inheritance as a marriage annuity,
thereby reducing the number of divisions. Over time, fractions of houses could be reunited
as families sold shares to each other (for example, P. Hamburg 12, P. Hawara Lüdd. 9A and
9B, 118 BC), or through marriage alliances.86 One example of a house in Hawara becoming
whole again is found in two marriage settlements, of the same woman, recorded in P. Chic.
Haw. 6 (259 BC) and then in P. Carlsb. 34 and P. Chic. Haw. 9 (239 BC). The woman’s first
husband commits two thirds of his house as security for her marriage annuity; following
the death of her husband the woman then marries his nephew and, in turn, he commits
the remaining third of the property as security to his new wife (Muhs 2008: 190). Such a
marriage may have served to consolidate property, but might also reflect familiarity with,
and trust in, a known family.
In an examination of patterns of inheritance and domestic organisation amongst Egyptian

and Greek families in Roman Egypt, Huebner (2014: 101, 2013: 124-40) concludes that rural
families often held property jointly and undivided, while children who inherited in urban
contexts often divided property immediately. Using the outcomes of Huebner’s study
in Roman Egypt and the example of virtual fractional ownership of houses in Ptolemaic
Hawara, it could be argued that in earlier periods married brothers, sisters and their
extended families in rural villages and smaller towns also continued to live in close proximity
into adulthood, a scenario that might encourage cousin marriage to consolidate property
ownership, although we cannot assume continuity of practice over millennia (see Kemp
85
For the family archive of Kronion, son of Cheos, see: http://www.trismegistos.org/arch/archives/pdf/125.pdf.
Accessed 8.1.2017.
86
Muhs (2008: 190) remarks that marriage amongst close family members would be a tactical means of reuniting
fractions, but is only aware of reference to one consanguineous marriage in Ptolemaic Hawara and the agreement
does not mention divided property (P. Hamburg 7, 99 BC (P. Hawara Lüdd. 13); Muhs proposes that this cession
contract refers to a second cousin marriage. Uytterhoeven (2009: 376-7) identifies a half-sibling marriage in
this cession contract alongside reference to a first cousin marriage. See also pages 23-24 and Appendix 1 for
consanguineous marriages in Ptolemaic Hawara.
57
1994: 306-08; Kóthay 2001: 349-68; Moreno García 2012: 3-4).87 At different stages, it would
be reasonable to suggest that family members married non-consanguineously, perhaps
through personal choice or because of family conflict, to combat poverty or to advance
property acquisition; it is also in keeping with Egyptian custom to marry outside the family
to access patronage links and associated labour networks. Irrespective of whether families
married consanguineously or not, family numbers would also have been reduced through
child and adult mortality and infertility. Taking into account the above factors, in villages
or small towns networks of families will be created through a mixture of consanguinity
and affinity, combining long-resident families with new families or individuals entering or
leaving the community. The impact of this type of interrelated network on expectations of
reciprocity, acts of altruism and resolution of community conflict is explored in the next
chapter.
Consanguineous marriage: financial commitments, family expectations and timing of

transfers
Given the legal nature of economic transactions, particularly inheritance and commitments
at marriage, consanguineous unions may affect the expectation of financial commitments,
the fulfillment of financial obligations and the timing of transfers. How these effects
might be felt within a small Ptolemaic community is examined using family archives in
this chapter’s case study. The summary below is a brief introduction to the actuality of
the woman’s goods and the expectations inherent in their delivery and return within
consanguineous families.
The detailed description and precise value of the woman’s moveable and immoveable
matrimonial goods in demotic marriage settlements would indicate that these goods were
actually given to the man around the time of the marriage settlement, although P. Brit. Mus.
10607 (186 BC) indicates that some of the woman’s matrimonial goods have been received
and the remainder will be given at a future date. P. Hausw. 14 (208 BC) details a copy of the
woman’s goods outside the sealed deed in addition to the list inside the deed; sometimes
the woman’s goods are copied onto separate lists and, as Pestman (1961: 97) points out,
these readily available lists serve as a kind of aide mémoire. As discussed above, the man’s
marriage gift may originally have had value and been transferred to the woman, but in
later demotic contracts this gift was only due at divorce (see pages 64 and 69 for specific
lists of male and female matrimonial goods). Even in consanguineous marriages (P. Adl.
Dem. 14 and 21), we know that these goods are committed and their return guaranteed.
At the time of Huebner’s study the population of Roman Egypt is estimated at 5-7 million; levels not achieved
87
again until 19th century Egypt (Frier 2000: 814; Scheidel 2001: 242-48). Population estimates for the dynastic
period have been placed at 4.9 million in 150 BC, 2.9 million in 1250 BC, 2 million in 1800 BC, at 1.6 million in 2500
BC and at 0.87 million in 3000 BC (Butzer 1976: 83). Sampling the town of Mainehes, whose households are listed
in one of the Ramesside robbery papyri, Kemp (1994: 306-08) suggests an average of six people per household; this
would include a nuclear family and perhaps servants or slaves, and more if poorer relatives or those receiving
patronage from households are included. In a study of household composition, Koltsida (2007: 12) also estimates
an average of six people in a medium house in the New Kingdom town of Deir el-Medina. Clarysse and Thompson
(2006: 315) found that two-adult households were most common in Hellenistic tax registers, 75% of which were
married couples; the average size of a Greek family was 4.4 and the average size of an Egyptian family was 4.0. See
also Koltsida (2007: 11-12) for a summary of evidence relating to house size and numbers of occupants in ancient
Egypt.
58
However, consanguineous marriages may have carried advantages in relation to the

amounts committed and the timing of their delivery, particularly in relation to land.
In a study of the economics of modern day consanguineous marriage in Bangladesh,

Do et al. (2013: 904-18) found that the requirement for a large dowry is diminished in
consanguineous marriage, inasmuch as the families act as agents investing in joint projects.
When the dowry serves as a pre-mortem inheritance it is easier for a couple marrying non-
consanguineously to request transfer of committed assets at marriage rather than enforce
their receipt at the death of the woman’s parents at some point in the future. But if a
marriage takes place within a consanguineous family, there are inherent mechanisms to
ensure the delivery of inheritance at the death of one or both parents. In addition, the
authors of the study also found that consanguineous families are less likely to sever links
with each other (for further details, see pages 75-76).
Although there are other modern studies on the economics of dowry and brideprice and
their changing patterns (for example, Anderson 2007: 151-74; Bossen 1988: 127-44; Botticini
and Siow 2003: 1385-98), there is little research on the economics of consanguineous
marriage, which is why the model analysed and evaluated by Do et al. (2013) is particularly
useful in the context of this discussion and in this chapter’s case study. However, there are
potential weaknesses in its application to ancient Egyptian marriages and, in particular,
those featured in the case study. In Bangladesh, the costs of dowry can be economically
debilitating on poor families, but less so on extremely poor families who have few assets to
lose (Alam and Khuda 2014: 306), and the changing values of dowry and bridewealth also
fluctuate according to exogenous economic and political shocks (Chowdhury et al. 2017:
1-56). In ancient Egypt, we do not know the relative value of matrimonial goods in relation
to the family’s overall wealth, nor do we know how much has been personally inherited by
the woman and how much has been given by her family, nor to what extent the woman’s
goods serve as a partial or full pre-mortem inheritance. We also do not know how political
or environmental conditions affected amounts committed in these contracts, although
evidence suggests these exogenous factors strengthened ancient Egyptian social networks
built around the core and extended family (including individuals that were part of the
kinship group, but not necessarily related through consanguinity or affinity, see Moreno
García 2016: 499-500; 2013b: 1042-44). In Bangladesh, the cost of marriage includes the
substantial expense of the wedding celebrations (Alam and Khuda 2014: 306), but there is no
evidence from ancient Egypt to indicate lavish wedding celebrations; only the consensus, a
transfer of assets and giving of gifts may have marked the celebration (Toivari-Viitala 2001:
61-69; Pestman 1961: 6-11).
In summary, we do not know whether the woman’s matrimonial goods in ancient Egypt
are a financial burden upon the family, as dowry can be in Bangladesh, but if they are
burdensome they might be alleviated through consanguineous marriage, as this appears
to do for many families in Bangladesh (Do et al. 2013: 904-18). This chapter’s case study
also focuses on families who have sufficient wealth for a daughter to include land in their
matrimonial goods and who can afford the cost of legally documenting the marriage. While
we do not know to what extent the woman’s matrimonial goods in ancient Egypt represent
their inheritance, in the context of partible inheritance a pre-mortem inheritance may
59
serve as a form of quit claim, thereby alleviating the pressures placed on land divisibility
(Bell 2008: 12). Allowing for the considerations above, the model by Do et al. (2013) used in
the Pathyris case study below can provide an insight into potential financial advantages
for families marrying consanguineously. After analysing marriage contracts as economic
exchanges, the case study then explores whether families who marry consanguineously
might also prefer to conduct economic transactions with relatives linked to them by
consanguinity and affinity.
Finally, further advantages created through marriage alliances may include increased
status and power, access to resources and labour networks, preservation of existing
property and social stability, as well as a set of rights and duties incumbent on both sets of
families (Goody: 1976: 13-18; Moreno García 2016: 488-89, 2012: 6). A full discussion on how
these aspects might be embodied in marriage agreements in ancient Egypt is not possible
within the scope of this chapter, although the creation of family networks and access to
their resources is observed in the case study and further explored in chapter four alongside
rights and obligations, particularly expectations of reciprocity and altruism.
Case study: Marriage, consanguinity and economics in Ptolemaic Pathyris
The John Rylands Papyrus Collection holds eight catalogued demotic marriage settlements
from the Upper Egyptian town of Pathyris. Ranging from 176–89 BC, they detail money and
wheat committed by the husband to the wife, and money and goods brought by the woman
into the marriage. In the garrison town of Pathyris many families were interrelated and
regularly conducted business transactions with each other. Texts from the Rylands papyri
are explored here alongside the Adler papyri in the context of marriage and other economic
transactions from Pathyris to compare financial commitments made at marriage, to offer
suggestions as to how consanguineous marriage might affect these financial commitments,
and to assess whether preferences exist for economic transactions in general amongst
consanguineous families. A study of the papyri in family archives from Pathyris, informed
by current research on economics and consanguinity, offers an insight into a range of
options and advantages created through consanguineous marriage.
Ptolemaic Pathyris and family archives
The garrison town of Pathyris in Upper Egypt is notable for the amount of demotic and
Greek papyri dated to the Ptolemaic Period that have been found at this site. As such, these
Pathyrite papyri provide a valuable context for understanding the economic dealings of
the town’s inhabitants, including the economic transactions documented in the eight
demotic marriage settlements in the John Rylands Collection.88 A detailed prosopography of
Pathyris, compiled by Vandorpe and Waebens (2009), reveals a high level of interrelatedness
through birth or marriage amongst the families documented in the surviving archives.
Even where there is no indication of consanguinity or affinity amongst the parties in the
contracts, it is possible to identify preferences of certain families to conduct business with
88
For demotic papyri from Pathyris see Griffith 1909, Vol. 1, pls 64, 68, 73–75, 78, 83 (demotic texts), Vol. 3: 130–63
(translations), 265–91 (transliterations). All subsequent references to Rylands demotic papyri, abbreviated to P.
Ryl. Dem., are taken from this edition.
60
each other. The documents found at Pathyris have been divided into a series of archives:
official, military, temple, and family; the marriage contracts fall into the family archives
(Vandorpe and Waebens 2009: 93-199).
Although there is evidence of settlement on the site of Pathyris from the Predynastic Period
in Egypt (pre–3000 BC),89 the town received an influx of military settlers during the reign
of Ptolemy V Epiphanes following the large-scale Theban revolt that occurred between
207–186 BC. The town went into decline again in 88 BC, a year marked by rebellion in the
Thebaid region.90 The majority of soldiers that settled in Pathyris were of Egyptian descent,
although some of the inhabitants took an additional Greek name according to their military
or government positions. Greek and demotic papyri have been found in Pathyris and while
local Egyptians adopted the Greek language for contractual or bureaucratic purposes, they
did not change their native traditions (Vandorpe and Waebens 2009: 47). The marriage
contracts under review are written in demotic with the earliest dating from c.176–135 BC
and the latest is dated 89 BC (see table 3.2). The other economic transactions from Pathyris
discussed in this paper are written in demotic or Greek.
Comparisons between marriage settlements and other economic transactions
In order to examine how consanguinity might affect marriage transactions in the town
of Pathyris, this case study approaches the papyri in four stages. Firstly, the amount of
money and goods committed by the husband and wife in the eight marriage settlements
in the Rylands demotic papyri is examined.91 Secondly, the amount of money and goods
committed in five of these Rylands demotic marriage settlements is compared to two
demotic marriage settlements from Pathyris that are part of the Adler papyri collection.92
The two marriage settlements in the Adler papyri belong to the Archive of Horos, son
of Nechouthes. It is known that the named parties in both these Adler papyri are first
cousins (Griffiths 1939: 4-5),93 but they are also related to a family that appear in five of
the eight marriage settlements in the Rylands papyri: these five marriage settlements are
associated with the Archive of Pelaias, son of Eunous (alias Nechouthes).94 This second stage
explores whether there are any marked differences between the amount of money and
goods committed in the Adler papyri marriages, which are known to be consanguineous,
compared to the five marriages in the Archive of Pelaias in the Rylands papyri where there
is no direct evidence of consanguinity between the partners.
89
In the Pharaonic Period the earliest name for the town was I҆nrty or Two Rocks. From the 12th dynasty (1985–
1773 BC) the town was also known as Pr-Ḥwt-Ḥr or House of Hathor, which developed into the name Pathyris by
the Ptolemaic Period (332–30 BC). The Arabic name for this site is El-Gebelein, meaning Two Mountains. For a
summary of the site’s settlement and its different names, see Marochetti (2013).
90
The great Theban revolt and subsequent rural unrest are analysed by Manning (2003a: 164–71).
91
There is a total of ten catalogued demotic marriage settlements in the John Rylands collection: eight are from
Pathyris, one from Thebes (P. Ryl. Dem. 10, 315 BC), and one fragment without provenance (P. Ryl. Dem. 42,
c.221–152 BC) (Griffith 1909, Vol. 1, pls. 48 and 83; Vol. 3: 114–15, 167).
92
The edition used is by Adler, Tait, and Heichelheim (eds Greek texts), Griffith (demotic texts), 1939. All
subsequent references to Adler demotic and Greek papyri, abbreviated to P. Adl. Dem. and P. Adl. Gr., are taken
from this edition.
93
For a possible brother-sister marriage in Pathyris, see P. Grenf. 2.26.3-8 (103 BC) in Appendix 1.
94
One of the five marriage settlements, P. Ryl. Dem. 30, is linked to the archive but does not belong within it
(Vandorpe and Waebens 2009: 158).
61
The third stage of approaching the papyri is to compare the marriage settlements belonging
to the Archive of Pelaias, son of Eunous (alias Nechouthes), with all the other economic
transactions within this archive. The aim is to explore whether Pelaias’s family show any
preference for conducting economic transactions with consanguineous relations. Not all
the papyri from this archive have been found and, as such, the outcomes of this comparison
will be limited by the surviving documents.95
Finally, in the fourth stage the marriage settlements belonging to the Archive of Horos,
son of Nechouthes, are similarly explored in the context of all the economic transactions
within this archive. The Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes, is regarded as the only
‘closed find’ known from Pathyris; it is thought that the jar which contained the papyri had
remained intact when it was sold to Lord Adler in 1924.96 However, a few papyri belonging
to this archive have appeared in different collections, perhaps indicating the jar was not
intact, or there may have been a second jar (Vandorpe and Waebens 2009: 127-28). If the
archive of Horos in the sealed jar has not been tampered with, the analysis of the economic
transactions might offer a more accurate assessment of the level of transactions between
consanguineous family members. If families frequently choose economic transactions
amongst people to whom they are consanguineously related, might this also imply a
preference amongst certain families for consanguineous marriage?
There are three elements in the marriage settlement that are likely to be affected by the
level of consanguinity between the parties involved. They are the gift of the man to the
woman (šp n s.ḥmt), the goods brought by the woman into the marriage (nkt.w n s.ḥmt), and
the division of inheritance. The final section of this chapter focuses particularly on the
goods brought by the woman into the marriage and how the timing of their delivery, and the
amount committed before (or received after) marriage might be affected by consanguinity.
While it is not directly comparable, current research on economics and consanguinity can
offer insight into economic influences upon the choice of marriage partner, the credibility
of ex-ante and ex-post commitments made by the bride and her family, and the long-term
financial impact of consanguineous marriage.
Categories of consanguineous marriage
Couples who marry consanguineously share a proportion of genes in common, this is called
the coefficient of relationship. The husband and wife in a first cousin marriage have 12.5%
of their genes in common, whereas second cousins have 3.13% of genes in common. When
the level of consanguinity in economic transactions from Pathyris is explored later, the
results will be expressed as percentages reflecting the coefficient of relationship. Table 3.1
lists the proportion of genes shared in common between family members up to the level
of second cousin. The two marriages attested in the Archive of Horos are between first
cousins (P. Adl. Dem. 14 and P. Adl. Dem. 21).
95
For a description of the archive of Pelaias, see Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 148-54).
96
In July 2012 the Adler Papyri were acquired for the Papyrus Carlsberg Collection.
62
Table 3.1: Genetic relationships between consanguineous family members. Source: after Bittles,
Consanguinity in Context, 2012: 6.
Biological relationship Coefficient of relationship

Parent-child, sibling 50%
Half-sibling, unle-niece, aunt-nephew, double first cousin 25%
First cousin 12.5%
First cousin once removed 6.25%
second cousin 3.13%
Requirements and financial commitments in demotic marriage settlements
All the marriage settlements discussed in this chapter fall into a type of contract classified by
Pestman (1961: 21-52) as a Type A deed and contain some or all of the following elements:97
• money and sometimes wheat given by the man to the woman;

• goods brought by the woman into the marriage and their value;
• payment due if the woman is repudiated by the husband;
• in the event of repudiation, the wife’s right to a proportion of the shared property.
While the man does not hand over his gift, except in the event of repudiating his wife, the
woman does give her goods to the husband at marriage (see n.99). He has the right to use
them and dispose of them, but must return goods of an equivalent value, or the original
goods, in the event of the dissolution of the marriage (Pestman 1961: 98). We only have
evidence of a small sample of marriages as not all marriages were recorded, and those
that were recorded did not stipulate moral expectations but dealt practically with financial
arrangements should the marriage result in divorce. It is likely that what is contained
in the demotic marriage (and divorce) settlements found from the Late Period of Egypt
onwards builds more fully on elements of family law from much earlier periods of Egyptian
history (Johnson 1996: 180-81).98
97
Pestman (1961: 21-52) divides demotic marriage settlements into three groups: types A, B and C. Types B and C
are generally termed ‘annuity’ settlements in which the wife brings a sum of money that is managed by her
husband and serves as her maintenance.
98
(i) For a consideration of the continuity of ancient Egyptian family law, and its social and moral assumptions,
see Johnson (1996: 180-81).
(ii) Greek marriage documents of the Ptolemaic and Roman Periods could be written to mark ekdosis, the giving
away of the woman in marriage (or more rarely, auto-ekdosis), and include details of the dowry’s delivery (Yiftach-
Firanko 2003: 41-45). Alternatively, a document is drawn up to record the husband’s receipt of the dowry (phernê)
(for an overview of dowry in Graeco-Roman Egypt, see Yiftach-Firanko 2003: 175-82). A document was not needed
for a marriage to be valid, so while many marriages of Greeks in Egypt were likely to be agraphos gamos (unwritten
marriage), an engraphos gamos (written marriage) could be drawn up to secure an aspect of material affairs related
to marriage (Yiftach-Firanko 2003: 45, 259-60). Commenting on the act of marriage, (Yiftach-Firanko 2003: 53)
remarks that the handing over of the wife to the husband, whether recorded of not, marked the creation of the
marriage.
63
John Rylands demotic marriage settlements
Out of the eight Rylands marriage settlements from Pathyris, four belong to the Archive
of Pelaias, son of Eunous (alias Nechouthes), and one is linked with it. One marriage
settlement is linked to the Archive of Psenenoupis, son of Horos, and it is not known to
which archive the remaining two settlements belong. All the Rylands marriage settlements
from Pathyris are listed in table 3.2, alongside the archive owner, the value of the man’s
gift and the value of the woman’s goods. There is uncertainty over the validity of P. Ryl.
Dem. 28 belonging to a woman called Takoibis. Pestman (1961: 99) believes that the lack of
signed witnesses on this contract does not make it invalid as similar marriage settlements
have been found without signatories; in contrast Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 152) regard
this settlement as invalid. A second marriage settlement (P. Ryl. Dem. 30), also belonging
to Takoibis, is linked with the Archive of Pelaias, but this may belong in another archive
as women’s marriage settlements were usually held by the bride’s family (Vandorpe and
Waebens 2009: 152).
Table 3.2: Archive owners and money and goods committed in the Rylands demotic marriage
settlements from Pathyris. Sources: Vandorpe and Waebens, Reconstructing Pathyris’ Archives: A
Multicultural Community in Hellenistic Egypt, 2009: 156–58; Pestman, Marriage and Matrimonial Property in
Ancient Egypt, 1961, Chart A (deeds of type A); Griffith, The Adler Papyri, 1909, Vol. 3: 130–63.
Rylands papyrus Family archive Value of the man’s gift Value of the woman’s
text number (šp n s.ḥmt) goods (nkt.w n s.ḥmt)
P. Ryl. Dem. 37 Unknown 25 deben 600 deben
176–135 BC (+1/3 property and 25
deben*)
P. Ryl. Dem. 16 Archive of Pelaias 400 deben 1210 deben
152 BC 10 artabas wheat 30 artabas wheat
(+1/3 property and 30 1 deben silver
deben*) 1 1/3 pieces gold
1 deben 3 kite silver
1 1/3 pieces gold
3 kite silver
P. Ryl. Dem. 27 Archive of 100 deben 830 deben
107–101 BC Psenenoupis 10 artabas wheat ?10 artabas wheat
(30 deben*)
P. Ryl. Dem. 38 Unknown X 935 deben
103–91 BC 5 artabas wheat
91 BC (?invalid) 5 artabas wheat
P. Ryl. Dem. 30 ?Archive of Pelaias 100 deben 785 deben
89 BC 5 artabas wheat
* Payment and share of joint property committed to the wife if the husband should divorce her
64
The money and goods committed are valued in a variety of ways in the Pathyrite marriage
settlements. At the time of these contracts, the man’s gift (šp n s.ḥmt) is usually a notional
amount of currency and wheat committed in the event of the marriage dissolving and
not given to the woman unless she is repudiated by her husband (Pestman 1961: 14-15).99
In addition, the earlier settlements – P. Ryl. Dem. 37 and P. Ryl. Dem. 16 – also assign the
woman one third of the property acquired during the marriage should the husband leave
her. There is no evidence to confirm whether the man’s gift is given to the woman should
she choose to leave her husband; however, the inclusion of the šp n s.ḥmt in these Type A
settlements is important as it is a legal element that brings about the marriage (Pestman
1961: 20).
In contrast to the terms of the man’s gift, the woman actually brought personal goods into
the marriage. These goods usually included money, wheat, jewellery, personal items, and
a valuable piece of clothing called ἰnšn, which is sometimes translated as a shawl.100 The
total value of the woman’s goods is given in copper deben and artabas of wheat, although
sometimes individual pieces of gold or silver jewellery are itemised separately and valued
as gold or silver (see tables 3.3 and 3.4). In order to assess the differences between financial
commitments made in the settlements, the value of the money and wheat committed is
standardised in silver deben in figures 3.1 and 3.2. To establish the relative worth of the
money committed, the value of silver deben is assessed below in relation to the cost of
wheat and land, and the potential productivity of land, from the end of the second century
BC to the beginning of the 1st century BC.
Although the money committed in the marriage settlements under discussion is in copper
deben, in the earliest marriage settlements it was listed in silver deben. One silver deben
was equivalent to 20 silver drachmas or 5 silver staters, an equivalence that remained
stable from the 6th century BC to the end of the Ptolemaic Period (Reden 2007: 49). While
the value of silver remained stable, copper was devalued three times during the 2nd and 1st
centuries BC. In order to standardise the value of money committed, the following ratio of
silver to copper deben has been applied in this chapter (Pestman 1961: 14):
183-173 BC 1:120,
173-130 BC 1:240,
after 130 BC 1:480.
All the marriage settlements, except P. Ryl. Dem 37, also specify an amount of wheat
measured in artaba; although the size of an artaba varied over time, thirty litres appears
to be the most common amount in the Ptolemaic Period (Bingen, 2007: xi). Reden’s (2010:
151-52) analysis of wheat prices shows that they remained fairly stable over a period of
200 years (c.270–70 BC) and, judging from available data, the relation of wages to grain
prices remained equally stable. Pestman (1961: 148) gives one artaba of wheat a value of
99
The man’s gift only had significant value in the 25th and 26th dynasties (Pestman 1961: 14). Originally the man’s
gift was given to the bride’s father, then to the wife herself, but by the time of these settlements the šp n s.ḥmt is
only given to the wife in the event of divorce; the amount of šp n s.ḥmt also becomes formulaic depending on the
region, the temple where it is written or the form used by the scribe (Pestman 1961: 13-20).
100
Translated as ‘shawl’ by Pestman (1961: 94–95) and ‘scarf’ by Griffith (1939: 91, 100).
65
Table 3.3: Different valuations of the man’s gift and the woman’s goods in P. Ryl. Dem. 20.
Total value of financial commitments in artabas of wheat/silver deben/arouras of land/

land productivity in P. Ryl. Dem. 20
The rates used are:
Rate of copper deben to silver deben 1:480
One artaba of wheat = 0.21 silver deben
One aroura of land = 1.55 silver deben
Potential productivity of land: 10 artabas per aroura
Man’s gift Total gift in Total gift in silver Total gift in Potential
artabas of wheat deben arouras of land productivity of
land in artabas of
wheat
100 copper deben 11 2.3 1.48 14.8
and 10 artabas of
wheat
Woman’s goods Total goods in Total goods in Total goods in Potential
artabas of wheat silver deben arouras of land productivity of
land in artabas of
wheat
2170 copper deben 31.5 6.62 4.27 42.7
and 10 artabas of
wheat*
* Two additional items not given value equivalents in this contract appear to be an archaic form
of valuation: 1 deben 3 kite of silver and 1 1/3 pieces of gold.
0.21 deben of silver. Using an exchange rate of 20 silver drachmas to one silver deben, this
would place a value of 4.2 silver drachmas on one artaba of wheat. If one artaba of wheat
is sown, it is likely to produce around 10 artabas of wheat per aroura, depending on the
quality of the land and on seasonal inundation (Criscuola 2011: 172).101 The cost of land
prices in Pathyris between 111–91 BC has been studied by Monson (2008: 121) who has
produced a mean price of 31 silver drachmas per aroura.102 Using 31 silver drachmas per
aroura as the average price of land, and an exchange rate of 20 silver drachmas to 1 silver
deben, the average cost of one aroura of land between 111–91 BC is 1.55 silver deben or
744 copper deben (at a value of 1:480). As an illustration of how the conversions described
above can be applied to the contracts, P. Ryl. Dem. 20 is given as an example (table 3.3).
Comparisons between financial commitments and unusual features within them
When the value of the woman’s goods and the man’s gift are standardised across the
marriage settlements in the Rylands demotic papyri, financial committments made by
women are consistently larger than those of men. However, the man’s gift is understandably
lower in the light of his commitment to maintain his wife as part of the marital agreement
(Pestman 1961: 145). When the value of the man’s gifts is compared there is, as expected,
An aroura is a unit of land measurement of 2,756 square metres (Bingen 2007: xi).
101
This figure is a notional conversion rate, based on the Pathyrite contracts, of one silver drachma to 300 bronze
102
drachmas, although the figure fluctuates according to other conversions (Monson 2008: 121).
66
Rylands Demotic Papyri

Comparison between the woman's goods and the man's gift
Vvalue standardised in silver deben 16

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
P. P. P. P. P. P. P.
P. Ry.
Ryl. Ryl. Ryl. Ryl. Ryl. Ryl. Ryl.
Dem.
Dem. Dem. Dem. Dem. Dem. Dem. Dem.
22
37 16 20 27 38 28 30
Woman's goods 5 11.43 6.62 4.94 3.82 2.99 2.5 1.63
Man's gift 0.2 3.8 2.3 1.25 2.3 0 1.25 1.25

Figure 3.1: Comparison between the woman’s goods and the man’s gift committed in marriage
settlements in the Rylands demotic papyri. The figures at the bottom of each column are the values
in silver deben.
little variation in the size of this gift (see figure 3.1). It is most frequently 1.25 silver deben
or 2.3 silver deben; the difference is due to whether the amount of wheat committed is 5 or
10 artabas. The only exceptions to the formulaic amount of the man’s gift are P. Ryl. Dem.
16 – the largest gift with a value of 3.8 silver deben – and P. Ryl. Dem. 37 with the smallest
value at 0.2 silver deben (the value of the man’s gift for P. Ryl. Dem. 38 has not survived).
When the woman’s goods are standardised in these same settlements all the amounts vary,
but there are no remarkable differences except for P. Ryl. Dem. 16 with a larger value of
11.43 silver deben (see figure 3.1).
Why might certain contracts be noticeably different in terms of the man’s gift or the
woman’s goods? P. Ryl. Dem. 16 is a contract belonging to a woman called Sebtitis and
there is no known consanguinity between either party. Sebtitis comes from a local family of
priests, it is her second marriage and we know from the assignment of heirs in the contract
that she already has a son from this second marriage. Why did Sebtitis ask for a higher šp
n s.ḥmt than normal? Could it be that alongside the goods returned to her from her first
marriage, Sebtitis has also brought an inheritance or additional assets and in return she
has asked for a higher gift from her second husband? Even so, her goods are unusually
large and this might be a sign that the family into which she is marrying is trusted, perhaps
related to her and that sufficiently strong familial influence is already in place to ensure
goods would be returned in the event of a marital breakdown.
67
By comparison, a low šp n s.ḥmt is committed in P. Ryl. Dem. 37, but we do not know to
which archive this contract belongs as the names have not survived. Perhaps they were
not a prosperous family, although they could afford a settlement to be drawn up. Perhaps
they were consanguineous and a lower šp n s.ḥmt has been agreed in the knowledge that
maintenance is guaranteed, or family bequests are likely to appear after the marriage.
P. Ryl. Dem. 37 is also interesting as this is the second highest amount of goods brought by
a woman, even though the man’s goods were the lowest of all the settlements. Did she bring
goods that she owned personally alongside a sizeable (pre-mortem) inheritance in the
knowledge that she was marrying someone trusted by her family and who had adequate
economic backing to support her?
Finally, the smallest amount of goods is brought by a woman called Takoibis who appears
in P. Ryl. Dem. 30 and in P. Ryl. Dem. 28. Her first marriage settlement, P. Ryl. Dem. 28, is
thought to be invalid as there are no witnesses to the settlement and two years later she
is party to another marriage settlement to a different man. She brings fewer goods to this
second marriage and they also vary from those documented in her first marriage. If
P. Ryl. Dem. 28 was invalid, why are there different goods listed in the two settlements?103
Takoibis might have been given a completely different set of goods back at the end of her
first marriage. Might she bring a small amount of goods to the second marriage (or possibly
this is her first valid marriage) because she is related to her in-laws and they do not expect
high value goods as they know she will receive family gifts or bequests in the future?
Two of the marriage contracts in the Rylands demotic papyri are not linked with any
known archive (P. Ryl. Dem. 37 and P. Ryl. Dem. 38), while one is linked to the Archive of
Psenenoupis (P. Ryl. Dem. 27). If the marriage settlement is included, there are four texts
in the Archive of Psenenoupis, a family of priests in Pathyris (Vandorpe and Waebens 2009:
198).104 In contrast, the Archive of Pelaias has 23 texts; it is this range of texts that allows a
more detailed exploration of the economic transactions within this archive. The number
of marriage settlements in the Archive of Pelaias also enables a comparison with the two
marriage settlements in the Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes (which contains a total
of 60 texts).
Potential implications in the value of marriage settlements in the Archive of Pelaias and the
Archive of Horos
The two marriage settlements in the Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes, are known to
be consanguineous. The two daughters of Horos marry their first cousins – the sons of
two of Horos’s brothers. We know that the marriage settlements in the Pelaias archive are
not between first cousins, but we cannot say with certainty that some of these marriages
are not distantly consanguineous as there is insufficient documentary evidence to trace
the genealogies further back. Are there any differences between financial commitments
made at marriage between families who are known to be consanguineous at the level of
This was noted by Pestman (1961: 99 n.2) who does believe that this was a valid contract.
103
Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 198) remark that as this is Psenenoupis’ marriage settlement it would normally
104
be kept by his wife’s family, so it is uncertain whether it belongs to this archive. The other texts in the Psenenoupis
archive are P. Ryl. Dem. 18 (with tax receipt P. Ryl. Gr. 2.250), P. Ryl. Dem. 31, and BGU 3.993.
68
Table 3.4: Money and goods committed in the marriage settlements in the Archive of Horos, son of
Nechouthes. Sources: Griffith, The Adler Papyri, 1909: 89-93, 99-101; Pestman, Marriage and Matrimonial
Property in Ancient Egypt, 1961, Chart A (deeds of Type A).
Papyrus collection Family archive Value of the man’s Value of the woman’s
and text number gift (šp n s.ḥmt) goods (nkt.w n s.ḥmt)
P. Adl. Dem. 14 Archive of Horos 100 deben 1585 deben
97–96 BC First cousin marriage 10 artabas wheat 10 artabas wheat
1 deben 1 kite silver
1 1/3 pieces gold
P. Adl. Dem. 21 Archive of Horos 10 deben 2065 deben
92 BC First cousin marriage 5 artabas wheat 1 deben silver

Archive of Pelaias and Archive of Horos
Comparison between the woman's goods and the man's gift
Vvalue standardised in silver deben
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
P. Ryl. P. Ryl. P. Ryl. P. Ryl. P. Ryl. P. Adler P. Adler
Dem. 16 Dem. 20 Dem. 22 Dem. 28 Dem. 30 Dem. 14 Dem. 21
Woman's goods 11.34 6.62 4.94 2.5 1.63 5.4 4.3
Man's gift 3.8 2.3 1.25 1.25 1.25 2.3 1.07
Figure 3.2: Percentage comparison of the woman’s goods in the Archive of Pelaias and the Archive
of Horos. The figures at the bottom of each column are the values in silver deben.

first cousins (that of Horos in the Adler demotic papyri) and families that we know from
the available prosopography of Pathyris were not married to first cousins (that of Pelaias
in the Rylands demotic papyri)? Both families are fairly prosperous, they are engaged in
documented business activities and nearly all the male family members were active soldiers
or reserve soldiers (Vandorpe and Waebens 2009: 133-34, 153-54). The families in these
two archives are also related as Horos’s grandfather (Phibis) is Pelaias’s great-grandfather,
that is, Horos is a first cousin once removed to Pelaias. The money and goods committed
in marriage settlements in the Archive of Horos are listed in table 3.4, and their value is
standardised in silver deben and compared with the archive of Pelaias in figure 3.2.
69
The value of the gifts given by the husband in P. Adl. Dem. 14 is 2.3 silver deben, similar
to the man’s gift that often appears in the archive of Pelaias, but P. Adl. Dem. 21 is less at
1.07 silver deben. There does not appear to be anything notably unusual in comparisons
between the value of the wife’s goods in the Archives of Horos and Pelaias; with the
exceptions of P. Ryl. Dem. 30 (discussed above) and P. Adl. Dem 21; in both archives the
wife is committing money and goods that are approximately two to three times more than
the husband’s gift. There is, however, a difference between the amounts brought into the
marriage by the two sisters in P. Adl. Dem. 14 and 21. If the sisters’ goods represent gifts
or inheritance from their parents, has Senmenches, the sister in P. Adl. Dem. 21, accepted
goods from her parents of a lesser value than her sister Taesis in P. Adl. Dem 14? The two
sisters may have accepted these differences with equanimity, or the goods given by their
parents may have been equally distributed but we are not seeing this documented in the
contract? Furthermore, Senmenches has accepted the lowest man’s gift at 1.07 silver
deben; is this a sign of trust in the cousin she is marrying?
The right of a woman to own and trade in property (or other assets) in ancient Egypt
means that she could attain independent financial standing (Johnson 1996: 177); the
goods that she brings into a marriage may not only represent what she wants to commit
(or her parents want her to commit), but also what she is willing to risk as her husband
has the right to use and dispose of these goods. What we are seeing overall in the marriage
settlements might be different negotiations from families of varying wealth, and what
we are not seeing are other assets not named or committed in the contracts. It could be
that it is here, in what is not recorded in writing, that the difference lies in economic
transactions between families related consanguineously and non-consanguineously. The
risks of making financial commitments in marriage, and the levels of trust invested in
the delivery of financial commitments, are discussed later in this paper with reference to
modern studies on economics and consanguinity.
Consanguineous and non-consanguineous economic transactions in the Archive of

Pelaias and the Archive of Horos
If the marriage settlement is considered an economic transaction between individuals

and their families, might there be a preference for interaction with consanguineous
family members in the other economic transactions in the Archives of Pelaias and
Horos? Figure 3.3 details the type of documents contained in the Archive of Pelaias;
the texts have been divided by Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 156-58) according to the
family members by whom they were kept and these groupings are used here. Altogether
there are 23 certain texts and the marriage contract (P. Ryl. Dem. 30) linked to this
archive but not belonging within it. The Archive of Pelaias has been broken up and so
we are only getting a partial view of family transactions compared to the Archive of
Horos that is regarded as a ‘closed find’ where the texts have remained intact (although
there may be a further pot of documents as several other texts have been identified,
see n.109).
70
Texts and transactions in the Archive of Pelaias
Figure 3.3: Types of documents belonging to family members in the Archive of Pelaias. The archive
contains 12 demotic and 11 Greek texts (plus P. Ryl. Dem. 30 which is linked to the archive).
Figure 3.4: Texts and transactions associated with family members in the Archive of Pelaias.
71
Figure 3.4 shows that the names of all parties are known in the 23 certain texts that belong
to the Archive of Pelaias.105 Three of the texts belonging to the businesswoman Nahomsesis
relate to different stages of an initial loan followed by a property acquisition when the
property placed as security was ceded to Nahomsesis.106 The texts were also checked to
determine whether certain families regularly carried out economic transactions with
each other, but there were only two different transactions with the same family in the
Nahomsesis group, and two within the Nechouthis and Tapremithis group.107 After
deducting two of the three texts that belong to different stages of the same transaction,
and deducting a will (P. Ryl. Dem. 17), a search of the family tree of Pelaias and his ancestor
Panechates was conducted to determine if there is any known consanguinity between the
parties in the remaining 20 texts.108 The search did not reveal any direct links through birth
or marriage, however, since it is not possible to recreate all the family trees associated with
all the named parties there might well be consanguineous links within these economic
transactions.
Texts and transactions in the Archive of Horos
The same research method was applied to the Archive of Horos, which has 60 texts (37
more than the Archive of Pelaias) and ranges across 45 years from 134–89 BC (19 years
less than Archive of Pelaias).109 As the Archive of Horos is regarded as a ‘closed find’, a
more detailed appraisal can be gained of the type of transactions and the relations between
named parties. In their listing of this archive Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 138-41) have
italicised the names of close family members of Horos and the majority of the documents
relate directly to Horos or are between parties related to Horos. My examination of the
texts showed that out of a total of 60 texts the names of both parties are known in 50
transactions, and 11 texts have been deducted as they relate to the history of a sale or
to the same transaction (see figure 3.5).110 In the remaining 39 texts only P. Adl. Dem. 4
is missing one name in a group of names. A search of the family tree of Horos and of his
ancestor Panechates was then carried out.111 Nineteen, or 49%, of the economic transactions
105
P. Ryl. Dem. 16, 17 (with Greek tax receipt P. Ryl. Greek. 2.249), 20, 22, 23, 28, 29, 33, 34, 36; P. Amh. Gr. 2.46, 2.47,
2.48, 2.50. 2:51; MDAIK 21, (1966) p.142 number 2; BGU 3.996, 3.999, 3.1000; P. Ludg. Bat. 19.6, 19.7a, 19.7b,
P. Gebelen Heid. 23. The archive is listed in Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 156-58).
106
P. Lugd. Bat. 19.6, 19.7a and 19.7b.
107
BGU 3.996 (house purchased in trust) and P. Amh. Gr. 2.47 (loan of wheat); P. Ryl. Dem. 29 (land sale) and 36 (oath).
108
See Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 155) for family tree and Appendix chart.
109
P. Adl. Dem. 1–30, P. Adl. Gr. 1–21, P. Ryl. Greek 4.581, Pap. Lugd. Bat. 19.5 (demotic and Greek), P. Cornell 4
(Greek), P. Mil.1.1 2 (Greek), Enchoria 19–20 (1992/93), p. 78, no. 28 (wood), Enchoria 19–20 (1992/93), p. 79, no. 29
(wood) (demotic), P. British Library, Additional MS 56920 ined. (demotic). The archive is listed in Vandorpe and
Waebens (2009: 138–41). Two texts, P. Cairo 2.30652 and SB 20.14198, originally listed as uncertain in Vandorpe
and Waebens (2009: 141), are now considered part of the archive of Horos; personal communication, Thomas
Christiansen 2015.
110
P. Adl. Dem. 28 and P. Adl. Gr. 10, 13, 16 relate to the history of a land sale (Horos is named in P. Adl. Dem 28 and
P. Adl. Gr. 16); P. Adl. Gr. 7 is a copy of P. Mil. 1.1 2 and SB 20.14198 is a cession document related to this sale; P. Adl.
Dem. 8 is the likely cession relating to P. Adl. Dem. 7; P. Adl. Gr. 12 and 14 are a land sale and cession document;
P. Adl. Gr. 15 and P. Adl. Dem. 19 and 20 relate to a loan, an oath and a cession; P. Adl. Gr. 1 and 18 probably belong
to the legal history of land purchased by Horos. Out of these fifteen texts ten have been deducted. Three other
texts are measurement receipts and a further one is thought to be a sale contract; all four have been deducted
under ‘parties to contract known’ as only Horos is named.
111
See Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 136–37) for a family tree of Horos and the Appendix chart for the family tree
of Panechates.
72

Archive of Horos texts from 134-89 BC
70
60
Number of texts
50
40
30
20
10
0
Texts
deducted: Total texts Transactions
Total Parties to
related to where between
number of contract
history of parties family
texts known
sale or same known members
transaction
Texts from
60 50 11 39 19
134-89 BC

Figure 3.5: The Archive of Horos contains 34 demotic, 25 Greek and one bilingual texts. Nineteen of
the transactions in this archive are between consanguineous family members and/or their affines.
Document types in the

Archive of Horos:
Sale contracts 53%

51% 49% Loan contracts 24%
20 texts 19 texts Other 12%
Temple oaths 5%
Lease contracts 3%
Marriage contracts 3%
Transactions between consanguineous family members or members related by

affinity to consanguineous family
Transactions between family members with no known consanguinity
Figure 3.6: Number of economic transactions between families or individuals related through

consanguinity, or through affinity to consanguineous family, in the Archive of Horos. Source for
document types in the Archive of Horos: Vandorpe and Waebens, 2008: 131.
involved family members who were related by consanguinity or by affinity, having married
a consanguineous relation (see figures 3.5 and 3.6).112
112
Some of these texts also include non-consanguineous parties: P. Adl. Dem. 4, 17, and P. Adl. Gr. 20.
73
Consanguineous economic transactions in the Archive of Horos113
Do these results imply that some families had an almost equal preference for consanguineous
economic transactions, including marriage? Also, there must be other business activities,
partnerships, negotiations and arrangements that were not committed to writing. Table
3.5 illustrates the contractual relationships between family members in the Archive of
Horos, and the coefficient of relationship in terms of their level of consanguinity to Horos.
Table 3.5: Economic transactions between consanguineous family members and their affines in the
Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes. The family relationship and genetic relationship to Horos are
listed according to each transaction.113
Coefficient of relationship
Adler texts Consanguinity in relation to Horos
to Horos
Mother, three brothers, aunt (and uncle through
Gr. 2 50%, 50%, 50%, 50%, 25%
marriage)*
Gr. 7 Mother and brother* 50% 50%
Gr. 8 Mother and brother** 50% 50%
Dem. 14 Daughter and nephew** 50% 25%
Dem. 21 Daughter and nephew** 50% 25%
Brother and first cousin once removed
Dem. 13 50% 6.25%
(descending)**
Gr. 3 Brother* 50%
Gr. 11 Five nephews* 25%, 25%, 25%, 25%, 25%
Dem. 25 Nephew* 25%
Dem. 4 Brother of uncle through marriage (affine)* Uncle’s wife 25%
Uncle through marriage and his 6 brothers
Dem. 7 Uncle’s wife 25%
(affines)*
Nephew, uncle, two first cousins and first cousin
Dem. 17 25% 25% 12.5% 12.5% 6.25%
once removed (descending)* (?Horos party to oath)
Dem. 23 First cousin * 12.5%
Dem. 24 First cousin * 12.5%
First cousin (and her husband) and four first
Dem. 9 12.5% 6.25% 6.25% 6.25% 6.25%
cousins once removed (descending)**
Dem. 15 First cousin once removed (descending)* 6.25%
6.25%
Gr. 20 ?First cousin once removed (ascending)*
* Horos is one of the parties in the contract

** Contract between parties related to Horos
113
First cousin ‘descending’ or ‘ascending’ refers to younger and older generations respectively.
74
The closest level of clinical consanguinity is between the mother, daughters and brothers
of Horos at a coefficient of 50% and the most distant level in terms of clinical consanguinity
are first cousins once removed at 6.25%.
Seven of these nineteen transactions involve Horos’s immediate family; the transactions
might be a way in which the family moves and distributes inheritances or gifts. It is also of
interest that five transactions document business activities involving six to eight parties
(Horos included), an indication of family related by blood or affinity acting cooperatively
in business dealings and perhaps using these transactions as a means of keeping family
property intact.114 Nine of the transactions are sale contracts specifying land or property
and one is a family agreement regarding a vineyard.115 Some of these sales may reflect
Horos’s aim to restore his family property and avoid its eventual disintegration, or they
may reflect Horos’s aim to accumulate his own property;116 whichever is the case, the
consanguineous marriages of his two daughters are likely to have consolidated family
property. While some of the transactions in the archive record loans made, we do not
always have documentation for repayment or cession and it could be that such demands
were not always made.117 Were financial buffers being constructed? Perhaps repayment
was not demanded on one transaction, but there might be an expectation of reciprocity at
a later date in times of need.
If there is a preference for consanguineous marriage in the family of Horos, and perhaps
in other families in Pathyris, how might money and goods brought into the marriage by
the woman and financial commitments made by the man be influenced by the level of
consanguinity within the family? Even though there are equal inheritance rights for all
children within Egyptian law, commitments made in the marriage contract may be affected
by the allocation of inheritance received, by an agreed portion becoming due at death,
or on the timing of the division of family property .118 While the man’s gift, the woman’s
goods, and the assignment of heirs all need consideration in the light of the marriage
contract and how it might be affected by arrangements within the consanguineous family,
it is the woman’s goods that will be under discussion in the final section of this chapter.
The woman’s matrimonial goods, modern dowry and the economics of consanguinity
In order to gain insight into how consanguinity might influence the value of the woman’s
goods brought into marriage, reference is made here to a research paper on dowry and
the economics of consanguineous marriage in contemporary Bangladesh (Do et al. 2013:
114
In P. Adl. Dem. 22, we also see Horos and five of his family cooperatively repaying a debt to a family with whom
there are no known consanguineous links.
115
P. Adl. Dem. 7 (land), 13 (palm grove), 17 (land transfer oath), 23 (land); P. Adl. Gr. 3 (land and palm grove), 7
(palm grove, a copy of P. Mil. 1.1 2), 8 (palm grove), 11 (pigeon house), 20 (land); and P. Ryl. Dem. 9 (family
agreement).
116
Vandorpe and Waebens (2009: 134) suggest that Horos’s land purchases were designed to increase his personal
property. In contrast, in a review of the Adler texts, Préaux (1939: 394-95) believes that Horos tried to avoid the
partition of family assets by restoring their father’s land, divided through inheritance between the brothers.
117
P. Adl. Dem. 4, 5, 12, 25 are loans and P. Adl. Dem. 15 and P. Adl. Gr. 2 are cessions for something placed or
purchased in trust. P. Adl. Dem. 24 is a lease contract and P. Adl. Dem. 14 and 21 are marriage settlements.
118
The eldest son might be given an extra share to carry out his parents’ funerary arrangements and administer
the family estate (Manning 2003b: 839–41).
75
904–18).119 The authors based their paper on the premise that marriages are frequently
marked by significant dowries or a transfer of assets from the woman and suggest that the
enforcement mechanisms to deliver financial commitments are stronger in consanguineous
families. The model they use is one of families acting as agents investing in a joint project
(a model that could be applied to the demotic marriage settlements under discussion). In
summary, Do et al.’s paper tests the idea that consanguinity is a cheaper way for families to
deal with dowry costs in a rural marriage market. Their data comes from 4,364 households
in 141 villages in Matlab, Bangladesh; this area is described by the authors as relatively
isolated with a predominantly agricultural society. The cohort under review is described
as ‘85% or more’ Muslim and the remainder are Hindu (Do et al. 2013: 909). Dowry is a
customary transfer from the bride’s family to the groom and retrieval of dowry at divorce
can be subject to negotiation, but its return is not guaranteed. Dowry is not a legal element
of the Islamic marriage contract, but is commonly observed in Bangladesh.120
The authors argue that once a commitment to marriage is made it is costly to sever these
links and one family might want to take financial advantage of the other. Insisting on
before the event (ex ante) payments is preferable when after the event (ex post) payments
may not be credible. However, if there is trust between the parties and knowledge that
promises made are likely to be kept, particularly as there are enforcement mechanisms
in place through consanguinity, then there is less pressure to insist on before the event
payments. A study by Mobarak et al. (2019: 427) in Bangladesh and Pakistan supported the
findings of Do et al. (2013: 904-18) in the trust and enforceability of delivery of dowry after
marriage amongst families who marry consanguineously, particularly when families are
constrained by credit or liquidity. Do et al. (2013) tested four predictions that produced the
following outcomes:
a. Dowry levels are lower in consanguineous marriages. Women are 6% –7% less likely
to bring a dowry, suggesting consanguinity and dowry are sometimes substitutes;
b. Bequests or gifts to daughters are larger when they marry close kin; women are 4%
more likely to bring an inheritance;
c. Consanguinity is more prevalent in environments with more severe credit
constraints;121
d. Consanguineous unions are less prevalent among wealthier unions as families have
sufficient wealth to look outside the kin group to extend credit and social networks,
and diversify genes (but this also works in the opposite direction as wealthy families
may want to consolidate their assets and maintain privileged status, see Bittles 2012:
64-65).
119
This 2013 case study, based on evidence from Bangladesh, has been chosen as it deals directly with the
economics of consanguineous marriage. The discussion presented here is not suggesting that the prevalence of
cousin marriage in the modern Middle East reflects unbroken continuity with ancient Egypt and neighbouring
regions.
120
In Islam, a woman maintains ownership rights to personal property she has brought into the marriage,
including her family inheritance (Quran 4:7). In Hinduism, a woman has ownership rights to moveable property
voluntarily presented to the bride from family and friends, called stridhan, which remain the wife’s absolute
property after marriage (Section 14, Hindu Succession Act 1956).
121
Mobarak et al. (2013: 1845-71) found that following the construction of flood protection embankments in
Bangladesh, families whose properties were protected were less likely to marry biological relatives than
unprotected families, who promised ex-post payments as a form of credit for dowry demands.
76
How might the results from Bangladesh provide insight into the financial commitments
made in Pathyris? First of all, the families in Pathyris live in fairly close physical proximity
and in some instances their lands border each other, for example P. Adl. Gr. 11 and 13.
It is the physical and social proximity of consanguinity that makes it easier to apply
enforcement mechanisms to financial commitments. We also see consanguineous families
acting cooperatively in economic transactions, for example, P. Adl. Dem. 17 and P. Adl.
Gr. 2, enabling family members to capture more marital product due to the business
arrangements they engage in cooperatively. This also carries advantages in terms of land
tenure as it avoids the division of productive land.
An economic outcome of consanguineous unions to consider is the potential of the daughter

who is marrying to contribute long-term to the family income. If the daughter moves away
from her parents to live with her in-laws, the parents are less likely to capture the full marital
product of the couple (Do et al 2013: 907). However, if the woman marries consanguineously,
moving away from her natal home but still living in close proximity, she can continue to
participate in the family’s economic output. The timing and amount of the bequests and gifts
might also change. For example, if a marriage settlement stipulates that all children born of
the union receive equal inheritance shares (for example, P. Ryl. Dem. 16), a consanguineous
marriage might allow greater flexibility and trust between families in the delivery of
inheritance or allocation of gifts to a daughter. Finally, if a married son is more likely to reside
patrilocally, the daughter who has moved away cannot commit to handling the parent’s assets
in the same way as a male sibling (Botticini and Siow 2003: 1386). However, if the parents are
investing in a consanguineous network, such as the first cousin marriages in the Adler papyri,
they might still continue to give regular gifts or bequests to their daughter after marriage if
the predictions by Do et al. (2013: 908-09) are applied.
Case study summary
There are no known consanguineous marriages in the Archive of Pelaias, son of Eunous, and
two attested consanguineous marriages in the Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes. Although
we have valuable genealogical data from Pathyris, it is not possible to provide detailed family
trees for all individuals named in these archives. When the demotic marriage contracts in
the Archives of Pelaias and Horos are compared, a few notable differences in money and
goods committed allow the suggestion that some couples may be related consanguineously.
However, the difference between consanguineous and non-consanguineous marriages might
lie in what we are not seeing – the personal assets that are not recorded, the willingness of
consanguineous couples to risk greater financial commitments because of family trust, to
promise more after marriage because of family enforcement mechanisms, or to bring less
into the marriage in the knowledge of future family gifts or bequests.
There is no known evidence in the Archive of Pelaias, son of Eunous, for consanguineous
economic transactions (including marriage) but the archive is incomplete. In contrast, the
Archive of Horos, son of Nechouthes, is regarded as a ‘closed find’ and therefore allows a
more accurate appraisal and shows an almost equal preference for economic transactions
between families related through consanguinity, or related by affinity to consanguineous
family members. On this evidence in the Archive of Horos, this chapter proposes that
77
consanguineous marriage was a preferred option within some families in Pathyris. Social
proximity, reinforced by ties of consanguinity, carried economic and social advantages, but
social distance also carried advantages by extending social, credit and labour networks.
Using the results of current research on consanguinity and economics, perhaps in Pathyris
the choice of a marriage partner was limited by credit constraints at one end of the
spectrum, by family prosperity at the other, and thirdly by the number of siblings in the
family and their choice of residence after marriage.
We may only have documented evidence for two first cousin marriages in Pathyris, but in
this town where there is evidence of interrelatedness through consanguinity and affinity,
there may well be many more undocumented consanguineous marriages. While this case
study focuses on economic transactions amongst families related through the clinical
definition of consanguinity, there will also be more complex pedigrees of relationship that
develop through generations. Two outcomes might result: one is that the inhabitants of
Pathyris might be more related in terms of clinical consanguinity than the documents
reveal; the second outcome, and probably more relevant to the inhabitants of this town,
is that consanguinity carried economic benefits. Perhaps marriages up to and beyond the
level of second cousin brought families not only into the network of consanguinity, but
also into the network of kinship, bringing with it a range of economic and social benefits.
Conclusion
This chapter’s analysis and discussion was based on the hypothesis that consanguineous
marriage avoids the fragmentation of moveable and immoveable property, and alleviates
pressure on families in terms of the timing and amount of gifts given in marriage and
in inheritance. The research considered whether ancient Egyptian inheritance laws and
customary economic practice at marriage made it more advantageous for families to
marry consanguineously and used summary comparisons with Mesopotamia, classical
Greece and ancient Rome, where there is varied, although sometimes limited, evidence
for consanguineous marriage. This chapter proposes that retention of wealth amongst
propertied families and protection from poverty amongst families with few assets may
be central motives for consanguineous marriage in all regions, but this does not preclude
families from other socioeconomic backgrounds choosing consanguineous unions.
Within Egypt, more than the other regions reviewed, the application of partible inheritance
and the requirement for heirs to alienate their inheritance rights may result in a preference
for consanguineous marriage amongst some families. Furthermore, ties created through
consanguineous marriage can bind a family, enabling private resolution of disputes over
shared landholding, although surviving legal texts prove that family conflict and land
fragmentation was sometimes inevitable. The equitable share of parental property under
Egyptian laws of succession, combined with the rights of men and women to own, buy and
sell property may, however, lead to greater financial freedom in the choice of marriage
partner. This is a basic analysis, and marriages and succession in all regions discussed above
are influenced by rank, wealth, geographical location, age, sex, and changes in the law over
time. Family conflict, health and demography, access to labour networks and patronage
links, alongside political and climatic change, are also likely to affect marital choices.
78
What has been captured in this chapter’s case study are the economic exchanges amongst
families in a Ptolemaic town where many of the families are interrelated and where
there is evidence for two consanguineous marriages within the same family. All the
families are sufficiently wealthy to record their business and marriage transactions and
many in this garrison town share similar economic backgrounds. An examination of ten
marriage settlements does not reveal any major differences in the value of matrimonial
goods transferred between families related consanguineously and non-consanguineously,
although the differences may lie in unrecorded transactions and in the timing and delivery
of financial commitments. Using the marriage contract as an economic transaction
between individuals and their families, this chapter assessed whether there might be a
preference for interaction with consanguineous family members in other economic
transactions in the Ptolemaic Archives of Pelaias and Horos. There were no indications of
preference for economic transactions amongst individuals related by consanguinity and
affinity in the Archive of Pelaias; this result was likely to have been affected by the limited
number of surviving texts and their chronological span – 23 texts dated from 152–88 BC.
The Archive of Horos, in which there are two consanguineous marriages, offered greater
opportunity for analysis as it is considered a ‘closed find’ (although several texts not
found in the original sealed pot have since been included in this archive) – 60 texts dated
from 134–89 BC. Analysis of the Archive of Horos shows that almost half of the economic
transactions conducted by this family are with relatives related through consanguinity, or
with individuals related by affinity to a consanguineous member of the family.
In summary, this chapter proposes that consanguineous marriage creates economic

gain through inheritance and the exchange of matrimonial goods. Families who marry
consanguineously may benefit from the timing and delivery of marriage gifts and property
due through inheritance. Economic commitments made at marriage may be delivered ex-
post in the knowledge that family enforcement mechanisms are in place to ensure their
fulfillment, including the delivery of inheritance due at the death of one or both parents.
Parents of children marrying consanguineouly, such as the first cousin marriages in the
Adler papyri, might still continue to give regular gifts or bequests to their children in the
knowledge that they are investing in a family network over which they have an element
of control. For poorer families, consanguineous marriage may alleviate or reduce the
expectation of gifts committed in marriage and the economic gain may be in the retention
of labour networks, if the family continues to live in close proximity. Finally, the choice
of consanguineous marriage may fluctuate according to social and economic change and
family health, and through a mixture of consanguinity and affinity family networks are
created in villages or small rural towns, to which are added new families or individuals
entering or leaving the community. The impact of this type of interrelated network on
expectations of reciprocity, acts of altruism and resolution of community conflict is
explored in the next chapter.
79
Chapter 4
Consanguineous marriage in Deir el-Medina and

economic impacts: family interrelationships,
occupations, offspring, and expectations of altruism
and reciprocity
You should not ignore your neighbours (on) the days of their
need, and they will surround you in [your moment?].
You should not celebrate your festival without your neighbours,
and they will surround you, mourning, on the day of burial.
…You should not be hard-headed in fighting with your neighbours;
your helpers [will fall?...]
O. Petrie 11, C6, 7, 9; Hagen, The Prohibitions, 2005: 144.
Introduction
The Prohibitions, a didactic text from Deir el-Medina, contains lines stressing the
interdependency of neighbours and reflects the importance of reciprocity. Ostraca found in
the village also imply the existence of an open credit system, whereby parties to transactions
delay the repayment of goods loaned in favour of neighbourly goodwill; in addition, notes
were made of gifts received in the expectation of future reciprocity. But how different were
economic and social obligations placed on family members? Evidence indicates eleven
consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina alongside a complex network of interrelated
families across many generations. Current research on reciprocity and altruism suggests
families are more likely to act altruistically – the closer the kin, the greater the trust and
the lower the expectation of reciprocity, while non-family members are more likely to trust
transactions if punishment mechanisms are in place (for example, Ackerman et al. 2007:
369, 372; Ben-Ner and Kramer 2011: 216-21; Vollan 2011: 14-25). Using current case studies
and documentary evidence from Deir el-Medina, this chapter examines the hypothesis that
families related consanguineously have more flexible terms of reciprocity and a greater
willingness to act altruistically than non-consanguineous families, and suggests that
altruism, combined with innate trust, helped consanguineous families in Deir el-Medina
create support networks to combat debt and resolve conflicts.
Using the prosopography of Deir el-Medina, the chapter begins by listing the identity of
22 individuals thought to have married consanguineously and explores familial networks
between each set of couples to determine to what extent they might also be related to
each other through consanguinity or affinity. The choice of matrilateral (related through
mother) or patrilateral (related through father) partner is also examined to assess how this
choice might influence jural and affective ties between families. The family trees of each
of the consanguineous couples is then explored to assess whether there is a preference
80
Consanguineous marriage in Deir el-Medina and economic impacts
to marry amongst families who share professions, possibly indicating consolidation of

family status and property. The family trees of each of the consanguineous couples are also
analysed to determine whether the number of children born to consanguineous parents
differs from the number born to parents not known to be consanguineous.
All of these assessments are affected by the fragmentary nature of the documentary
sources, by the interest (or otherwise) that families had in recording their genealogies,
by abbreviated lines of succession in inscriptions and by ambiguous kinship terms. The
information from which the prosopography of Deir el-Medina is drawn is also weighted by
the dating of ostraca and other inscribed material. Haring (2006: 261) states that there is
little documentation from the early 19th dynasty followed by an increase in documentation
as the dynasty progressed – 200 non-literary ostraca are dated to the reign of Ramesses II
(many from the latter part) while less than 50 ostraca date to the reign of Seti I – written
records continue to increase into the 20th dynasty before entering a sudden decline in the
late 20th dynasty.122 The unpredictable nature of survival alone may not account for these
variations in numbers; they may also indicate less commitment to written documentation
in the first half of the 19th dynasty, followed by a rapid increase in private and legal texts
and, subsequently, a decline in the later 20th dynasty, possibly due to the use of papyrus
which is more fragile (Haring 2003: 255). The unusually high levels of literacy in Deir el-
Medina combined with privileged access to monumental forms of commemoration, due to
the technical and artistic skills of the workmen, makes Deir el-Medina unique compared
to other ancient Egyptian villages; we are, therefore, provided with a more complete
picture of village life than can simply be attributed to the chance survival of textual and
archaeological evidence.
The second part of this chapter begins by summarising the range of known economic
activities amongst the villagers of Deir el-Medina, particularly the practices of gift-
giving,123 ‘open credit’, object exchange and barter. A selection of textual sources relating
to economic exchanges is used to explore whether known consanguineous families are
involved in transactions and to assess generally the types and character of the transactions
between families and between non-related villagers.124 By placing informal economic
activities within the social and legal context of the village, factors affecting the willingness
122
Janssen (1992: 82) remarks on high levels of literacy and semi-literacy in Deir el-Medina and proposes a level of
40%, excluding external service staff serving the community. Sweeney (1993: 523) states that around 470 letters
survive from Deir el-Medina and 14% are sent by or addressed to women (see page 106). For a discussion on
written records and oral practice in Deir el-Medina, see Haring 2003: 249-72.
123
The acquisition of material goods or commercial exchange can be framed wihin gift-giving and gift-exchange
in the ancient world; for example, see Carla and Gori (2014) for a range of contributions on the interrelatedness of
wealth, performance and status in the mechanisms of gift-giving in ancient economies. See Mauss, The Gift (1966
[1925]), for a seminal discussion on the custom and function of gift exchange. For an examination of the theory of
gift-giving, see Wagner-Hasel (2014: 51-69).
124
(i) See Eyre (2015: 707-25) for a general discussion on the challenges of interpreting micro- and macro-
economics in ancient Egypt, suggesting that micro-economics might be meaningfully analysed through personal
economics, combining quantitative and qualitative data. Eyre (2000: 15-17) also highlights the inconsistency
and problems of interpretation between what is represented in state bureaucratic records, which can be read as
official ideals, with the reality of small-scale social and economic activities.
(ii)
Deir el-Medina ostraca and papyri referenced in this chapter are indexed in the Deir el-Medina database at:
http://dmd.wepwawet.nl. The database also provides a concordance for any other numbers associated with each
entry.
81
to give and the expectation to receive are explored and, ultimately, do the obligations of
reciprocity become a burden upon families? Within this setting the economic and social
advantages of consanguineous marriage can be assessed. I argue that the ties of blood and
affinity created through consanguineous marriage might lessen the burden of reciprocity
and encourage altruism within family networks. Furthermore, what is considered a
satisfactory exchange in terms of reciprocity is likely to be affected by the nature of the ties
of those involved in the exchange. In terms of the expectation of reciprocity, I propose that
a sliding scale may have existed between immediate families, their relatives, neighbours,
and work colleagues. Ultimately, acts of reciprocity benefit the cohesiveness of the village
social network and transactions such as gift-giving and ‘open credit’ are likely to have
protected the overall stability and wellbeing of the inhabitants of Deir el-Medina.125
Terms of reference: altruism and reciprocity
Reciprocal altruism was the term given by Trivers (1971: 35) to describe acts of mutually
beneficial behaviour between non-relatives on the basis that individuals help others who
have cooperated with them in the past, or help those who are likely to reciprocate in the
future. West et al. (2007: 420) note that alternative names such as reciprocity or reciprocal
cooperation are used to describe reciprocal altruism. Fehr and Fischbacher (2003: 785)
argue that in contrast to reciprocity (motivated by long-term self-interest) and reputation-
building cooperation (thereby improving the likelihood of future coalitions), there is also
strong reciprocity. Strong reciprocators are more likely to carry out altruistic punishments
to prevent unfair actions or behaviour or punish by ceasing interactions.126 However, if
there are no mechanisms in place to deter individuals who do not cooperate or reciprocate,
then the presence of strong reciprocators cannot prevent the breakdown of cooperation.
The decisive factor in group cooperation is the belief that most members of the group are
willing to cooperate and reciprocate (Fehr and Fischbacher 2003: 787).127
In the context of economic anthropology, Sahlins (1972: 175-77) categorises three types
of reciprocity: generalised reciprocity refers to transactions commonly assumed to be
altruistic and although there is a ‘diffuse’ obligation to reciprocate, the timing, amount
and quality of the return is unspecific; balanced reciprocity is a term loosely applied to
transactions which expect returns equivalent in ‘worth or utility’ within a short and finite
timeframe;128 and negative reciprocity applies when individuals endeavour to make a gain
at another’s expense (haggling is one of the most ‘sociable’ forms).
125
See Granovetter’s (1985: 481-510) seminal work on the embeddedness of economic action in social relations,
which argues that economic activities are not ‘atomised’ or driven in the pursuit of self-interest, but are affected
by interpersonal relationships.
126
In altruistic punishment an individual is willing to make a personal loss to prevent unfair actions or behaviour,
whereas repeated interactions will cease in individual punishment (Fehr and Fischbacher 2003: 785, 787).
127
See West et al. (2007: 415-32) for a discussion on the semantic variation and confusion over terms used in
research on cooperation: terms such as reciprocal altruism, weak altruism, strong reciprocity, altruistic
punishment, mutualism and mutual benefit.
128
Bell (1991: 260) challenges the notion of a balanced exchange when two dissimilar parties are mutually satisfied
with an exchange of incommensurable goods and services, pointing out that an ‘exactly’ balanced exchange can
only be achieved when ‘similar people are exchanging similar objects’. See also, Sahlins (1972: 176) on perfectly
balanced reciprocity.
82
Altruistic behaviour is summed up by Ben-Ner and Kramer (2011: 216) as a willingness to

sacrifice one’s resources so that others may benefit, ‘representing a trade-off between one’s
self-interest and regard for others’.129 Kin altruism, as defined by Hamilton (1964: 1-17),
benefits the evolutionary fitness of biologically related kin at the expense of the actor (the
generality of inclusive fitness has been challenged, for example, see Veelan et al. 2017: 176-
230).130 Hamilton (1970: 1218-20; 1964: 14-16) describes altruistic acts as one of four social
behaviours assessed by the cost or benefit to the actor and the recipient. While altruism is
costly to the actor but beneficial to the recipient, selfishness is beneficial to the actor but
costly to the recipient, mutualistic behaviour is beneficial to both, and spiteful behaviour
is costly to both (see also Pradel 2008: 9). There is also debate as to whether altruism is
linked to short- or long-term gains and whether the individual ultimately benefits from
their actions (for example, see West 2007: 420-22).131 Sober and Wilson (1998: 31-34) suggest
that an act is altruistic if it is beneficial to recipients at the expense of the actor, who does
not expect any reward, although there may be unexpected future returns. In this chapter
I am using the definitions of altruism summarised above by Ben-Ner and Kramer (2011)
and Sober and Wilson (1998) and the definition of reciprocity developed by Trivers (1971).
Number of consanguineous marriages, networks of interrelated families and types

of cousin marriages
A complex network of interrelationships is established when the family trees of the husbands
and wives in the eleven known consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina are traced. This
indicates consanguineous ties not only amongst collateral relatives of their generation,
but also amongst relatives of generations in ascendancy and descendancy. I have used the
term ‘known’ marriages or ‘known’ children with the caveat that these names are normally
associated with particular marriages and their family trees (in particular, see Davies 1999),
although it cannot be stated with certainty that these marriages are consanguineous. There
is the possibility of a further consanguineous marriage between an uncle and a niece, but as
Davies (1999: 160) points out this requires the acceptance of a ‘tenuous’ explanation; Davies
(1999: 117) also mentions a possible cousin marriage between the offspring of two brothers,
although two of the names are fragmentary.132 These latter two examples are not included
129
Research by Oda et al. (2014: 208) found that an individual’s personality traits affected their levels of altruism
and the degree to which these traits differ varied according to the recipient; conscientiousness was associated
with altruism only towards family, agreeableness with altruism only towards friends or acquaintances, and
openness with altruism only towards strangers.
130
Veelan et al. (2017: 205-07, 214-15) found that being related as kin was not a sufficient criterion on its own for
cooperation to evolve; cooperation and altruism evolve when there is discrepancy between those who provide
opportunities for cooperation and those who are in competition.
131
Pradel (2008: 10) highlights two camps that explain human altruism on different grounds: the individual-level
theory may at first seem detrimental to the individual but individual fitness benefits exist; the group-level
adaptionist theory posits that altruistic individuals benefit the group but harm themselves and never receive
reward, but since the group benefits then group-level mechanisms evolve to prevent altruism from extinction.
See also Pradel (2008) for a detailed study of explanations for the evolution of human altruism.
132
There is a possibility that Anhotep (i) married his niece Mahi (ii). For this to apply, Neferabu (i) was married to
Ta-Isis (i), as listed on Chart 11 in Davies (1999), their daughter Mahi (ii) then married Anhotep (i), the brother of
Neferabu (i) (her paternal uncle) who appears on Chart 11 in Davies (1999). However, as there is uncertainty over
the identity of the woman called Mahi, the wife of Antotep (i) is listed as Mahi (iii) on chart 11 (Davies 1999), and
Davies (1999: 160) remarks that ‘debate must be postponed’ until further evidence comes to light. The possible
cousin marriage is between Amennakht (xviii) and the lady Iues[…], a daughter of To (i) and Amen […] (Davies
1999: 117, chart 9).
83
in the analysis that follows, but they are listed in Appendix 1. Details of eleven marriages
and the level of consanguineous and affinal interrelationships are summarised in table 4.3
in chronological order according to the approximate dates for each of the consanguineous
marriages, followed by a diagram illustrating the consanguineous and affinal networks
between the group of eleven marriages (see figure 4.1).
The occupations of the fathers of the consanguineously married couples and of the
husband in each union are listed in table 4.4 to assess whether a pattern emerges in terms
of marriage preferences. Finally, Appendix 3 indicates the number of children born to
parents who married consanguineously compared to families within their family trees,
and compared to other consanguineous marriages and their genealogical trees. This data
is constructive as it demonstrates family size and the potential for complex pedigrees
of relationships – and the subsequent mutual obligations this might signify, although it
does not necessarily imply that more distant relations considered each other part of their
kinship group. The data also shows that some consanguineous couples did have offspring,
but does not allow accurate comparisons to be drawn between numbers of offspring within
and between family trees due to the fragmentary nature of the sources.
Consanguineous families and interrelated networks
Eleven probable or possible consanguineous marriages can be identified in the context

of the prosopography of Deir el-Medina,133 which appears a relatively low number
compared to the overall population living in the village during the Ramesside Period (the
population is estimated at 100–200 people in the 19th dynasty and at 190–370 during the
reign of Ramesses IX, see Toivari-Viitala 2001: 4-5 and n.55). Most of the available data for
constructing genealogies comes from the 19th–20th dynasties and not all individuals can
be identified with specific family trees. In Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina, Davies (1999) has
reconstructed 47 family trees: my counts of villagers listed comes to 1029 and of all named
inhabitants, including those not associated with known family trees, comes to 1446. When
the number of known marriages in Deir el-Medina – 188 – is compared to the number
of known consanguineous marriages – 11 – it shows that approximately six percent of
marriages were consanguineous (see table 4.1).
Given that data on marriages within Deir el-Medina is incomplete, that there are difficulties
of interpretation, and there is no data from similar communities with which to compare,
it is impossible to say if six percent of marriages being consanguineous is a high or low
percentage within a village setting in ancient Egypt. Taking into account the difficulties
in reconstructing relationships from fragmentary data, I decided to investigate the links
of consanguinity and affinity between each of the consanguineous couples to explore
133
See table 4.3 and Appendix 1 for detailed notes on the marriages. Marriages numbers eight, nine and ten
depend upon the correct identification of certain individuals: number eight is dependent upon Henuwati (ii)
being identified with Henuwati (i) and the husband Knummose (i) being identified with Mose (viii), son of Anuy
(ii); number nine is dependent upon Nebnefer (xv) being identified with Nebnefer (xxiii), son of Khons (v) making
Ipuy (viii) and Henutmire (i) first cousins although this is not recognised as a cousin marriage in Davies (1999:
51 and chart 8); number ten is dependent upon Nakhtmin (iii) being synonymous with Nakhtmin (i). Marriage
number five may be an aunt-nephew marriage, or possibly a second cousin marriage, depending on whether the
wife, Tarekhanu (i), is the daughter of Amennakht (xi) and Henuteriunu (i) or their granddaughter.
84
Table 4.1: Number of consanguineous marriages as a percentage of the overall number of known
marriages in Deir el-Medina between the 19th–20th dynasties. Sources: Based on family trees nos.
1–47, Davies, Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina, 1999; Bierbrier, The Late New Kingdom in Egypt, 1975: 30.
Number of consanguineous marriages between the 19th–20th dynasties in Deir el-Medina

Number of people on 47 family trees 1029
Number of known marriages (including twice married) 188
Number of known consanguineous marriages 11
Consanguineous marriage as total of number of known marriages 6%
whether there are underlying networks of familial relationships. If a small number of

consanguineous marriages shows intricate and wide-ranging links of interrelationship
within the group, then if a larger set of data were available there is a possibility that higher
numbers of consanguineous marriages (and interrelatedness generally) may be indicated
than the current prosopography allows. The results are shown in table 4.3 and figure 4.1.
It appears that each of the consanguineous couples is related to at least one or more of
the other couples, for example, Anhurkhawy (i) and Henutdjuu (i) in marriage number
one are related to two couples by consanguinity and four further couples by affinity, while
Khnummose (i) and Henuwati (i/ii) in marriage number eight are only related to one
couple through consanguinity.
Preferences and outcomes of jural and affective ties in marriages between parallel and cross
cousins
In table 4.2 the types of cousin marriage follow the classifications described on page 11: a
marriage between the children of two brothers or two sisters is a parallel cousin marriage,
a marriage between the children of a brother and sister is a cross cousin marriage. The kin
type, listed in brackets, is the terminology used by anthropologists to describe relationships
prior to their classification in a particular system, so that in ancient Egypt a female cousin
might variously be called s3t nt snt.f (daughter of his sister), s3t nt sn.f (daughter of his
brother); and a male cousin would be referred to as s3 n snt.s (son of her sister), s3 n sn.s (son
of her brother) and so on; cousins also referred to each other as brother or sister. Again,
caution is needed in assuming first cousin relationships in textual sources since snt and sn
also refer to female and male collaterals generally, so the argument for cousin marriage in
Deir el-Medina is supported as far as possible through detailed prosopography.
Of the eleven consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina, it appears that eight are
between the children of two brothers – father’s brother’s daughter (FBD) marriages; two are
between the children of a brother and his sister –father’s sister’s daughter (FZD) marriages
and one is possibly between an aunt/nephew or it may be a second cousin.134 With such
limited data it is not possible to draw conclusions on preferred types of marriages within
Deir el-Medina, however, modern studies on the differences in preferences for cousin
marriages between men and women and the reasons for these choices may help to shed
134
Father’s brother’s daughter (FBD) is also the type of marriage documented in P. Adl. Dem. 14 and P. Adl. Dem.
21 discussed in the case study in chapter three.
85
light on possible scenarios, but research conducted in modern Egypt is limited by different
socio-religious contexts. Murdock’s (1957: 687) world ethnographic sample of 210 societies
that permit/approve of first cousin marriage shows that only 6% preferred parallel cousin
marriage, while 42% permit/approve symmetrical cross cousin marriage (Arab societies
exhibit an explicit preference for patrilateral parallel cousin marriage, Rugh 1984: 111). It
is worth noting that while the majority of consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina are
patrilateral parallel cousin marriages (albeit, eleven marriages is a relatively small number
from which to draw conclusions), this is in contrast to the cousin marriages identified by
Whale (1989) in 18th dynasty private Theban tombs (see page 28); out of nine marriages
where it is possible to identify patrilateral or matrilateral kin, six are probable matrilateral
cross cousin marriages (mother’s brother’s daughter, MBD).
The material I am using to consider modern gender preferences in cousin marriage

is drawn from the Egypt Demographic and Health Survey (EDHS) 2014, data collected by
Shawky (2011), and outcomes of a research project carried out by Rugh (1984), an
anthropologist focusing on the family in contemporary Egypt. Overall, Rugh (1984:
2-4) investigates factors permitting a country-specific concept of family to emerge and
remain stable over a long period of time, noting that a unique set of geographical and
climatic conditions have created a fairly homogeneous and stable agricultural economy
(although population movements to cities have weakened agricultural ties). Rugh (1984:
2-3) argues that these agricultural conditions require the cooperation of small groups
with clearly defined land rights and, frequently, it is family kin groups that are the most
stable. While Rugh highlights the environment as one of the determining factors for the
emergence of a stable concept of family, other variables such as religion, law, politics
and economy will have shaped social structure. Using evidence of land tenure, Eyre
(1997: 367-69) also argues for historical continuity between the Egyptian population and
agricultural production (with the most important modern change being demographic),
while noting the risks of assuming an ‘essentially unchanging’ Egypt.
The EDHS 2014 notes that 31% of ever-married women report that their current or most
recent husband was a blood relative and over 50% of these consanguineous marriages were
to first cousins (EDHS 2014: 91). In all recorded age groups ranging from 15-49 years in
the EDHS 2014, more women married relatives through their father’s side (patrilateral
marriages) than through their mother’s side (matrilateral marriages). For example, in
the 20-24 age group, with a cohort of 3,055 ever-married women, 10.9% of women were
married patrilaterally to a first cousin and 6.8% were married matrilaterally (EDHS 2014:
92).135 Consanguineous marriage is more common in rural than urban areas – almost 50% of
marriages in rural Upper Egypt are consanguineous, and just under 25% are consanguineous
in urban areas, with the lowest percentage (18%) in urban Lower Egypt. (EDHS 2014: 91-92).
A separate study, conducted by Shawky et al. (2011: 157-63) with a cohort of 10,000 couples,
reports a 35.3% rate of consanguineous marriage amongst which 86% were to first cousins
(2010 data); the highest percentage of consanguineous marriages were in Sohag in Upper
The EDHS 2014 reports a trend for increased age at first marriage, for example, 33% of women aged between
135
45-49 years were married by age 18 compared to 17% of women aged between 20-24 years at the time of the survey
(2014: 93). For full details of age at first marriage and median age at first marriage by background statistics, see
EDHS 2014: 92-94.
86
Table 4.2: Preferred cousin marriage in order of priority amongst mainly urban Muslim and Christian
Egyptians. Numbers 2 and 3 for women were often considered interchangeable. Source: Rugh, The
Family in Contemporary Egypt, 1986: 111.
Preferences for type of cousin marriage

For the man For the woman
1. Father’s brother’s daughter (FBD) 1. Mother’s sister’s son (MZS)
2. Father’s sister’s daughter (FZD) 2. Mother’s brother’s son (MBS)
3. Mother’s brother’s daughter (MBD) 3. Father’s brother’s son (FBS)
4. Mother’s sister’s daughter (MZD) 4. Father’s sister’s son (FZS)
Egypt (42.2%) and the lowest in Assiut in Middle Egypt (21.7%), while Cairo reported 36.1%.
Shawky et al. (2011: 161) note that consanguinity was marginally higher amongst Muslims
than Christians.
While Arab societies tend to prefer patrilateral parallel cousin marriage above all others,
Rugh (1984: 111) has reported differences between men and women on what is considered
the preferred or ideal marriage amongst first cousins. Table 4.2 illustrates the results of
Rugh’s interviews with mainly urban Muslim and Christian Egyptians from lower socio-
economic communities.136
Rugh (1986: 110-12) remarks that through male marriage preferences men derive more
jural assets, they strengthen their patrikin, and their personal and economic interests
and activities are focused in the residences of paternal relatives. The term jural in this
context refers not only to the legal obligations defined through civil or religious law, such
as rights to property or supporting a wife and children, but also includes social obligations
that carry authority in the family network. Female marriage preferences are derived more
from affective relations shaped by personal and emotional involvement that can change
over time between kin and non-kin, often reflected in acts of goodwill, generosity, moral
or financial support – such acts do not necessarily require reciprocation within families
(Rugh 1986: 91-94, 111-13). In summary, Rugh (1986: 111) points out that the traditional
Arab preference for patrilateral marriage is likely to reflect male authority and decision-
making within society and consolidates wealth within the husband’s family. The female
preference for matrilateral marriage reflects a more informal and less authoritarian set of
relationships within the family itself and strengthens matrikin.
In ancient Egypt it is not possible to make such direct connections between marriage
choices and gender, authority and decision-making, nor between the demarcation of social
or legal spheres between men and women. For example, rules regarding inheritance also
impact upon marital choices and in Islamic law a woman receives half as much as her
brother/ brothers, or half the legacy if she is an only child (Quran 4.11), while partible
inheritance in ancient Egypt offered greater freedom of movement and choice of partner,
but may have increased risk of property fragmentation (see chapter three). Choice of
residence on or after marriage may have been influenced by levels of relatedness between
136
In Islam, uncle-niece marriages are proscribed by law (Quran 4.23).
87
families, but economic practicalities are equally as likely to have governed these decisions.
In Deir el-Medina house sizes were dictated by population numbers and the walls enclosing
the village, although some houses were constructed beyond it. Koltsida (2007: 12) estimates
that the number of people living in a medium-sized Deir el-Medina house is between 5–8
with an average of six people, which could include parents, two or three children, and one
or two relatives, which would give an allocation of 8–10 square metres per person (see also
n.87). Even if extended families did not live next to each other, the layout of Deir el-Medina
still allowed them to live in close proximity. In a discussion on historical demography,
Chamberlain (2006: 52) points out that household size is dependent on a range of factors
including conjugal versus extended family, age at marriage of offspring, and population
density; ethnographic observations of agricultural communities and historical rural census
returns show a median household size of five people. This figure has to be considered in the
light of high infant mortality in antiquity and, as Chamberlain (2006: 52) notes, estimates of
total fertility and completed family size are often much higher.137
What might be constructive to draw from the modern demographic and anthropological
studies summarised above are male and female preferences for types of cousin marriage,
preferences possibly reflected in the results of table 4.3. For example, a marriage to a father’s
brother’s daughter could consolidate professional links and enhance job opportunities
and status in the Deir el-Medina community, and is the most common type of marriage
amongst the known consanguineous marriages in the village. If women’s preferences are
applied, then marriage to a mother’s sister’s daughter possibly strengthened a network
of affective ties, enhancing informal emotional and economic support amongst families.
McDowell (1999: 40-41) comments on the importance of support networks amongst women
in Deir el-Medina, and although women could inherit, own or generate personal wealth,
many were largely supported by husbands or fathers, or relied on the goodwill of family
and friends (see also Eyre 2007: 238).138 This does not imply that women could not, or
did not, act independently regardless of their marital state. For example, we know that
Menatnakht (i) inherited from her mother Naunakhte (i) and possibly married twice, being
party to a property settlement drawn up at the start or end of her second marriage, and
that she participated in barter and gift-giving (Davies 1999: 255 outlines possible scenarios
in Menatnakht’s life; see also Toivari-Viitala 2001: 238). The networks between the families
of consanguineous couples illustrated in figure 4.1 gives an indication of the potential for
consolidating both jural and affective ties, and also suggests that beyond the groups of
families linked by consanguinity, a highly complex social network of business and personal
ties emerged in Deir el-Medina.
137
Using data from the Roman census returns in Egypt, Bagnall and Frier (2006: 145) estimate that the Total
Marital Fertility Rate (TMFR) was close to nine children; ‘TMFR is the number of children born to a woman who
from age 15-50 gives birth at the average rate for women her age’.
138
In the Deir el-Medina village census (Stato Civile), a woman is recorded as living in her husband’s house, and
later recorded as a resident in her married son’s house (he does not have children) (Demarée and Valbelle 2011:
6, 35). See Sweeney (2006: 135-53) for a study of occupations open to women in Deir el-Medina as they grew older
and an assessment of their capacity to support themselves.
88
Table 4.3: Consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina and consanguineous and affinal links between
couples. See Appendix 2 for notes detailing the consanguineous and affinal links illustrated in this
table and figure 4.1. Sources for family trees: Davies, Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina, 1999; Bierbrier, CdE
59, 1984: 208-10; H.T.B.M Part 10, 1982: 27; The Late New Kingdom in Egypt, 1975: 30-35. Spelling of names
and the roman numerals identifying individuals follows Davies 1999.
Marriage Type of marriage: Names of husband Related through Approximate Date

Number CC = cross cousin and wife consanguinity (c)
PC = parallel or affinity (a)
cousin to marriage/s no/s
FBD = father’s
brother’s daughter
FZD = father’s
sister’s daughter
1 CC his father, her Anhurkhawy (i) 8 (c) 10 (c) 6 (a) 2nd half of reign
mother are brother Henutdjuu (i) 2 (a) 10 (a) 4 (a) Ramesses II
and sister
FZD
2 PC fathers are Nebmehyt (iii) 1 (a) 6 (a) 2nd half of reign
brothers Henutmehyt (iv) Ramesses II
FBD
3 PC fathers are Buqentuf (i) 5 (c) year 49 Ramesses II
brothers Iyi (iii) 11 (a)
(FBD)
4 PC fathers are Iyernutef (ii) 6 (c) 7 (c) possibly year 40
brothers Tabaki (i) 1 (a) Ramesses II or end
FBD 19th dynasty
5 aunt-nephew or Amennakht (x) 3 (c) end of 19th dynasty
second cousin Tarekhanu (i) 11 (a)
6 CC his father, her Pashedu (ii) 4 (c) 1 (a) year 2 Merenptah
mother are brother Tanodjemethemsi 7 (a) 2 (a) – Siptah (possibly
and sister (ii)/ from year 63
FZD Nodjemhemsiset (i) Ramesses II)
7 PC fathers are Nekhemmut (i) 4 (c) 11 (c) 9 (c) Ramesses III
brothers Webkhet (vi/viii) 6 (a) (possibly 2nd half of
FBD reign of Ramesses II)
8 PC ? fathers are Khnummose (i) 1 (c) Seti II – year
brothers Henuwati (i/ii) 24 Ramesses III
FBD (possibly early
Ramesses IV)
9 PC ? fathers are Ipuy (viii) 11 (c) 7 (c) year 14 Ramesses III
brothers Henutmire (i) – year 12 Ramesses
FBD IV
10 PC ? fathers are Penrennut (i) 1 (c) reign of Ramesses
brothers Tadehnetemheb (i) 1 (a) IV
FBD
11 PC fathers are Khons (vi) 7 (c) 9 (c) post-year 3
brothers Taweretemheb (ii) 3 (a) 5 (a) Ramesses V – before
FBD year 15 Ramesses IX
89
Legend: linked by consanguinity linked by affinity
Number in the square corresponds to marriage numbers in table 4.3

Number in small circle corresponds to known number of children
Figure 4.1: Consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina and their links through consanguinity and
affinity to other first cousin marriages, 19th–20th dynasties.
Occupations within consanguineous marriages in Deir el-Medina: occupation of

husband, husband’s father, and wife’s father
Senior positions within the gang of workmen were usually hereditary and, if possible, the
sons of ordinary workmen also succeeded to their father’s role, but competition was high
and not every son was guaranteed employment in the necropolis workforce (McDowell
1999: 228). There was room for professional mobility within the gang and also into the gang
from outside, for example, the scribe Ramose (i) transferred to the workforce from a scribal
post as ‘treasury chief ’ in the memorial temple of Tuthmosis IV in western Thebes; he is
thought to have adopted a son from ‘outside’, Qenhirkopshef (i), who then followed in his
footsteps as a scribe (Davies 1999: 79, 81). The numbers of workmen in the gang fluctuated
according to royal building requirements, so the completion of royal tombs during the
reign of Ramesses II reduced the workforce to around 30 men and the expansion of building
work during the reign of Ramesses IV resulted in the workforce being doubled from 60 to
120 men (Davies 1999: xix).
In the eleven consanguineous marriages all the fathers of the husbands and wives came
from Deir el-Medina and table 4.4 lists the occupations of these men alongside the husbands
in each consanguineous marriage. The aim was to assess whether the married couples were
90
Table 4.4: Occupations within consanguineous families in Deir el-Medina: occupation of husband, husband’s
father and wife’s father. Source: drawn from data within Davies, Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina, 1999.
Marriage
Husband’s title Husband, son of Wife, daughter of Approximate dates
Number
1 Anhurkhawy (i) Qaha (i) Kel (i) 2nd half of reign Ramesses II
chief workman chief workman workman (husband chief workman
post-year 40 Ramesses II –
undated Merenptah)
2 Nebmehyt (iii) Amenmose (vii) Amennakht (xxi) 2nd half of reign Ramesses II
workman workman workman
3 Buqentuf (i) Nakhy (iii) Amennakht (xi) year 49 Ramesses II
workman workman (‘chief workman (‘chief
craftsman’)** craftsman’)**
4 Iyernutef (ii) Ipuy (i) Neferronpet (ii) possibly year 40 Ramesses II
sculptor sculptor sculptor or end 19th dynasty
5 Amennakht (x) Buqentuf (i) Amennakht (xi)?* end 19th dynasty
deputy chief workman workman (‘chief
workman craftsman’)**
6 Pashedu (ii) Hehnekhu (ii) Nakhtamun (ii) Year 2 Merenptah – Siptah
workman workman sculptor (possibly from year 63
Ramesses II)
7 Nekhemmut (i) Khons (ii) Khabekhnet (i) Ramesses III (possibly 2nd
chief workman workman workman half of reign of Ramesses II)
(husband chief workman,
year 11 Ramesses III – year 15
Ramesses III)
8 Khnummose (i) Anuy (ii) Nebamentet (i) Seti II – year 24 Ramesses III
workman workman workman (possibly early Ramesses IV)
9 Ipuy (viii) Neferhor (i/vi) Nekhemmut (vi) year 14 Ramesses III – year 12
?chief workman workman chief workman Ramesses IV
10 Penrennut (i) Nakhtmin (iii) Amenemone (ii)/ reign of Ramesses IV
workman workman (iii)
workman
11 Khons (vi) Nekhemmut (vi) Nebnefer (xv) post-year 3 Ramesses V –
deputy chief chief workman workman before year 15 Ramesses IX
workman (husband deputy chief
workman(?), year 8 Ramesses
VI/VII – year 8 Ramesses IX)
* Dependent on aunt-nephew marriage in which the wife, Tarekhanu (i), is the daughter of Amennakht
(xi) and Henuteriunu (i).
** For the title ‘chief craftsman’ attributed to the fathers in marriages 3 and 5 (who are in the same
family), see Davies (1999: 64).
Marriage 8 is based on the father of Khnummose (i) being synonymous with Mose (viii), son of Anuy
(ii), but if Pashedu’s (i) father is synonymous with Mose (iv), then his father is chief workman Anakhtu
(ii), however, Davies (1999: 41) believes this is unlikely.
Marriage 9 is based on Bierbrier’s (1975: 30-35) genealogy, whereas Davies (1999: 51) believes Neferhor
is the son of Ipuy (iii) as opposed to Khons (v).
Marriage 10 is dependent upon Nakhtmin (iii) being synonymous with Nakhtmin (i), son of Huy (iii),
see Davies (1999: 212).
Marriage 11 is dependent upon Nebnefer (xv) and Nebnefer (xxiii) being synonymous, see Davies
(1999, chart 7).
91
the offspring of men in similar positions of authority and whether their marriages were
the means by which hereditary positions were consolidated, alongside family property and
influence. In all the marriages except numbers five, seven, nine and eleven, the husband
and his father shared the same role: in marriage number one both were chief workmen,
in number four both were sculptors, and in marriages two, six, eight and ten both were
workmen. Number three is slightly unusual as the husband and fathers are workmen,
but both fathers were given the title ‘chief craftsman’, and the son of this marriage is the
husband in marriage number five with the title deputy chief workman, while his wife’s
father may be the same ‘chief craftsman’ who appears in marriage number three (if this
is an aunt-nephew marriage, or possibly the wife’s grandfather in a cousin marriage);
whichever this may be, there is an implication that senior roles were consolidated within
this family.
Although the father of the husband in marriage number seven was a workman, the husband
became a chief workman and the wife’s father (the husband’s uncle) was a workman. In
marriage number nine the husband was possibly a chief workman while his father was
a workman, however he marries the daughter of a chief workman (his uncle), probably
consolidating family influence. The occupations of the husband and his father in marriage
number eleven is not markedly different, while the husband is deputy chief workman, his
father is chief workman. A pattern, however, emerges in marriages seven, nine and eleven
as they are all members of the family of Sennedjem (i) and in each marriage at least one of
the fathers, or a son, is a chief workman.
Overall, the pattern that develops amongst the husbands and their fathers is consistent
with what might be expected generally in the community. It would be exceptional in a
father’s brother’s daughter’s marriage (FBD) if the husband, his father and his wife’s father
were all chief workmen, as this would imply that two brothers were both in the most
powerful and influential positions at a similar time. In all cases the wife’s father either
occupied the same position as the husband and his father or held a less senior role with the
exception of number nine – the wife’s father is a chief workman, her husband is possibly
a chief workman and her husband’s father was a workman, however, they all belong to
the family of Sennedjem (i) discussed above. In marriage number six, the wife’s father is a
sculptor, a skilled role amongst the workman, but the specific role amongst the workmen
of her husband and his father is unknown.
Offspring of consanguineous marriages and numbers of known children in their

family trees
Following on from the complexity of structure that seems to underlie a relatively small
number of marriages, I wanted to assess the number of children that evidence suggests
were born from each union. Ideally, it would be interesting to calculate if consanguineous
couples have more or less children than non-consanguineous unions, but this is
impossible given the nature of the sources. However, I think it is viable to compare the
known number of children from consanguineous marriages with those from marriages
that are not known to be consanguineous not only to determine if any unusual pattern
emerges, but also to show that a low or zero number of children appearing is not unusual
92
Figure 4.2: Number of marriages and offspring in family trees with one or more consanguineous
marriages (gen. = generations)
when examining ancient evidence (the same difficulties appear to a lesser extent in
demotic archives, but analysis is always limited by uncertainty over exact numbers of
offspring).
Appendix 3 shows that out of the identifiable offspring of the consanguineous marriages,
two had six children (marriage number seven may have had seven), two had four, one had
two, four had one, and two had zero. There is nothing inconsistent when these figures
are compared to the number of offspring of other marriages within their individual
family trees, or in relation to other family trees. For example, there are nine generations
in the family of Qaha (i), which comprises 27 marriages and 62 children, with numbers
of offspring per marriage ranging from zero to 11 – the known consanguineous marriage
had six children. Likewise, the ten generations in the family of Sennedjem (i) comprise
28 marriages and 57 children whose offspring from marriages range from zero to nine
children, and the offspring of the three known consanguineous marriages number six,
four and zero. There are smaller family trees, for example, Huynefer (ii) (marriage
number ten) which comprises seven marriages and 30 children and produces a higher
average number of children per marriage (4.3) than the family of Sennedjem (i) (2) or the
family of Qaha (i) (2.3); this is also the highest ratio of all the marriages (see figure 4.2).
However, no firm conclusions can be drawn due to the chance survival of sources, but
93
the mean number of children born to each marriage – 2.8, with a median figure of 2.7 – is
consistent with the composition of families living in Deir el-Medina houses assessed by
Koltsida (2007: 12).
This exercise also illustrates the unpredictability of data that can reveal the genealogies of
some families in detail while relationships between others are barely known. For example,
comparatively detailed genealogies of the families of Baki (i), Huynefer (ii), Sennedjem (i),
and Kasa (i) can be pieced together through the prosopography of Deir el-Medina (two of
the consanguineous marriages occur in the families of Huynefer (ii) and Sennedjem (i).
However, as Davies (1999: xxiii, 21) and McDowell (1992a: 107) point out, most families in Deir
el-Medina did not have an interest in recording genealogies, although there are exceptions
such as Anhurkhawy (ii) who enumerated five generations of his family in his tomb (TT359;
his grandfather Anhurkhawy (i) married his cousin Henutdjuu (i), see marriage number
one, table 4.3). The influential descendants of the scribe Amennakht (v) also took pride
in their ancestry as witnessed in their graffiti on the cliffs in western Thebes (McDowell
1992a: 107, see also Davies 1999: 105-18 and chart 9, for the family of Ammenakht (v)). The
appearance of a family name repeated every other generation indicates that names were
at least remembered within the families up to the level of grandparents (or similar degrees
of relationship) while distant relatives fell into the general classification of ancestors,
although usually still strongly associated with collective family memory and identity in
household cults and funerary contexts (Moreno Garcia 2010: 20-21; see Demarée 1983: 282-
90 for 3ḫ ἰḳr n R‘- stelae; see Harrington 2004: 71-88 and Meskell 2002: 120-21 for ancestor
busts found in Deir el-Medina; see McDowell 1992a: 106-08 for family archives kept for
legal and economic purposes, and dating events during the villagers’ own lifetimes by
recollection of shared events).
Does the apparent lack of interest in genealogy imply a lack of interest in the centrality
of the family and its legacy? I think a set of interstitial contexts exists in the village of
Deir el-Medina that influences the allegiances and obligations within families, between
neighbours and with state officials. Campagno (2014: 20) describes the ‘multiplicity of
social logics operating simultaneously’ in a discussion on patronage practices during the
First Intermediate Period and earlier. At a micro-level this same multiplicity probably
existed in Deir el-Medina. The family consolidated influence and wealth through marriage,
hereditary occupations and shared resources, but families did not create powerful
hereditary ‘clans’ in the village, so neighbours were valuable economic and social allies (as
well as sources of conflict).139 In turn, as workers in the royal necropoleis, villagers were
allied to the state through networks of employment and duty; and further networks of
extended family, employment and patronage would have existed between the villagers
of Deir el-Medina and communities closer to the Nile.140 The conditions that led certain
139
P. Salt 124 details Amennakht’s (vii) letter impressing upon the vizier his suitability for the position of chief
workman. Amennakht’s (vii) brother, Neferhotep (ii), previously held the post and Amennakht (vii) implies he
was unfairly passed over in favour of the current chief workmen Paneb (i); to reinforce his claim Amennakht
(vii) lists Paneb’s (i) many failings and wrongdoings. Not all the charges may be true, but they did arise out of
animosity between the two men (see Davies 1999: 33-34; Černý 1929: 243–58; McDowell 1999: 191).
140
(i) The villagers were served by a network of outside personnel (smdt n bnr), paid for by the state, including
water-carriers, woodcutters and laundrymen, with some families of personnel working for the villagers down
several generations (Muhs 2017: 121-22). For a detailed study on the structure and roles of service personnel in
94
families to choose a consanguineous marriage may have been fluid: for some a conscious
choice to consolidate wealth and status, but not so for others, who may have been related
by consanguinity and affinity merely through complex degrees of relationship within the
close-knit structure of the village. While the workers at Deir el-Medina were relatively
well-paid, they, too, were affected by morbidity and mortality that might affect a family’s
income and leave individuals dependent upon their kin; for example, the draftsman Pay
(i), struck by blindness, writes to his son Prehotep (i) requesting support: ‘Do not turn your
back on me – I am not well. Do not c[ease] weeping for me because I am in the [darkness?...]’
(O. Berlin 11247; McDowell 1999: 55-56, no. 27; Wente 1990: 142 no. 185).141
The villagers were also subject to political and environmental shocks, such as the hunger
caused by failure in food supplies that led to the strikes recorded in the Turin Strike
Papyrus in the reign of Ramesses III: ‘The prospect of hunger and thirst has driven us to
this; there is no clothing, there is no ointment, there is no fish, there are no vegetables’
(P. Turin Cat. 1880; Egerton 1951: 140; Frandsen 1990: 178). According to testimony in
the Late Ramesside Tomb Robbery Papyri (investigations recorded during the reigns of
Ramesses IX, X and XI), starvation also drove villagers to plunder tombs: ‘This inner
coffin is ours (?). It belonged to some great person (?). We were hungry and we went and
brought it away, but be you silent… (P. Brit. Mus. EA 10052, Peet 1930: 152, plate 31, l. 7).142
The combination of social logics operating in the village, combined with susceptibility
to external factors and the unpredictable personal circumstances of each family
could explain why families moved in and out of consanguineous marriages as needed,
why many families did not have a particular interest in recording family lineages, or
perhaps marrying close family members did not carry a particular importance for some
individuals or families.
Economic transactions in Deir el-Medina and expectations of altruism and reciprocity

in consanguineous families
This section explores gift-giving, debts and credit, informal object exchange and barter,
primarily amongst Deir el-Medina residents and occasionally also involving service
personnel from outside the village. The Deir el-Medina workmen were paid through a
system of state redistribution, with higher rations allocated according to seniority in the
gang. Grain was delivered on a monthly basis with other goods such as water, bread, fish,
vegetables, beer, cakes and fuel delivered on a more regular basis. More irregular deliveries
of items such as oil, meat, natron and garments were received from high officials. Excess
Deir el-Medina, see Gabler (2018).

(ii) See McDowell (1994: 41-59) for contact between the village of Deir el-Medina and the outside world; for
evidence of foreigners living in the village, see Ward (1994: 61-85).
141
Discussing evidence of developmental anomalies in skeletal remains, Austin (2014: 234) notes that the resultant
physical limitations would have prevented the affected individuals from being active in the workforce and also
probably affected their physical functioning in informal village activities, but their presence in Deir el-Medina
indicates that they were members of the community who may have received care, if required.
142
(i) During an interrogation to account for ownership of silver in P. Brit. Mus. EA 10052 we hear the following: ‘I
got it in exchange for barley in the year of the hyenas when there was a famine’ (Peet 1930: 153, pls. 31-32, l. 7-8).
Collier et al. 2010: 242-47) discuss a section of P. Brit. Mus. EA 10052 identified after Peet’s 1930 publication.
(ii) See Winand (2018: 127-52) for a study on scribal standardisation and variation in the Late Ramesside Tomb
Robbery Papyri, including P. Brit. Mus. EA 10052.
95
from goods received as rations alongside items such as furniture or textiles produced
by the villagers, or the exchange of particular skills, were used in barter or gift-giving
(Mandeville 2014, in particular, 83-110 for recipients of rations and quantities).143 The
economic transactions discussed here raise questions as to how consanguinity might
influence the nature of the exchange and the expectations arising from it. Finally, examples
of family transfers are provided which indicate a picture of mutual family commitments,
expectations (and failures), whether in receipt of moveable and immoveable property, or
general care and support.
Gift-giving
Janssen (1997: 55-86, 1982: 253–58) has classified a set of texts in the Deir el-Medina corpus
as lists of gifts given at celebrations, the majority of which date from the 20th dynasty.144
The lists, recorded by the recipient of the gifts, comprise mainly of foodstuffs although
household goods are also named. Bread is listed in almost every entry, sometimes in large
quantities, such as 30 sš loaves brought by Henshene (O. IFAO 1322 + O. Varille 38 + O. Cairo
CG 25705, l. 8). Other gifts include beer, cakes, vegetables, fruits, fish, meat, flowers, wreaths,
rushes (for example, O. DeM 222), and O. Cairo CG 25624 + O. Cairo CG 25365 also mention
boxes, sandals, baskets and possibly a folding stool. The named guests are a mixture of
men and women although women feature more frequently than men (see table 1, Janssen
1997: 83); for example, 33 women and three men are listed in O. IFAO 1322 + O. Varille 38 +
O. Cairo CG 25705, in contrast, O. DeM 222 lists at least 25 men and three women. In a study
of feasts at Deir el-Medina, Jauhiainen (2009: 262) proposes that larger quantities of food
may indicate a party celebrating a public feast while fewer gifts may indicate a private
feast or a small gathering at a public feast.145 In terms of the relationships between guests
at these celebrations, I would agree with Janssen (1997: 59, 61, 67) that the contributors
of large amounts of comestibles are likely to be relatives helping the host cater for the
feast, or possibly influential members of the community contributing to the feast. Within
this celebratory context it seems natural that gifts brought by relatives might be recorded
143
(i) Mandeville (2014) has conducted a detailed study of wage accounting at Deir el-Medina. See also Černý 1973:
107, 112-13, 236, 246 for workmen’s grain rations; the scribes’ rations of grain were usually half that of the
foreman, see 224; see also 176-77 for rations given to female servants. Ostraca listing rations, deliveries and extra
allocations include O. Cairo CG 25608, O. Medelhavsmuseet MM 14126, O. Berlin 11238, O. Gardiner 59, O. DeM 46,
O. Cairo CG 25504. For a summary of New Kingdom redistributive networks, see Muhs 2016: 115-27.
(ii)
McDowell (1992b: 195-206) considers evidence for farming by the villagers of Deir el-Medina, concluding that
agriculture on a significant scale cannot be proven but remains probable.
144
(i) Janssen (1997: 55-86) discusses nine lists in detail, as they are in a fairly complete state, and lists a further 13
that are fragmentary (see 56 n.a): IFAO 1322 + O. Varille 38 + O. Cairo CG 25705; O. DeM 134; O. DeM 222; O. DeM
643; O. Cairo CG 25624 + 25365; O. Cairo CG 25660 + O. Cairo JE 37649; O. Petrie 31; O. Faulkner 1; O. Berlin P 14328
(O. Or. Inst. Chicago17005, complete but not discussed by Janssen as it is dated to the 19th dynasty; fragmentary
lists: O. DeM 282; O. DeM 666; O. Cairo CG 25650; O. Turin N. 57010; IFAO 1026; O. IFAO 1242; O. IFAO 1308; O. IFAO
1329; O. Gardiner 178; O. AG 63; O. Prague H 24; O. IFAO 1329; O. Louvre E 3262b.
(ii) Bleiberg (1996: 117-23) assesses the official exchange of gifts (ἰnw) between individuals of different status from
the Old to New Kingdoms, a custom resulting from a social obligation to transfer goods to a political or religious
institution, which was subsequently obliged to redistribute the goods on the basis of kinship, friendship, status,
or hierarchy.
145
Jauhiainen (2009: 258 and 259 n.4) includes one list consisting of four texts that were not originally in Janssen’s
group: O. Berlin P 1120 + O. IFAO 177 + 178 + 179, which documents about nine men and possibly three women
giving a range of foodstuffs at a feast, but O. DeM 282 (which was on Janssen’s list) has been excluded as it is a list
of commodities.
96
alongside those of neighbours as a way of remembering friends’ generosity with a view

to reciprocation at a future feast. The recipient of the gift is rarely mentioned, making
it difficult to establish whether consanguineous or affinal relations are the givers and
receivers of gifts.
One list mentions Minkhau bringing gifts home, which would indicate he was the recipient,
but there is no apparent link between Minkhau (i) or (ii) and the consanguineous families
in table 4.3. O. Cairo CG 25624 + 25365 col. 2. l. 3 mentions gifts given to Tasaket, but she does
not appear to be linked through marriage or affinity to four named individuals bringing
gifts.146 The children of the first cousin marriage between Nekhemmut (i) and Webkhet
(vi/viii) (marriage number seven, table 4.3) appear in O. IFAO 1322 + O. Varille 38 + O. Cairo
CG 25705 as bringers of gifts, as does the sister of Ipuy (viii) and cousin of Henutmire (i)
(marriage number nine, table 4.3), however, the presence of these women is not unexpected
amongst this list of 33 village women. The recording of gift transactions and their social
context stands slightly apart from ‘open credit’, barter and other types of economic
exchanges discussed below.147 For families, gift giving might indicate supportive networks,
and for villagers reciprocal networks, or possibly the structural value and function of the
exchange might be the same irrespective of consanguinity, but the obligations created
though gift and/or ‘open credit’ exchanges may have placed financial pressures upon
families or neighbours who were unable to reciprocate. How these financial burdens might
be eased within a sliding scale of reciprocity is addressed on page 110-11.
Debts and credit
It is not unusual in Deir el-Medina to find ostraca noting that goods of one person are
with another person: the phrase used to describe this placement of goods is nty m-dἰ or nty
m-‘ (‘which are with’, literally ‘which are in the hand’) (Janssen 1994: 129-36). Examples of
this type of transaction include O. Gardiner 204, which records 10 items worth 76 deben
‘which are with’ the chantress of Amun Shedytemduat (i) and notes on the ostraca record
her gradual partial repayment of the debt with a different range of commodities. Goods of
a much lesser value are listed on O. DeM 428 that records objects of Hay ‘which are with’
the doorkeeper Khaemwese; they include services, such as feeding an ox for four months
and stringing a bed alongside sandals, oil and fruit, which total seven deben. O. Petrie 51,
however, is unusual, as goods belonging to Amenemone are with six different people
including two chief policemen, two scribes and a woman whose status is unknown; Janssen
(1994: 130) believes that this (temporary?) placement of one individual’s goods amongst a
group of people is unique. Further ostraca recording goods placed with another person are
146
Given this this ostraca is dated year 27 of Ramesses III, this is likely to be Tasaket (ii) who is also mentioned in
O. IFAO 1322 + O. Varille 38 + O. Cairo CG 25705, as the daughter of Merutmut. Davies (1999: 56 n.722) notes this
may be Merutmut (ii) the wife of Neferhor (i)/(vi); if the latter case is applied then Tasaket (ii) is the sister of Ipuy
(viii) and cousin of Henutmire (i) in marriage number nine on table 4.3.
147
Jauhiainen (2009: 262-64) discusses lists that record the transfer of goods at feasts or family celebrations that,
unlike the gift-giving lists above, are written by the giver and record transfers made on a range of occasions. For
example, O. DeM 952 records goods by one man to mark the birth of another man’s daughter, and continues to list
goods transferred on three subsequent days that presumably also mark this birth celebration. Jauhiainen (2009:
263) remarks that these texts may be similar types of transactions that are written from different perspectives –
the giver and the receiver.
97
discussed in detail by Janssen (1994: 129-36) who terms this type of exchange ‘open credit’
suggesting that most of the village inhabitants were the debtors or creditors of several
others.148 The ostraca are witness to individuals crediting others with goods or services,
a note is made of their value and in time the debtor gradually repays (some or all of the
debt) with goods of a similar value. In order to effect these transactions, the creditor or the
debtor might borrow from others so a chain of economic obligations is created.
I have not discerned any of the couples married consanguineously in these ‘open credit’
ostraca, although close relatives of these couples appear in some of them. For example,
in O. Gardiner 204 the workman Penniut (i), who is probably the son of Khnummose (i), is
owed 76 deben by Shedytemduat (i) (Bierbrier 1984: 221; Davies 1999: 41, 260-61; Janssen
1994: 130); this Penniut (i) is the son of Khnummose (i) and Henuwati (i/ii) in marriage
number eight (figure 4.3). We see the workman Khnummose (i) again in O. Gardiner 162 in
which a debt of 66 deben is owed to him by the chief policeman (Medjay) Nebsmen (iv), son
of the lady Raia (iii), who tentatively may be the daughter-in-law of Khnummose (i) (Davies
2001: 261 and n.724; Janssen 1994: 131). If this is the case, we see the workman Pennuit (i)
crediting Shedytemduat (i) with goods worth almost seven times the average monthly wage
of a workman, and in another we see the son of Raia (iii) (the chief policeman Nebsmen)
possibly being credited with goods by his mother’s father-in-law Khnummose (i) (marriage
number eight) that are equivalent to six months of a workman’s average wage.
The goods credited in O. Brussels E 6311 are with Huy (iii/vi/vii/ix), the son of Huynefer (ii/
iv). This is the cousin of Henutdjuu (i) and Anhurkhawy (i) in marriage number one (Davies
1999, charts 3, 4). We learn from the text that Huy may have been taken to court due to his
unwillingness to pay a debt, and Janssen (1994: 132) wonders whether the Huy of this text is
the same Huy who appears as a debtor in O. Cairo CG 25572. Huy (iii/vi/vii/ix) who appears
in O. Brussels E6311 is also the grandfather of Penrennut (i) and Tadehnetemheb in marriage
number ten. What appears from these ostraca, if these links with the consanguineous
families are correct, is that members of these families are variously debtors or creditors
(some to high amounts of deben), which would not be unusual within Deir el-Medina,
but as far as I can find the only possible example of open credit arrangements between
members of the same families are in O. Gardiner 162 (66 deben).149
I agree with Janssen (1994: 136) that these ‘open credit’ ostraca are a reflection of ‘generalised
reciprocity’ within the village, but how might families related consanguineously interact
economically within this context? The need to document larger amounts, such as 76 deben
148
O. Aberdeen (rt.); O. Brussels E. 6311; O. Cairo CG 25572; O. Gardiner 33; O. Gardiner 162; O. Gardiner 194; O.
Gardiner 204; O. DeM 261; O. DeM 402; O. DeM 428; O. Nash 4; O. Petrie 51; O. Varille 24; O. Gardiner 56 (purchase
of 29 pieces of wood with 14 people involved in its purchase, which may have been a straightforward exchange).
P. Cairo 65739, found outside Deir el-Medina in TT 48 at El-Khokha, may also record an ‘open credit’ transaction;
it relates to a legal case that lists goods ‘bought’ or ‘brought’ (ἰnἰ) to purchase a slave and from whom they were
acquired, although Eyre (2015: 714) remarks it is unclear whether the list records receipts or loans.
149
I cannot secure the identity of the two parties – Ammenakht and Neferhotep – in O. Dem 402 (Janssen 1994:
132). In the family in which there is a consanguineous marriage between Henutdjuu (i) and Anhurkhawy (i)
(marriage number 1), two men named Amennakht and Neferhotep appear as brothers, as well as their grandfather
and great-grandfather being named Neferhotep (Davies 1999, chart 6). Within another family there are four
cousins called Amennakht, as well as one uncle, one grandfather and one cousin called Neferhotep (Davies 1999,
chart 9). A similar pattern with these shared names occurs in other families.
98
in O. Gardiner 204 or 102 ½ deben in O. Nash 4, are understandable whether parties involved
are related as family or not, but why smaller amounts such as loaves of bread and a mnt-
jar of beer (O. Gardiner 194) need to be recorded are more challenging to understand.150
Janssen (1994: 136) remarks that borrowing of basic staples was generally not recorded, so
why list these smaller comestible items? Perhaps they serve as an aide mémoire amongst
some villagers, but these lists might be better understood if certain individuals were more
active than others in intricate networks of ongoing exchanges accumulating to relatively
sizeable credits and debts. Also, ostraca may be produced as supporting legal evidence if
a debtor fails to repay (for example, O. Cairo CG 25572), or perhaps documented debts are
forwarded if a debt is being transferred. We do know that financial tensions existed within
families, for example, the deposition of the scribe Qenhirkhopshef (O. Cairo CG 25725 + O.
IFAO inv 137 + O. Louvre E 3259) relates his daughter’s refusal to return a garment loaned
by him during her illness, subsequently he sent further goods but considered the value
of alternative items being returned by his daughter was inadequate.151 The text implies
a mixture of willingness to care for a family member and a level of expected reciprocity
combined with a contentious family relationship. Discussing the case of Qenhirkhopshef
alongside the transfer of goods from parents, Toivari-Viitala (2001: 109-10) raises an
interesting point that women’s goods are often defined as ‘property received from the
father’, indicating a specific type of economic transaction recognised by the villagers.
Families related consanguineously (provided they were not in conflict with each other)
might be more liberal in their expectations of reciprocity, even if a note is made of credited
goods, repayment might be laid aside for the benefit of the wider family. Alternatively,
goods might be given as acts of altruism between relatives, the implications of which are
discussed on page 107-11.
Informal object exchange and barter
Informal object exchange is one of trust between individuals; it relies on goods of a certain
standard being exchanged for goods of an equal standard with a value mutually agreeable
to both parties (Reinstein 2014: 87). Since the villagers of Deir el-Medina lived in close
proximity to each other, deceiving a friend or neighbour in exchanges would jeopardise
the opportunity for future exchanges and mutual understanding would be weakened
(see Reinstein 2003: 87-88, for equilibrium and reputation in the relationship of exchange
between two individuals). Alongside informal object exchange between neighbours or
friends, other types of exchange were conducted in the village: the first was pure barter
where one or more items were directly exchanged for another (or others), the second was
money barter where an agreed value was set on the goods exchanged using different units
of account, including sniw of silver, deben of copper and khar of grain (Janssen 1975a: 546,
101-11). As Ezzamel and Hoskin (2002: 354) point out, exchanges in Deir el-Medina were
conducted in a fairly ‘closed’ market so whether object exchanges were conducted house
The capacity of a mnt jar is uncertain and may have varied (Janssen 1997: 57 n.c).
150
151
(i) Austin (2014: 109-14) discusses in detail the expectations placed upon family members as caregivers and
textual evidence illustrating the providers and receivers of care.
(ii) This is unlikely to be the scribe Qenhirkhopshef (i), the first husband of Naunakhte, as their marriage is
thought to be childless (for the Will of Naunakhte, see Černý 1945: 29-53; Eyre 2007: 240-41; Pestman 1982: 173-81,
1961: 162-64).
99
to house or bartered in public places, there were likely to be repeated economic encounters
that allowed a margin of tolerance between the low value goods exchanged (below 10
deben), as gains or losses were accepted as part of the ‘reciprocity game’.
While tolerance might be acceptable for small amounts that were often left unrecorded,
more valuable transactions were carefully documented.152 For example, O. BM 50737
records an exchange between two children of Naunakhte: Khatanub (i) purchases a bed
valued at 19 deben from Qenhirkhopshef (iv) and gives items of equivalent value in return
(Janssen 1975a: 525, concludes the price of a bed ranged between 12–25 deben). O. Gardiner
204 records Shedytemduat (i) buying a range of items, including a bed, from the workman
Pennuit (i), but having exchanged items worth 54 deben she still owed him 22 deben
(Toivari-Viitala, 2001: 125).153 This latter example is unusual in that it is one of the largest
debts recorded at Deir el-Medina, given that 11 deben was the average workman’s monthly
wage in the village (Janssen 1975a: 533-34). O. Gardiner 204 is also discussed under the
section ‘Debts and credit’ as it appears to fall between barter and a debt. Finally, O. Černý
19 seems to be a transaction conducted under pressure of events: the draftsman Pay (i)
instructs his son to obtain two faience hearts and incense saying, ‘I shall pay to their owner
all that he shall demand for their price’ (ll. 3-4); Janssen (1975a: 510) points out that this is
not purchase but barter since the buyer requires other commodities and is willing to pay
with whatever objects the seller wants.
Family transfers and expectations
There are sometimes uncertainties as to whether ostraca record gifts, object exchange or
a type of family agreement, for example, in O. DeM 587 two (half?) siblings make a series
of transfers accompanied by overtones of dissatisfaction as to whether this constitutes an
equal exchange; Toivari-Viitala (2001: 111) suggests the brother may have been supporting
his sister and the valuation of the goods was to some extent symbolic. There is no doubt
that there were rights and obligations expected from family members, but certain demands
may be more a reflection of the character of the husband and wife, highlighting a lack of the
normal level of support expected amongst families. For example, the anger of a husband
named Merymaat over the failure of his in-laws to supply provisions, which he considers
customary, is seen in a letter from Merymaat’s wife to her sister requesting food (O. Prague
1826):154
‘I will divorce you’, he keeps saying… ‘Now your mother does nothing for you’ he keeps
telling me and says ‘Although you have brothers and sisters they don’t take care of you’,
he keeps telling me in arguing with me daily.
Wente, Letters from Ancient Egypt, 1990: 147-48.
152
See Janssen (1975a: 494-509) for seven fixed formulae related to transactions (including objects said to be
‘which are with’ discussed on pages 97-99 above), and an eighth rarely used category of expressions for
transactions.
153
I cannot find evidence for a relationship through consanguinity or affinity between Shedytemduat (i) and
Pennuit (i).
154
(i) Davies (1999: 158, chart 11) lists Merymaat (i), a woodcutter, but no wife is named so he may be unconnected
to Merymaat in O. Prague 1826. Merymaat’s (i) brother, Anhotep (i), may have married his niece (see n.132).
(ii) The kinship implications of this ostraca are discussed by Olabarria (2020b).
100
The transfer of food and goods between family members is recorded in O. DeM 119 with
Nebneteru’s (i) request to his mother to send him bread and other provisions, or Ankhau’s (i)
letter to his daughter asking for food to be sent to the riverbank every ten days (O. DeM 324).155 A
father’s concern for a daughter-in-law is illustrated in O. Petrie 61 in which Haremwia (i) promises
Tenetdjeseret, his daughter-in-law, the use of his storeroom in the event of her husband, the
workman Baki (ii), repudiating her. This text presents two points of interest, firstly it appears that
Haremwia (i) is offering a place of security as marital separation may leave Tenetdjeseret in a weak
financial position (Toivari-Viitala 2001: 45, 94), and secondly, Haremwia (i) has rights of ownership
of a storeroom (presumably including rights of succession) (McDowell 1990: 123-24):
…You are my good daughter. If Baki throws you out of the house, I will act. … You will
dwell in the portico in my storehouse, because I am the one who built it, and no one in
the land will throw you out of there.
McDowell, Village Life in Ancient Egypt, 1999: 42, no.17.
Why would Haremwia (i) feel a duty towards his daughter-in-law?156 There is no evidence
to suggest that his son Baki (ii) is related to his wife through consanguinity, although Baki’s
cousin is in a consanguineous marriage: Haremwia (i) is the brother of Tuy (i) who is the
father of Anhurkhawy (i) in marriage number one (table 4.3). It is possible that Tenetdjeseret
brought few goods into her marriage and her biological family cannot support her, or may
no longer be alive, or perhaps her husband failed to return her goods or squandered them,
so her father-in-law is responding out of duty and concern. We do know that wives were
customarily entitled to one third of marital property, for example, in O. Gardiner 55 vs. a
husband states that two thirds of joint property was allocated to him and one third to his
wife; the husband then confirms that his share is for his present wife and her children
(see chapter three for the potential intra-familial complications caused by divorce and the
allocation of property, or death and disputed rights of succession):
As for the equipment which he gave, the 2/3 given to me when he divided…with their
mother. Her part…with her, for herself. As for all, all of the things which are in my
house, they are for my wife and her children. Indeed it is she who brought it.
O. Gardiner, 55 vs., Toivari-Viitala, Women at Deir el-Medina, 2001: 94: 113-14.
Contention between a brother and his siblings is recorded in O. Petrie 16 (6 rt.–6 vs.), in
which a son claims rights of inheritance since his siblings failed to help with their mother’s
burial.157 Two brothers mention their mother arguing over what may be an inheritance
155
See Toivari-Viitala (2001: 97-110) for a discussion on property received from parents, including inheritances
and subsequent disputes.
156
See Toivari-Viitala (2001: 199 n.145) for reference to daughter-in-law (šrἰt) in this context. For Haremwia (i) as
father of Baki (ii), see Davies 1999: 11 n.121 and chart 1. McDowell 1999: 42, no. 17 refers to Tenetdjeseret as
Horemwia’s daughter, not daughter-in-law, and notes that Tenetdjeseret’s relationship with Baki is uncertain,
but she may be his wife. If Tenetdjeseret is Horemiwia’s daughter, it would not be unusual that he should offer
her a place to live should Baki ‘throw’ her out.
157
This case is sited by the claimant in P. Bulaq 10 who defends his right to his father’s inheritance against the
siblings of his father, since he has taken responsibility for his father’s burial. The verso of P. Bulaq 10 illustrates
the expected line of succession as Hay (iii)/(v) divides his property between four sons and a daughter. Hay (iii)/(v)
had inherited the property from his father, who in turn had inherited it from his father (see Janssen and Pestman
1968: 149-52). Hay (iii)/(v) is the uncle of Penrennut (i) and Tadehnetemheb (i) in marriage number ten (table 4.3).
101
in O. C. Campbell 17, but it is unclear whether the disagreement relates to one third of the
property legally due to the wife or whether she is managing her deceased husband’s share
on behalf of their children (McDowell 1993: 22-23; see also Toivari-Viitala 2001: 106-07).158
O. Louvre E 2425 is a more direct example of property transmission whereby Nebanmentet
hands over a share due to his sister, while O. Gardiner 272 records a statement made by the
husband in marriage number seven (table 4.3) before his wife and witnesses to confirm that
their son has made full payment to his siblings to settle inheritance rights. Further affairs
of this cousin marriage are recorded in O. DeM 112 in what may be the will of Nekhemmut
(i) or his wife Webkhet (vii/viii) listing equal shares of immoveable property amongst their
children. Finally, the grandfather of Pashedu (ii) and Tanodjemethemsi (ii) (marriage six, table
4.3) draws up an ἰmyt-pr document naming the beneficiaries as his wife, two daughters, two
sons, and a male called Neferemsenut (O. DeM 108) (for family names in the will, see Davies
1990: 223-24; for texts referring to property transmissions, see Toivari-Viitala, 2001: 98-99).
Overall, textual sources present a picture of mutual family commitments, expectations

(and failures), whether they are in the receipt of food, household goods, funerary
provision, immoveable property, or general care and support. These expectations,
including legal obligations, occur alongside acts of reciprocity between villagers who may
not be biologically related but who live and work in close proximity. Given the complexity
of obligations at all levels amongst the villagers, might duty to family be given priority
inasmuch as families may be more likely to behave altruistically to each other, or be less
demanding in their expectations of reciprocity?
What affects willingness to give and expectation to receive?
The social logics within Deir el-Medina involves interplay and collaboration between
families, neighbours or working colleagues, many of whom conducted activities reliant on
trust, reciprocity or altruism, although individuals did misuse the system, for example, Huy
and Khaemseba contesting a debt in O. Cairo CG 25572.159 The extent to which regulatory
mechanisms, social networks and family contexts are likely to shape the villagers’ willingness
to trust economic transactions, or possibly to act altruistically, is explored in this section.
Legal bodies and regulatory mechanisms in Deir el-Medina
The local court (ḳnbt)
The membership of the secular court at Deir el-Medina – the ḳnbt – varied but usually
included a captain of the gang,160 an outside official, such as a scribe of the vizier, and
ordinary workmen; in session they were known collectively as ‘officials of the court’ (srw
n ḳnbt) and although they could not enforce decisions, the level of respect commanded by
158
McDowell (1993: 25) remarks that the two correspondents addressing each other as sn does not necessarily
mean they are brothers and they may be collateral relatives.
159
Glynos and Howarth (2007: 133) describe how social logics ‘enable us to characterize practices in a particular social
domain, say the practices of consumption and exchange within an economy, or an entire regime of practices’. The
authors (2007: 140) summarise social logics as aiming to capture ‘the ‘patterning’ of social practices where such
practices are understood in this regard as a function of the contextualized self-interpretation of key subjects’.
160
‘Captains of the gang’ included chief workmen, scribes and chief draftsmen (Černý 1973: 231-43).
102
the court combined with villagers’ witness to its proceedings placed some social pressure
to conform, however not everyone abided by the decisions reached (McDowell 1990: 117,
171-72). The litigants appearing at the ḳnbt were all connected to the necropolis (workmen,
smdt n bnr and police), but the claimants were all from Deir el-Medina, possibly due to the
fact that the workmen had sufficient income to act as creditors and pursued debts owed
by their peers, or by poorer personnel such as water-carriers (McDowell 1990: 151). While
many cases focused on contested ownership of property or unpaid debt, charges related to
sexual misdemeanours were also presented before officials. In the following case officials
(srw) are mentioned as opposed to the ḳnbt – P. DeM 27 documents how Merysekhmet (iii),
the son of wealthy draftsman Menna (i), is accused twice of adultery and merely sanctioned
on both occasions by taking an oath to behave, although the claimant originally received
100 blows for bringing the name of Merysekhmet (iii) into disrepute.161 There are other legal
transactions such as oaths or business transactions that could be witnessed by individuals
but, as McDowell (1990: 145) points out, when disagreements arose over oaths or business
dealings they approached the ḳnbt.
One court case, documented in O. Cairo CG 25572, combines ‘open credit’, trust and deceit,
regulatory bodies and spiritual intervention; ultimately the conflict is officially resolved
although it may have resulted in a level of personal animosity. The text itself is a good
example of social logics in action and provides a useful context for understanding how
economic affairs of individuals or families are intertwined in the functioning of village
institutions. There is uncertainty in O. Cairo CG 25572 as to whether objects of Khaemseba
are with (nty m-‘) Huy, or that objects of Huy are with Khaemseba, in either case the accused
denies on oath that they possess objects belonging to the other man. Subsequently the
ḳnbt delivers 100 blows to extract the truth. Huy (or Khaemseba) returns to the ḳnbt the
following week reporting that a ‘manifestation of a god has come about’ (rt. l. 16), implying
he is guilty of the charge. Depending on the ostraca’s interpretation, the defendant may
have been falsely accused and the plaintiff admits his guilt (for different readings, see
Janssen 1994: 131-32, 1975b: 293; McDowell 1990: 179-80).
In this case, we are first of all presented with evidence for open credit or an agreed transfer
of goods, through one or two sets of hands. The accusation, whether true or not, hinges
on trust and when that trust breaks down the parties move their dispute to a decision-
making body, the ḳnbt. Even after receiving one hundred blows, the accused still denies
the charge on oath, which probably causes increased friction amongst the individuals and
families involved. It then appears that the accused had a crisis of conscience, whether
161
McDowell (1990: 115, 175) remarks that in the early stage of this case the magistrates did not conduct a hearing
but reacted in anger by giving the servant a beating for questioning the behaviour of Merysekhmet (iii); Janssen
(1975b: 295) also comments on this case as a example of ‘class justice’ reflecting the social difference between the
claimant and the defendant. For an overview of women appearing before officials in relation to sexual misconduct
and domestic disputes, including wife-beating (for example, O. Brit. Mus. 65938), see Toivari 1997: 163-66.
McDowell (1990: 152) notes that women appear at the ḳnbt less frequently than men, usually appearing as
defendants rather than claimants, for example, for theft (O. Brit. Mus. 65930; O. Gard. 166), non-payment of debt
(O. Cairo CG 25725 + O. IFAO 137 inv + O. Louvre E. 3529) and neglecting a sick relative (O. Petrie 18) (see also
Toivari-Viitala 2001: 132-35). Tanodjemethemsi (ii), the wife from cousin marriage number six, was accused of
theft and her case cited as a legal precedent at a later criminal trial held at Deir el-Medina (O. Nash 1, vs. 9-10)
(Davies 1999: 224-25). McDowell (1990: 152) suggests that the relatively few appearances of women at the ḳnbt
might be due to women being less involved in larger economic transactions.
103
under pressure from other villagers or not. The defendant’s claim that ‘a manifestation of
god’ (b3w) came about is the means by which the accusation could be retracted.162 Janssen
(1994: 136) points out that O. Cairo CG 25572 indicates misuse of the system of trust in
the village – trying to acquire goods but refusing to reciprocate. While it does highlight
manipulation of trust in an economic transaction, I find it interesting that two men (no
evidence indicates they are closely related) eventually found a means to reconcile an event
that could create a negative impact on the villagers if unresolved. What the case seems to
reflect is a relatively close-knit and mutually dependent set of villagers, even though they
had their bullies and troublemakers, such as the much-discussed foreman Paneb (i) (for
example, P. Salt 124; P. Turin 1880, rt. 4, 1-16a; see Bierbrier 1982: 29, 107-08, 1978: 138-40;
Černý 1929: 243-58; McDowell 1999: 190-93).
Although levels of consanguinity cannot be proved for many of the exchanges discussed,
I propose that families related through consanguinity and affinity may have had greater
levels of altruism and lower expectations of reciprocity amongst themselves (the father-
daughter conflict in O. Cairo 25725 + O. IFAO 137 inv + O. Louvre E. 3529 may be unusual). I
suggest that families also extended this goodwill to others in the village to whom they were
not closely related, creating a sliding scale of expected reciprocity and, perhaps, a limited
level of altruism outside the family.
The oracle
Oracular pronouncements at Deir el-Medina were given at public processions or at specific

locations by a deified form of Amenophis I, processed on a palanquin carried by eight
workmen officiating as lay wa’ab priests. Decisions were sought for personal matters
and property ownership disputes were brought before the oracle rather than the ḳnbt.
As McDowell (1990: 118, 125-27) points out, this is not surprising as the village houses,
tombs, and huts in the Valley of the Kings were ultimately the property of the pharaoh
and the oracle carried the authority of a deified pharaoh.163 Responses to petitions were
given in the affirmative or negative by moving the statue backwards, forwards or sideways
(interpreting the perceived movements of the statue), by pointing to a particular text, and
occasionally it is said to speak (see O. Brit. Mus. 5625 and O. Gardiner 4).164 The oracle had
to be trusted to be effective in the village and decisions made by the oracle needed public
support to be enacted, so it is unlikely the oracle was considered open to manipulation;
McDowell suggests the bearers may have acted on auto-suggestion, personally responding
to the rights or wrongs of the case and feeling they were moved by the god (McDowell 1990:
110-11).
The dispute in O. Cairo CG 25572 related to moveable property while disputes over
immoveable property ownership were resolved using the oracle, or sometimes referred
162
See Borghouts (1982: 3-6) for references to b3w in four non-religious Deir el-Medina texts where b3w appear as
a manifestation of a transcendental being/s that instill a sense of fear.
163
Private property did exist in the village and huts built by the workmen could be inherited, for example, O. DeM
586 documents two women receiving equal shares in what appears to be an inheritance; one daughter succeeds
to three storehouses, a hut, a pyramid and a small shrine (see McDowell 1999: 176, no. 131).
164
The features, mechanics and questions placed before the oracle are discussed in detail by Černý (for example,
1972: 49-69, 1942: 13-24, 1935: 41-58, 1927: 159-203); see also McDowell (1990: 107-141).
104
to the vizier or higher authorities outside the village; the oracle was also used for small-
scale disagreements and valuations (McDowell 1990: 118).165 All the regulatory mechanisms
within Deir el-Medina are likely to have included individuals who knew each other to
some extent. While the ḳnbt involved direct human contact in enacting a legal decision, in
theory the oracle was removed from human interference. Perhaps the oracle was a means
of interpersonal conflict resolution since the potential for disagreement or blame was
reduced by removing decision-making to a deity, and particularly so for families where
disputes over property could be emotionally and financially destructive (see O. Berlin
10629 for an inheritance dispute between a mother and daughter).166 The oracle might also
be chosen when challenging more powerful individuals, for example, the daughter of the
scribe Amennakht (v) is accused of theft by the sculptor Qaha (iv/v?) in O. Gardiner 4, but
there is uncertainty whether this appeal for justice is chosen to avoid Amennakht’s (v)
influence on the ḳnbt or through lack of evidence, however, the daughter was found guilty
by the oracle (McDowell 1999: 181-82; Sweeney 2008: 159).167 An individual refusing to
accept an oracular pronouncement may have been pressurised by villagers into accepting,
but as McDowell (1999: 174, 1990: 127) remarks, the oracle represented the consensus of
the villagers so if bystanders doubted the justice of the god’s pronouncement they, too,
would be reluctant to support the judgement. An example of an oracular decision being
contested is found in O. DeM 133, which records a dispute over delivery of a donkey; the
policeman Amenkha is the middleman in the transaction who refuses three times to accept
the oracle’s decision, even swearing his innocence to the ‘entirety of the gang’ after the
third oracular pronouncement. Workmen of the gang were only finally convinced of his
guilt when the defendant, Pawekhed the water-carrier, took an oath before them that he
had delivered the donkey to Amenkha (McDowell 1990: 137).168
Social networks and informal controls on behaviour
Levels of interrelatedness, shared activities, physical proximity of the villagers and the
geographical location of Deir el-Medina on the west bank of Thebes, distanced from Nile
settlements, would have resulted in an overarching social network on the level of the
village, within which smaller social networks would have interacted, for example, with
sub-groups of work colleagues, neighbours and families. Discussing the influence of
propinquity on social networking, Kadushin (2012: 14, 18) notes that those who live closely
together tend to share characteristics such as values and social statuses, which is more
165
(i) The vizier and other external authorities also dealt with criminal activities, such as assault, punished by time
spent stone-cutting (P. Geneva MAH 15274 vs. 111, l. 1-3) or the theft of a copper chisel which eventually led to
the discovery of a stolen hoard of copper objects (O. Nash 1) (see McDowell 1999: 186-88, and 1990: 187-234 for a
detailed discussion of cases handled by external authorities).
(ii) McDowell (1990: 118) states there are four or five fragmentary cases related to moveable property that were
placed before the oracle.
166
See Sweeney (2008: 161-63) for a commentary on O. Berlin 10629. See O. Cairo CG 25725 + O. IFAO 137 + O. Louvre
E. 3529 for a father and daughter dispute before the ḳnbt.
167
(i) This may be the well-known scribe Amennakht (v), although Davies (1999: Chart 9) lists him as having nine
sons but no daughters, or the scribe Amennakht (xv) (Davies, 1999:109), and the sculptor may be Qaha (iv) or (v)
(Davies 1999: 20, 186).
168
In a study on gender and oracular practices, Sweeney (2008: 158, 164) tabulates 102 people mentioned in ostraca
addressed to the oracle, of which eight are female; women’s involvement appears to be related to property
whereas men’s cases are wider-ranging including questions over promotions and wages.
105
than being ‘in the same place at the same time’ – they are co-present in that they share
a social relationship within the context of a social structure.169 The cohesiveness of the
group/s in the network/s is one of the ways in which the inhabitants of Deir el-Medina
could unite in the face of disruption or turmoil, for example, at the village level we see the
cohesive action taken by the villagers documented in the Turin Strike Papyrus; or at the
level of village sub-group, we witness letters sent to friends following disagreements that
appeal to the strength or longevity of mutual friendship, for example, P. DeM 4 and 5 (see
page 107). Moody and White (2003: 106) remark that ‘collectivity is structurally cohesive to
the extent that the social relations of the group hold it together’ and I propose that it is the
collectivity of the interconnected social groups within the village, including interrelated
families, which act as the first line of regulatory mechanisms in the face of personal and
professional conflicts.
While the ḳnbt and the oracle were formal bodies for conflict resolution and third-party
punishment, many family disagreements would have been resolved internally. In a study of
women’s correspondence from Deir el-Medina, Sweeney (1993: 523-4) calculated that 14%
of letters and communications from Deir el-Medina are addressed to women or written
by women; within this 14% group, 86% consists of correspondence between men and
women, usually focusing on some type of disagreement in which they are involved (see
also Toivari 1997: 155-60). For example, O. DeM 587 records the effort of Paser to resolve an
ongoing disagreement with Thutwia, his sister/half sister, or O. DeM 562 documents Kar’s
letter to Menumose in which she reproaches him for not reciprocating after having taken
some of her goods, additionally pointing out that she is sick and should not be abandoned
(although the text implies a mutual dependency, I cannot find any known consanguineous
links between Kar and Menumose and it may be that consanguinity is not the structuring
principle of this relationship). In correspondence between men, Toivari (1997: 159) notes a
strong desire to settle informal disputes through dialogue, for example, O. Berlin 10627 is a
letter of reproach from an anonymous author to the scribe Nekhemmut170 chiding him for
his bad moods and frugal behaviour, and O. DeM 303 documents the draftsman Prehotep’s
(i?)171 complaint to the scribe Qenhirkopshef (i) that he treats him like a donkey, only calling
upon him when work is needed.
Even at a level of friendship, or the exchange of favours or information, a norm of

reciprocity is still expected to maintain balanced friendships. The importance of reciprocity
in friendship is reflected in the Instructions of Ani (7–9): ‘Befriend one who is straight and
true. One whose actions you have seen. If your rightness matches his, the friendship will
be balanced’ (Lichtheim 1976: 138). Sweeney (1998: 112-13) has discussed ‘friendship and
frustration’ in Deir el Medina and while some letters such as P. DeM 6 reflect irritation
169
Within social sciences there are three types of networks: ego-centric which connects with a certain individual;
sociocentric which are networks within a ‘box’, such as workers in the same company; and open system networks
in which the boundaries that limit them are unclear, such as the elite in a country (Kadushin, 2012: 17). Kadushin
(2012: 21) also describes four types of relationships within networks: firstly, none at all; secondly, A relates to B;
thirdly, B relates to A; fourthly, A and B relate to each other, which is the relationship of reciprocity or mutuality.
170
This may be the temple scribe Nekhemmut (ii), but Davies (1999: 50 n.636) believes there is no evidence to
suggest this is the childless scribe Nekhemmut who appears in O. Berlin 10627.
171
This is possibly Prehotep (i) mentioned as the ‘draftsman of Amun’; the draftsman Prehotep (i) may also be
synonymous with the draftsman Rehotep (Davies 1999: 151, 77).
106
that the recipient will not cooperate, Sweeney concludes that letters such as P. Dem 4 and
5 are more than expressions of resentment or accusation that draw attention to negative
behaviour, they are also ways to effect reconciliation and restore the reciprocity of
friendship:
What will I do? Please write to me the offence [I] did [against you via] the policeman
B[asa]. Now if it is only to me that you don’t send anything whatsoever, really this is a
rotten […] day. <I > won’t ask anything from you. A man is happy when he is with his old
eating companion.
Possessions are good new, but friends are better old.
P. DeM 4, rt. 7 – rt. 12, Sweeney, Friendship and Frustration, 1998: 108.
I concur with Toivari (1997: 156) that informal channels appear to exist to resolve disputes
over interpersonal obligations, channels that are also indicative of an accepted system of
social control within the village. Janssen (1994: 136) echoes this position when he remarks
that social controls in the village would have put a ‘brake on excess egotism’ without the
ability to eradicate it completely, so although economic transactions may have taken a
while to be reciprocated, positive relations were preferred to short-term gain.172
Trust and cooperation between families related by consanguinity and affinity
Families in Deir el-Medina may have acted more altruistically towards each other, but the
complexity of social networks within the village possibly resulted in acts of generosity
or support not purely defined by biological or affinal ties.173 This section begins with
modern research investigating levels of trust and trustworthiness between individuals
considered kin and non-kin and observes the impact of biological relatedness on altruistic
and reciprocal behaviour, and on willingness to sanction family members. The possibilities
and limitations of using modern studies to understand economic and personal transactions
in Deir el-Medina are also assessed here. I then propose the existence of a sliding scale of
altruism and reciprocity, noting that reciprocity may also become a burden, and end by
examining the importance of reputation formation in developing trust in future reciprocity
and how this might have functioned in Deir el-Medina.
Altruism, trust and trustworthiness amongst family members
A study conducted by Vollan (2011: 14-25) in nine rural communities in Namibia and
South Africa tested levels of trust and trustworthiness between family members, friends
and unrelated villagers and may offer insight into the interactions that took place in
Deir el-Medina. The study also tested the willingness of a third party, such as a judge or
172
Eyre (2016: 163-79) discusses the presentation and acceptance in ancient Egypt of ordered reciprocal processes
as essential to the functioning of social relationships, and in contrast personal vendettas and feuds are presented
as indecorous. Eyre (2016: 171, 178-79) remarks on the difficulty of accessing legal retribution in ancient Egypt
– enforcement of legal decisions through government hierarchies or through local councils required influence
and patronage, so while the temptation to personally retaliate may have been present, local ‘pecking orders’ and
patronage networks were key to low-level social organisation.
173
See Granovetter (1985: 490) for trust in economic transactions through repeated interactions and personal
experience.
107
community leader, to interfere in family disagreements by sanctioning family members.

I am not suggesting that this model can be directly transposed onto Deir el-Medina, since
factors such as duty to the pharaoh, patronage and social networking in a tight-knit and
interrelated community also come into play. Ancient Egyptian attitudes towards sanctioned
and unsanctioned violence also affect the application of modern studies on sanctioning
individuals in an ancient Egyptian context, inasmuch as punishment was normal in legal
contexts. For example, 100 blows were given to the accused during testimony in O. Cairo
CG 25572; or punishment in warfare, for example, the dismemberment of Syrian prisoners
in the 18th dynasty tomb of Horemheb (Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, Leiden).174 Sanctions
also governed interpersonal violence – who had the right to punish and to what extent? –
such as the master’s right to punish or defend a servant from abuse by others, for example,
P. Genève D 187 (see Hue-Arcé 2017a: 177-78).
The study by Vollan (2011) is unusual in experimental economics as it focuses on biologically

related kin, exploring encounters between family and friends and investigating the effect
of punishment by a third party.175 Vollan (2011: 17) applies the following four hypotheses to
encounters between family and friends:
(i) family members determine the baseline behaviour for trust and trustworthiness in
that they should be more trusted than unrelated villagers;176
(ii) reciprocity is less important amongst kin;177
(iii) using Hamilton’s kin selection theory (1964: 1-52, parts 1 and 11) the higher the level
of the coefficient of relationship, the greater the level of altruism (for coefficient of
relationship, see page 10);
(iv) punishment of a family member by an outside third party is least effective amongst
family members since no notable behavioural change is expected as they already
behave more altruistically towards each other than to family or friends.
In summary, Vollan (2011: 20-22, 24) found that family members treated each other with
more trust and trustworthiness than unrelated villagers, and levels of trust increased with
levels of relatedness (amongst kin, trust increased when dealing with the household head).
174
For an assessment of violence in Egyptian sources, including preternatural violence in religious texts, see
Muhlestein (2015: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9661n6rn Accessed 14.4.2018). For gender and violence, see
Matić (2017: 103-21, in the context of Nefertiti smiting her enemies) and Hue-Arcé (2017b: 133-50, in the context
of violence against women in Graeco-Roman Egypt).
175
Other research using natural groups, as opposed to induced groups, to study group identity and enhanced
cooperation include Ruffle and Sosis (2006: 147-63) who found that increased cooperation between Israeli kibbutz
members, as opposed to anonymous outsiders, is shaped by in-group membership interaction. Bernhard et al.
(2006: 217-21) studied variation of punishment within and across two tribes in Papua New Guinea, each with
their own network of cooperation and gift-giving. The study showed that individuals carrying out third-party
punishments were more willing to punish if the violator did not belong to their ‘in-group’.
176
In a discussion on social support networks, Agneesens et al. (2006: 434, 439) argue that reliance on partners,
biological kin, friends and other acquaintances varies according to the type of support sought, although the
results might be affected by culture-specific factors. In a study of the psychology of human kin recognition,
Park et al. (2008: 224) suggest that since kin recognition systems are fallible, humans might respond at cognitive,
emotional, and behavioural levels to non-kin in the same way as they would to kin.
177
Ackerman et al.’s (2007: 369, 372) study notes that the provision of resources to a friend derives fitness benefits
dependent on reciprocity, while the provision of resources to a family member derives fitness benefits irrespective
of reciprocity, however, they found that psychologically women are more likely to respond to their friends as
they would to kin.
108
While ties of trust between friends were not significantly less, they were more fragile and
only reached similar levels to trust between families when third-party punishment was
present. Third parties were also reticent to intervene in intrafamilial family conflicts or to
enforce punishments on family members as they believed different norms applied within
family contexts. Even though family members trusted each other more, the expectation of
trust was less when interacting with family members, leading Vollan (2011: 26) to conclude
that the reduction in expectations of trust was because family members behaved more
altruistically without expecting reciprocity.178
Does the unusual case presented in O. Bodleian 253 reflect an example of trust and
punishment between family and unrelated villagers? In O. Bodleian 253, a father named
Telmont (Tener Monthu) requests an oath, witnessed by village authorities, to be drawn up
to protect his daughter in her union with a man called Nekhemmut.
…Make Nakhte-em-Mut take an oath of the lord, l.p.h., saying ‘I will not abandon (netja)
his (lit. ‘my’) daughter’.
Oath of the lord, l.p.h., that he swore: ‘…if I go back on my word and abandon (netja) the
daughter of Tener-Monthu in the future, I will receive 100 blows and be deprived of all
the property that I will acquire with her’.
McDowell, Village Life in Ancient Egypt, 1999: 33, no.7.
The Telmont named in this text may be the father of Hathor (ix) whose husband was
Nekhemmut (vi), in turn, this couple are the parents of Khons (vi) (cousin marriage number
eleven) and Henutmire (i) (cousin marriage number nine) (table 4.3). It is interesting
that Telmont made his future daughter’s husband swear to fairly strict sanctions should
he abandon her; it is possibly a guarantee exacted when two families are suspicious of
each other, and certainly suspicious of an individual’s intentions (suggesting a lack of
intrafamilial enforcement mechanisms). McDowell (1999: 33) remarks that the demands of
this oath are exceptional and perhaps a unique example of a covenant created at marriage.
It is not unusual, however, to secure terms over property in the event of divorce (see
Toivari-Viitala 2001: 94), and although I am not aware of property agreements between the
couples married consanguineously in Deir el-Medina, they may well have existed.
Ben-Ner and Kramer (2011: 216-21) combined a study on levels of altruism between kin
and unrelated individuals alongside an investigation of the extent to which personality
affects willingness to act altruistically. Rather than using interrelated kin as in Vollan’s
(2011) study, this research used the ‘dictator game’ in which individuals were given roles:
178
Ben-Ner and Halldorsson (2010: 65) explore conceptual issues surrounding trust and trustworthiness, noting
that trust reflects an expectation or belief that party A invests in party B, so in varying degrees A expects that: ‘(1)
B will not take advantage of the situation to make a gain while imposing a loss on A, (2) B will not act maliciously
towards A, (3) B will be willing to make small sacrifices for A, and (4) B is competent to act favorably towards A’.
These elements of trust vary according to situation, context and individuals. When levels of trust are not absolute
then other means might also be applied, such as a written contract for loan of a larger amount of money. Ben-
Ner and Halldorsson (2010: 65-66) point out that trustworthiness has four parallel aspects to trusting, which are
also variable between individuals and contexts; expectations of trustworthiness are based on social norms so
there is room for discretion in what constitutes trustworthy behaviour. Thielmann and Hilbig (2014: 61-65) also
found that an individual’s expectations of trustworthiness in others is based on the individual’s native level of
trustworthiness and cooperation.
109
kin, collaborator, competitor, and neutral based on their similarity/relationship to the

subject. The results showed that individuals were most altruistic towards kin and their
generosity was unaffected by personality traits; next in line were collaborators, followed
by neutrals, and least altruism was shown to competitors – the personality traits of these
last three groups all had a significant effect on willingness to act altruistically.179 Might this
study offer an insight into levels of tension or animosity amongst the villagers, particularly
but not exclusively outside kin networks? One of the most striking examples of personal
animosity combined with competitiveness is the Amennakht (vii)/Paneb (i) conflict in P.
Salt 124 that lists accusations including theft, multiple adultery and violence (see Černý
1929: 244-46). Davies (1999: 36) remarks it is generally agreed that Paneb’s (i) sudden
disappearance from administrative records is because of the many charges documented in
P. Salt 124; amongst them are the following:
…Penēb debauched the citizeness Tuy, when she was wife to the workman Ḳenna,
he debauched the citizeness Ḥunro, when she was with Pendua, he debauched the
citizeness Ḥunro, when she was with Ḥesysenēbef; so said his son. (rt. 2, ll. 2-3)…
…And he plundered the place of the Pharaoh. The people who passed near by in the
desert saw the stone-cutters, when they were standing working on top of the work of
the Pharaoh, and they heard voices. (rt. 2, ll. 7-8)
Černý, Papyrus Salt 124 (Brit. Mus. 10055), 1929.
Sliding scales of altruism and reciprocity in Deir el-Medina
Alongside kin altruism defined by Hamilton (1964: 1-17), which benefits the evolutionary
fitness of biologically related kin, there is also reciprocal altruism (reciprocity) described
by Trivers (1971: 45-54) and Fehr & Fischbacher (2003: 788-89), which involves making
sacrifices for individuals who are unrelated, yet who are likely to reciprocate with at least
as much support, but it does involve the ability to recognise these potential partners. I
propose that the types of economic transactions reflected in Deir el-Medina ostraca may
reflect a sliding scale of trust and trustworthiness, beginning with altruism amongst close
family members, followed by limited altruism and flexible terms of reciprocity between
more distant family and friends, in which there is reduced emphasis on the contractual
nature of the exchange (although notes may be made of the value of goods or gifts
received). The next descending level is general reciprocity, more strictly defined since a
specific return is expected on goods at some point, even though it relies on trust.
But is it possible that reciprocity becomes a burden if the recipient cannot reciprocate in
the long-term? In a modern assessment of the suppressive function of reciprocity, Offer
(2012: 790, 799-800) observes that poverty weakens participation in social support networks
since reciprocation is difficult, resulting in a voluntary withdrawal or exclusion from the
immediate exchange community. When families in Deir el-Medina became financially and
179
In an investigation of personality and kin by Osiński (2009: 377), reciprocity amongst non-kin is positively
associated with agreeableness and negatively associated with neuroticism, but reciprocity with kin was less
affected by differences in social agreeableness and more affected by social norms that operated irrespective of
social distance. Social distance influences the willingness of individuals to share goods and resources with others
and social discounting is a measure of how generosity decreases across social distance (Jin et al. 2017: 1).
110
emotionally vulnerable through poverty and/or morbidity or mortality, the expectations

of reciprocity may have remained unfulfilled, and at this point support networks within
consanguineous families might have lessened the burden of reciprocity through altruistic
acts (unless they, too, were too poor or unwilling to participate).180 The lowest level on the
sliding scale of trust and trustworthiness is pure barter or money-barter, which appear to
be direct transactions involving goods of (near?) equivalent value (see Janssen 1975: 542-
45 for inexactitude in relation to fixed prices; see Ezzamel and Hoskin 2002: 353-54 and
Ezzamel 1997: 663, 573 for exactitude of prices).181
In addition to the giving or exchange of goods that had ‘monetary’ value or object value,
a sliding scale of reciprocity probably also existed for acts of neighbourly goodwill as
described in the Prohibitions (O. Petrie 11, vs. 6, 7, 9). I believe that family were more likely
to be altruistic to other family members in terms of goodwill gestures, such as offering free
labour or practical and emotional support in times of need. Trusted friends or neighbours
were probably also supported but with an expectation of reciprocity: ‘You should not
ignore your neighbours (on) the days of their need, and they will surround you in [your
moment?]’ (O. Petrie 11, vs. 7). I am not, however, suggesting blanket levels of altruism and
reciprocity according to biological and affinal kin, friends and colleagues, since personal
animosities would have intruded upon generosity or willingness to transact.
Reputation formation and trustworthiness in Deir el-Medina
Finally, I will examine the importance of reputation formation in the context of Deir el-
Medina transactions. Fehr and Fischbacher (2003: 787) note that indirect reciprocity
experiments show that individuals with a history of willingness to help others (with no
obvious direct reciprocity) are significantly more likely to receive help themselves, leading
the authors to suggest that the desire to gain a reputation drives the donor’s behaviour.182
The goods that appear to be given as gifts in the texts discussed on pages 96-97 may be
the means by which reputation is formed or consolidated and trustworthiness is secured.
Reinstein (2014: 89) discusses prestige and reputation in ancient and modern societies
as valuable in themselves (in addition to being instrumental in influencing others and
accessing better treatment in a variety of spheres) and describes the consumption of gifts
as a direct way to ‘eat our reputation’.
180
(i) Social support networks created through patronage may also provide a safety net in financially critical
periods for individuals or families. However, families or individuals who lost property and found themselves
indebted may have become the serfs of others (see Moreno Garcia 2016: 498-99, 2012: 5).
(ii) Research by Menjivar (2000: 33) found that the resilience of social networks based on kinship becomes strained
under extreme poverty.
181
Ezzamel (1997: 663, 573) argues that the development of accounting systems established ‘metrics of quantity
and quality’ that rendered reciprocal transactions calculable and visible; this system of accountability with its
methods of monitoring and calculating also gave the appearance of conformity to expected values, inputs and
outputs.
182
Wedekind and Milinski (2000: 850-52) also note that individuals sometimes act altruistically to other non-
related individuals, knowing that a return is unlikely, however, in the long term the act enhances their status and
reputation, in turn this affects assessments by others who may consider the individual in future interactions. See
also Milinski et al. (2001: 2495-501).
111
Might the villagers of Deir el-Medina be ‘eating’ their reputation in the types and amount
of food given? We know that chief workmen and scribes or their wives sometimes brought
large quantities of food, for example, Tawere(et)emheb (iii), wife of the scribe Amennakht
(v), was one of the largest donors in O. DeM 134, yet at another feast her gift of one jar
of beer was consistent with the smaller amounts brought (O. DeM 643). In contrast,
detailed gifts listed in O. DeM 222 do not appear to be determined by the seniority of the
25 guests whose names have survived: while the chief workman Anhurkhawy (ii) brings
six assorted items, the scribe Amennakht (v) only brings two loaves, but interestingly the
workman Bakenamun (i) brings ten items – is the reason for his generosity to enhance his
reputation? On other occasions the amount given may reflect a close relationship between
host and guest, for example, Henshene (who Janssen (1997: 58, note k) suggests may be the
daughter of the well-known female Naunakhte) brings 30 sš loaves, at least three times as
much as other guests (O. IFAO 1322 + O. Varille 38 + O. Cairo CG 25705, l. 8). We do not know
the full context for these celebrations, so it may be that senior figures in the community
are consolidating their reputation, or perhaps we are witnessing acts of reciprocity or
intrafamilial altruism.
Toivari (1997: 156, 162, 164) mentions reputation in the context of male-female
interpersonal disputes. Referring to O. DeM 439 vs., in which a woman warns a man to take
note of his wife’s adulterous behaviour, Toivari (1977: 156) suggests that gossiping was a
means of ‘facilitating the flow of reputational information’ and is a frequent mechanism of
informal social control in small interrelated communities. From an economic perspective,
trustworthiness in transactions was important in reputation formation, but we know from
complaints about extramarital relations (for example, P. Salt 124, P. DeM 27, O. DeM 439) that
sexual conduct also contributed towards the diminishing or consolidation of reputation.
Conclusion
Using documentary evidence from Deir el-Medina and current research on economic
sociology and anthropology, this chapter examined the hypothesis that families related
consanguineously have more flexible terms of reciprocity and a greater willingness to act
altruistically than non-consanguineous families, and argues that altruism, combined with
innate trust, helped consanguineous families in Deir el-Medina create support networks to
combat debt and resolve conflicts.
The chapter began with an analysis of the prosopographic data from Deir el-Medina
published by Davies (1999) and Bierbrier (1984: 208-10, 1975: 30-35) to determine the
number and type of consanguineous marriages in the village, networks between families
in which the marriages occurred, occupations of the husband and the fathers of each
consanguineously married couple, and the number of offspring from each union compared
to the number of offspring associated with each of their family trees. The second part of the
chapter summarised evidence for gift-giving, debts and credit, informal object exchange
and barter, and provided examples of family transfers and expectations. Factors affecting
the willingness to give and the expectation to receive were explored through formal and
informal regulatory structures within the village. Finally, levels of trust and cooperation
between families related by consanguinity and affinity were examined to assess whether
112
consanguineous families in Deir el-Medina were more likely to behave altruistically

towards each, or with fewer expectations of reciprocity, than to villagers outside their
family networks.
Out of 188 known marriages spanning up to 10 generations between the 19th–20th

dynasties, six percent of marriages are considered consanguineous based on available
evidence, with the majority of unions between the children of two brothers. Eight out
of eleven are FBD (father’s brother’s daughter) marriages that may have consolidated
professional links between families, thereby enhancing job opportunities and status in
the Deir el-Medina community. Marriages through the female side of the family, such as
mother’s sister’s daughter, are not indicated in the known textual sources in the village,
but they are likely to have strengthened affective ties between families. The population of
Deir el-Medina is estimated at 100-200 people in the 19th dynasty and at 190-370 during the
reign of Ramesses IX, so at any one time there may have been around 6-22 consanguineous
marriages in the community, however, the close-knit nature of the village probably resulted
in a larger number of consanguineous unions. When the consanguineous and affinal links
between eleven consanguineous marriages are analysed, a network of ties emerges with
some consanguineously married couples being linked to as many as six other families
in which there are consanguineous marriages, although one married couple only links
consanguineously to one family in this network. This indicates consanguineous and affinal
ties not only amongst collateral relatives of their generation, but also amongst relatives of
generations in ascendancy and descendancy.
In the eleven consanguineous marriages all the fathers of the husbands and wives came
from Deir el-Medina and in six of the eleven marriages the husband and his father shared
the same role of workman (in one of these marriages both were sculptors). In four marriages
there was at least one chief workman (and sometimes two) – either the husband, his father
or the wife’s father – three of these marriages belonged to the family of Sennedjem (i). In
the remaining marriage the husband was a deputy chief workman while the wife’s father
was a workman with the title ‘chief craftsman’. The choice of marriage partner may be the
means by which hereditary positions were consolidated, alongside family property and
influence. Overall, the pattern that develops amongst the husbands and their fathers is
consistent with what might be expected generally in the gang of workmen.
Numbers of offspring born from the consanguineous unions varied from zero to six and with
available evidence there is nothing to indicate that consanguineously married couples had
a different rate of childbirth to non-consanguineous couples. Using totals for the number
of marriages and children born in the family trees in which there are consanguineous
marriages, the average number of children born from each marriage ranges from 2–4.3,
and overall the mean number of children born to each marriage is 2.8, with a median figure
of 2.7. This is consistent with data presented by Koltsida (2007: 12) for the composition of
an average-sized household in Deir el-Medina.
Many of the low-value economic transactions in the village were unrecorded, but evidence
from documented gift-giving lists, notes of debts and credit, and evidence of informal object
exchange and barter suggests a general level of trust and trustworthiness in economic
113
transactions, backed by formal mechanisms such as the ḳnbt and the oracle. Informal
networks of social control would have influenced family interactions and also impacted
on behaviour and reputation formation in business dealings amongst the villagers. Textual
sources related to economic interactions indicate a complexity of reciprocal obligations
operating at all levels within the community, although conflicts within families and
between villagers prove that some expectations of reciprocity were unfulfilled. However,
it is likely that levels of trust and cooperation increased with levels of relatedness, with
families acting altruistically towards each other without necessarily expecting any
immediate return.
I propose that the types of the economic transactions reflected in the Deir el-Medina
texts reflect a sliding scale of trust and trustworthiness, beginning with altruism between
close family members, followed by a combination of limited altruism and flexible terms of
reciprocity between more distant family and friends. The next descending level is general
reciprocity that relies on an element of trust, but a specific return is expected at some point;
finally, there is direct exchange of goods of equivalent value. In effect, consanguineous
families (and extended families) were probably better able to survive economically due to
their willingness to act altruistically and their flexible terms of reciprocation, particularly
when members were financially vulnerable or in need of support. However, patronage
networks that emphasised duty and reciprocity, with their concomitant influence, also
operated alongside or beyond family networks providing optional (or for some the only)
support system. We know from textual evidence that levels of trust, social cohesion and
social control in economic and personal interactions encouraged community reciprocity,
which ultimately protected the overall stability of the Deir el-Medina inhabitants.
114
Chapter 5
Biological outcomes of non-royal consanguineous

marriage: prevalence, impact and perceptions of
abnormality in ancient Egypt
Introduction
Congenital anomalies are reported in mummified and skeletal remains from the Early
Dynastic to Roman Period in Egypt. While these anomalies are reported far less frequently in
the ancient record than the modern record, this is probably due more to the survival of human
remains than the biological reality. In current clinical studies, certain congenital conditions
and morbidity in infancy and childhood are observed more frequently in consanguineous
families (with parents biologically related as second cousins or closer). This chapter assesses
evidence for potential biological outcomes of consanguinity in ancient Egypt and considers
the burden of care, if any, that these physical abnormalities and cognitive disorders may have
placed on family and community. Medical conditions associated with consanguinity are also
assessed in the wider context of health, sickness and perceptions of disability in ancient Egypt.
This chapter is based on the hypothesis that congenital anomalies and morbidity in infancy
and childhood resulting from consanguineous marriage were not distinguished from other
health conditions by the ancient Egyptians and that individuals with physical abnormalities
or cognitive disorders were neither socially excluded nor considered ‘disabled’. The research
in this chapter is informed by archaeology, palaeopathology, textual sources and iconography
alongside current clinical studies in consanguinity, orofacial clefting and intellectual and
developmental disorders.
The chapter begins by presenting evidence for congenital anomalies in the Egyptian
palaeopathological record; it then lists commonly associated biological outcomes of
consanguinity in modern populations and considers their identification in ancient Egyptian
human remains. However, not all outcomes of consanguinity, such as cognitive disorders,
can be identified in physical remains and these disorders usually impact primarily upon
healthy family members in terms of time and resources invested in less able kin. Two types
of congenital anomalies are examined: intellectual and developmental disorders (IDD), and
non-syndromic orofacial clefts (cleft lip with or without cleft palate, and cleft palate); the
latter are amongst the most commonly reported outcomes of consanguinity which are
detectable on skeletal remains, and for which there is limited evidence in ancient Egypt.
The physical impact of IDD and orofacial clefts on the individual and the social impact
on the family are examined using a bioarchaeology of care analysis. This is followed by a
discussion on the perception of disability in ancient Egypt and the acceptance, or otherwise,
of physical difference with reference to medical papyri, iconography and burials. Finally,
with reference to current consanguineous studies, this chapter offers suggestions as to
ways in which ancient Egyptian families who married consanguineously might provide a
support network capable of accommodating increased physical and mental needs.
115
Reported congenital anomalies in mummified and skeletal remains in ancient Egypt
Congenital conditions reported in mummified and skeletal remains include various forms
of dwarfism (skeletal dysplasia) (Kozma 2008: 3104-09),183 spina bifida occulta,184 spina bifida
cystica (Boano et al. 2009: 481-87), hydrocephalus (Missori et al. 2010: 1837), orofacial clefts
(Derry 1938: 295-98), cerebral palsy (Nerlich et al. 2010: 113-16), osteogenesis imperfecta
(Gray 1969: 106-08), bilateral congenital hip dislocation (Spigelman and Bentley 1998: 6-12),
congenital hypothyroidism (Naunton 2009), congenital atrophy of a kidney (Gordetsky
and O’Brien 2009: 476-79), and congenital spontaneous amputation (Finch 2012: 111-24).
There are, however, congenital conditions such as cognitive impairment that do not leave a
physical trace and an understanding of its presentation and reception in ancient societies
depends on historical textual sources and on inferences from modern clinical studies.
In clinical genetics a range of congenital anomalies and morbidity associated with childhood
and infancy are noted more frequently in consanguineous families; some are reported in
national studies while others have been observed in geographic and/or religious isolates
(for example, Becker et al. 2001: 8-13; Kelley 2002: 318-26; Zlotogora 1995: 32-37).185 The
term ‘congenital anomaly’ used in this chapter follows the World Health Organisation
definition:
‘Congenital anomalies are also known as birth defects, congenital disorders or

congenital malformations. Congenital anomalies can be defined as structural or
functional anomalies (for example, metabolic disorders) that occur during intrauterine
life and can be identified prenatally, at birth, or sometimes may only be detected later
in infancy, such as hearing defects’.
World Health Organization, Fact Sheet Number 370, updated September 2016.
The search for congenital anomalies in ancient remains has to be placed in the overall
context of the identification of disease or impairment and its prevalence in different
populations. Most human remains are skeletal and disabling conditions only affecting soft
tissue cannot be identified, or conditions affecting parts of the skeleton may not be found
in fragmentary skeletal remains; furthermore, evidence for deformed/diseased skeletons
may not be representative of the sample, or individuals with impairments may be buried
separately (Roberts 2000: 46-49). Even though mummified remains offer potentially greater
scope for identification of disabling conditions affecting soft tissue, this is still limited by
the survival of soft tissue in the mummification process, the type of medical condition,
and the effect of embalming on soft tissue may lead to an incorrect diagnosis. For example,
ochronosis was originally suggested in 1961 for the appearance of radiopacity of the
183
See also Kozieradzka-Ogunmakin (2011: 200-06) for a report of multiple epiphyseal dysplasia in an Old Kingdom
skeleton, there is only one other report of this type of short-limb dwarfism from ancient Egypt (Kozma 2008:
3105-06).
184
Spina bifida occulta, a common anatomical variant and rarely a pathological condition, is observed relatively
frequently in ancient Egyptian palaeopathology (for example, Hussein et al. 2009: 613-27; Parr 2005: 257-61; Sarry
El-Din and El-Banna 2006: 200-207). See also Kumar and Tubbs (2011: 19-33), for a review of terminological errors
and discrepancies in the palaeopathological diagnosis of spina bifida.
185
Even if marriages take place outside the clinical definition of consanguinity, in small isolated communities
members may be related to some degree, see Bittles (2012: 8-9).
116
Biological outcomes of non-royal consanguineous marriage
intervertebral disk similar to the pattern seen in living ochronosis patients (Simon and
Zorab 1961: 384-86). Following later investigation it was found that the embalming resin
in which natron was embedded gave a black colour to the disk space (see Aufderheide and
Rodriguez-Martin 1998: 112; see also Aufderheide 2011: 75-80, for soft tissue taphonomy).
Consanguineous marriage: ancient evidence and modern biological outcomes
This section provides a brief background to consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt and
is followed by a summary of congenital anomalies and morbidity in infancy and childhood
reported at increased frequency in consanguineous marriages.
Consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt
The census returns from Roman Egypt have revealed the highest level of documented
sibling marriage in antiquity (Bagnall and Frier 2006: 127-33). There is, however, no
evidence to suggest that sibling marriage was common in non-royal marriages from earlier
periods of Egyptian history, but there is limited evidence for cousin marriage and uncle/
niece marriage, for example, the marriage of two sisters to their first cousins in P. Adl. Dem.
14 and 21 from the Ptolemaic town of Pathyris in Upper Egypt (Adler et al. 1939: 4-5) (see
pages 68-70). Given the close-knit nature of Egyptian village life, it is likely that endogamy
was practised to some degree (for example, see Clarysse and Thompson 2006: 332; Eyre
1992: 218 n.68; Lesko 1994: 23), and if intermarriage amongst some local families occurred
across and down generations then the degree of biological relationship between a husband
and wife may be consanguineous.
Congenital anomalies and morbidity in infancy and childhood reported at increased frequency
in modern consanguineous families
Consanguinity principally influences the incidence of rare recessive disorders although

there are congenital anomalies and disorders of infancy and childhood that are significantly,
but not consistently, associated with consanguinity and endogamy (Bittles 2012: 160-61).
Congenital anomalies that are commonly reported at increased frequency in the offspring
of consanguineous unions are congenital heart defects, non-syndromic orofacial clefts, and
neural tube defects;186 causes of morbidity commonly recorded in infancy and childhood
are non-syndromic intellectual developmental disorders, neurodevelopmental disorders,187
mitochondrial disorders, non-syndromic childhood deafness, and visual defects188 (Bittles
186
Although studies appear to suggest a strong association between neural tube defects and consanguinity, Bittles
(2012: 150) points out that the most convincing evidence for this association is noted in rare syndromic disorders
that include neural tube defects. Bittles (2012: 152) also notes the challenges in positively linking non-syndromic
orofacial clefts and consanguinity.
187
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5 2013, 5th edition) has clustered six categories
under neurodevelopmental disorders: intellectual and developmental disorders, communication disorders,
autism spectrum disorders, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, learning disorders, and motor disorders.
Neurodevelopmental disorders form one of 20 diagnostic chapters. For comment on classification and criteria
changes of DSM-5, see Reiger et al. (2013: 92-98). Gambrill (2014: 13-36) criticises the idea of ‘mental illness’ on
which the DSM-5 is based, claiming it obscures environmental factors in the cause and treatment of ‘mental
illness’. See also Drake’s (2015: 283-84) discussion on alternative models of mental health to the biomedical model.
188
Congenital glaucoma, bilateral retinoblastoma, the autosomal recessive forms of retinitis pigmentosa and
congenital cataracts have all been associated in a range of studies on parental consanguinity (Bittles 2012: 142-43).
117
2012: 119-21, 138-60; Hamamy et al. 2011: 841-47; Sabbagh et al. 2014: 501-13; Shawky et al.
2013: 161-63; Shawky and Sadik 2011: 69-78; Sheridan et al. 2013: 1350-59; Sutton and Alford
2011: 37-42, 107-13; Tadmouri et al. 2009: 6-17). Limited studies on dental metric anomalies
associated with consanguinity indicate an impact on dental occlusion, overjet, overbite
and vertical bite (Bittles 2012: 118-19, 145, Hart el al. 2000: 95-101; Lauc et al. 2003a: 273-
78, 2003b: 301-08).189 Hamamy et al. (2011: 845) report that the appearance of congenital
anomalies in the offspring of first cousin marriage is estimated to be 1.7 – 2.8% higher than
the background population risk. In an appraisal of 17 studies comparing major congenital
outcomes of first cousin marriage to non-consanguineous marriage, Bittles (2012: 146-47)
records a 4.1% mean excess level of congenital defects and a median excess level of 3.3%.
A meta-analysis of 64 studies in 14 countries across four continents concluded that first
cousin marriage is linked to a mean increase of 3.7% in all causes of mortality from 28
weeks gestation to 8-10 years of age, while a further study gave an additional median risk
of 3.3% for birth defects (Bittles 2012: Table 9.3; Chisholm and Bittles 2015: 1-2; Small et al.
2017: 436). A meta-analysis of 41 reports on consanguineous marriage reported younger
age at marriage and greater fertility, measured as total live births, compared to non-
consanguineous marriages (Chisholm and Bittles 2015: 3).190
The challenges presented by linking consanguinity with disorders of adulthood are

discussed by Bittles (2012: 162-77) who has listed the following age-related disease states in
which links to consanguinity are possible or have been indicated: cardiovascular disease,
diabetes, various cancers, behavioural and psychiatric disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar
disease, Alzheimer’s disease, tuberculosis, leprosy, multiple sclerosis, infertility, and
coagulation disorders. Bittles (2012: 176-77), however, notes that data related to common
diseases of adulthood are often confusing or contradictory with inadequate controls for
non-genetic variables.
Consanguinity and non-syndromic cleft lip/palate (CL/P) and cleft palate (CP)
In 2014 a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting consanguinity in

relation to non-syndromic orofacial clefts (NSOFC) concluded that there was almost twice
the risk of a child being born with NSOFC if there was parental consanguinity (Sabbagh et
al. 2014: 501-13). This 2014 review noted that studies in which the level of consanguinity
was included, and where individual results could be ascertained, a stronger association
with NSOFC in infants born of first cousin marriages was revealed.
The following reports illustrate a range of results indicating positive or neutral associations
between consanguinity and CL/P and CP. A study on the incidence of orofacial clefting in
the Northwest Frontier of Pakistan amongst 61,156 live births reported a higher incidence
of consanguineous marriage amongst the parents of children with CL/P and CP compared
189
In an appraisal of 258 skulls and dentition of ancient Egyptians, Miller (2008: 66) notes that 16.7% exhibited
Class 2 occlusion, remarking that this type of occlusion is a feature of New Kingdom royal mummies, particularly
in the 18th dynasty. Miller points out that this could be a genetic predisposition arising from royal consanguineous
marriages, although Class 2 occlusion may have been caused by oral habits such as thumb sucking.
190
See also reviews of consanguinity and child health in Bittles and Black (2010c: 737-41); Bittles (2003: 571-76);
Saggar and Bittles (2008: 244-49).
118
to parents of matched controls (32% and 18% respectively), with first cousin marriages
implicated more than second cousin marriages (Elahi et al., 2004: 1153-54).191 In Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia, consanguineous marriages were identified in the parents of 56.8% of 1171
cases of CL/P and CP, while family history of CL/P and CP was more likely to be positive
for individuals whose parents were consanguineous (Ravichandran et al. 2012: 541-46). In
contrast, a review of 807 cases of CL/P and CP, also carried out in Riyadh, indicated that the
parents of 54.4% of cases had consanguineous marriages whereas the remainder were non-
consanguineous, leading the authors to conclude that no clear link could be made between
orofacial clefts and consanguinity in their region (Aljohar et al. 2008: 592-96). A study of
the incidence of oral clefts in Iran amongst 11,651 live births indicated that the risk of CL/P
or CP increased to 10.7:1000 live births amongst the offspring of consanguineous parents
compared to 2.14:1000 in the general background population (although the study does not
define the level of relatedness to qualify as consanguineous) (Jamilian et al., 2007: 174-76).
Other examples of reports of a positive association between consanguinity and CL/P and CP
include studies in Palestine (Zlotogora 1997: 472-75) and Lebanon (Kanaan et al. 2008: 367-
72).192 A review conducted in South India of 1247 patients with CL/P, CP and CL reported
that 47.2% were the offspring of consanguineous marriages, with males predominating in
all types of clefts (Rajeev et al 2017: 3-8).
Characteristics of cleft lip/palate and cleft palate and their reported incidence in modern
and ancient populations
Cleft lip with or without associated cleft palate (CL/P) and cleft palate (CP) are amongst
the most common birth anomalies worldwide and their occurrence differs amongst sexes,
populations and ethnicities (Marazita 2012: 264). Approximately 70% of CL/P and 50% of
CP are considered non-syndromic in that they are isolated conditions with no apparent
cognitive or structural anomalies, and CP is more likely to be syndromic than CL/P (Burg et
al. 2016: 67; Marazita 2012: 263-83).193 CL/P and CP are distinct entities due to disturbances
associated with different morphogenetic fields (Barnes 2012: 25-26, 32; 1994: 171, 184).194
191
Elahi et al. (2004: 1151-53) reported that 20% of individuals with CL/P and CP manifested associated identifiable
syndromic or non-syndromic anomalies. The report did not include data from homebirths and did not give a
separate breakdown for CL/P and CP.
192
A study by Sivertsen et al. (2008: 423-24) of 2.1 million children born in Norway between 1967–2001 showed the
occurrence of CP to be 56 times greater, and the occurrence of CL/P to be 32 times greater, amongst first-degree
relatives (siblings or parent/offspring) although the risk of recurrence within families was not notably related to
the severity of the defect nor was it related to a higher incidence of CP/P or CP in mothers compared to fathers
(the report focused on the recurrence of CL/P and CP within families and did not identify how many families
in the review were married consanguineously). A study by Grosen et al. (2010: 164-65) of 6,776 children born
between 1952-2005 in Denmark reported the relative risk of CL/P to be 17 times higher amongst first-degree
relatives than the risk observed in the background population. Grosen et al. (2010: 164-65) note that the risk
decreased amongst second-degree relatives (four times higher) and amongst third-degree relatives (three times
higher) and report a similar risk pattern for CL only and CP.
193
Although fifteen types of orofacial clefts have been annotated, all are rare except for CL/P and CP (Marazita
2012: 263-83).
194
Barnes (1994: 171) describes cleft palate as follows: ‘Developmental delay in the descent of the primitive tongue
from the nasal region slows the change in direction of the palatal processes. This upsets the timing of their
development and their approach to one another’. Barnes (1994: 184) describes cleft lip as follows: ‘Cleft lip
develops when one or both of the maxillary prominences fail to unite with the premaxillary prominence… The
more severe the clefting between the maxilla and premaxilla (particularly with bilateral clefting), the more likely
it is for there to be a secondary cleft in the palate as well’. The timing and extent of developmental delay affects
119
Figure 5.1: Cleft lip (cleft premaxilla) (young child): A normal (with dotted lines outlining the
premaxilla), B incomplete unilateral left cleft, C complete left unilateral cleft, D bilateral cleft, E
midline cleft, F agenesis of the maxilla - wide cleft. Source: Redrawn by author after Barnes, Atlas of
Developmental Field Anomalies of the Human Skeleton: A Paleopathology Perspective, 2012: 28.
Although genetic variants and mutations causing syndromic orofacial clefts have been
identified, less progress has been made determining the aetiology of non-syndromic
orofacial clefts although they are thought to have a multifactorial response combining
genetic and environmental influences (Burg et al., 2016:1; Mazarita 2012: 264).195 There are
the severity of cleft lip/palate and cleft palate (Barnes, 1994:173, 186; see also Barnes 2012: 25-26, 32).
195
For discussion of aetiology of non-syndromic orofacial clefts, see Dixon et al. (2011: 167-78).
120
more than 400 chromosomally or genetically based disorders that involve CP and more
than 200 that involve CL/P (Mossey et al. 2009: 1779; Shprintzen 2002: 17-27). In a study
of 6454 infants with multi-malformations, anomalies most frequently associated with
CL/P are recorded as congenital heart defects (28.6%), polydactyly (16.2 %), deformation/s
(14.6%), hydrocephaly (11.4%), and a-microphthalmia (8.3%), while anomalies most
frequently associated with CP are congenital heart defects (31.1%), deformation/s (22.4%),
hydrocephaly (11.2%), urinary tract defects (9.7%), and polydactyly (9.2%) (Mossey and
Catilla, 2003:19).
CL/P occurs more frequently in males and isolated CP is observed more often in females;
the sex ratio varies according to a number of factors including ethnic origin, number of
affected siblings in a family, and the presence of additional malformations (Mossey and
Modell 2012: 4). The highest rate of CL/P and CP is found amongst Native Americans and
Asians with almost 2:1000 live births, Caucasians have approximately 1:1000 live births, and
African-derived populations have approximately 1:2500 (Mazarita 2012: 265); the overall
figure for the prevalence of orofacial clefts is approximately 1:700 live births (Mossey
and Modell 2012: 1). CL/P and CP range in expression, severity and position and can be
unilateral or bilateral, incomplete or complete.
CL/P and CP are rarely reported in historic and prehistoric populations, and even less so
in infant skeletal or mummified remains. Many reasons have been posited as to why these
conditions are so rarely seen: few infants may have survived facial clefts, the fragility of
neonatal skulls and lack of fusion of the bones of the orofacial region make it difficult to
diagnose these clefts or they have been overlooked, bones are poorly preserved or cartilage
disintegrated, children may have been abandoned or killed, or infants and younger children
may have been buried separately from adults (Roberts and Manchester 2007: 9, 40; Phillips
and Sivilich 2006: 528-35). An unusually large find of nine cleft palates (of varying degrees)
has been identified in a set of 164 preserved maxillae in the Athenian Agora well burial,
which held at least 449 foetuses and infants; all nine palates appear to belong to full-term
infants (Liston and Rostroff, 2014: 64, 74; see n.212). The reported incidence of CL/P and CP
in palaeopathology is found in studies by Anderson (2000: 201-02); Gregg et al. (1981: 210-
22); Ortner (2003: 456-59); and Phillips and Sivilich (2006: 528-35).
Cleft lip/palate and cleft lip in ancient Egypt
There is one report of CL/P and one report of CL in the ancient Egyptian palaeopathological
record, and to the author’s knowledge there are no other reported cases supported with
evidence. Hawass et al. (2010: 645) claim to have identified a cleft palate on the body of
Tutankhamun (KV62) and on what may be the body of Akhenaten (KV55),196 but their
assertions are not substantiated with scientific evidence, while Strouhal (2010: 110-11) refutes
the claimed evidence for cleft palate in Akhenaten since the posterior part of the hard palate
has been broken off. In ancient Egyptian texts or art there are no specific references to cleft
lip or cleft palate although Dasen suggests the term ‘Horus birth’ might imply cleft palate
196
Duhig (2010: 113-15) sheds doubt on the KV55 remains being that of Akhenaten and proposes that it is a
different royal male.
121
Figure 5.2: Cleft lip (premaxilla) with cleft (maxillary) palate (young child): A normal (with dotted
lines outlining the premaxilla), B incomplete left cleft lip with unilateral left cleft palate, C unilateral
left cleft lip and palate, D bilateral cleft lip and palate, E midline cleft lip and palate, F agenesis
of the premaxilla with wide midline cleft palate. Source: Redrawn by author after Barnes, Atlas of
Developmental Field Anomalies of the Human Skeleton: A Paleopathology Perspective, 2012: 29.
(Dasen 1993: 99). Györy (2000: 112) believes that ‘Horus birth’ probably refers to a delicate or
under-developed child, as opposed to a child with marked physical abnormalities.
As Györy (2000: 106) notes, any physical abnormalities caused by abnormal development of
the foetus, or by adverse events during labour, would have become noticeable at birth and
so protection was sought through practical actions and amuletic decrees:
122
We shall (cause her) to conceive male and female children. We shall keep her safe from
the Horus birth, from a miscarriage (?) (d3.t) and from giving birth to twins. We shall
keep her safe from any (kind of) death and any (kind of) sickness in giving birth.
Turin Museum 1984, in Edwards, Oracular Amuletic Decrees of the Late New Kingdom,
Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum, Fourth Series, 1960, Vol. 1, 66-67; Vol. 2, plate
24: T.2. ll. 112-15.
The only way in which it might be possible to estimate the frequency of CL/P or CP in ancient
Egypt is by comparison to the modern clinical record, but because of its multifactorial
response its past prevalence may not be the same as current estimates, and evidence from
which comparable data can be drawn does not exist from ancient Egypt. Even where there
are large assemblages of skulls, for example, 749 skulls in the Egyptian skeletal collection
at the University of Turin (Massali and Chiarelli 1972: 161-69), or 3750 ancient skulls in the
Upper Missouri River Basin (Gregg et al. 1981: 210-22), the likelihood of finding cleft palate
would still be low. A rare example of a large bilateral cleft of the central and posterior area
of the palate has been identified in an adult female Nubian cranium belonging to X group,
Ballana Culture, AD 400-600 (figure 5.3), which is held in the Nubian skeletal collection in
the British Museum of Natural History (BMNH 210 72/291) (Ortner 2003: 457).
In 1938 Derry reported a midline cleft lip caused by total aplasia of the premaxilla on a skull
dated to the 25th dynasty found at Matmar, south of Assiut in Middle Egypt (Derry 1938:
295-98 and plate 1).197 Although the bodies found in the Matmar cemeteries are described
in the 1929-31 excavation report (Brunton 1948), there are no genealogical details related
to this individual and an assumption of consanguinity cannot be made. Derry states the
skull appears to be a woman ‘well past middle age’ and with the exception of this cleft the
skull is normal. The absence of the premaxillary part of the maxilla has resulted in the
antemortem absence of incisor teeth and only the right canine has developed (see figure
5.4).198 Derry also notes that the horizontal plates of the palatine bones are absent and
together with the missing premaxilla this has resulted in a marked reduction in size of the
hard palate (see figure 5.5). Using the categories illustrated by Barnes in figures 5.1 and
5.2, agenesis of the premaxilla can occur with CL and CL/P; in this case of cleft lip the hard
palate is reduced in size but not clefted. A midline or median cleft lip is a rare anomaly with
an incidence of 0.43% to 0.73% in modern cleft patient populations (Apesos and Anigian
1993: 94-96; Koh et al. 2016: 242-47).199
197
Derry commented only on the skull and did not mention the rest of the skeleton and therefore any other
skeletal abnormality cannot be assumed. Brunton’s (1948) excavation report gives limited details about skeletal
remains found during excavations at Matmar. In his 1938 article, Derry reports a second skull with agenesis of the
premaxilla, but no provenance is given and he believes the skull to be ‘relatively modern’ (1938: 296).
198
This midline cleft has also been commented on by Barnes (1994: 189); Ortner (2003: 457); Roberts and Manchester
(1995: 40).
199
Apesos and Anigian (1993: 94-96) highlight two major categories of dysplasia associated with median cleft lip:
De Mayer sequence which is associated with cerebral anomalies, intellectual impairment and a relatively short
life expectancy; medium cleft face syndrome is often associated with hypertelorism, nasal deformity and little or
no intellectual impairment and a normal life expectancy. Starck and Epker (1994: 1217-19) point out that midline
diastema of the maxillary dentition is the mildest form of median cleft lip, while related congenital anomalies
associated with abnormalities in the development of the frontonasal process include cyclopia, holoprosencephaly,
and hemicephalus.
123
Figure 5.3: Large bilateral cleft of the central and posterior area of the palate, adult
female, X group, Ballana Culture, Nubia, AD 400–600. Photograph courtesy of Roger
Forshaw.
Figure 5.4: Frontal view of the 25th dynasty skull with midline cleft lip and absence of
incisor teeth. The white area is the crown of the right canine lying horizontally across
the middle line below the nasal spine. Source: Derry, 1938, Two Skulls with Absence of
Premaxilla, Journal of Anatomy, 72, part 2, plate 1, figure 1. Reproduced courtesy of the
Journal of Anatomy.
124
The second report of orofacial clefting

in ancient Egypt belongs to a mummy
of a child from the Roman Period (c. AD
31–395) who also had a fracture of the
skull and of the femur at the time of
death. Hoffman and Hudgins (2002: 1368-
69, 1373-74) state that the child mummy
is from the 25th or 26th dynasties, but
Lacovara et al. (2001: 25) consider the
mummy dates from the Roman Period.
The mummy was brought to Canada in
the mid-19th century but was not studied
or published until 2001 (Lacovara and
D’Auria 2001: 22-27). There are no details
about the provenance or genealogy of
Figure 5.5: Profile view of the 25th dynasty skull this mummy and it cannot be assumed
with the mandible in position. The upper teeth have her family was consanguineous. From
been caught between the teeth of the mandible and
the pattern of tooth eruption the child is
have been pushed upwards and inwards because
of the reduced size of the palate. Source: Derry, thought to have been around five years
1938, Two Skulls with Absence of Premaxilla, Journal of of age and CT scans reveal a mild form
Anatomy, 72, part 2, plate 1, figure 3. Reproduced of CP, which appears to be confined to
courtesy of the Journal of Anatomy. the anterior midline alveolar process,
but not extending into the posterior
palate (Hoffman and Hudgins 2002: 1370, 1373, 1375) (see figures 5.6 and 5.7). The volume-
rendered image of this child mummy also suggests a midline cleft lip (Forshaw 2013).200
Consanguinity and intellectual and developmental disorders
Intellectual and developmental disorders (IDD)201 involve diminished cognitive and adaptive
development and are observed more frequently in the offspring of consanguineous parents,
which Bittles (2012: 152) notes suggests the expression of detrimental recessive genes
in some individuals. IDD encompasses a varied range and type of impaired intellectual
functioning and adaptive behaviour and is manifested in the development period up to
the age of eighteen years (Wehmeyer and Obremski 2010: 8). Research in the State of Qatar
amongst a representative sample of 1515 women, of whom 54% were in a consanguineous
marriage, report a rate of IDD amongst the offspring of consanguineous marriages at
3.7% compared to 0.4% in the offspring of non-consanguineous marriages (Bener and
Hussein 2006: 372-78).202 A study in Bangladesh found that severe IDD was associated with
consanguinity in rural areas and mild IDD with consanguinity in urban areas (Durkin et
al. 2000: 1024-33). In Egypt a study amongst a random sample of 3000 people in Assiut
200
Cases of oral pathology from the KNH Mummy Studies, pending publication.
201
Previously called ‘mental retardation’ or ‘learning disability’. For example, see Terdal (1981: 180) and Walmsley
(2001: 187-89).
202
In a study on the six most common psychiatric disorders in the state of Qatar, Bener et al. (2016: 172-81) remark
that generalised anxiety disorders, major depression and personality disorders were significantly higher in
consanguineous marriages than in non-consanguineous marriages.
125
Figure 5.6: Axial CT scan showing

bony cleft in midline (straight
white arrow). A wad of resin-
soaked linen was put over the
right side of the child’s nose
to restore the natural facial
contours (curved white arrow).
Copyright: American Roentgen
Ray Society, 2002.
Figure 5.7: A volume-rendered shaded-surface-display CT image showing a midline

cleft lip. Source: Hoffman and Hudgins, Head and skull base features of nine Egyptian
mummies: evaluation with high-resolution CT and reformation techniques, American
Journal of Roentgenology, 2002, 178 (6): 1373, figure 11, A and B. Copyright: American
Roentgen Ray Society, 2002.
126
Governorate found an overall prevalence of IDD of 3.8%; the rate of consanguinity amongst
the parents of this group was 65% (Temtamy et al. 1994: 347-51). Other reported increased
rates of IDD in association with consanguinity include studies in Sweden (Furnell 1998:
608-11), southern Israel (Saad et al. 2014: 1-3), and Bahrain (Al-Ansari, 1993: 140-43).
Commenting on the high association between consanguinity and IDD, Bittles (2012: 153)
notes that consanguineous marriage is most common in lower socioeconomic communities
and, therefore, the influence of non-genetic variables needs to be minimised in studies
investigating links between consanguinity and IDD.
Characteristics of intellectual and developmental disorders and their reported incidence in

modern and ancient populations
The umbrella term Intellectual and Developmental Disorders (IDD) is a cluster of syndromes
and disorders with multiple aetiologies and comorbidities;203 its prevalence is estimated at 1%
in high-income countries and at 2% in low- and middle-income countries (Carulla et al. 2011:
175-80). However, the reported prevalence of IDD in regions or countries varies according to
diagnostic systems used, severity of illness, the population under review, the age and gender
of the group, and socioeconomic status. For example, a study in Egypt that includes borderline
cases reports a prevalence of 39:1000 (Temtamy et al. 1994: 347-51); a review from Canada of
14-20 year olds reports 7.18:1000 (Bradley et al. 2002: 652-59), and a study of 0-6 year olds
in China reports 9.3:1000 (Zie et al. 2008: 1029-38). A meta-analysis conducted in 2011 on
the prevalence of IDD in 52 population-based studies reported 10.37:1000 with the highest
rates seen in low- and middle-income countries, and also increased rates among children and
adolescents in contrast to adults. The meta-analysis did not include results from studies on
the prevalence of comorbid mental disorders in people with IDD (Maulik et al. 2011: 419-36).
Two leading diagnostic classification systems for defining intellectual disability are the
Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the American Association
on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD), both of which define IDD as a
developmental condition characterised by significant deficits in intellectual functioning
and adaptive behaviour with onset before 18 years of age (AAIDD, 2017; DSM-5 Intellectual
Disability Fact Sheet, American Psychiatric Association, 5th ed., 2013). Tassé (2016) points
out that there are no ‘universal biomarkers’ associated with IDD and definition relies on
clinical evaluation. Tests to determine impairments affecting intellectual and adaptive
functioning cover three areas: conceptual skills involving language, reading, writing,
mathematics, reasoning, knowledge and memory; social skills involving communication,
social judgement, creating and maintaining relationships; and practical skills involving
personal care, job responsibilities, organisation of work, money, and social life (DSM-5
Intellectual Disability Factsheet, American Psychiatric Association, 5th ed., 2013). Although
it is difficult to diagnose comorbidities in people with IDD, a number of physical and mental
disorders have increased association with IDD and many are more prevalent in those with
severe to profound IDD (Maulik and Harbour 2010). These disorders are discussed in further
detail in the section on infant survival and adaptive functioning below.
203
Comorbidities: ‘Any distinct additional entity that has existed or may occur during the clinical course of a
patient who has the index disease under study’ (Feinstein 1970: 456-67; see also Valderas et al. 2009: 357-63).
127
IDD do not leave a trace in human remains, and the scope of syndromes and disorders
encompassed by the term IDD makes it impossible to identify specific references to them
in the ancient record. However, it might be possible to find documentary references to
behaviours indicative of intellectual impairment (in its current definition), but even then
IDD cannot be assumed. Studies related to mental impairment, mental states and unusual
or aberrant behaviours in ancient societies often employ the generic term ‘madness’,
although this term and its definition continues to be re-examined and refined. While IDD
is specifically related to development of skills manifested during the development period,
it is frequently associated with mental disorders (Cooper et al. 2007a: 493-501; Munir 2016:
97-99).204 A population-based study in the UK reported a 40.9% prevalence rate of mental
ill health (clinical diagnoses) among adults with intellectual disability, with problem
behaviour as the most prevalent type (Cooper et al.: 2007b: 27-35). Further findings that
children, adolescents, and adults with IDD are at high risk of developing comorbid serious
mental illness include studies in Australia (White et al. 2005: 395-400), Israel (Reichenberg
et al. 2006: 193-207) and Finland (Koskentausta et al. 2002: 126-31).
Attitudes towards intellectual and developmental impairment in ancient Greece
This section presents a summary of the presentation of mental states in ancient Greece,
and touches upon the use and interpretation of the terms ‘madness’ and ‘hysteria’. This
material has been included as a parallel to ancient Egypt to illustrate differences in
approach to potential intellectual and developmental disorders within ancient Greek
literary texts and medical treatises; it also discusses the association that has been made
between ‘hysteria’, attributed to migratory uterus in the writings of Hippocrates, to the
displaced uterus described in the Kahun Papyrus.
There is extensive evidence for social exclusion in ancient Greek literature and iconography
for reasons such as madness, disability, abnormal birth, enslavement, or for being a stranger
or foreigner.205 In an analysis of mental states from the time of Homer to Late Antiquity,
Goodey and Rose (2013: 19) choose the term ‘disparity’ to describe differences not only in
physical and mental states, but also in characters flawed through foolish behaviour, avarice
or trickery, and comment on the difficulty of locating a concept of intellectual disability
tied to permanence or identity (‘disparity’ does not assume a general level of normalcy).
The earliest Greek vocabulary for lack of intelligence occurs in the Iliad and the Odyssey,
but it was a social observation and rarely a permanent state; for example, on hearing from
her nurse of Odysseus’ return, a disbelieving Penelope exclaims to her nurse how gods
make the wise foolish/slow-witted. (Goodey and Rose 2013: 25-26, Odyssey, 23, 10-15). In
204
While Cooper et al.’s (2007a: 493-501) study focuses specifically on mental ill-health in adults with profound
intellectual disabilities, their work also refers to a range of research between IDD and mental disorders.
205
See Papadopoulous (2000: 97-98) for a list of literary testimonies relating to social exclusion for reasons
including strangers and foreigners, ‘lunatics’ and epileptics, prisoners, gender and sexuality; also, literary
references to exposure of abnormal births, and attitudes towards scapegoats, deformity, disabled citizens and
dwarfs. For a range of studies on disability in Antiquity see Laes (ed.) (2017). For Greece, Rome and the Graeco-
Roman world, see Garland (1995); Kelley (2007: 31-45); Laes et al. (2013); Rose (2003); Trentin (2011: 195-208);
for health, sickness, environment and demography, see Pudsey (2017: 22-34). For Mesopotamia (and Israel), see
Kellenberger (2017: 47-60); Walls (2007: 13-30); for ancient Persia, see Coloru (2017: 61-74); and for disability in
Biblical literature, see Avalos et al. (eds) (2007); Moss and Schipper (2011); Olyan (2008); Raphael (2009).
128
the Homeric epics the body and mind remained inseparable and the function that guided
behaviour was located in the upper torso.206
The inseparable functioning of body and mind in Homeric sources also has parallels as
late as the Roman Period in the medical treatises of the Greek physician Galen (b. AD 129).
Intellectual or developmental impairment, inasmuch as they can be categorised, reflected
an imbalance in the health of the body’s organs, a type of functional disturbance, and were
treated as impermanent disorders arising from situations; Galen’s belief in the sympathetic
link between body and mind is reflected in a treatise written at the end of his life, ‘That the
Faculties of the Soul (mind) follow the Mixtures of the Body’ (see Clark and Rose 2013: 38; Holmes
2013: 147, 171-76).207
In Plato’s Phaedrus (for example, 245a-b, 246a-b), Socrates describes two types of madness,
one arises from disease and is destructive, the other is god-given and positive, so that
madness becomes a passage into a volatile state that ‘runs alongside the ordinary functions
of the mind’ (Vogt 2013: 182). An example of divine madness is that of Agave in the Bacchae,
although Agave’s madness is delusional and a form of punishment compared to the ecstatic
madness of the real maenads, a gift of Dionysus (Theodorou 1991: 80-81).208 As the play
culminates Agave attacks her son, Pentheus, the king of Thebes:
But her mouth dripped foam and her eyes rolled: she was not in her right mind but
possessed by the bacchic god, and his entreaty did not move her. Taking his right hand
in her grip and planting her foot against the poor man’s flank, she tore out his arm at
the shoulder, using a strength not her own but put in her hands by the god.
Bacchae, ll. 1120-29, Euripides, Kovacs, 2003.
In the medical writings attributed to Hippocrates, Corpus Hippocraticum (4th century BC),
‘hysteria’ (now classified under dissociative, somatoform, and conversion disorders) is
associated primarily with women and caused by displacement of the uterus (womb).209 For
example, hysterical suffocation is the result of the uterus moving into the upper abdomen
causing the mouth to fill with fluid, coldness in the legs, inability to speak, and head and
tongue overcome by drowsiness (Eghigian, 2010: 32).210 The ancient Greek wandering or
206
Clarke (1999: 73) notes that the head is a ‘sign of life and identity, especially from another person’s point of
view, but thought and consciousness are in the upper torso’. See Goodey and Rose (2013: 26-27) for a discussion
on terms and contexts used to describe wise and foolish behaviour.
207
Holmes (2013: 147-76) discusses in detail sympathetic affections and mental disorders in Galen and, in
particular, the relationship between mind and body as a site of sympathy.
208
(i) Theodorou (1991: 66-85) explores the symptomatology of madness in the Bacchae, Orestes and Herakles and the
vocabulary used by Euripides to distinguish different aspects and faces of madness.
(ii) See Vogt, (2013: 182-87) for god-given madness in the Phaedrus and an examination of features and names
ascribed to them.
209
(i) Dean-Jones (2013: 108) remarks that one sixth of the Corpus Hippocraticum is gynaecological and a woman’s
reproductive system is treated as the main site of female disease and treatment.
(ii) Oyama et al. (2007: 1333) describe somatoform disorders as a ‘group of psychiatric disorders in which patients
present with a myriad of clinically significant but unexplained physical symptoms. They include somatization
disorder, undifferentiated somatoform disorder, hypochondriasis, conversion disorder, pain disorder, body
dysmorphic disorder, and somatoform disorder not otherwise specified. These disorders often cause significant
emotional distress for patients and are a challenge to family physicians’.
210
Hippocratic treatises relating to the ‘wandering’ womb (displacement of the uterus) appear in gynaecological
129
migratory uterus and resultant ‘hysteria’ has been attributed to the ‘wandering womb’
as a cause of hysterical states in ancient Egyptian medicine (for example, Veith 1965: 2-3,
10). This interpretation is challenged by Merskey and Potter (1989: 751-53) on the basis
that the Middle Kingdom Kahun Papyrus211 links the uterus to sickness in a variety of body
locations but does not state how this occurs, while the Ebers Papyrus mentions a displaced
uterus with no indication of distance; for example, Ebers 795 describes fumigation with
an ibis of wax burnt on charcoal ‘to make the uterus return to its position’. Collier and
Quirke’s (2004: 58, case 2, col. 1, ll. 5-8) translation of a prescription in the Kahun Papyrus
describes fumigation with whatever ‘she smells as roast’ for a woman ‘who is ill from
her womb wandering’.212 However, in his medical assessment of the gynaecological texts,
Nunn (1996: 196) suggests that Ebers 789-95, which lists remedies ‘to cause the uterus to
go down’, suggests a prolapse of the uterus. In effect, the understanding of the displaced
uterus in ancient Egyptian texts is open to modern interpretation as a psychiatric state or
a biological prolapse even before its influence is considered on the ‘migratory’ uterus in
the Corpus Hippocraticum and, thereby, highlights one of the inherent difficulties of modern
interpretations of historical medical texts.
Evidence for burial for socially excluded individuals or groups is more limited in ancient
Greece. Papadopoulos (2000: 97, 112) suggests this may be due to sites chosen for
archaeological searches rather than scarcity of evidence. For example, skeletons in wells
are a phenomenon in Aegean prehistory and classical archaeology and may be a type of
burial for infants, children and adults who were socially excluded for a variety of reasons,
including infants not given rights of passage;213 however, the socially excluded were not
necessarily given noticeably different burials either in type or location (such as wells) and
instead they may be buried in special cemeteries or plots within general cemeteries and
the extent of their burials may be overlooked (Papadopoulos 2000: 113).214 Not all those
considered different, deviant or disabled were necessarily excluded in communities in life
or differentiated at burial, therefore judgements on the extent of social exclusion need
texts including Nature of Women (2012, Loeb Classical Library 520: 187-323; Nature of Women shares many textual
parallels to Diseases of Women I and 2 and Barrenness) (Potter 2012: 189). Adair (1995: 154, 163) proposes that Plato
revised the interpretation of ‘hysteria’ as a frustrated impulse arising from the womb, ‘a proto-psychological
theory of hysterical symptoms’ rather than a physical wandering of the womb.
211
Although fragmentary, the Kahun Papyrus contains 34 prescriptions for fumigations, pastes and applications
for gynaecological conditions; the document also offers guidance on contraception, pregnancy, including
determining the sex of an unborn child, and sterility (see Collier and Quirke 2004: 58-64; Griffith 1898: 5-11).
Gynaecological diagnoses and treatments are also found in Berlin, Carlsberg, Ebers, London, and Ramesseum
Papyri (David 2008: 188-89).
212
This link between a migratory uterus in Egyptian and Greek medicine has also been challenged by Lloyd (1983:
65 n.21, 84 n.100).
213
In ancient Greece a child ceased to be a baby at three years and as a member of society would usually be buried
in adult cemeteries. Corpses of infants under three years of age are commonly found intramurally or within
settlements in Bronze and early Iron Age Greece (Papadopoulos 2000: 111). Well burials containing only foetuses,
neonates or infants have also been recorded, for example, the Messene agora (3rd–2nd century BC) containing an
estimated 262-284 foetuses, neonates and infants; the Athenian agora well (G 5.3, 165–160 BC) containing at least
449 foetuses and infants and 130 dogs; deposit FK 153 of the Eretria well containing remains of at least 19 infants
and 1100 dog bones (Bourbou and Themelis 2010: 112-13; Liston and Rotroff 2013: 62-77).
214
The bodies of 12 individuals, each with their arms shackled behind their backs, have been found in a grave at
Paleon Faliron, the port of Athens prior to the establishment of Piraeus in the 5th century BC. This grave is part of a
network of graves dating from the 8th–5th centuries BC containing around 1500 skeletons, almost one third are children
interred in pots, as well as simple pit graves and more elaborate elite burials: (https://archaeologynewsnetwork.
blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/shackled-skeletons-to-shed-light-on.html#ROxYGIAUjeWu8Dep.97. Accessed 31.3.2017.
130
to be tempered when considering physical, literary and iconographic evidence. Even in

relation to the burials of foetuses, neonates and infants in wells, Bourbou and Themelis
(2010: 115) remark that the well burials of infants may not be deviant burials, but merely
reflect the status of children under three years of age.215
Attitudes towards intellectual and developmental impairment in ancient Egypt
Although I have used medical discourse to describe IDD and its potential impact on the
individual, the lack of terms (or uncertainty relating to terms) describing mental and
behavioural disorders in ancient Egypt implies an inclusive attitude towards different
behaviours. It is likely that conditions that are now considered symptomatic of IDD
were not considered sufficiently different or relevant to be given specific terms. Just as
magic, medicine and religion are closely intertwined, what might be diagnosed in modern
medicine as IDD probably belonged to the wide spectrum of health and healing into
which fall sicknesses, diseases and ageing alongside recovery and management of medical
conditions.
In a discussion on the embodied response to dis/ability Oliver and Barnes (2012: 98, 1990:
22-24) note that the individual’s response to their impairment is shaped by socially and
culturally determined attitudes towards society, and the individual’s experience of their
impairment also changes during the course and circumstances of their life. Developing
this argument, Zakrzewski (2014: 64) proposes that ancient Egyptians may have viewed
an individual’s ability along a continuum varying according to age, occupation and status,
as a result everyone had varying abilities and adjusted their lives accordingly. I agree
with this proposal and would extend it to the intermittent or permanent differences in
behaviour and health caused by intellectual and developmental disorders. The use of the
term ‘disparity’ coined by Goodey and Rose (2013: 19) to describe differences in physical
and mental states and the difficulty of locating a fixed concept of intellectual impairment
could also apply to ancient Egypt. What may currently be considered permanent IDD, with
varying degrees of severity, can be contextualised in ancient Egypt into the capacity to be
involved at some level in family or community life according to functional performance,
which should be understood in relation to context and not tied to permanency or normalcy.
This may change according to age and circumstances and also needs to be considered in
the context of religious beliefs, the general health environment and life expectancy (see
page 21).
There is very little in Egyptian literature to assume behaviour associated with IDD and one
of the most suggestive references to mental illness is in the Instructions of Amenemope:
215
In a report of a well burial in Messene of foetuses, infants and newborns, Bourbou and Themelis (2014: 112-13)
found no evidence of long-term disease or trauma, concluding the risks of pregnancy, childbirth and survival in
the early weeks of life were probable causes of death (cleft palate is recorded amongst a ‘number’ of individuals,
leading the authors to suggest infanticide). Bourbou and Themelis (2014: 117) propose that some infants were
originally buried in pots and relocated to this well, which was thereafter associated with the community as a place
of disposal for infants.
131
Do not laugh at a blind man,

Nor tease a dwarf,
Nor cause hardship for the lame,
Don’t tease a man who is in the hand of the god,
Nor be angry with him for his failings.
Instructions of Amenemope, chapter 25, ll. 8-11, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Lichtheim
1976: 160.216
The expression ‘in the hand of the god’ implies a liminal status between the world of the
temporal and the divine, but is suggestive of care and not exclusion; Lichtheim (1976: 163 n.26)
comments that ‘in the hand of the god’ has a special meaning here of being ill or insane.217
There are parallels here with Mesopotamian sources in which ‘Hand of the God’ has been
associated with epilepsy in young children, but can also be linked with other diseases, such
as seizures (possibly asplasia) (Stol 1993: 34-36).218 The line from the Instructions of Amenemope
sits within a didactic context, one of many rules that should guide behaviour and attitudes;
its placement alongside the temporary nature of life – ‘man is clay and straw, the god is his
builder’ – does not give any more weight to impairment or behavioural abnormalities than
it does to correct behaviour in the presence of an official or attitudes towards widows or the
elderly (set as instructions in neighbouring chapters). What it does imply is that individuals
with physical differences may have been subject to mockery, but not social exclusion, and
its moral tone echoes the balanced behaviour that is expected of Egyptians, but not always
delivered. Jeffreys and Tait (2000: 94) remark on the provision of care for the ‘physically
disadvantaged’ outside ‘mainstream’ society as possibly a religious duty or expected altruism.
Perhaps the Instructions laid down by Amenemope do reflect an aspect of religious duty, but
in an environment where physical and mental outcomes of disease, infection, trauma and
congenital anomalies are common from birth and not hidden from society, it is unlikely that
physical abnormalities were generally considered outside mainstream society, although care
provision may have been an expected altruism.
The idea of a god intermittently guiding or controlling actions is also reflected in the
Middle Kingdom tale of Sinuhe, which details the self-imposed exile to Syria of Sinuhe,
a royal servant and the tale’s narrator. During political unrest following the death of
Amenemhat I, Sinuhe fears he will suffer political retaliation but is deeply troubled by his
choice to flee Egypt. Sinuhe attributes agency for his actions to a ‘god’ or to his ‘heart’,
although early in the text Sinuhe alone was responsible for his flight to Syria (Baines
1982: 39-40).219 On his eventual return, Sinuhe stands before Sesotris I claiming again
that forces beyond him have taken control, ‘If I reply to it, it is not my own doing, it is
216
This phrase – ‘in the hand of the god’ – also appears in an earlier chapter in the Instructions of Amenemope
(chapter 10, l. 20) where the text advises not to speak falsely and through truthfulness become ‘secure in the hand
of the god’; here this term carries the implication of balance and stability associated with ma’at.
217
Berkson (2006: 28-40) points out that the concept of distinguishing intellectual disability from episodic mental
illness first appeared by the second or third centuries AD under Imperial Rome, and during the early mediaeval
period in northern European and Arabic civilisation.
218
A range of symptoms has been associated with ‘Hand of the Goddess’, but it is the term’s appearance in the
same context as epilepsies which may indicate a specific association (Stol 1993: 37).
219
The introduction of an alternative voice into Sinuhe’s account – god, heart or mind – may serve as a literary
device to present different emotions, as in The Dialogue of a Man with his Soul (Baines 1982: 40).
132
the action of (a) god’ (B 261-2, Baines, 1982: 39); but this line may be translated differently,
implying that Sinuhe’s reply is cautious as it is pharaoh who is a god (Allen 2013: 140;
Baines, 1982: 39). Szpakowska (2003: 46-47) remarks how Sinuhe describes the events linked
to his flight from Egypt as the ‘unfolding of a dream’, inferring that a lack of control over
his actions makes him victim to a chaotic reality. We do not know how widely these stories
were disseminated, but the notion ‘being in the hand of the god’ and the belief (or literary
motif) of the mind or heart being held, guided or controlled must have had resonance for
the authors of the texts and their intended audience.220
Although neither depression nor suicidal thoughts are necessarily indicative of IDD,
depression is at least as, or more likely, in individuals with IDD; Hsieh et al. (2020: 49) report
increased estimates of depression ranging from 2.2% to 15.8% compared to the general
population, while Hartley and Maclean (2009: 147) state that depression is one of the most
common psychiatric disorders in adults with intellectual disability. Okasha (1999: 919) and
Nasser (1987: 421) interpret the Debate between a Man and his Soul (P. Berlin 3024, P. Amherst
3) as a personal expression of depression and suicidal thoughts.221 In turns, the Middle
Kingdom text contrasts the fearful prospects of death with the joyful release of ending life;
however, this inner turmoil may be a literary technique employed to reflect uncertainty
resulting from the social and political upheavals of the First Intermediate Period. Allen
(2015: 327) suggests that ultimately this text is an ‘affirmation of life’ when faced with the
most challenging circumstances:
...As for you bringing to mind entombment, it is heartache;

it is bringing tears by saddening a man… (ll. 56-58, spoken by the ba [soul])
…To whom can I speak now?
Faces are obliterated,
every man with face down toward his brothers. (ll. 118-20, spoken by the man)
… Death is in my sight now,
like myrrh’s smell,
like sitting under sails on a windy day. (ll. 132-34, spoken by the man)
Allen, The Debate Between a Man and his Soul, 2015: 327-59.
Okasha (1999: 918-19), Nasser (1987: 421) and Ghalioungui (1963: 79) also highlight an
incident in the demotic text Setne Khamwas and Si-Osire (Setne 2, P. Brit. Mus. 10822 vs.) as
indicative of depression (although there is no indication that Setne’s circumstances are
linked to consanguinity). At the pharaoh’s request, the scribe and magician Setne cannot
read a magical document without breaking the seal and, aware he will fail pharaoh, lies
down oblivious to his surroundings, neither drinking nor eating. His wife finds him and
places her hand in his clothes: ‘My brother Setne, there is no warmth in the breast, no
stirring in the flesh. There is sorrow and grief in the heart’ (Lichtheim 1980: 143).
220
The Bentresh Stela relates how a scribe from the House of Life is sent from Egypt to Mittani to cure a ‘malady
that has seized her [Brentesh] body’ (Lichtheim 1980: 91). The tale reflects the reputation of Egyptian doctors
to banish spirits, but in this case the scribe Thothemheb could diagnose but not cure Bentresh, only Khons-the-
Provider from Thebes is sufficiently powerful to banish evil and restore equilibrium (see Lichtheim 1980: 93-4 n.9
and 10).
221
Allen (2015: 327) points out the uniqueness of the text as the dialogue is between a man and his ba (the realm
of the ba is the afterlife), whereas other literary personal dialogues are with the ἰb or ḥ3ty heart.
133
In Egyptian medicine mental disorders were regarded as symptoms of heart and uterine
diseases; with the possible exception of the displaced uterus, there is no suggestion that
illness was embodied.222 Disease and sickness were extrinsic to the body and could be
brought about by supernatural forces, hostile spirits or deities inhabiting the body, or
by wḫdw bearing weakness, purulence and disease, for example, plague is the ‘evil wind’
brought by emissaries of the goddess Sekhmet (Pinch 2006: 143), while the Ebers Papyrus
lists a general spell for expelling wḫdw:
Nothing will be done in Abydos until the driving out of the [evil] influence of a god,
goddess, male wekhedu, female wekhedut, and so on, and the influence of all evil things
that are in this my body, in this my flesh, and in these my limbs…Perish as you came
into being. Words to be said four times and spat out over the site of the disease. Really
effective: a million times.
Ebers 131, Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine, 1996: 105.
Invisible and hostile entities from the land of the dead have been named in texts from at
least the First Intermediate Period to the Late Period; Szpakowska (2009: 803, 2008: 161)
notes that they were particularly linked to possession or invasion of people or places
resulting in emotional and physical disorders. While many spells were protective, aimed
to divert hostile entities, other spells and incantations were designed to counterattack and
aid individuals already affected by their destructive influence. These potential invaders
are named as 3ḫw – transfigured and justified dead, m(w)t – unjustified dead, and ḏwy –
adversaries of the gods or their generic enemies (Szpakowska 2008: 160-61).
The heart, regarded as the seat of emotion, intelligence and consciousness as well as a
physical entity, is written as ḥ3ty and ἰb, terms used differently in ancient Egyptian sources.
Piankoff (1930: 13) proposes that in the Old and Middle Kingdoms ḥ3ty refers primarily to
the physical heart and ib to the heart in a moral sense, while Assmann (2005: 29-30) posits
that ḥ3ty designates phenomena such as consciousness, recollection and individuality
that are not biologically inherited, and ἰb designates personal emotion and cognition
that are biologically inherited (for example, ἰb n mwt.ἰ, heart of my mother, in Chapter
30B of the Book of the Dead), as well as being a physiological entity.223 Ebell (1937: 293-310)
suggests a physiological interpretation of ἰb as stomach; referring to a prescription in Ebers
50.21 translated as ‘let the heart (ἰb) receive bread’, so that r ἰb – mouth of the stomach –
specifically relates to the cardia – the opening of the oesophagus into the stomach. Nyord
(2009: 55-127, 142-3) discusses the meanings of ἰb and ḥ3ty in detail with particular reference
to the torso and its organs in conceptions of the body in the Coffin Texts and highlights
the challenge of categorising physical and metaphorical terminology related to the body.
222
‘The Ancient Egyptian Demonology Project: Second Millennium BCE’ (Swansea University) explores how
diseases, disorders, environmental threats, worries and unexplained problems were placed into an understandable
context by being blamed on demons, were embodied as demons, or their influence and control lay within the
power of demons.
223
In Chapter 30B of the Book of the Dead, ἰb is used for ‘heart of my mother’ and ḥ3ty for ‘heart of my being’: ‘O my
heart of my mother, O my heart of my mother, O my heart of my being! Do not rise up against me as witness, Do
not oppose me in the tribunal, Do not rebel against me before the guardian of the scales!’ (Lichtheim 1976: 121).
134
In the glosses to Ebers 855 (1500 BC) we hear of the heart being ‘flooded’, ‘unaware’,
‘forgetful’, ‘burying’, ‘weary’ and ‘shrouded in darkness’, amongst other states. Nunn
(1996: 85-87) assesses these 23 glosses as ‘pathological’ states of the heart, however Okasha
(1999: 919) believes that some of these states indicate psychiatric or psychotic conditions,
suggesting they are disturbances of thinking, intellect, emotions and behaviour suggestive
of schizophrenia, catatonia, or dementia.224 Two of the remaining glosses attribute the
state of the heart ‘to the breath of the lector priest’ (Ebers 855u), and one is attributed to
‘something entering from outside’ (Ebers 855y) (Nunn 1996: 86; Okasha and Okasha 2000:
421).225
Certain gynaecological conditions addressed in the medical papyri have been associated
with the generic term ‘hysteria’. North (2015: 497) notes the current classifications of
dissociative, somatoform, and conversion disorders are used to describe mental disorders
‘sharing common historical roots in a syndrome previously known as hysteria’ (interlinked
in some periods with spiritual maladies). Ghalioungui (1963: 119) suggests links to ‘hysteria’
in the Kahun Papyrus cases 5, 8 and 11, while Okasha (1999: 918) observes links in 1, 5, 6
and 11, but proposes that many of the diseases described in the Kahun Papyrus would be
recognised today as ‘hysterical disorders’:
Examination of a woman whose eyes are aching till she cannot see, on top of aches in
her neck… (case 1, col. 1. 1)
Examination of a woman aching in her teeth and molars to the point that she cannot
[…] her mouth … (case 5, col. 1. 15)
Examination of a woman all of whose limbs are ill, aching in the socket of her eyes …
(case 6, col. 1. 20)
Examination of a woman aching in her molars, her front, and her ears so much that she
hears no word
You should say of it ‘it is terrors of the uterus’.
You should treat it with the same prescription used for removing detritus of the uterus…
(case 8, col. 1. 25-27)
Examination of a woman bed-bound, not stretching when she shakes it … (case 11, col.
2. 5)
Kahun Medical Papyrus (UC32057), Collier and Quirke, The UCL Lahun Papyri,
Religious, Literary, Legal, Mathematical and Medical, 2004: 58-60.
Jeffreys and Tait (2000: 93) point out that there is no recognisable word to characterise
mental illness in the dynastic period, but a word for madness commonly used in the Coptic
language (from 3rd century AD) makes its first appearance in demotic in the 1st century
BC. The word λιΒε in Coptic (Sahidic dialect and λιΒι in Bohairic dialect, and linked to rbyy
meaning bear or lion in Egyptian) is translated as madness, to be excited or insane in Coptic
and demotic by Vycichl (1983: 94, 402). Černý (1976: 70) translates λιΒε as madness or be
mad and also refers to – to feel violent love, possibly derived from a Semitic root
224
In a discussion on psychiatry in ancient Egypt, Nasser (1987: 421) links glosses in Ebers 855 with fainting as a
psychological symptom.
225
See Mitchell (2011: 81-88) for a discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of using historical texts for
investigating and diagnosing diseases in the past.
135
and related to Arabic ‫( لبلب‬liblib) – the tender love of a mother for her young.226 Crum (1939:
136-37) translates λιΒε in a wide range of contexts including gluttony and idolatry. In the
Dictionary of Late Egyptian Lesko (2002: 345, 350, 361, 2004: 137) translates ḫἰnἰw, ḫ3nἰ and ḫn
as fool and šš as madman (see also Černý 1929: 251 n.50, P. Salt 124, vs. 2.3 for mad or silly).
Groll (1980: 76; see also Lesko 2004: 12) translates syḥ as ‘madness’ in P. Lee, l. 3, although
Goedicke (1963: 84) translates syḥ in this context as ‘excitement’ or ‘rapture’, referring to
the religious fervour of the people witnessing the divine bark of Amun.
Functioning and adaptive ability, accommodation of impairment, and provision of care
A bioarchaeology of care analysis is used in the following discussion to determine or

estimate what care was necessary and what care was possible in relation to orofacial clefts
and intellectual developmental disorders. This discussion is guided by the Index of Care
initiated by Tilley and Cameron (2014: 5-9) and Tilley (2015a and 2015b), then developed
further by Tilley and Schrenk (2016). The structure of the Index of Care follows four
consecutive stages that are summarised below (Tilley and Cameron 2014: 6):
1. Describe, diagnose and document (includes cultural, social, economic, environmental

and mortuary contexts);
2. Determine disability (includes an assessment of whether the impact on function
required direct support and/or accommodation from others);
3. Construct a model of care (includes the characteristics of care that are likely to be
required);
4. Interpretation: explore implications of collective and individual agency in provision
and receipt of care.
Once the disability is diagnosed and its context documented, the approach I have used
assesses the essential impacts in relation to basic survival, for example, what additional
support was needed with feeding, or was extra supervision provided to protect from
physical danger? To what extent would individuals suffering from orofacial clefts or
cognitive impairment have functioned adequately without support to meet social and
cultural demands? To address these questions within a bioarchaeology of care framework,
I have interpreted how the family and caregiving community might accommodate an
individual, how the individual’s identity might be affected (if at all) by their impairment,
and how that impairment might be perceived within their society.
Infant survival and functioning and adaptive behaviour associated with non-syndromic
orofacial clefting
The most dangerous period for the health of an infant with facial clefting is the first year of
life, and in particular the neonatal period (up to 28 days old). The mortality risk for infants
with facial clefting, with or without other abnormalities, was compared by Hujoel et al.
(1992: 451-55) to infants with no diagnosed abnormalities. The study was carried out in
Washington State over a four-year period. The number of deaths per 1000 live births in the
The word for madness in Arabic is ‫( جنون‬junūn) and the word for mad is ‫( مجنون‬majnūn) – to be possessed by
226
djinn, implying a condition caused by external agency.
136
first year of life for infants with CP was 11.5 and all had died within the first 27 days of life.
The number of deaths per 1000 live births in the first year for infants with CL/P was 36.4,
and of those 18.2 infants died in the first 27 days of life. Both sets of figures are for clefting
without other anomalies. When clefting is associated with other anomalies the number of
deaths is much higher at 441.8:1000 and 352.9:1000 for CP and CL/P respectively (Hujoel et
al. 1992: 451-55).227
The physical difficulties related to CL/P and CP are most notable in infancy as nutrition is
compromised. The infant cannot create enough vacuum to suckle properly unless there is
sufficient tongue protrusion under the nipple to gain suction; breastfeeding may be more
difficult to achieve with CP unless the mother hyperlactates to provide rapid milk flow
so that little suction or compression is required of the infant (Riski 2014: 7). It has been
suggested that mothers in ancient societies might have found alternative ways of feeding,
for example, with a spoon or other type of modification (Roberts and Manchester 1995:
40). Two small pinch pots were found in a domestic context at Middle Kingdom Kahun
(Griffith 1910: 40, nos 412, 415; Petrie 1890: 24 and plate 8, nos 89, 90); their size and shape
may have been designed, or be suitable, for feeding infants. Feeding bottles that may
help to control the flow of liquid have also been found in Roman Egypt, for example, a
clay bottle in the shape of a pig (Petrie Museum, UC 48325).228 With CP liquid can enter
the infant’s nasal cavities during feeding and may leak into the airway after swallowing
causing aspiration and a cough response; depending on the position and severity of the
cleft, infants with CL/P and CP are also prone to infection (Barnes 1994: 187, 189; Cummings
2008: 40, 51). While the rate of hearing loss for children with CL is no different than that
of children without orofacial clefts, CP increases the risk of recurrent or persistent ear
infections or the build-up of fluid; current data suggests that 15% of children with cleft
palate experience sensorineural hearing loss (Cummings 2008: 50-51). The articulation of
speech is also affected with CL, while CP (with or without CL) can result in velopharyngeal
incompetence causing hypernasality or unintelligible speech (Cummings 2014: 18-21; Riski
2013: 4-5).
Infant survival and functioning and adaptive behaviour associated with intellectual and
developmental disorders
IDD is often linked with psychiatric conditions including emotional and behavioural
problems, psychotic disorders, affective disorders and anxiety disorders (Maulik and
Harbour 2010; Munir 2016: 97-99). Gentile and Gillig (2012: 210) report a three- to sixfold
increase in the frequency of psychiatric and behavioural problems amongst individuals
with intellectual disorders compared to the general population. Aggression and anger,
227
A study in Norway of long-term health outcomes for children born with orofacial clefts (2337 young adults in
the cohort with a mean age of 30.6 years), found no increased risks of morbidity or mortality in individuals with
isolated CL only compared to unaffected individuals. However, individuals with isolated CL/P showed increased
risks of intellectual disability and cerebral palsy, while individuals with isolated CP showed increased mortality,
increased risks of intellectual disability, anxiety disorders, autism spectrum disorders, severe learning disabilities,
cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and muscle or skeletal disorders (Berg et al. 2016: 1063-70).
228
In the Petrie Museum there are feeding cups from 18th dynasty Qurna: UC 19082, UC 19083, UC 19084 (Petrie
1909: 13, XLII, 747, 748), an undated feeding jug from Qurna: UC 19094, and a feeding cup from the Neolithic Period
from Jebel Moya in the Sudan: UC 70119.
137
expressed physically or verbally, is one of the most frequently reported problem

behaviours from childhood to adulthood in individuals with IDD, with increased rates of
aggressive behavior in severe to profound intellectual disorders (Benson and Brooks 2008:
454, 457). Higher levels of self-injurious behaviour are associated with severe intellectual
and sensory impairments (and visual and hearing deficits are more common in individuals
with intellectual disorders) (Carvill and Marston 2002: 264-65; Gentile and Gillig 2012:
214-16; Tenneji et al. 2009: 1252-55).229 Aggression, destructive behaviour and self-injury
are included under challenging behaviours by Emerson et al. (2001: 77, 92) who reported
that 10-15% of people with mental ‘retardation’ coming into contact with specialist
support services showed challenging behaviours (aggression was more common amongst
individuals with less severe disabilities, and self-injury more common amongst people with
more severe disabilities). The level of care, provision of a safe and secure environment,
and the need for protection and supervision all depend on the severity of IDD, so the
provision of care and the level of adaptive behaviours required may be time-consuming for
all household members and other care providers.
In a discussion of the impact of IDD on communication skills, Cummings (2008: 138-49,

152-60) details feeding difficulties experienced by individuals of all ages due to limited
linguistic or cognitive skills; speech disorders caused by structural factors, such as CL
and CL/P, or neurological factors, including dysarthria and dyspraxia; and difficulties of
speech development and language acquisition in children. Cummings (2008: 149-52) also
notes that hearing disorders common in individuals with IDD include conductive and
sensorineural hearing losses and deficits in central auditory processing, and often more
than one type of hearing disorder may be present. Families or communities may develop
alternative methods of communication, for example, the sign language specific to families
related consanguineously in Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, and the Al-Sayyid Bedouin
community in the Negev desert in Israel (Al-Fityani and Padden 2010: 435, 440, 444-48, see
category ABSL; Groce 1985; Kisch 2008: 283-313; Sandler et al. 2014: 252-54).
Tyrer et al. (2007: 523) report that life expectancy for individuals with mild IDD does not
differ from the general population, but mortality rates for moderate to profound IDD were
found to be three times higher than the general population but varied notably with age,
with the highest rates amongst men and women in their twenties and the lowest in older
age groups. Notable differences in causes of death are noted between individuals with
moderate to profound intellectual disability and the general population; they include death
due to congenital malformations and diseases of the nervous system and sense organs,
respiratory infections, cerebrovascular disease and accidental death (Tyrer 2009: 900-02).
A study in Western Australia conducted by Bittles et al. (2002: M470-472) found a negative
association between severity of intellectual disability and survival, reporting median life
229
Cooper et al. (2009: 217-32) found that more than a quarter of adults exhibiting self-injurious behaviour
remitted within a short to medium term (based on two-year incidence and remission rates). Using the predicted
age structure of a regional population in England, Emerson et al. (2001: 86-87) report a rise in challenging
behaviour (including self-injurious behaviour) during childhood with an observable decline from school leaving
age; however, the decline in challenging behaviour in individuals with severe mental ‘retardation’ is not
observable until 50 years of age.
138
expectancies of 74.0, 67.6, and 58.6 years for people with mild, moderate and severe levels
of IDD respectively.
Finally, the attitudes of the social body that make up the overall community have a
significant effect on the well-being of individuals with IDD, particularly the extent to
which they are positively received, integrated into family and community, and given tasks,
if possible, appropriate to their skills (see Johnson et al. 2012; Mahar et al. 2013; Overmars-
Marx et al. 2014; Simplican et al. 2015).
Accommodation of impairment and provision of care for non-syndromic orofacial clefting

and intellectual and developmental disorders in ancient Egypt
Cleft lip and cleft lip and palate
The individuals with CL and CL/P reported in the two ancient Egyptian skulls may have
required an equal input of care provision from the mother and native resilience from the
infant. The condition of the two skulls is not suggestive of extensive provision of care by
their mothers (or other females), as the infants may have developed adaptive behaviours
such as compensatory suction. We know that the female from Matmar belonged to a
low socioeconomic agricultural community living close to the river Nile. Her body was
excavated in a cemetery containing 212 females, 162 males, and 131 children dating from
950–650 BC. They were described in Brunton’s (1948: 79) excavation report as the ‘poorest
peasant class’; the graves were undisturbed and included pits in sandy ground and simple
coffin-shaped mud brick structures; bodies were found in thin wood or reed coffins or
covered with sticks or mud bricks. The burials were in a sandy wadi not far from the area
of cultivation. Although this cemetery group were from a lower socioeconomic class, as a
relatively sedentary agricultural community it is likely that the mother or other females
would have had excess time to provide care and safety in relation to feeding and nursing
through periods of infection.230 The cause of death for the female with agenesis of the
premaxilla is unknown, but the report by Derry (1938: 295) notes that she lived ‘well past
middle age’ – above average life expectancy in ancient Egypt (see page 21).
The Roman Period child with mild CL/P survived the risks of infancy and we do not know
the cause of death later in childhood. In their evaluation of the CT scan of this child,
Hoffmann and Hudgins (2002: 1375) point out that although the cleft is seemingly mild,
the child may have experienced speech and eating difficulties and would have an increased
risk of infection. The child was found in a gilded coffin, indicative of a family that could
afford mummification and more elaborate burial arrangements than those found in the
Late Period Matmar burials; and also perhaps a family with greater financial resources
to offer care provision, and possibly even a wet nurse. Wet nurses were common in elite
households, although there are references to wet nurses amongst the Ramesside Period
workmen’s community at Deir el-Medina (Janssen and Janssen 1990: 17-18; McDowell 1999:
In cemeteries dating to the Old Kingdom and the Ptolemaic Period at Saqqara the main possible causes of child
230
mortality and morbidity are as follows: anaemia, infectious diseases, upper respiratory tract infections, parasitic
diseases, droplet infections, and dental decay (sugars mixed with starches are more cariogenic than sugar on its
own). Personal correspondence, Iwona Kozieradzka-Ogumankin, February, 2018.
139
36; Robins, 1994-95: 24-25) and in Roman Egypt, for example, P. Tebt. 2.399 from second
century AD Oxyrhynchus.231 We do not know if the two individuals with CL and CL/P were
born of consanguineous families, but even if they had been it is unlikely they would have
required extensive support from a consanguineous network; however, the families of
children with more severe forms of orofacial clefting may have called upon this family
resource, such as the Nubian adult female (AD 400–600) with a large bilateral cleft (see
figure 5.3, page 124). Finally, CL and CL/P would have altered the facial appearance of both
these individuals and their articulation of speech. However, there is no evidence from
ancient Egypt to suggest that altered physical appearance or speech impairment due to
congenital anomalies would have marked these people as different or ‘disabled’ or have
given them a liminal status in society.
Intellectual and developmental disorders
The range of conditions encompassed by IDD does not allow a specific case study for its
presentation and reception in ancient Egypt, but the presentation of mild to severe IDD
is likely to require notably different levels of care and vary considerably in its impact on
the family. Deficiencies in reading, writing and mathematical ability were probably less
important in ancient Egypt than in modern societies. While the content of scribal texts,
such as the Middle Kingdom Satire of the Trades, elevates the social importance of literate
individuals, stating that learning garners respect, enhances authority and offers access to
power, the majority of Egyptians were not literate.232 Baines (1983: 584) estimates that the
literacy rate in pharaonic Egypt was one per cent, although it was higher in Deir el-Medina
due to the skills required for resident crews working on the royal tombs. McDowell (1999:
4) suggests that literacy in Deir el-Medina peaked in the 20th dynasty when an estimated
forty per cent of the population was literate, including almost all the young boys (see
n.122). Bowman (1986: 20) points out that the Greeks brought to Egypt a level of literacy
that had a ‘gradual but ultimately massive impact’ resulting in increased bureaucracy and
the widespread production of written material, but how far literacy extended amongst the
population is difficult to gauge. Impairments resulting from IDD would also be likely to
affect the acquisition and performance of practical skills, such as carpentry or metalwork,
although this depends upon the severity of the condition, as does full participation in
agriculture and food production. Family or community participation in shared domestic
or agricultural activities might offer roles for individuals with IDD that are commensurate
with their skills and performed in a protective, or at least supervised environment.
Speech impairment or hearing disorders arising from IDD may not have limited the effective
functioning of an individual within the family or community, although an increased
231
P. Tebt. 2.399 is a receipt for the services of a female slave as a wet nurse over the course of three years:
‘(Thenkebkis acknowledges) the receipt from him, Isidoros, of 500 drachmas of silver, being the residue of
payments for nursing and oil and other expenses during three years in which Sarapias, the slave of Thenkebkis,
suckled and nurtured Eudaimon surnamed Mu’ (Trismegistos 28423). The majority of wet nurses in Roman Egypt
were free women as opposed to slaves. Personal correspondence, April Pudsey, February, 2018.
232
For Satire of the Trades, see Lichtheim, (1975: 184-92); see also Papyrus Lansing, P. Brit. Mus. 9994 (20th dynasty)
in praise of the scribe’s profession (Lichtheim 1976: 168-75). While these texts deride manual labour, Lichtheim
(1975: 184) points out that all types of labour are respected in the major didactic texts: the Instructions of Ptahhotep
and The Eloquent Peasant.
140
input of time may have been required to clarify communication. There is evidence in the
Ebers (761-81), Edwin Smith and Berlin Papyri for the treatment of hearing disorders and
deafness, for example, ‘to treat the deaf of an ear, insert the sting of a scorpion’ (Berlin
papyrus, (B)71, 1350–1200 BC), while the Ebers Papyrus prescribes an application of red
ochre and tamarix juice finely ground with balanites oil ‘for an ear whose hearing is
poor’ (Stephens 2006: 87).233 Deafness and physical weakness associated with ageing are
referred to in the literary Instructions of Ptahhotep, ‘eyes are dim, ears deaf, strength is
waning through weariness, the mouth, silenced, speaks not’ (Lichtheim 1975: 63). Finally,
the ears are the channels through which the breaths of life and death enter:234
…There are two metu in him to his right ear, the breath of life enters into them. There
are two metu in him to his left ear. The breath of death enters into them.
Ebers 856g, Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine, 1996: 94.
While hearing and speech impairment might limit an individual’s ability to fully participate
in conversations or social gatherings, this can be accommodated by the family and by
the community in which they live. The islanders of Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts
adapted to generations of inherited deafness in the community with sign language, used
by hearing and non-hearing individuals, so that bilingualism (speech and signs) formed an
integral part of all island events involving communication (Groce 1985: 59). In a study of
hereditary deafness on the island, Groce (1985: 40-41) notes that by the late 18th century
96% of the population was married to a relation (usually cousins).235 The community of Al
Sayyid Bedouin in the Negev desert, founded by their common ancestor Al-Sayyid early
in the 19th century, practise consanguineous marriage within their village community,
with a current population of approximately 3700 (Kisch 2008: 288). As a result of genetic
isolation, high levels of non-syndromic recessive deafness have been found in the village,
beginning with the first report of congenital deafness three generations ago. In 2004 there
was a prevalence rate of 3.3% of non-syndromic recessive deafness amongst villagers; using
population figures of the village for 2008 the prevalence rate was approximately 122 out of
3700 villagers, compared to the expected rate of 1-1.7:1000 for congenital deafness against a
general background population (Giaillusi et al. 2013: 894-95; Kisch 2008: 288). The Al-Sayyid
community has developed an indigenous sign language used by deaf and hearing people,
with deaf villagers fully integrated and marrying at the same rates as hearing villagers;
estimates suggest most families in this community have at least one deaf member (Giaillusi
et al. 2013: 895).
Unlike ancient Egyptian Nile Valley settlements, the examples above are isolated
settlements through lack of immigration, or cultural choice/pressure, however, they do
illustrate the capacity of families and communities to accommodate hearing loss and
233
As part of the autopsy of mummy PUM II, a male aged 30-40 years thought to date from the Ptolemaic Period,
Benitez (1998: 485-90) identified a perforated eardrum and middle ear disease; evidence of middle ear disease has
also been reported in an Egyptian mummy by Horne et al. (1976: 713-15).
234
See Stephens (2006: 85-93) for a summary of attitudes towards deafness in ancient civilisations and attitudes
towards hearing loss and impairment.
235
When Groce began her research in 1979 most of the islanders who could remember the island’s deaf population
were already elderly and few could still ‘speak sign language’. Groce (1985: 109-10) reports that the community
never regarded deafness as a ‘handicap’.
141
communicate effectively. Congenital hearing or speech impairment may have occurred

more frequently in ancient Egyptian isolated settlements if the gene causing hearing
deficit was present in the interbred families, but we do not know if any type of indigenous
speech language existed.236 Although inbreeding has been associated with higher levels
of morbidity and mortality, consanguineous marriages in small isolated communities
also reportedly result in faster population growth, despite the deleterious effects of
interbreeding; since the number of consanguineous unions is high, the mortality levels
resulting from inbreeding are exceeded by the number of surviving offspring (Denic et
al. 2012: S227-32).
Perceptions of health, sickness and disability in ancient Egypt
In ancient Egypt, medical papyri and human remains are witness to physical disorders,
sickness, trauma, and disease alongside the physical decline of senescence. If a social model
of disability is applied, there is no indication in ancient Egypt that individuals with medical
conditions, diseases or disorders were treated as outsiders or as socially different,237
although dwarfs and blind musicians may have had different status because of symbolic
associations with their conditions. Dwarfs are commonly depicted as members of elite
households in Old Kingdom tombs, in the Middle Kingdom they are mainly represented as
attendants and nurses in tomb models, and from the New Kingdom onwards human dwarfs
rarely appear in reliefs or paintings, although there is a widespread increase in statues and
amulets of the dwarf gods Bes and Ptah-Pataikos (Dasen 1993: 126-31, 143).238 Blindness
is frequently associated with musicians, particularly harpists, and Bleiberg (2005: 174)
records that at least 47 tombs in the Theban necropolis depict blind harpists. While music
may have been deemed an appropriate occupation for the blind, the association between
loss of sight and music may have had symbolic associations, or a closed eye may indicate
concentration during performance. Manniche (1978: 13-21) suggests that blindness or
being blindfolded could signify that the person is not allowed to see or not supposed to be
seen, such as the blindfolded musicians in the sun temples of Amenophis IV at Karnak and
in the Amarna tombs.
In a number of Graeco-Roman texts impairments are mentioned as identifying features, for

example, P. Mich. inv. 675 (P. Mich. 5.323, AD 47, Tebtunis) names ‘Heraklous, who is lame’
236
All of the deaf members of the Al-Sayyid Bedouin community are descended from two of the five adult sons of
the community’s founder, Al-Sayyid (Scott et al. 1995: 965). Groce (1985: 35) states that the original unrelated
English settlers of Martha’s Vineyard did not carry the gene for congenital deafness; it was not until they
intermarried with English settlers, families from the Weald in Kent, that deaf individuals were born. Immigration
to the island virtually stopped after 1710; the population was 400 by 1700 and after 1800 it remained stable at
around 3100 until the early 20th century.
237
(i) A model in which society determines who is disabled as opposed to disability being an attribute of the
individual (Oliver 1990: 22-24). See Oliver (2013: 1024-26) and Shakespeare (2013: 214-21) for further discussion
on, and development of, the social model of disability.
(ii)
I have used the following definitions from the American Medical Association (2011): ‘condition indicates a state
of health, whether well or ill; disease denotes a condition characterized by functional impairment, structural
change, and the presence of specific signs and symptoms; disorder, in contrast, denotes a condition characterized
by functional impairment without structural change’ (which may, but not necessarily, be accompanied by specific
signs or symptoms).
238
Dasen (1993: 251-87) lists 207 representations of dwarfs from the Early Dynastic to the Late Period in Egypt;
Weeks (1970: 163-95) lists 99 representations of dwarfs from the Predynastic Period to the New Kingdom.
142
as a slave in a property division and P. Mich. inv. 4172 (P. Mich. 4.358A, AD 173– 4, Karanis)
lists ‘Maximus the leper’ on a tax roll. There is an unusual account of the lived experience
of blindness in the legal petitions submitted by Gaius Gemellus Horigenes, a landowner in
Karanis (born c. AD 171, Archive of Gemellus Horion, AD 93–214, Karanis),239 who complains
of discrimination and assault as a direct result of impaired vision – one eye is blind and
the other has a cataract (Draycott 2015: 194-200). Eye conditions, whether congenital or
acquired are not unusual in antiquity and Draycott (2015: 200-01) observes that Gaius
Gemellus Horigenes may have highlighted his blindness as a means of drawing attention
and sympathy to his case: in P. Mich. 6.425 (AD 198) we hear him claim: ‘This person who
held me in contempt because of my infirmity – for I have only one eye and I do not see with
it, although it appears to have sight, so that I am utterly worthless in both – victimized me,
having first publicly abused me and my mother’.
The following sections in this chapter suggest ways in which impairments and congenital
anomalies might be perceived and accommodated in ancient Egypt in the context of
the treatment of sickness and abnormalities in medical papyri, iconography, burial and
religious beliefs.
The medical papyri
Ancient Egyptian medical papyri treat a wide range of conditions without judgement or
partiality. In modern assessments of the texts, certain papyri are deemed more ‘medical’
than others. For example, the Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus (c.1600 BC) details practical
treatment for traumatic injury while the Ebers Papyrus (c.1550 BC), which is termed
magico-medical, is a collection of notes, extracts and prescriptions, including spells
and incantations. It could be argued that treatment of certain trauma or snakebites
was inevitably more practical since the injuries were more visible compared to internal
disorders or infectious diseases.240 However, the Egyptians did not perceive a separation
between medicine and magic in that both were effective and complementary. As Ritner
(1993: 8) remarks, describing a text as magical as opposed to medical or religious is highly
subjective and problematic since the Egyptians regarded magic as ‘quintessentially part of
nature…coeval with the creation of the natural order’. The Egyptians believed that divine
power and magical energy lay in the names of gods and in the incantation of spells, and
medical papyri contained varying degrees of magical content; it is this interweaving of
magic and medicine that likely played an effective role in the perception of healing (David
2004: 134). Disease was attributed to external agency whether it was identifiable, as in the
case of a bite or a traumatic injury, or unidentifiable as in the case of epidemics borne by
demons entering the individual (Forshaw 2014: 26). It is, therefore, justifiable to consider
what is currently termed IDD within the ancient Egyptian framework of disease-bearing
external agency (conversely, certain conditions may have been attributed to benign
influences). Some spells relied on the power of the word alone to address the evil root
of the disease, such as the preventative incantation ‘for barring air of the bitterness of
For the Archive of Gemellus Horion see: https://www.trismegistos.org/archive/90. Accessed 10.8.2017.

239
Nunn (1996: 188) points out that treatment for snakebite was threefold: local treatment of the bitten area,
240
treatment with mainly herbal medicine (most frequently onion) and magical incantations.
143
the night demons’ (P. Edwin Smith, vs. l. 11, Allen 2005: 107), while others invoked a deity
alongside the use of drugs:
Incantation for drinking a remedy, the remedy comes and there comes that which drives
(evil) things from this my heart and these my limbs. Strong in magic in combination
with medicine and vice versa...
Ebers 3, Nunn, Ancient Egyptian Medicine, 1996: 105.
There are also uncertainties in the modern interpretation of ancient Egyptian medical
texts; some leave little room for doubt such as treatment for an infected wound described
in a gloss to Case 41 of the Edwin Smith Papyrus: ‘As for ‘his flesh cannot receive a bandage’,
it means that his flesh will not receive the remedies because of the fever/inflammation
which is in his flesh’ (Nunn 1996: 173).241 Other medical texts are open to interpretation, for
example, Nunn (1996: 85-87) interprets the set of glosses in Ebers 855 as ‘pathological states
of the heart’ but Okasha (1999: 919) considers some of the glosses indicate psychiatric or
psychotic conditions (see page 135). Furthermore, there are names of illnesses that cannot
be identified although some or all of the pharmacopeia used in treatments are recognisable,
for example, Papyrus Hearst 39 (1550 BC) prescribes the external application of carob and
salt of Lower Egypt, boiled in urine, to drive out the ashyt disease (Nunn 1996: 149).
It is tempting to suggest that the glosses in Ebers 855, or the description of the man ‘in the
hand of the god’ in the Instructions of Amenemope, or terms for madness in late Egyptian and
Coptic might accommodate some of the conditions arising from IDD, but it is inappropriate
to make this equation. I can only propose that based on modern biological outcomes of
consanguineous marriage it is likely that consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt
gave rise, within some families, to children with varying levels of IDD. However, there
is no evidence to suggest that these individuals were regarded as outsiders or treated
differently in their families or communities because of their condition, nor evidence to
suggest that conditions falling into the modern category of IDD would have even been
recognised as such or specifically categorised by Egyptian priests/doctors. Furthermore,
there is no evidence to indicate that ancient Egyptians recognised that children born of
consanguineous marriages might be at risk of congenital disorders.
Therapeutic dreams and ritual bathing
Individuals with IDD may have displayed erratic or unpredictable behaviours for which
dream therapy or ritual bathing might have been considered to have healing properties.242
Dreams in ancient Egypt were not thought to arise innately but had an objective existence
whereby the individual entered an alternative state enabling them to see a dream, or see
something within a dream; for a temporary period the barriers to perception that are
241
The Edwin Smith Papyrus, mainly describing trauma, is a book of instruction listing 48 cases that are each
divided into examination, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.
242
Skrzypińska and Szmigielska (2018: 97-115) discuss the increasing use of dream analysis as a therapeutic tool
within cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), while Wilner (2007: 14-21) reviews evidence for the effectiveness of
CBT in adults with learning disabilities in a range of studies, noting its increasing use as an effective treatment for
groups and individuals, particularly in relation to anger management.
144
present in a waking state are drawn back (Szpakowska 2003: 20-21; 2001: 31). The earliest
references to dreams are ‘Letters to the Dead’ from the First Intermediate Period, which act
as a channel of communication with the dead; for example, a man begs his late wife to ease
his pain and requests that he might see her doing so in a dream (Wente 1990: 215, no. 349).
In the New Kingdom, pharaohs reference dreams in their biographies as an affirmation of
their direct line of communication with gods and their legitimacy to rule, but by the end
of the New Kingdom dreams also provided access to gods for non-royal individuals and, as
Szpakowska (2011: 509-10; 2001: 30, 32-33) points out, the changing function, perception
and reference to dreams reflects political and religious change, including changes in the
sanctioned expressions of piety.243 There is also textual evidence for nightmares and the
driving out of ‘bad things’ causing the nightmares and it is interesting that Szpakowska
(2001: 35) remarks that the Egyptians did not feel the need to distinguish spells for
banishing nightmares from other magical spells. There is no separation between mental
anxiety or fear and physical infection or trauma, so that all conditions are accommodated
and worthy of medical/magical treatment.
By the Ptolemaic Period dreams were incubated within temple precincts, for example,
the sanitorium attached to the temple of Hathor at Denderah and the Sarapieion and
Asklepieion at Saqqara (although access may have been limited to cult officials in
the Serapieion) (Renberg 2010: 653-54).244 There is also increased evidence for dream
interpreters and references to dreams in Ptolemaic dream texts, including the extensive
compilation in the Greek and demotic Archive of Hor of Sebennytos, found at Saqqara.
Hor interprets dreams, consults a lector priest regarding his own dreams and occasionally
receives medical prescriptions through dreams (Renberg 2017: 725, 2015: 243; see also Ray
1978, 1976). Certain categories of Egyptian priests working in the House of Life may have
divined dreams as part of their role, for example, the ‘knower of things’ (rḫ-ḫt) or the lector
priest (ẖry-ḥbt), both attested from the Old Kingdom; in Deir el-Medina the ‘wise woman’
(t3 rḫt) is recognised as a healer with skills to diagnose illness and mediate between the
deceased and the gods (Forshaw 2014: 32; Graves-Brown 2010: 80; Lesko 1994: 26; Meskell
1999: 180; Ritner 1993: 229-33; Szpakowska 2011: 514).245 By the Ptolemaic Period the role of
dream interpreter is also closely associated with the pastophóroi (‘gatekeepers’), such as Hor
of Sebennytos, working at sites associated with temple incubation and dream divination
(although the presence of a dream interpreter at a particular site is not proof of incubation
at that site) (Renberg 2017: 719-21, 734).246 Dream interpreters may have also operated
243
The only dream manual found in Egypt prior to the Graeco-Roman Period is recorded on P. Chester Beatty 3, rt.
1-11 (dated to the early years of the reign of Ramesses II) and excavated at Deir el-Medina. Szpakowska (2001: 34)
notes that while the dreams it interprets offer insights into the wishes and concerns of the villagers of Deir el-
Medina, they do not explore the psychology of individual Egyptians and there is uncertainty as to whether this
text required a dream interpreter or was a curiosity. See Szpakowska (2011: 509-17) for a discussion on P. Chester
Beatty 3, rt. 1-11.
244
It is likely that the Theban temple of Imhotep had an incubation facility although no evidence survives (Renberg
2017: 726).
245
Forshaw (2014: 8) notes that the earliest known record for a lector priest is a 2nd dynasty vase inscription, but
activities for the lector are lacking before the 5th dynasty; see also Forshaw (2014: 115-21) for the role of the lector
priest in healing.
246
Although there is abundant evidence for dream interpreters in Greek and Roman cults, they did not have a
formal role as in Egyptian cults; during the Graeco-Roman Period outside of Egypt, the only known reference to
individuals with the title of dream interpreter has been found in Greek inscriptions at the Egyptian sanctuaries at
Delos and Athens (Renberg 2015: 235, 241).
145
independently, for example, a Ptolemaic stela found in the vicinity of the Anoubieion at
Saqqara advertises the services of a dream ‘judge’, which raises questions as to whether
this ‘judge’ was operating as an independent professional or in the service of the temple
(Renberg 2015: 243-44).
The conditions of the dream-inducing incubation temples place the patient into a state
of receptivity enabling the priests to unravel and interpret the dreams in a method that
Nasser (1987: 422) likens to hypnotherapy.247 Okasha (2001: 378) highlights the role of
suggestion in the psychotherapeutic methods used in the incubation temples, pointing out
that the treatment depends on the manifestations and contents of dreams, which in turn
were affected by the temple environment combined with confidence in the healer’s powers
and the deities invoked. It is reasonable to suggest that unusual or aberrant behaviours
associated with IDD may have been interpreted as forms of hostile possession suitable for
dream therapy treatment, alongside but not differentiated from other abnormal physical
and mental states. In a modern study of the conceptual use of dreams in psychotherapy,
Eudell-Simons and Hilsenroth (2005: 267) found that, as a whole, treatments using dream
interpretation are either effective or not detrimental. Steck and Steck (2016: 225-27) assess
dreams and the dreaming brain, presenting a range of functions for dreams, which include
a form of thinking and feeling that offers help with problem-solving and creative activities;
a means of addressing the regulation of emotions and social interactions; and a form of
restitution following traumatic experiences.
Cemeteries and intramural burials
There is no evidence in ancient Egypt that individuals with impairments or physical

abnormalities were buried in separate areas or in different contexts. There are indications
in the Ptolemaic Period in Dakhleh Oasis that four individuals with leprosy were excluded
from their city and sent to this desert location, but not excluded at death from burial in
the ancient necropolis at Dakhleh.248 Evidence for physical abnormalities in skeletal and
mummified remains include the burial of a four year old girl, reported by Bruyère as
having hydrocephalus (tomb no. 1375), found in a lower level of the Deir el-Medina eastern
necropolis where infants, children and adults were buried at different strata according to
age, the youngest at the base (Bruyère 1937: 11-15, 166-67; Zillhardt 2009: 27-28).249 Other
sub-adults buried in the same necropolis were two children with achondroplasia, estimated
to be four and six years old (tomb no. 1372b and 1372c), a boy aged four with scoliosis
(tomb no. 1373), and a boy of three years named Ikry (tomb no. 1390) described in Bruyère’s
247
In psychoanalytical theories dreams have multiple functions including the following: a form of communication
influenced by the interest of the listener and all aspects of the dream are important to understand the dreamer
and the dream (Blum 2011: 275-77); a form of unconscious thinking in which the mind ‘deals with conflicts by
giving expressive pictorial representation to the emotions involved in a conflict’ (Da Rocha Barros 2011: 270); a
way of expressing fulfilment of unconscious childhood wishes and conflicts (Freud 1913: 129-39).
248
This is currently the earliest evidence for leprosy in ancient Egypt. Dzierzykray-Rogalski (1980: 72-73) suggests
these four European morphological type males may be high status due to their proximity to the ancient necropolis,
and their burial at Dakhleh Oasis may indicate expulsion from a city because of their infectious condition. The
diagnoses of leprosy at Dakhleh Oasis have since been confirmed by DNA analysis (Donoghue et al. 2005: 389-94).
249
There is uncertainty as to whether the individuals buried here are linked to Deir el-Medina or are from outside
the community. Personal communication, Cédric Gobeil, April 2018.
146
report as being severely physically deformed (Bruyère 1937: 165, 202; Janot 2003: 175-80;
Meskell 1999: 171; Zillhardt 2009: 15-16, 22, 26).250
There are numerous recorded examples of spinal conditions of varying degrees of severity,
for example, radiographical reports of 31 mummies in the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden,
Leiden, show that three adult males had kyphotic curves in situ in life (Raven and Taconis
2005: 109, 150, 161). There are rare skeletal remains displaying a range of types of dwarfism,
amongst which achondroplasia is most frequently identified (Dasen 1993: 16-21; Kozma et
al. 2011: 1817-24; Kozma 2006: 305-06). Skeletal remains of a male aged 25-33 years, buried
in the Old Kingdom lower necropolis at Saqqara, showed indications of acromegaly, and
hereditary multiple exostoses was observed in three adults at the same site (male aged 35-
45 years, female 50+ years, male 40-50 years) (Kaczmarek and Kozieradzka-Ogunmakin 2013:
366-67, 374, 381; Kuraszkiewicz et al. 2010: 102-05).251 There is also evidence of prostheses,
for example, a prosthetic toe attached to a female mummy aged 50-55 years, 21st–22nd
dynasty (Finch et al. 2012: 181-91; Finch 2011: 548-49; Nerlich et al. 2000: 2176-79) and a
possible prosthesis (or restoration) of a lower forearm, the result of trauma or a congenital
anomaly, in an early Ptolemaic female aged 50-60 years at death (Finch 2012/2013: 118-
24).252 In a 6th dynasty cemetery at Matmar containing 103 bodies buried in simple pit
graves, Brunton (1948: 33, no. 3316) records the body of an adult male whose left hand is
missing, noting that the healed bone at the site of injury indicates pre-mortem loss.
There is mortuary evidence for the careful burial of infants and neonates in ancient Egypt
that may reflect their significance as social beings. At the base of the eastern necropolis at
Deir el-Medina, Bruyère (1937: 12-13) reported the remains of infants, foetuses, neonates,
placentas and viscera, often accompanied by sharpened flint tools which Bruyère thought
may have been used during the mothers’ delivery; Harrington (2012: 141-42) suggests the
flints may have been buried without re-use because of their negative associations with
the early death of the children. In the Kellis 2 cemetery (3rd– 4th century AD) at Dakhleh
Oasis, 82 foetal and perinatal skeletons, many wrapped individually in linen, were found
buried in the same location as the general cemetery population (Tocheri et al. 2005: 326-
41).253 Commenting on the Deir el-Medina burials, Meskell (2002: 81) believes deliberate
interments of foetuses, neonates and infants indicates that even the very youngest were
considered embodied persons whose untimely deaths deserved the same response and
care as adults.254 Although children were usually buried in cemeteries, intramural burials
250
Bruyère (1937: 202) describes the child as ‘un petit enfant monstrueux aux jambes torses, au crâne difforme
dont les hypophyses n’ont jamais pu se souder et ont doté l’enfant d’un bec de lièvre prononcé’.
251
Hereditary multiple exostoses have been reported in a consanguineous family in Pakistan (Faiyaz-Ul-Haque
2004: 144-51), although a study of 21 cases of hereditary multiple exostoses in an island community on Guam
reported no known familial consanguinity (Krooth et al. 1961: 340-47). The condition affects 1-3% of the general
population, amongst which 10-15% are hereditary (Staal et al. 2014: 1-8).
252
It is unlikely that families or communities in lower socioeconomic circumstances could afford, or have access
to prosthetic limbs in life (evidence that they were capable of being functional is rare), or pay for mummification
and the restoration of a limb at death (see Finch 2012/2013: 124-26).
253
Marlow (2001: 108) suggests that the east-west orientation and scant grave goods in the Kellis 2 cemetery may
indicate adoption of Christian beliefs.
254
In a discussion on Egyptian birth and child mortality, Robins (1994-5: 28) provides the following data for
numbers of children’s burials in the New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period in the cemeteries at Gurob,
Matmar and Mostagedda: 50% of 276 graves at Gurob, 48% of 233 graves at Matmar, and 42% of 31 graves at
Mostagedda; there was also a children’s cemetery at Gurob where bodies were buried in shallow rock-cut pits.
147
of infants less than one year old have been recorded under house floors from all periods
of ancient Egypt, including Middle Kingdom Kahun (Petrie 1890: 24) and New Kingdom
Amarna (Frankfort and Pendlebury 1933: 43; Peet and Woolley 1923, Part 1: 17, 85).255 Infant
burials have also been found in urban areas, but outside domestic contexts, including six
infant (10-12 months old) burials dating to the early 19th dynasty found under a fortification
wall at Tell el-Retaba (Rzepka 2011: 155-56) and six infants found in the urban area of ‘Ayn
Asil, five of whom were buried on the former site of the governor’s palace, dated from the
end of the Old Kingdom to the beginning of the First Intermediate Period, leading to the
suggestion that this was a zone dedicated to infant burials (Gobeil 2009: 161-75).
Evidence for deviant or irregular burials in ancient Egypt (undisturbed burials that diverge
from normal burials of their period and unaltered due to taphonomic processes) includes
manipulations of the body, difference in body position, divergence in coffin types and
accompanying grave goods, and tomb modifications.256 I am not aware of reports from
ancient Egypt of deviant or irregular burials linked to pre-mortem physical abnormalities
or impairments.
Physical abnormalities in iconography
The majority of formal and informal representations of physical abnormalities appear in

funerary iconography. Certain types of physical abnormalities are included and others
omitted, and it appears that physical abnormalities that do not prohibit movement and the
use of most senses fall within normal funerary artistic parameters. In contrast, a range of
diseases and conditions that may cause instability or destruction are held at bay through
omission, symbol and magic (Robinson 2017: 6).
Eight conditions depicted on statues, funerary stelae, reliefs or paintings are dwarfism,
blindness, poliomyelitis, talipes equinovarus, kyphosis, trauma, hernias and swellings,
and genu recurvatum.257 Physical conditions, diseases and abnormalities that, as far as
I am aware, have not been identified in funerary iconography but have been described
or indicated in medical papyri and/or identified in ancient Egyptian human remains
include parasitic diseases, cardiovascular and lung diseases, ear, nose, skin, dental, and
gynaecological disorders.258 Depictions of snake or scorpion bites have also not been
Filer (1998: 391) estimates that at least 20% of all infants died within their first year. Halcrow and Tayles (2011:
334-36) discuss the challenges presented generally by the variety of terminologies used to describe childhood and
age categories in the context of biological approaches used to assess health and disease amongst children. See
Kamp (2001: 1-34) for a study on the archaeology of childhood in prehistoric contexts.
255
Infant jar burials in Egypt and Sudan, including those found in domestic contexts, are discussed by Kilroe
(2014: 217-28).
256
(i) Antje Kohse, personal communication and conference presentations: Current Research in Egyptology 2014,
London; Egyptological Conference in Copenhagen 2016, Copenhagen.
(ii)
Millela et al. (2015: 1) use the term ‘irregular’ in preference to ‘deviant’, describing them as ‘burials showing
features that contrast with the majority of others in their geographic and chronological context’. See also Aspöck
(2008: 169-90) for a definition of deviant burials.
257
For representations of physical abnormalities in funerary iconography and commentaries on perceptions of
disability, see David (2017: 75-89); Filer (1995); Ghalioungui (1963, 1973); Jeffreys and Tait (2000: 87-95); Kamal (1967);
Nunn (1996); Robinson (2017: 6-33); Weeks (1970); Worth Estes (1989); Zakrzewski (2015: 157-67, 2014: 57-68).
258
This summary is not a comprehensive account of represented and unrepresented medical conditions in
funerary, or other, iconography.
148
identified, but there are

protective spells for the deceased
in the Book of the Dead, for
example, Spell 33:
I know your name, Ḥf3w-snake.

Do not go against me! Behold,
Geb and Shu have stood up
against you. If you bite into
me, you will have eaten a
mouse, the abomination of Re,
and you will have chewed the
bones of an afflicted cat.
Spell 33, Mosher, An
Intriguing Theban Book of the
Dead tradition in the Late Period,
2010: 133.
The unrepresented medical

conditions, such as parasitic
diseases or snakebites, may be
excluded from the context of the
afterlife as they represent pain,
disorder, or uncontrolled sickness
that threatens the individual
or community. However, some Figure 5.8: Funerary stela of Roma the doorkeeper,
medical conditions may have dedicated to the goddess Astarte, 18th dynasty. The
proved difficult to depict visually depiction of Roma’s physical condition could indicate
poliomyelitis, talipes equinovarus, and/or cerebral
and are therefore unrepresented
palsy. Reproduced courtesy of Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek.
in funerary art. I propose that IDD Photograph: Ole Haupt.
and orofacial clefting are included
in this category, although there
is a possibility that behavioural
aspects of IDD might be associated
with disorder, particularly in a
funerary context.
Figure 5.9: Attendants in the tomb of

Baqt I, Middle Kingdom. The feet of
the figure in the centre of the lower
register suggest talipes equinovarus,
while the figure to the left appears to
have kyphosis and the figure to the
right may be a dwarf. Redrawn by
author after Newberry, Beni Hasan,
1893, Part 2, tomb no. 29, south wall,
plate 32.
149
Visual signs of physical abnormality are indicators of Egyptian attitudes to ability and
disability, and what may be acceptable or unacceptable in the afterlife. There appear to
be ‘positive’ physical differences that are socially acceptable in funerary iconography, but
their representation does not make them any the less socially or culturally normal. For
example, the 18th dynasty funerary stela of Roma the doorkeeper displays muscle atrophy
and shortening in the right leg with an equinus deformity of the foot, which could indicate
poliomyelitis, talipes equinovarus, or cerebral palsy (Kozma 2010: 291; Nunn 1996: 77; Rida
1962: 735-6; Panteliadis et al. 2013: 286). Roma is at the centre of the scene and although his
leg is withered, the ball of his foot rests on the same baseline as that of his wife and child;
his physical abnormality does not affect his centrality in this stela nor are there overtones of
perceived disability in relation to those next to him. (see figure 5.8 and Jeffreys and Tait 2000:
90).259 The depiction of Roma the doorkeeper’s physical abnormalities and of other medical
conditions in iconography might portray difference, but their main elements sit within the
Egyptian artistic canon – the figures themselves are not disordered or threatening, and all
have the ability to function and participate in the afterlife (Robinson 2017: 6, 26).
There is, however, a difference in status as physical abnormalities are more frequently depicted
amongst servants and working people in tombs (for example, figure 5.9, see Dasen 1993: 135;
Newberry 1893: 36 and plate 32; Nunn 1996: 79; Ruffer 1921: 42). This association of roles with
physical characteristics may reflect the observation of occupationally acquired conditions, or
the occupation chosen because of the medical condition, but certain physical differences often
appear to signpost non-elite status and activities (Hebron 2005: 95; Jeffreys and Tait 2000: 92-
93; Weeks 1970: 120).260 While many of the physical abnormalities listed above indicate specific
conditions or diseases, there is a risk in inferring specific congenital or infective causes from
generalised physical abnormalities, such as spinal kyphosis or foot deformities. There is also the
possibility that representations indicating medical conditions are due to stylistic convention,
artist’s error, or simply the challenge artists faced in presenting numerous activities within the
parameters of funerary iconography.261 Overall, however, depictions of physical abnormalities
are rare in relation to the thousands of human figures depicted in Egyptian iconography.
Funerary ritual: renewal, protection and sustenance
You come to the earth in the tomb of the west…

Your eyes are given to see,
Your ears to hear what is spoken;
Your mouth speaks, your feet walk,
Your hands, your arms have motion.
The Prayers of Paheri in his tomb at El-Kab, Lichtheim, Ancient Eyptian Literature,
1976: 17.
259
(i) Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, AEIN 0134.
(ii) For a discussion on the physical representation of Roma the doorkeeper and of other medical conditions
portrayed in iconography, including reference to their original sources, see Robinson 2017: 12-23.
260
See Hebron (2005: 95-110) for an assessment of anatomical abnormalities possibly caused by occupation and
anatomical abnormalities often associated with specific occupations but not caused by them.
261
In a study of the human figure in ancient Egyptian art, Weeks (1970: 146-49) highlights the judgement required
to identify medical conditions since the majority of physical abnormalities represented fall between the deliberate
depiction of physical abnormality and artist’s error. Difficulties of differentiation are also discussed by Smith
(1949: 309-16).
150
Ideally the body was embalmed, although many could not afford this, but religious ritual
and the provision of goods and protective amulets, however simple, were important.
Through correct procedures and commemoration, the dead with their physical weaknesses
and abnormalities that were unavoidable in life (but potentially treatable with medicine
and/or magic) could be renewed in the afterlife. What is represented or buried in the
tomb is transformed through ritual and magic, while threats and disorder are kept at bay.
The Opening of the Mouth ceremony, enacted before the mummy and on a statue of the
deceased during the burial, imbued life into the mummy and all the inanimate forms in
the tomb (David 2002: 121). It was the means through which the (healthy) deceased has a
continued place in the afterlife. Continuing funerary rituals to ensure continuity between
the worlds of the living and the dead included regular provision of food at the tomb to
sustain the ka (life force) of the deceased. Protection in the tomb from danger, including
attacks potentially resulting in physical dismemberment, was further enhanced by guides
and spells, including Coffin Texts (widespread in the Middle Kingdom) and the Book of the
Dead (widespread in the New Kingdom).262
Consanguineous marriage and the provision of support networks
The ancient Egyptian outlook on disability must have been partly affected by the belief
that impairment, illness and human ageing could be replaced by a transformed state at
death, and then protected in the afterlife (providing the correct funerary procedures were
followed at burial and after death). But this ideal lay at the end of life and the provision of
care was borne by family and community, while individuals with congenital or acquired
physical and mental disorders had to manage the lived experience of their conditions.
In a study on the modern perception of perceived quality of life, particularly in relation to

individuals with IDD, Alborz (2017: 18-20) discusses the place of the ‘person’ in the various
models that are currently used. By applying psychological theory, Alborz highlights the
individual’s varying perception of a ‘good’ quality of life and how this might vary amongst
individuals who share similar circumstances. This level of variation within an individual’s
determination of their quality of life finds resonance in the discussion of the lived
experience of individuals with physical or mental impairment in ancient Egypt. Even when
we have (rare) textual sources directly referring to a personal physical impairment, such
as Gaius Gemellus Horigenes complaining of his ongoing ill-treatment and discrimination
at the hands of neighbours and authorities, and its detrimental impact upon his family
(Archive of Gemellus Horion, Karanis, see page 131), is this a subjective judgement based on
his quality of life or a technique to draw official attention to his plight?
The same variation in response might come from families who care for individuals with
impairments. As evidence from ancient Egypt is so fragmentary these questions are difficult, if
not impossible, to answer and textual sources are affected by context and intended audience.
For example, two children abandoned by their father on his second marriage petition the
gods for help as they have been denied their rightful inheritance due on their mother’s death
See Nyord (2009) on conceptions of the body in the Middle Kingdom Coffin texts, including discussion on
262
individual body parts.
151
(P. BM 10845, see page 46) – are they children left homeless and hungry or has their plight been
exaggerated in their plea? ‘Quality of life’ as an assessment tool in a health environment is an
emic concept, and subjective, and when applied to ancient Egypt draws the discussion into a
much wider framework encompassing families, communities, state and religion that is beyond
the scope of this study. However, drawing on available archaeological and textual sources,
what has been proposed in this chapter are interpretations regarding the lived experience of
individuals and attitudes within Egyptian society towards impairment and abnormalities.
The final question posed here is the extent to which ties of consanguinity can ease the
emotional, social and economic burdens of morbidity and mortality? To help answer this,
it is constructive to review current reasons given by families and couples as to why they
chose consanguineous marriage. The reported economic and social advantages include the
consolidation of family property, the strengthening of family bonds, and the transmission of
cultural values (Bittles 2001a: 5, 2001b: 91; Chisholm and Bittles 2015: 3; Hamamy et al. 2011:
843; Joseph 2007: 757-58; Mobarak et al. 2019: 425, 427). There are also reported advantages
of increased female autonomy, decreased risk of violence and divorce,263 reduction in
hidden uncertainties regarding the appropriateness of the union and ease of financial
negotiations (Alwan and Modell 1997: 67-70; Bittles and Hamamy 2010: 90; Hussain 1999:
453-59). Writing on the choice of kin in consanguineous marriages, Denic et al. (2010a: 746)
conclude that, overall, members of consanguineous families receive up to two and a half
times more support and cumulative help than members of non-consanguineous families,
with statistically varying levels of support according to the type of consanguineous
marriage.264 The strengthening of supportive ties within consanguineous families creates
‘bonding social capital’ – these are the links created through shared similarities that enable
cooperation and the larger the cooperating group, the greater the social capital they achieve
(Joshi et al. 2009: 5).265 Denic et al. (2010a: 747) also suggest that increased levels of support
and protection in the event of accidental trauma, or in times of warfare or scarce resources,
might improve life expectancy in consanguineous families. This level of support within
family networks reflects the expectation of help in times of need with reduced expectation
of reciprocity, or help may be given altruistically (see chapter four).266 I am not suggesting
263
Bittles and Hamamy (2010: 91) remark that studies in Syria (Maziak and Asfar 2003: 313-26) and amongst
Palestinian refuges (Khawaja and Tewtel-Salem 2004: 526-33) show no significant difference between levels
of domestic violence in consanguineous and non-consanguineous families (the authors of the study amongst
Palestinian refugees note that the results may be affected by small sample size). Saadat (2013: 67-70) has focused on
the association of consanguinity and the survival of marriages suggesting that consanguinity has some protective
roles. Using qualitative evidence from a survey of 1638 families in Bangladesh and Pakistan, Mobarak et al. (2019:
425) found that the likelihood of domestic violence increased with consanguineous marriage; husbands and wives
also reported positive benefits, including better relationships between spouses and lower likelihood of divorce.
264
Denic et al.’s (2010a: 741) analysis of levels of help offered by consanguineous families is based on biological
relatives across four generations, although the authors highlight that their shared time is limited by lifespan and
family break-up. Denic et al. (2010a: 746) also note that their results support Hamilton’s (1964a: 1-16) theory of
altruism, which proposes that close biological relatives are more likely to act selflessly.
265
The importance of family networks in providing social support exchange for both healthy and sick members is
discussed by Ell (1996: 173-83), and the role of social networks in the wider community health is assessed by
Berkman and Glass (2000: 144-47).
266
In a study on social support, Agneesons (2006: 434, 437-38) found that personal networks created by close kin
are important in relation to important decisions and emotional and instrumental support, such as caring for ill
family members. However, the role of extended kin varied according to the type of support expected (in some
cases none), but the study did not request information regarding levels of consanguinity amongst the respondents
or levels of consanguinity amongst their extended families.
152
that supportive social and kinship networks do not exist outside consanguineous families,
nor am I undervaluing the importance of the wider community in cooperation and support
within village life, but in times of need consanguineous families report that they can draw
more freely and consistently on the resources of kin related by blood and associated affinity
than those outside family networks.
Conclusion
This chapter examined the hypothesis that ancient Egyptians did not distinguish congenital
anomalies and morbidity in infancy and childhood in the offspring of consanguineous
marriages from other health conditions, and that individuals with physical or mental
abnormalities were neither socially excluded nor considered ‘disabled’. Evidence for
congenital anomalies in Egyptian mummified and skeletal remains was considered, but
overall in the palaeopathological record evidence for congenital anomalies is limited. The
chapter focused in particular on biological abnormalities observed at increased frequency
in the offspring of consanguineous marriages in modern populations, and in particular
non-syndromic cleft palate (CP) and cleft lip with or without cleft palate (CL/P), for which
there is limited evidence in the Egyptian palaeopathological record: a midline CL linked
to agenesis of the premaxilla in a 25th dynasty adult female and CL/P in a Roman child
around five years of age; there is no evidence to support that either of these individuals was
born of consanguineously related parents. Not all biological outcomes frequently linked to
consanguinity, such IDD, are identifiable in human remains, yet they may impact on healthy
family members in terms of time and resources invested in less able kin, therefore ways in
which IDD might be interpreted and understood in ancient Egypt were also assessed.
Alongside CP and CL/P this chapter examined evidence for aberrant or unpredictable
behaviours that might be associated with IDD in Egyptian literary and medical texts.
For comparative purposes, attitudes towards ‘madness’ and unusual behaviours were
summarised in ancient Greek textual sources alongside evidence for socially excluded
groups. In ancient Egypt there is no distinguishing language or context for ‘madness’ or
aberrant behaviours and what might be diagnosed in modern medicine as IDD probably
belonged to the wide spectrum of health and healing into which fall sickness, disease and
ageing alongside recovery and management of medical conditions.
In order to evaluate the physical impact of non-syndromic CP and CL/P and IDD on the
individual and the social impact on the family, a bioarchaeology of care analysis was
employed to determine levels of functioning and adaptive ability, accommodation of
impairment and provision of care. The 25th dynasty adult female with midline CL belonged
to a low socioeconomic agricultural community living close to the river Nile at Matmar in
Middle Egypt and her survival past infancy may have been due to an equal input of native
resilience and adaptive feeding techniques used by the mother; in this sedentary community
excess time may have been available to the mother, or other females, to provide care and
a safe environment for feeding and nursing through periods of infection. The Roman child
with mild CL/P also survived the first year of life, the most dangerous period for the health
of an infant with facial clefting. The body was found in a gilded coffin, indicative of a family
that could afford mummification and more elaborate burial arrangements than those
153
found in the Late Period Matmar burials; and also perhaps a family with greater financial
resources to offer care provision, and possibly even a wet nurse. Finally, CL and CL/P
would have altered the facial appearance of both these individuals and their articulation
of speech, but there is no evidence from ancient Egypt to suggest that altered physical
appearance or speech impairment due to congenital anomalies would have marked these
people as different or ‘disabled’, or have given them a liminal status in society.
Impairments in conceptual, social and communication skills characterising IDD were

assessed using a bioarchaeology of care analysis. The scope of conditions encompassed
by IDD ranges from mild to severe and would have required notably different levels of
care and had variable impacts on the lived experience of the individual and their care
providers. Deficiencies in reading, writing and mathematical ability were likely to be less
important in ancient Egypt than in modern societies, but the acquisition and performance
of practical skills and the participation in agriculture and food production may have
had a greater impact, although this depends on the severity of the condition. Family or
community participation in shared domestic or agricultural activities might also offer
roles for individuals with IDD that are commensurate with their skills and performed in a
protective, or at least supervised environment.
This chapter ended with an exploration of the perception of disability in ancient Egypt
and the acceptance, or otherwise, of physical difference with reference to medical/
magical papyri, dream therapy, burials, and funerary iconography. In terms of medical
treatment and dream therapy, there is no evidence to suggest that individuals were socially
excluded or treated differently, nor evidence to suggest conditions falling into the modern
category of IDD would have been specifically categorised by Egyptian priests/doctors. I
am not aware of reports from ancient Egypt of deviant or irregular burials linked to pre-
mortem physical abnormalities or impairments, including burials in distinct locations.
When physical abnormalities are depicted in funerary iconography there appear to be
‘positive’ physical differences that are socially acceptable and culturally normal, usually
portrayed within normal artistic parameters. Finally, if the offspring of consanguineous
marriages experienced health disorders requiring high levels of care, or support related to
functioning and adaptive ability, the extended consanguineous family may have had the
infrastructure and willingness to provide additional support in the short- and long-term.
This level of support within consanguineous family networks may reflect the expectation
of help and protection in times of need without the expectation of reciprocity.
154
Chapter 6
Conclusion
This work aimed to explore and assess the potential economic and biological outcomes
of non-royal consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt between kin biologically related
beyond the level of sibling and half-sibling. Following a summary of marriage and kin
terms in ancient Egypt and an introduction to definitions of consanguinity, chapter two
collated evidence for non-royal consanguineous marriage in select sources from the
Middle Kingdom to the Roman Period and provided an overview of evidence from regions
beyond Egypt. Chapter three then explored and evaluated the use of inheritance and
dowry as economic strategies in non-royal consanguineous marriage, with particular
reference to bilingual family archives from Ptolemaic Pathyris. Chapter four assessed
interrelationships amongst families who married consanguineously in Deir el-Medina
and examined expectations of altruism and reduced reciprocity amongst families,
relatives and neighbours in this Ramesside workmen’s village, with specific reference to
economic transactions. Chapter five assessed the potential impact in ancient Egypt of
biological outcomes linked to consanguineous marriage on individuals, their families and
communities, focusing particularly on orofacial clefts and intellectual and developmental
disorders. The chapter then explored how outcomes of consanguinity may have been
received in the context of attitudes towards physical and cognitive anomalies in textual
and archaeological sources. The definition of consanguinity used in this research is that
of a biological relationship up to the level of second cousin or closer and is employed as a
means for identifying consanguineous marriages. There does not seem to be any indication
that ancient Egyptians themselves categorised these unions as specifically consanguineous,
or used any other category to differentiate them from non-consanguineous unions. It is
likely, however, that Egyptians were aware when marrying close biological kin.
The majority of non-royal consanguineous marriages are recorded in, or adduced from,
Roman Period textual sources including census returns. Evidence becomes scarcer and
less reliable in earlier historical periods, but sources such as family archives suggest
consanguineous marriage within communities linked by occupation and location, for
example, the Hawara embalmers in the Ptolemaic Period, inhabitants of the Ptolemaic
garrison town of Pathyris, and workmen of the royal tombs in Ramesside Period Deir el-
Medina. Research in select sources for evidence indicating possible or probable non-royal
consanguineous marriages has produced a total of 180 consanguineous marriages. Outside
Egyptian royal families, the search is limited by the fragmentary nature of documentary
evidence, by bureaucratic requirements for identifying family members, by preferences
for recording genealogies, and by the extended use of kin terms to express consanguinity,
affinity and wider kinship.
Within Egypt, the application of partible inheritance, and the requirement for heirs to
alienate their inheritance rights, may have resulted in a preference for consanguineous
marriage amongst some families to mitigate the fragmentation of property. Furthermore,
155
ties created through consanguineous marriage may create conditions enabling private
resolution of disputes over shared landholding, although surviving legal texts prove
that family conflict and land fragmentation were sometimes inevitable. However, rights
of offspring to parental property under Egyptian laws of succession, combined with the
rights of men and women to own, buy and sell property, may have led to greater freedom
in the choice of spouse. The judicious choice of a marriage partner may have been outside
consanguineous family networks, a choice driven by the intention to extend social and
labour networks, including the creation of patronage links.
Comparison between demotic marriage settlements from Pathyris does not reveal any
difference in the value of the economic transactions agreed at (or in) marriage between
two sets of interrelated couples known to be consanguineous at the level of first cousin
(in the Archive of Horos), and five couples not known to be consanguineous at this level
(in the Archive of Pelaias). The difference, however, may lie in the timing and amount of
money and property given in marriage and as pre-mortem inheritance. Families related
consanguineously may have placed more trust in the delivery after marriage of agreed
financial commitments, in the knowledge that family enforcement mechanisms are in place
to ensure their receipt; in addition, there may also be unrecorded family assets brought
into the marriage, or promised at a future date, on the basis of shared family ownership.
If the marriage settlement is considered an economic transaction between individuals and

their families, this research explored whether consanguineous families might prefer to
transact amongst themselves in other economic transactions. An analysis of the Archive
of Horos (134–89 BC), in which the two consanguineous marriages appear, indicates that
almost half the economic transactions were between family members related through
consanguinity, or related to consanguineous families through affinity. Perhaps this is an
indication that some families had an almost equal preference for consanguineous economic
transactions, including marriage.
When the family trees of the husbands and wives in the eleven known consanguineous
marriages in Deir el-Medina are traced, a complex network of interrelationships of
consanguinity and affinity is established. Using available data (drawn from existing
prosopographic studies of Deir el-Medina) the numbers of known offspring born to
consanguineously married couples does not differ from offspring born to couples not
known to be consanguineous. Overall the mean number of children born to each marriage
is 2.8, with a median figure of 2.7. Allowing for early life mortality, this is consistent with
data presented by Koltsida (2007: 12) for the composition of an average sized household in
Deir el-Medina: six people including 2-3 children.
Taking into account formal and informal regulatory mechanisms, I propose that the types
of the economic transactions documented in Deir el-Medina ostraca and papyri are likely
to reflect a sliding scale of trust and trustworthiness. This ranges from altruism amongst
families related consanguineously, followed by a combination of limited altruism and
flexible terms of reciprocity between more distant family and friends; the next descending
level is general reciprocity, more strictly defined since a specific return is expected on
goods at some point, even though it relies on trust, and finally, pure barter or money-
156
Conclusion
barter, which appear to be direct transactions involving goods of equivalent (or near
equivalent) value. Patronage networks that emphasise duty and reciprocity, with their
concomitant influence, also operated alongside or beyond family networks providing
optional (or for some the only) support system. Families in Deir el-Medina may have acted
more altruistically towards each other, but the complexity of social networks within the
village possibly resulted in acts of generosity or support, not purely defined by biological
or affinal ties, that protected the overall stability of Deir el-Medina.
There are no indications that physical anomalies or cognitive disorders more frequently
recorded in the offspring of consanguineous marriages in modern populations were
recognised as outcomes of consanguineous unions in ancient Egypt; nor is there textual
or archaeological evidence to indicate that individuals with biological anomalies were
socially excluded in life or in death. The lack of direct references to physical or cognitive
abnormalities outside medical texts suggests, at most, an element of ambiguity towards
them, but it is unlikely they were distinguished in the context of the general health
environment of ancient Egypt.
Orofacial clefting (using two ancient Egyptian cases discussed in chapter five) may have
altered facial appearance and articulation of speech, but there is no evidence that altered
physical appearance or speech impairment would have marked individuals as ‘disabled’ or
liminal to society. Their impairment may have been accommodated through care provision
from the mother and other adults, alongside native resilience from the infant. A similar
bioarchaeology of care analysis was applied in relation to impairments in conceptual, social
and communication skills that characterise intellectual and developmental disorders (IDD).
What might be diagnosed in modern clinical studies as IDD probably fell naturally in ancient
Egypt into the wide spectrum of disease, disorders, healing, health and ageing. While the
presentation of IDD would vary significantly, affecting provision of care and impact on
the family and the individual, deficiencies in reading, writing or mathematical ability are
likely to be less important in ancient Egypt than in modern societies. Adverse effects on
the acquisition and performance of practical skills could have been accommodated within
family and community through domestic and agricultural activities, commensurate with
the level of skill and supervision required. In summary, if offspring of consanguineous
families experienced adverse biological outcomes, the extended consanguineous family
may have had the infrastructure and willingness to ease any additional emotional, social
and economic burdens of morbidity and mortality.
The retention of wealth amongst propertied families, the protection from poverty amongst
families with few assets, or the maintenance of shared occupational status may have been
motives for consanguineous marriage in all historical periods. However, this does not
preclude families from other socioeconomic backgrounds, or mixed occupational groups,
from choosing consanguineous marriage. Families could be affected by environmental and
political shocks, such as those caused by famine, or when families were personally affected
by health shocks, such as unexpected illness or death. At these times, the potential stability
and social capital afforded by consanguineous ties, including the (anticipated) willingness
to behave altruistically with reduced expectations of reciprocity, may have resulted in
some families choosing consanguineous marriage as a preferred choice of union.
157
Appendix 1
Table of probable or possible non-royal

consanguineous marriages from select sources
Abbreviations:
BF Bagnall and Frier, The Demography of Roman Egypt, Cambridge, rev. edn, 2006.
BM EA British Museum Egyptian Antiquities
RT Rowlandson and Takahashi, Brother-sister marriage and inheritance strategies in
Greco-Roman Egypt, Journal of Roman Studies 99, 2009: 104-39.
HTBM Hieroglyphic Texts from Egyptian Stelae, etc., in the British Museum, Parts 1-11,
London.
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
Note: Rowlandson and Takahashi (2009: 138-39) have pointed out that the marriages
referenced here in sources as RT 74-81 are doubtful cases in the census returns and RT 82-95,
which were previously suggested as sibling marriage, are very doubtful cases.
Number 170 (RT 48, SB 26.16803) is documented as a full twin marriage; numbers 17 (Stela
Cairo 20051), 60 (P. Chic. Haw. 9) and 61 (P. Phil. 25) are included in the cousin category, but
are not first cousins.
Biological Papyrus/tomb/ Date, site Sources

relationship stela/name
1. Half-sibling Stela Louvre C16, 12th dynasty Černý 1954: 25-26; Millard 1976: 25;
(brother-sister)? C17, C18 Gayet, Musée du Louvre Stèles de la
XII Dynastie, Bibliothèque de l'École
des Hautes Études, 68, 188: pls 51/52.
2. Parallel cousin Stela Ashmolean 12th dynasty Dakin 1938: 190-7, pl.12; Millard
(father's brother's Museum E3921 Rekaknah 1976: 38-9, 230-34 (Millard focuses on
daughter) register 4, see also Dakin 1938: 195).
3. Parallel cousin Stela Florence 12th dynasty Franke 1983: 36, 73, 91-92, 108; Millard
(mother's sister's inv. no. 2564 1976: 38, 168-71; Bosticco, Le stele
daughter)? Egiziane dall'Antico al Nuovo Regno,
1959, Vol. 1, photograph 37.
4. Parallel cousin Meir, B No. 3, A 12th dynasty Blackman, The Rock Tombs of Meir,
(father’s brother’s No. 3 Part 1, 1914: 12-13; Millard 1976: 39.
daughter)?
5. Parallel cousin Stelae BM EA 131 12th/13th Franke, 1983: 80-81 (BM EA 131), 44,
(mother’s sister’s and EA 129 dynasty 70, 73, 80-81 (BM EA 129); HTBM,
daughter)? 1911, Vol. 1, pl. 56 and 1912, Vol. 2, pls
41-43; Millard 1976: 39, 139-42.
158
Table of probable or possible non-royal consanguineous marriages
6. Half-sibling Stela Berlin 13675 13th dynasty Černý, 1954: 26; Franke 1983: 58, 60,
(brother-sister)? 131; Millard 1976: 24-25; Aegyptische
Inschriften aus den Königlichen
Museen zu Berlin, Part 1, 1913: 196.
7. Half-sibling Stela Cairo CG 13th dynasty/ Fischer 1957: 231, n.47; Lange und
(brother/sister)? 20144 and stela possibly later Schäfer, Grab- und Denksteine des
BM EA 236 Abydos, Mittleren Reichs, Theil I, Nos 20001-
northern 20780, 1902: 169-70; HTBM, 1914, Part
necropolis 5, pl.15.
8. Half-sibling Stela Louvre C44 13th dynasty Černý 1954: 27; Millard 1976: 26;
(brother/sister)? Moret, Catalogue du Musée Guimet,
1909: 91-92, pl.44.
9. Half-sibling BM stela EA 363 MK Černý 1954: 27; Franke 1983: 15;
(brother-sister)? Millard 1976: 24; HTBM, 1912, Part 3,
pl.7.
10. Uncle-niece Stela Cairo CG MK Millard 1976: 37, 109-110; Lange und
(sister's daughter) 20535 Abydos, Schäfer, Grab- und Denksteine des
northern Mittleren Reichs, Theil 2, Nos 20001-
necropolis 20780, 1908: 139-42.
11. Uncle-niece Stela Heidelberg MK Millard 1976: 37, 248-52.
(sister's daughter)? inv.no. 560
12. Aunt-nephew Stela Florence MK Franke 1983: 70, 84; Millard 1976: 37-
(uncle's half-sister, inv. no. 2521 38, 168-71; Bosticco, Le Stele Egiziane
not stated if through dall'Antico al Nuovo Regno, 1959, Vol.
mother of father)? 1, photograph 33.
13. Aunt-nephew Stela Cairo CG MK Franke 1983: 71, 86 (for CG 20681),
(mother's half 20043 and CG Abydos, 17 (for CG 20043); Millard 1976: 36-
sister’s son)? 20681 northern 7; Robins 1979: 202, n.10 and 214,
necropolis figure 8 (for CG 20681); Willems 1983:
161; Lange und Schäfer, Grab- und
Denksteine des Mittleren Reichs,
Theil I, Nos 20001-20399, 1902:53,
1908: 308-09.
14. Parallel cousin Stela Cairo CG MK Millard 1976: 38, 72-75; Lange und
(mother’s sister’s 20161 Abydos Schäfer, Grab- und Denksteine des
daughter)? Mittleren Reichs, Theil I, Nos 20001-
20780, 1902: 189-91.
15. Cross cousin Stela Cairo CG MK Millard 1976: 38, 106-07; Lange und
(father’s sister’s 20518 Abydos, Schäfer, Grab- und Denksteine des
daughter)? western Mittleren Reichs, Theil I, Nos 20001-
necropolis 20780, 1908: 113-14.
16. Parallel cousin Meir, B No. 3, A 12th dynasty Blackman, The Rock Tombs of Meir,
(father’s brother’s No. 3 Part 1, 1914: 12-13; Millard 1976: 39.
daughter)?
159
17. Second cousin? Stela Cairo 20051 MK Franke 1983: 38, 70, 85, 98, 153;
(parents cross Abydos, Millard 1976: 38, 51-54; Robins 1979:
cousins) northern 210, figure 1; Lange und Schäfer, Grab-
necropolis und Denksteine des Mittleren Reichs,
Theil I, Nos 20001-20399, 1902: 60-62.
18. Cross cousin? Tomb of Ttἰ-ky Dra' Abû el- Whale 1989: 9.
(mother's brother's TT15 Naga'
daughter) Early 18th
dynasty
19. Cousin marriage? Tomb of Ỉ'ḥ-ms ḏw Sheikh 'Abd el- Whale 1999: 40-43.
n.f '3-mṯw TT83 Qurna
Hatshepsut-
Tuthmosis III
18th dynasty
20. Cross cousin? Tomb of Sn-m-ἰ'ḥ Sheikh 'Abd el- Whale 1999: 48.
(mother's brother's TT127 Qurna
daughter) Hatshepsut-
Tuthmosis III
18th dynasty
21. Parallel cousin Tomb of Pwἰ-m-r' Khôkha Whale 1989: 54.
(mother's sister's or Ỉpw-m-r‘ TT39 Hatshepsut-
daughter) Tuthmosis III
18th dynasty
22. Uncle-niece Tomb of Ỉmn-m- Sheikh 'Abd el- Whale 1989: 67, 254.
(sister's daughter)? ḥ3t TT82 Qurna
Tuthmosis III
18th dynasty
23. Cross cousin Tomb of Ỉmn-m- Sheikh 'Abd el- Whale 1989: 64.
(father's sister's ḥ3t TT82 Qurna
18th dynasty
(mother's brother's ḥ3t TT82 Qurna
18th dynasty
(mother's brother's ḥ3t TT82 Qurna
18th dynasty
26. Cousin marriage? Tomb of Nb-ἰmn Dra' Abû el- Whale 1989: 77.
(uncertainty over TT24 Naga'
parallel or cross Tuthmosis II-
cousin) Tuthmosis III
18th dynasty
160
27. Cross cousin Tomb of B3kἰ Dra' Abû el- Whale 1989: 82.
marriage (mother's TT18 Naga'
brother's daughter) Tuthmosis III
or earlier
18th dynasty
28. Cousin marriage? Tomb of Sn(.ἰ)-nfr Sheikh 'Abd el- Whale 1989: 91-99.
(uncertainty over TT99 Qurna
parallel or cross Hatshepsut-
cousin) Tuthmosis 111
18th dynasty
29. Cousin marriage? Tomb of Ỉmn-m- Sheikh 'Abd el- Whale 1989: 99.
(uncertainty over h3t TT53 Qurna
which side of the Tuthmosis III
family) 18th dynasty
30. Cousin marriage? Tomb of Sn-nfr Sheikh 'Abd el- Whale 1989: 151; Whale 1989: 146-51
(uncertainty over TT96 Qurna for three wives represented in the
parallel or cross Amenhotep II tomb (possible link with TT40).
relationship) 18th dynasty
31. Cross cousin Tomb of Dhwty- Khôkha Whale 1989: 225-26.
(mother's brother's ms TT295 Tuthmosis
daughter) 1V-Amenhotep
111?
18th dynasty
32. Father-daughter? Statue, Cairo 18th dynasty Metawi 2013: 221-32.
Museum N 129
33. Cross cousin Anhurkhawy (i) Deir el-Medina Bierbrier 1975: 36; Davies 1999: 275,
marriage (father's and Henutdjuu (i) 19th dynasty chart 3; Toivari-Viitala 2001: 57.
sister's daughter)
34. Parallel cousin Nebmehyt (iii) Deir el-Medina Brierbier 1975: 30-36; Davies 1999:
(father's brother's and Henutmehyt 19th dynasty 237-38, chart 21; Toivari-Viitala 2001:
daughter) (iv) 57.
35. Parallel cousin Buqentuf (i) and Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 64, chart 8.
(father's brother's Iyi (iii) 19th dynasty
daughter)
36. Parallel cousin Iyernutef (ii) and Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 185, chart 14; Toivari-
(father's brother's Tabaki (i) 19th dynasty Viitala 2001: 57.
daughter)
37. Aunt-nephew Amennakht (x) Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 65, chart 8.
(second cousin)? and Tarekhanu (i) 19th dynasty
38. Cross cousin Pashedu (ii) and Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 224-25, chart 24; Tiovari-
(father's sister's Tanodjemethemsi 19th dynasty Viitala 2001: 57.
daughter)? (ii)
39. Parallel cousin Nekhemmut (i) Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 46-47, chart 7; Toivari-
(father's brother's and Webkhet (vi/ 19th dynasty/ Viitala 2001: 57.
daughter) viii) 20th dynasty
161
40. Uncle-niece? Anhotep (i) and Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 160, chart 11.
Mahi (ii) 19th dynasty
41. Brother-sister? Anutwa (i) and Deir el-Medina Davies 999: 73, 171; Frandsen 2009: 38;
Nubiyi (i) 20th dynasty Cerny 1954: 26-27.
42. Parallel cousin Khnummose (i) Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 272, chart 5.
(father's brother's and Henuwati 20th dynasty
daughter)? (i/ii)
43. Parallel cousin Ipuy (viii) and Deir el-Medina Bierbrier 1975: 30, 33, 35, 1984: 209-10;
(father's brother's Henutmire (i) 20th dynasty Davies 1999: 51-52, chart 7; Toivari-
daughter)? Viitala 2001: 57.
44. Parallel cousin Penrennut (i) and Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 212, chart 4; Toivari-
(father's brother's Tadehnetemheb 20th dynasty Viitala 2001: 57.
daughter)?
45. Parallel cousin Khons (vi) and Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 53 and n.686, chart 7;
(father's brother's Taweretemheb 20th dynasty Toivari-Viitala 2001: 57.
daughter)? (ii)
46. Parallel cousin Amennakht Deir el-Medina Davies 1999: 117, chart 9.
(father's brother's (xviii) and 20th dynasty
daughter)? Iues[…]
47. Uncle-niece Tomb of Setau, El-Kab Bierbrier 1975: 12 and chart 3; Porter
(brother's daughter) EK4 20th dynasty and Moss 1929, 1962 edition, Vol. 5:
181-82.
48. Uncle-niece Tomb of Setau, El-Kab Bierbrier 1975: 12 and chart 3; Porter
(brother's daughter) EK4 20th dynasty and Moss 1929 (1962 ed.), Vol. 5: 181-
82.
49. Brother-sister Stela Louvre 18 Serapeum, Breasted, Vol. 4, 1906: 388 note a.;
Memphis Černý 1954: 23-24.
22nd dynasty
50. Parallel cousin Hormaakheru Thebes Bierbrier 1975: 92-93, chart 22;
(father's brother's and Hahat (ii) 23rd dynasty Kitchen 1986: 224-25.
daughter) (the Bessenmut
family)
51. Parallel cousin Pediamun (i) Thebes Bierbrier 1975, chart 23A; Kitchen
(father's brother's and Babai (i) 23rd dynasty 1986: 231.
daughter) (the Montemhat
family)
52. Brother-sister Pedisi and N’as Bahriya Oasis Fakhry 1942: 98; Frandsen 2009: 38-39.
26th dynasty
53. Brother-sister Tanefer-Bast (ii) Bahriya Oasis Fakhry 1974: 132, 1942: 89, 149;
and Thaty 26th dynasty Frandsen 2009: 38-39.
162
54. Half-sibling P. Chic. Haw. 1 Hawara Hughes and Jasnow1997: 9-15; RT

(same father, 365-364 BC I; Uytterhoeven 2009: 377, family
different mother) (terminus ante I.I stemma I.1. By the year of this
quem for the contract Achoapis is already married
marriage) for the third time.
marriage
settlement
55. Half-sibling P. Lonsdorfer 1 Edfu Pestman 1961, Chart A; see Cruz-Aribe
(same father, 364/3 BC 1985: 48, for family tree in the Edfu
different mother) marriage archive; RT ii.
settlement
56. Half-uncle-niece P. Chic. Haw. 2 Fayum Hughes and Jasnow 1997: 16-18;
(on father’s side) 331 BC Uytterhoeven 2009: 373.
marriage
settlement
57. Father-daughter? Statue of Djedhor 325 BC Frandsen 2009: 39-41; Sherman 1981:
Chicago Institute 85, n.10; Young 1965: 69-70.
Oriental Museum
10589
58. Brother-sister? SB 12 11053.2-3 Tholthis Clarysse 2006: 332; Huebner 2007: 23;
267 BC RT iii suggest this could be an uncle/
marriage neice; Trismegistos 4384.
settlement?
59. Uncle-niece P. Phil. 14 Thebes El-Amir 1959: 61-64, 110; Pestman
(daughter of 264 BC 1961, Chart A, no. 15.
brother's sister) marriage
settlement
60. Half-cousins P. Chic. Haw. 9 Hawara Hughes and Jasnow 1997: 52-58;
239 BC Uytterhoeven 2009: 377, family I,
provisional sale stemma I.4.
of property
61. First cousin P. Phil. 25 Thebes El-Amir 1959: 112, 115-19; Pestman
once-removed 223 BC 1961, Chart A, no. 21.
(Djeho (ii) was his marriage
father and her great- settlement
grandfather through
the patrilineal line,
also more distant
cousins through her
matrilineal line)
62. Half-sibling P. Hausw. 14 Edfu RT iv
(same mother) 208 BC
marriage
settlement
163
63. First cousin PSI 12.1227 Tebtunis Rowlandson 2016: 341; Trismegistos
(fathers were post-167 - 17397.
brothers) 202/5 AD
census return
64. Brother-sister P. Tebt. 3.1.766 Tebtunis Bussi 2002: 20; Clarysse and
147 or136 BC Thompson 2006: 332; Huebner 2007:
advance for 23; Trismegistos 5361; RT v.
tax due on
vineyard
65. Uncle-niece P. Berlin 5507 Thebes Mairs and Martin 2008/9: 24-26;
marriage 136 BC Pestman 1999: 20, Family B, 10-12;
bilingual sale of see also P. Berlin 3098 (demotic) and P.
liturgies Leiden 413 (Greek) for the documents
in relation to a sale of choachyte
rights; Trismegistos 78574.
66. Brother/sister? P. Grenf. 2.26 Pathyris Bussi 2002: 2016: 33; Clarysse and
103 BC Thompson 2006: 332; Huebner 2007:
contract 23; RTvi; Trismegistos 70.
related to the
advance of a
loan
67. Cousin marriage P. Hawara Lüdd. Hawara Demotic/Greek. Uytterhoeven
(fathers are 12 100 BC 2009: 376. Family II, Stemma II.4.
brothers) marriage Trismegistos 41465.
settlement
68. Half-sibling P. Hawara Lüdd. Hawara Uytterhoeven 2009: 377; Trismegistos
(same father, 13 99 BC 41466. Marephagoes marries his first
different mother) (terminus ante wife, Terobastis (i); they share the
quem for the same father, Sokonopis (ii) (see nos 71
marriage) and 72).
divorce
settlement
69. Cousin marriage Referred to in P. Hawara Uytterhoeven 2009: 376, family III,
(fathers are Hawara Lüdd. 13 99 BC stemma III.3; RT vii; Trismegistos
brothers) 41466. Muhs 2008: 108, Muhs believes
Hawara Lüdd. 13 only refers to one
second cousin marriage.
70. Parallel cousin P. Adl. Dem. 14 Pathyris Griffiths 1939: 89-92; Trismegistos 14.
(father's brother's 97/96 BC
daughter) marriage
settlement
71. Cousin marriage/ P. Hawara Lüdd. Hawara Uytterhoeven 2009: 377-78, family
half-sibling? 15 93 BC III, Stemma III.4; Trismegistos 41468.
marriage Marephagoes marries his second wife
settlement Tasouchion (see nos 68 and 72).
164
72. Parallel cousin P. Adl. Dem. 21 Pathyris Griffiths 1939: 99-101; Trismegistos
(father's brother's 92 BC 21.
daughter) marriage
settlement
73. Half-sibling P. Hawara Lüdd. Hawara Uytterhoeven 2009: 377-78, family II,
(same father, 16a 92 BC (terminus stemma II.1 and family IV, stemma
different mother)? ante quem for IV.1; Trismegistos 41469.
the marriage)
marriage
settlement
74. Cousin or P. Cairo 3.50129 Hawara Uytterhoeven 2009: 376-377, family
uncle/half-niece and SB 6.9297 86 BC III, stemma III.4; Trismegistos 41607.
marriage? marriage Marephagoes marries his third wife
settlement Tasouches (ii) (see nos 68 and 71).
75. Half-sibling P. Bibl. Nat. 224-5 Memphis RT viii
(same mother) 68 BC
marriage
settlement
76. Brother-sister BGU 8.1731 Herakleopolis RT ix; Trismegistos 4814.
68/7 BC
transfer of
cleruchic land
77. Half-sibling Stela BM EA 184 Memphis RT x
(same mother) 50/49 BC
biographical
stela of
Tnepheros
78. Brother-sister? BGU 4.1126 Alexandria RT 82; Trismegistos 18569.
9 BC
work contract
79. Brother-sister I. Alex. 66 Alexandria RT 50; Kayser, Recueil des inscriptions
early Roman grecques et latines (non-funéraires)
dedication of d’Alexandrie impériale (1er -111e s.
Hermanoubis apr. J.-C.), 1994.
80. Brother-sister P. Mich. 5.262 Tebtunis RT 51a. Trismegisos 12095.
AD 34/35 or
35/36
cession of land
81. Brother-sister P. Mich. 5.266 Tebtunis RT 51b; Trismegistos 12100.
AD 38
cession of land
82. Half-sibling P. Oxy. 2.361 Oxyrhynchus BF 75-Ox-1; RT 74; Trismegistos 20590.
(same father)? AD 76/7
census return
165
83. Brother-sister BGU 1.183 Soknopaiou Hopkins 1980: 322-23; Huebner 2007:
Nesos 23; RT53; Trismegistos 8944.
AD 85
marriage
settlement
84. Half-sibling P. Oxy. Census Lykopolis 89-Pt-15; RT 75; Trismegistos 25668.
(same father)? AD 89/90
census return
85. Brother-sister P. Oxy 4.713 Oxyrhynchus RT 54; Trismegistos 20413.
AD 97
registration of
property
86. Parallel cousin Archive of Tebtunis Rowlandson 2016: 334, n.55.
(father's brother's Philosarapis, Didyme (born
daughter)? marriage of 47-48 AD)
Didyme and Herakleides
Herakleides (40-144 AD)
87. Brother-sister P. Select. 23 ll.16- Oxyrhynchus RT 52; Trismegistos 25110.
19 AD 75-99
summary of
purchase of
slave
88. Half-sibling P. Tebt. 2.290 Tebtunis RT55; Trismegistos 25693.
(possibly full) late 1st early
2nd century AD
order for arrest
89. Half-sibling P. Oxy 67.4584 Oxyrhynchus RT 33; Trismegistos 78616.
(same father) AD 100/1
status
declaration
90. Half sibling? BGU 4.1048 Arsinoite RT 56; Trismegistos 9445.
AD 100/1 or
110/1
sale of land
91. Brother-sister? P. Mich. 8.465-466 Karanis RT 85; Trismegistos 17239, 17240.
AD 107-8 Apollinaris prohibited from legal
letters marriage as he was a serving
legionary.
92. Half-sibling BGU 1.232 Metrodorou RT 57; Trismegistos 8994.
(same father) Epoikion
AD 108
dowry receipt?
93. Brother-sister P. Kron. 8 Tebtunis RT 58; Trismegistos 11593.
AD 109
loan contract
166
94. First cousin? P. Laur. 1.8 Theadelpheia Bussi, 2002: 3; Trismegistos 28761.
AD 101-125
fragment of a
contract
95. Brother-sister PSI 9.1062 Arsinoe BF 103-Ar-1; RT1; Trismegistos 13774.
AD 104
census return
96. Brother-sister P. Corn 16.1-1 Arsinoe BF 103-Ar-3; RT2; Trismegistos 14858.
AD 104/5
97. Half-sibling CPR 1.28 Arsinoe RT 59; Trismegistos 9858.
(or brother-sister)? AD 110
marriage
settlement
98. Brother-sister P. Stras. 6.505 Tebtunis RT 60; Trismegistos 13384.
AD 107-115
sale of slave
99. Brother-sister? CP Jud. 2.436 Hermopolis Rowlandson 1988: 119-20; RT 84.
AD 116/17
letters, archive
of strategos
100. Brother-sister P. Corn. 16.21-38 Arsinoe BF 117-Ar-1; RT4a; Trismegistos
AD 119 14858.
census return
101. Brother-sister P. Kron. 11 AD 121 RT 58b; Trismegistos 11531.
Tebtunis
repayment of
loan
102. Brother-sister P. Oxy. 12.1452 Oxyrhynchus RT 35; Trismegistos 21853.
AD 127/8
status
declaration
103. Brother-sister P. Tebt. 2.379 Tebtunis Hopkins 1980: 323; Huebner 2007: 23;
AD 128 RT62; Trismegistos 13535.
contract for
sale of a crop
104. Brother-sister P. Lond. 2.299 Arsinoe RT 61; Trismegistos 11681.
AD 128
property
registration
105. Brother-sister PSI 9.1064.2 Report of a Scheidel 1996a: 11, n.11. Trismegistos
death 13775.
AD 129
167
106. Brother-sister BGU 11.2094 Soknopaiou RT 63; Trismegistos 9605.

Nesos
AD 131
property
registration
107. Brother-sister SB 4.7440b Hermopolis RT 36; Trismegistos 18049.
AD 132/3
status
declaration
108. Brother-sister P. Oxy. 3.477 Oxyrhynchus RT 37; Trismegistos 20613.
AD 132/3
status
declaration
109. Brother-sister P. Corn. 16.39-58 Arsinoe BF 131-Ar-3; RT4a; Trismegistos
AD 133 14858.
census return
110. Half-sibling P. Bon. 1.18 (col. Machor BF 131-He-4; RT5; Trismegistos 17178.
(same father) ii) AD 133
census return
111. Brother-sister P. Ryl. 2.103 Arsinoe RT 38; Trismegistos 12899.
AD 134
status
declaration
112. Brother-sister P. Kron. 52 Tebtunis Hopkins 1980: 323; Huebner 2007: 23;
AD 138 Lewis 1983: 72-73; Rowlandson 1998:
deed of divorce 130-31, n.102; RT58c; Trismegistos
11574.
113. Brother-sister P. BGU 3.983 Karanis Hopkins 1980: 323-24; Huebner 2007:
AD 138-161 23; RT 67; Trismegistos 9425.
petition to an
official
114. Brother-sister P. Mil. Vogl. 4.229 Tebtunis RT 64; Trismegistos 12417.
(full)? c. AD 140
petition related
to divorce
115. Brother-sister P. Kron. 17 Tebtunis RT65a; Trismegistos 11538. Siblings of
AD 140 P. Kron. 8.
loan contract
116. Brother-sister P. Kron. 20 Tebtunis RT 65b; Trismegistos 11544.
AD 146
loan contract
117. Brother-sister P. Meyer 9 Arsinoe BF 145-Ar-9; RT 6; Trismegistos 11963.
AD 147
census return
168
118. Brother-sister P. Berl. Leihg. Philagris BF 145-Ar-19; RT 8.

3.52B AD 147
census return
119. Brother-sister P. Amh. 2.74 Soknopaiou BF 145-Ar-20; RT9; Trismegistos
Nesos 10108.
AD 147
census return
120. Brother-sister CPR 6 p.3 Arsinoe BF 145-AR-23; RT 26. Parents of
(former marriage) AD147 Ptolemaios.
census return
121. Brother-sister CPR 6 p.3 Arsinoe BF 145-AR-23; RT 27. Parents of
(former marriage) AD147 Thaisas.
census return
122. Brother-sister SB 6.9317b Oxyrhynchus RT 66; Trismegistos 17893.
AD 147
registration of
property
123. Half-sibling BGU 1.95 Karanis BF 145-Ar-12; RT 76; Trismegistos
(same father)? AD 147 9135.
census return
124. Brother-sister PSI 10.1115 Tebtunis RT 68; Trismegistos 13833.
AD 152
marriage
settlement
125. Brother-sister P. Gen. 1.33 Arsinoe RT 39; Trismegistos 11227.
AD 155
birth
declaration
126. Brother-sister SB 12.10890 Arsinoe RT 40; Trismegistos 14349.
AD 156
status
declaration
127. Brother-sister P. Berl. Leihg. I.17 Arsinoe BF 159-Ar-4; RT 28; Trismegistos
(former marriage) AD 161 10201. Parents of below.
census return
128. Brother-sister P. Berl. Leihg. I.17 Arsinoe BF 159-Ar-4; RT 29; Trismegistos
(former marriage) AD 161 10201. Children of above, still co-
census return resident.
129. Brother-sister P. Ryl. 2.3 Arsinoe BF 159-Ar-5; RT 77.
(former marriage)? AD 161
census return
130. Half-sibling P. Lond. 2.182b Karanis BF 159-Ar-11; RT 10; Trismegistos
(same father) 160/1 AD 11646. Parents of below.
census return
169
131. Brother-sister P. Lond. 2.182b Karanis BF 159-Ar-11; RT 11; Trismegistos

160/1 AD 11646. Children of above.
census return
132. Brother-sister P. Fay. 319/SB Arsinoe BF 159-Ar-26; RT 12; Trismegistos
20.14111 AD 161 14810.
census return
133. Brother-sister P. Amh. 2.75 Hermopolis RT 41; Trismegistos 21677. Parents of
AD 161-168 below.
status
declaration
134. Brother-sister P. Amh. 2.75 Hermopolis RT 43; Trismegistos 21677. Children of
AD 161-168 above and parents of below.
status
declaration
135. Brother-sister P. Amh. 2.75 Hermopolis Hopkins 1980: 322; Huebner 2007:
AD 161-168 23; Rowlandson and Takahashi 2009;
status RT43; Trismegistos 21677. Children
declaration of above; family traced back to three
successive generations of sibling
marriage.
136. First cousin? P. Oxy. 3.494 Oxyrhynchus Bussi 2002: 3; Trismegistos 20630.
AD 165
Will of
Acusilaos
137. Brother-sister P. Vindob. Worp. Arsinoe Hopkins 1980: 323; Huebner 2007: 23;
5 AD 168 RT 69; Trismegistos 13696.
registration of
dowry land
138. Brother-sister P. Oxy. 38:2858 Oxyrhynchus Hopkins 1980: 321; Huebner 2007: 23;
AD 171 RT 44; Trismegistos 22245.
birth
declaration
139. Brother-sister BGU 2.447 Karanis BF 173-Ar-9; RT 13; Trismegistos 9178.
AD 174
census return
140. Brother-sister P. Brux 1.10 Thelbonthon BF 173-Pr-10; RT 15; Trismegistos
Siphtha 16047.
AD 174
census return
141. Brother-sister P. Brux. 1. 5 Thelbonthon BF 173-Pr-5; RT 14; Trismegistos
Siphtha 16042.
AD 174
census return
142. Half-sibling P. Brux. 1.10 Thelbonthon BF 173-Pr-10; RT 78; Trismegistos
(same father)? Siphtha 16047.
AD 174
census return
170
143. Half-sibling P. Brux. 1.13 Thelbonthon BF 173-PR-13; RT 79; Trismegistos

AD 174
census return
144. Half-sibling P. Brux. 1.17 Thelbonthon BF 173-Pr-17; RT 80; Trismegistos
AD 174
census return
145. Brother-sister P. Stras. 8.768 Tebtunis BF 173-Ar-12; RT 32; Trismegistos
(former marriage) AD 174/5 13440.
census return
146. Brother-sister P. Tebt. 2.317 Tebtunis (origin Hopkins 1980:323-24; Huebner 2007:
Alexandria?) 23; RT 70; Trismegistos 20817.
AD 174-175
petition to
appoint legal
representative
147. Half-sibling P. Flor. 3.301 Soknopaiou BF 173-AR-2; RT 30; Trismegistos
(same mother) Nesos 11164. Couple divorced when the wife
AD 175 was 26 years of age, may still be co-
census return resident.
148. Brother-sister BGU 1.302 Arsinoite BF 173-Ar-11; RT 31; Trismegistos
(former marriage) AD 175 14870.
census return
149. Brother-sister? BGU 2.562 Arsinoite RT 34; Trismegistos 9231.
after AD 177
correction
in status
document
150. Brother-sister P. Tebt. 2.320 Tebtunis Hopkins 1980: 321-22; Huebner 2007:
AD 181 23; RT 46; Trismegistos 13479.
claim for
privileged
status
151. Brother-sister P. Tebt. 2.320 Tebtunis RT 45; Trismegistos 13479. Parents of
AD 181 above.
152. Half-sibling P. Petaus 1-2 Ptolemais Scheidel 1996a: 11, n.11; RT 47;
Hormou Trismegistos 8798, 8799.
AD 185
birth return
153. Parallel cousin PSI 12.1227 Antinoopolis Rowlandson 2016: 341
(father's brother's AD 188 BF 187-An-2; Trismegistos 17397.
daughter) census return
154. Brother-sister P. Lips. 2.144 Arsinoe RT 24; Trismegistos 44418.
188/9
census return
171
155. Brother-sister BGU 1.115i Arsinoe BF 187-Ar-4; RT 16; Trismegistos 8887.

(one of four brother- AD 189 Parents of below.
sister marriages in census return
same household)
156. Brother-sister BGU I.115i Arsinoe BF 187-Ar-4; RT 17. Trismegistos 8887.

(one of four brother- AD 189 Children of above.
sister marriages in census return
same household)
157. Brother-sister BGU I.115i Arsinoe BF187-Ar-4; RT 18; Trismegistos
(one of four brother- AD 189 8887. Cousins of above, and niece and
sister marriages in census return nephew of their parents above.
same household)
158. Brother-sister BGU I.115i Arsinoe BF 187-Ar-4; RT 19; Trismegistos 8887.
(one of four brother- AD 189 Lodgers and possibly relatives of
sister marriages in census return above marriages.
same household)
159. Brother-sister P. Tebt. 2.504 Tebtunis BF 187-Ar-23; RT 23; Trismegistos
AD 189 14837.
census return
160. Half-sibling BGU 1.117 Arsinoe BF 187-Ar-8; RT 20; Trismegistos 8891.
(same father) AD 189
census return
161. Half-sibling P. Tebt. 2.322 Arsinoe BF 187-Ar-22; RT 22; Trismegistos
(same father) AD 189 13481.
census return
162. Brother-sister BGU 1.120 Arsinoe BF 187-Ar-12; RT 21; Trismegistos
AD 189 8897.
census return
163. Brother-sister? BGU 1.128ii Arsinoe BF 187-Ar-16; RT 81; Trismegistos
AD 189 8906.
census return
164. Brother-sister? BGU 2.406, col. 3.1 Soknopaiou RT 89; Trismegistos 28195.
Nesos
AD 192-200
census or
register
165. Brother-sister? SB 18.13958 Herkleopolite RT 71; Trismegistos 18333.
AD 193/4
letter of
strategos
regarding
property
registration
172
166. Brother-sister? P. Oxy. 3.524 Oxyrhynchus Hopkins 1980: 234; Huebner 2007: 23;
2nd century AD Rowlandson, 1998: 319, n. 250b; RT 88;
wedding Trismegistos 28364.
invitation
167. Half-sibling P. Tebt. 2.351 Tebtunis RT 72; Trismegistos 28420.
(same mother) 2nd century AD
tax receipt for
marriage gift of
house
168. Brother-sister? P. Oxy. 42.3059 Oxyrhynchus RT 86; Trismegistos 26811.
2nd century AD
letter
2nd century AD
letter
170. Full twins SB 26.16803 Arsinoe RT 48; Trismegistos 97163.
late 2nd
century AD
birth
declaration
171. Brother-sister? Stud. Pal. 22.60 Athribite RT 73; Trismegistos 27638; Wessely,
2nd/3rd Studien zur Palaeographie und
century AD Papyruskunde, 1922.
purchase of a
slave
172. Brother-sister? P. Stras. 1.56, ll. Unknown RT 90; Trismegistos 27754.
24-5 2nd/3rd
century AD
dispute over a
house
173. Parallel cousin P. Tebt. 2.480 Tebtunis BF 201-Ar-10; Trismegistos 14839.
(mother's sister's AD 203
daughter) census return
174. Brother-sister P. Lond 3.935-6 Hermopolis BF 215-Hm-1-2; RT25; Trismegistos
AD 217 22719, 22720.
census return
175. Brother-sister P. Oxy. 43.3096 Oxyrhynchus Scheidel 1996: 10-11, n.11; RT 49;
AD 223-224 Trismegistos 15975.
complaint of an
error in records
176. Brother-sister? PSI 5.457 Oxyrhynchus Scheidel 2001: 10-11, n.11; RT 94;
AD 269 Trismegistos 19301.
epikrisis of a
young man
173
177. Half-sibling P. Oxy. 43.3137 Oxyrhynchus Scheidel 1996: 10-11, n.11; RT 95;
(same mother)? AD 295 Trismegistos 16016.
birth return
178. Brother-sister? P. Oxy. 1.3 Oxyrhynchus Hopkins 198: 234; Huebner 2007: 23;
3rd century AD Lewis 1983, S.43; RT 91; Trismegistos
wedding 31343.
invitation
3rd century AD
letter
180. Brother-sister? PSI 13.1331 Oxyrhynchus RT 93; Trismegistos 30568.
3rd century AD
letter
174
Appendix 2
Details of consanguineous and affinal links between

consanguineously married couples in
Deir el-Medina (see chapter four, table 4.3 and
figure 4.1)
Marriage number 1: Anhurkhawy (i) and Henutdjuu (i)
See marriages 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 below.
Marriage number 2: Nebmehyt (iii) and Henutmehyt (iv)
A cousin of Nebmehyt (iii) and brother to Henutmehyt (iv) called Khaemtir (i) is married
to Nofrestatet (i) (one of 10 children). Nofrestat (i)’s niece and nephew are Pashedu (ii)
and Tanodjemethemsi (ii) of marriage number 6 (i.e. the couple of marriage 2 are related
through affinity to marriage 6). A cousin of Nebmehyt (iii) and brother to Henutmehyt (iv)
called Nebenmaat (ii) is married to Mertseger (v) whose sister and cousin are marriage 1
(i.e. the couple of marriage 2 are related through another line of affinity to marriage 1). See
figure A1.1 below.
Figure A1.1
175
Marriage number 3: Buqentuf (i) and Iyi (iii)
Buqentuf (i) and Iyi (iii) are the parents of Amennakht (x) in marriage 5. If marriage 5 is
read as an aunt-uncle marriage, then the wife in marriage 5, Terekhanu (i), is the sister of
Iyi (iii) and the first cousin of Buqentuf (i) who are the couple in marriage 3. However, if
marriage 5 is read as a cousin marriage, then Terekhanu (i) and Amannakht (x) share the
same grandmother. This couple are related by affinity to marriage 11: the great-grandson
of this marriage 5, Amennakht (vi/xii), marries Tahefnu (i), the sister of Khons (vi) and the
first cousin of Taweretemheb (ii). See figures A1.2a and A1.2b below.
Figure A1.2a
Figure A1.2b
Marriage number 4: Iyernutef (ii) and Tabaki (i)
The uncle of Iyernutef (ii) and Tabaki (i), Nakhtamun (ii), is married to Nubemshaes (i) and
they are the parents of the wife in marriage 6 (i.e. the couple in marriage 4 are first cousins
to the wife in marriage 6). The uncle of Iyernutef (ii) and Tabaki (i), Khons (i), is married
to Tentopet (i), the sister of Henutdjuu (i) who is married to her first cousin in marriage
1, so their aunt through marriage has a sister married to a first cousin in marriage (i.e.
the couple in marriage 4 are related by affinity to marriage 1). The aunt of Iyernutef (ii)
and Tabaki (i), Sahte (i), has a daughter, Webkhet (vi/viii), who marries consanguineously
(i.e. the couple of marriage 4 are first cousins with the wife of marriage 7). See figure A1.3
below.
176
Consanguineous and affinal links between consanguineously married couples
Figure A1.3
Marriage number 5: Amennakht (x) and Tarekhanu (i)
See marriage number 3. The husband, Amennakht (x) is the son of the couple in marriage 3,
and his wife Tarekhanu (i) is either the sister of the husband in marriage 3 or a first cousin
descending of the couple in marriage 3, in effect in this marriage Amennakht (x) and
Tarekhanu (i) may be cousins. This couple are also related by affinity to marriage 11: the
grandson of marriage 5 (and great-grandson of marriage 3), Amennakht (vi/xii), marries
Tahefnu (i), the sister of Khons (vi) and the first cousin of Taweretemheb (ii).
Marriage number 6: Pashedu (ii) and Tanodjemethemsi (ii)/Nodjemhemsiset (i)
See marriage number 4. The father of Tanodjemethemsi (ii) is Nakhtamun (ii) who is the
consanguineous uncle in marriage 6 (i.e. the couple in marriage 6 are first cousins with the
couple in marriage 4). Also related by affinity to marriages 1, 2 and 7 (Tanodjemethemsi (ii)/
(i)’s father’s brother is married to Tentopet (i), the sister of Henutdjuu (i) who is married to
her first cousin in marriage 1).
Marriage number 7: Nekhemmut (i) and Webkhet (vi/viii)
Sahte (i), the mother of Webkhet (vi/viii) and aunt through affinity of Nekhemmut (i),
is the sister of Reweben (iii) whose daughter Henutwedjebu (i) marries Amenmose (iii),
and his two brothers are the fathers of the parallel cousin marriage 6 (i.e. the first cousin
Henutwedjebu (i) of the couple in marriage 7 is aunt by affinity to marriage 6). Sahte (i) is also
the consanguineous aunt of marriage 4. See also links to marriages 9 and 11 below as they
are all members of the family of Sennedjem (i), in which there are three consanguineous
marriages. See figure A1.4 below. See also consanguineous links to marriages 9 and 11 in
figure A.1.6.
177
Figure A1.4
Marriage number 8: Khnummose (i) and Henuwati (i)/(ii)
This cousin marriage is dependent upon Henuwati (ii) being identified with Henuwati (i)
and the husband Khnummose (i) being identified with Mose (viii), son of Anuy (ii). (Anuy
(ii) is the brother of Nebamentet (i) who is the husband of Hathor (viii), the daughter of Hay
(ii), who is the uncle of cousin marriage 1). Henuwati (ii) is a first cousin once removed from
marriage 1, and her mother Hunero/Hathor (viii) is a first cousin of the two first cousins in
marriage 1 (i.e. the couple in marriage no 8 are first cousins once removed descending to
marriage 1). See figure A1.5 below.
Figure A1.5
178
Consanguineous and affinal links between consanguineously married couples
Marriage number 9: Ipuy (viii) and Henutmire (i)
This marriage is dependent upon Nebnefer (xv) being identified with Nebnefer (xxiii), son
of Khons (v) (see Davies 1999: 53, n.686, Bierbrier, Chronique d’Égypte, 1984: 208-10, 1975:
30-35). See links to marriages 7 and 11, as they are all members of the family of Sennedjem
(i) in which there are three consanguineous marriages. See figure A.1.6 below.
Figure A1.6
Marriage number 10: Penrennut (i) and Tadehnetemheb (i)
Penrennut (i) and Tadehnetemheb (i) are the grandchildren of Huy (iii/vi/vii/ix) who is
first cousin to marriage 1 (i.e. the couple in number 10 are the great niece and nephew of
marriage 1). Also, Tadehnetemheb’s (i) brother Seti (i) is married to the great-granddaughter
of marriage 1 (i.e. marriage 10 is related to marriage 1 by affinity). This cousin marriage
is dependent upon Nakhtmin (iii) being identified with Nakhtmin (i), son of Huy (iii). See
figure A1.7 below.
Figure A1.7
179
Marriage number 11: Khons (vi) and Taweretemheb (ii)
See marriages 7 and 9. The brother of Henutmire (i) called Khons (vi) marries his first cousin
Taweretemheb (ii) in marriage 11. In effect, a brother and sister each marry a first cousin
(i.e. the first cousins of marriage 11 are first cousins of marriage 9). This is dependent upon
the father of Ipuy (viii) and Henutmire (i) being Neferhor (i)/(vi), and the mother being
Merutemmut (ii) or (i) in Bierbrier’s genealogy (see Bierbrier 1975: 30-35). Marriages 7, 9
and 11 are all members of the family of Sennedjem (i).
180
Appendix 3
Number of known children in the eight family trees

in which there are consanguineous marriages
The number of known children associated with each consanguineous marriage is

highlighted in bold.
Sources: Counts drawn from family trees on charts 3-5, 7, 8, 12-14, 21, 22, 24, 27-29, Davies,
Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina, 1999; Bierbrier, The Late New Kingdom in Egypt, 1975: 30.
Family name No. of marriages where both parents Total no. of Total no. of
and generations known (A) marriages and marriages and
* corresponding number of children in children where children where
Marriage no. each both parents both or only
refers to table marriage (B) known one parent
4.3 A B known **
Family of Qaha 7 1 18 marriages 27 marriages
(i), 2 8 54 children 62 children
9 generations 2 2
2 5
2 0
1 11
1 7
1 (marriage no. 1) 6
Family of 3 1 6 marriages 9 marriages
Nebenmaat (i) 1 9 37 children (1 of 24 children
6 generations 1 5 these children
1 4 also appears in
1 (marriage no. 2) 0 family of no. 4)
Family of Didi (i) 1 9

8 generations 2 6 11 marriages 16 marriages
2 (one is marriage no. 3) 4 22 children 42 children
3 2
2 (one is marriage no. 5) *** 1
1 0
Family of Piay (ii) 4 0
5 generations 3 (one is marriage no. 4) 1
**** 15 marriages 19 marriages
2 11 53 children 55 children
1 9
1 8
1 7
1 6
1 5
1 4
181
Family of 4 (one is marriage no. 6) 1

Hehnekhu (i) 1 5 10 marriages 13 marriages
5 generations 1 11 35 children (5 of 35 children
1 10 these children
1 3 also appear in
1 2 family of no. 3)
1 0
Family of 3 1 13 marriages 28 marriages
Sennedjem (i) 2 9 31 children 57 children
10 generations 2 5
2 (one is marriage no. 9) 6
*****
1 3
1 2
1 (marriage no. 11) 0
Family of Hay (ii) 2 5 7 marriages 9 marriages
5 generations 1 3 26 children 28 children
1 9
******
1 (wife’s name uncertain) 0
Family of 2 (one is marriage no. 10) 1 4 marriages 7 marriages
Huynefer (ii) 1 2 12 children 30 children
5 generations 1 8 (1 child also
appears in
family of no. 4)
Notes to Appendix 3
* In the early or late generations the names of only one or two individuals are known, for
example, in Marriage 1 the two earliest generations list two married couples and the last
generation lists two children; also, the first generation of offspring of married children
in some of the marriages have been included where known, even though they appear on
other genealogical trees.
** When the existence of a child/husband/wife is recognised but their personal name is

unknown, they are listed by Davies (1999) as P/N; this includes two individuals in the family
of Sennedjem (i), one in Qaha (i), one in Hay (ii), and one in Huynefer (ii).
*** This may be an aunt-nephew marriage, or possibly a second cousin marriage, depending
on whether the wife, Tarekhanu (i), is the daughter of Henuteriunu (i) and Amennakht (xi)
or their granddaughter. Davies (1999: 65 and n.32) remarks that Valbelle (1975: 40) suggests
Henuteriunu (i) may have been the grandmother only of the husband, Amennakht (x), and
therefore this would not be a consanguineous marriage.
182
Number of children in family trees with known consanguineous marriages
**** There is uncertainty over 7 children: in one of the marriages with six children, the
identity of four children is tentative; there are three marriages where the name of one
parent is known and one child is tentatively associated with each marriage.
***** This is based on the Neferhor (i/vi) being the son of Khons (v), making Ipuy (viii) and
Henutmire (i) first cousins, although Davies (1999: 51-2) does not include this. Bierbrier
(1975: 30, 33, 35) recognises it as a cousin marriage, but also discusses the identity of
Neferhor (i/vi), suggesting he could be the son of Ipuy (iii) (1984: 209-10). The count
includes six children, although there may have been seven.
****** The husband in this marriage, Khnummose (i), may be synonymous with Mose (iv)
or (viii). The two children of Mose (viii) have been included in the count. Mose (xiii) is listed
in Davies (1999: chart 8) as a possible third child of Khnummose (i) and Henuwati (i/ii).
183
Bibliography
AAIDD Definition of Intellectual Disability, American Association of Intellectual and

Developmental Disabilities, AAIDD [Online]. Available: http://aaidd.org/intellectual-
disability/definition [Accessed 20.7.2017].
ACKERMAN, J. M., KENRICK, D. T., SCHALLER, M. 2007. Is friendship akin to kinship?
Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 365-374.
ADDIS, W. E., ARNOLD, T., revised by SCANNELL, T., B., HALLETT, P. E., ALBION, G. 1960.
A Catholic Dictionary, containing some account of the Doctrine, Discipline, Rites, Ceremonies,
Councils, and Religious Orders of the Catholic Church, 17th ed. London: Routledge and Kegan
Paul.
ADLER, E. N., TAIT, J. G., HEICHELHEIM, F. M. (Greek Texts); GRIFFITH, F. Ll. (Demotic Texts)
1939. The Adler Papyri. London: Oxford University Press, Humphrey Milford.
AGER, S. L. 2005. Familiarity breeds: incest and the Ptolemaic dynasty. The Journal of Hellenic
Studies, 125, 1-34.
AGNEESSENS, F., WAEGE, H., LIEVENS, J. 2006. Diversity in social support by role relations:
a typology. Social Networks, 28, 427-441.
AL-ANSARI, A. 1993. Etiology of mild mental retardation amongst Bahraini children: a
community-based case control study. Mental Retardation, 31 (3), 140-143.
AL-KHABORI, M., PATTON, M. A. 2008. Consanguinity and deafness in Omani children.
International Journal of Audiology, 47 (1), 30-33.
AL-FITYANI, K., PADDEN, C. 2010, Sign languages in the Arab world. In: BRENTARI, D.
(ed.) Sign Languages. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press (A Cambridge
Language Survey), 433-450.
ALAM, N., KHUDA, B-E. 2014. Demographic events and economic conditions of rural
households in Bangladesh. Asian Population Studies [Online], 10. Available: http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/17441730.2014.890162 [Accessed 18.12.2014].
ALBORZ, A. 2017. The nature of quality of life: a conceptual model to inform assessment.
Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 14 (1), 15-30.
ALJOHAR, A., RAVICHANDRAN, K., SUBHANI, S. 2008. Pattern of cleft lip and palate in
hospital-based population in Saudi Arabia: retrospective study. Cleft Palate–Craniofacial
Journal, 45 (6), 592-596.
ALLAM, S. 1975. Ehe. In: HELCK, W., EBERHARD, O., WESTENDORF, W. (eds) Lexikon der
Ägyptologie (LÄ). Wiesbaden: O. Harrasowitz, cols 1162-1181.
ALLAM, S. 1977. Les obligations et la famille dans la société égyptienne ancienne. Oriens
Antiquus Roma, 16, 89-97.
ALLAM, S. 1977. Familie, soziale Funktion (Struktur). In: HELCK, W., EBERHARD, O., WESTENDORF,
W. (eds) Lexikon der Ägyptologie (LÄ). Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, cols 104-113.
ALLAM, S. 1981. Quelques aspects du mariage dans l’Égypte ancienne. Journal of Egyptian
Archaeology, 67, 116-135.
ALLAM, S. 1990a. Women as holders of rights in ancient Egypt (during the Late Period).
Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 33 (1), 1-34.
ALLAM, S. 1990b. A new look at the Adoption Papyrus (reconsidered). Journal of Egyptian
184
Bibliography
ALLEN, J. P. 1991. Akenaten’s ‘mystery’ coregent and successor. In: Amarna Letters: Essays on
Ancient Egypt, c.1390-1310 BC, Vol. 1. San Francisco: KMT Communications, 74-85.
ALLEN, J. P. 2005. The Art of Medicine in Ancient Egypt. New York, New Haven, London: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, Yale University Press.
ALLEN, J. P. 2015. Middle Egyptian Literature: Eight Literary Works of the Middle Kingdom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ALLEN, T. D. 2009. The Ancient Egyptian Family: Kinship and Social Structure. New York, London:
Routledge.
ÁLVAREZ, G., CEBALLOS, F. C., BERRA, T. M. 2015. Darwin was right: inbreeding depression
on male fertility in the Darwin family. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 114 (2),
474-483.
ALWAN, A., MODELL, B. 1997. Community Control of Genetic and Congenital Disorders, Geneva,
World Health Organisation (WHO, EMRO Technical Publications Series, 24).
AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, Condition, Disease, Disorder [Online]. Available: Error!
Hyperlink reference not valid. amastyleinsider.com/2011/11/21/condition-disease-
disorder/ [Accessed 27.11.2016].
AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION, 2013. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM-5) 5th edn. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association.
ANDERSON, S. 2007. The economics of dowry and brideprice. Journal of Economic Perspectives,
21 (4), 151-174.
ANDERSON, T. 2000. Congenital conditions and neoplastic disease in British palaeopathology.
In: COX, M. MAYS, S. (eds) Human Osteology in Archaeology and Forensic Science. London:
Greenwich Medical Media, 199-226.
APESOS, J. ANIGIAN, G. 1993. Medial cleft of the lip, its significance and surgical repair. The
Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 30 (1), 94-96.
ASPÖCK, E. 2007. What Actually Is a Deviant Burial? Comparing German-Language and
Anglophone Research on Deviant Burials. In: MURPHY, E. M. (ed.) Deviant Burial in the
Archaeological Record. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 169-190.
APPLEBY, J. 2018. Ageing and the body in archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 28
(1), 145-163.
ARCHIBALD, E. 2001. Incest and the Medieval Imaginations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
ASPÖCK, E. 2008. What Actually Is a ‘Deviant Burial’? Comparing German-Language and
Anglophone Research on ‘Deviant Burials’. In: MURPHY, E. M. (ed.) Deviant Burial in the
Archaeological Record. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 17-34.
ASSMANN, J. 2005 [German edn 2001]. Death and Salvation in Ancient Egypt. Ithaca (NY),
London: Cornell University Press.
AUFDERHEIDE, A. 2011. Soft tissue taphonomy: a paleopathology perspective. International
Journal of Paleopathology, 1 (2), 75-80.
AUFDERHEIDE, A., RODRIGUEZ-MARTIN, C. 1998. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Human
Paleopathology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
AUSTIN, A. 2014. Contending with illness in ancient Egypt: A textual and osteological study of health
care at Deir el-Medina, Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of California Los Angeles.
AVALOS, H., MELCHER, S., SCHIPPER, J. (eds) 2007. This Abled Body: Rethinking Disability in
Disabled Studies. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature.
BAGNALL, R. S., CRIBIORE, R. 2006. Women’s Letters from Ancient Egypt, 300BC–800 AD. Ann
Arbor (MI), New York: The University of Michigan Press.
185
BAGNALL, R. S., FRIER, B. W. 2006 [1994]. The Demography of Roman Egypt (2006 edn with
census declarations Supplement). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
BAINES, J. 1982. Interpreting Sinuhe. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 68, 31-44.
BAINES, J. 1983. Literacy and Ancient Egyptian Society. Man (New Series), 18 (3), 572-599.
BARNES, E. 2012. Atlas of Developmental Field Anomalies of the Human Skeleton: A Paleopathology
Perspective. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley-Blackwell
BARNES, E., 1994. Developmental Defects of the Axial Skeleton in Paleopathology.
Colorado: University Press of Colorado.
BECKER, S. M. et al. 2001. Consanguinity and congenital heart disease in Saudi Arabia.
American Journal of Medical Genetics, 99 (1), 8-13.
BELL, D. 1991. Reciprocity as a generating process in social relations. Journal of Quantitative
Anthropology, 3 (3), 251-260.
BELL, D. 2008. Marriage payments: a fundamental reconsideration. Structure and Dynamics:
eJournal of Anthropological and Related Sciences, UC Irvine [Online], 3(1), 1-20. Available:
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6mv253zb [Accessed 17.1.2017].
BENER, A. 2016. Does consanguinity increase the risk of mental illnesses? A population-
based study. International Journal of Culture and Mental Health, 9 (2), 172-181.
BENER, A., HUSSAIN, R. 2006. Consanguineous unions and child health in the state of Qatar.
Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 20 (5), 372-378.
BENITEZ, J. T. 1988. Otopathology of Egyptian mummy Pum II: final report. The Journal of
Laryngology & Otology, 102 (6), 485-490.
BEN-NER, A., HALLDORSSON, F. 2010. Trusting and trustworthiness: what are they, how to
measure them, and what affects them. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31 (1), 64-79.
BEN-NER, A., KRAMER, A. 2011. Personality and altruism in the dictator game: relationship
to giving to kin, collaborators, competitors, and neutrals. Personality and Individual
Differences, 51 (3), 216-221.
BENSON, B. A., BROOKS, W. T. 2008. Aggressive challenging behaviour and intellectual
disability. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 21 (5), 454-458.
BERG, E. et al. 2016. Health status among adults born with an oral cleft in Norway. JAMA
Pediatrics, 170 (11), 1063-1070.
BERGMANN, E. von. 1887. Inschriftliche denkmäler der sammlung Ägyptischer alterthümer
des Österreichischen Kaiserhauses. Recueil de travaux relatifs à la philologie et à l’archéologie
Égyptiennes et Assyriennes: pour servir de bulletin à la Mission Française du Caire, 9, 33-63.
BERKMAN, L. F., GLASS, T. 2000. Social integration, social networks, social support, and
health. In: BERKMAN, L. F., KAWACHI, I. (eds) Social Epidemiology. Oxford, New York:
Oxford University Press, 137-173.
BERKSON, G. 2006. Mental disabilities in Western Civilization from ancient Rome to the
Prerogativa Regis. Mental Retardation, 44 (1), 28-40.
BERNHARD, H., FEHR, E., FISCHBACHER, U. 2006. Group affiliation and altruistic norm
enforcement. The American Economic Review, 96 (2), 217-221.
BETZIG, L. 1992. Roman monogamy. Ethology and Sociobiology, 13, 351-383.
BIERBRIER, M. L. 1975. The Late New Kingdom in Egypt (c. 1300-664 BC): a Genealogical and
Chronological Investigation. Warminster: Aris and Phillips.
BIERBRIER, M. L. 1978. Notes on Deir el-Medina II: The Career of Paneb. Journal of the Society
for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities, 8, 138-9.
186
Bibliography
BIERBRIER, M. L. 1980. Terms of Relationships at Deir el-Medina. Journal of Egyptian

BIERBRIER, M. L. 1982. The Tomb-Builders of the Pharaohs. Cairo: The American University in
Cairo Press.
BIERBRIER, M. L. 1984. Notes de prosopographie thébaine. Troisième Série. Chronique
d’Égypte, 56, 199-241.
BINGEN, J. 2007. Hellenistic Egypt: Monarchy, Society, Economy, Culture. Berkeley, Los Angeles:
University of California Press.
BITTLES, A. H. 1998. Empirical Estimates of the Global Prevalence of Consanguineous Marriage
in Contemporary Societies (Paper number 0074). Centre for Human Genetics Edith Cowan
University, Perth, and Morrison Institute for Population and Resource Studies Stanford
University, Stanford, 3-66 [Online]. Available: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/
summary?doi=10.1.1.215.6983 [Accessed 10.10.2017].
BITTLES, A. H. 2001a. A Background Summary of Consanguineous Marriage, Centre
for Human Genetics, Edith Cowan University. Available: http://www.consang.net/
images/d/dd/01AHBWeb3.pdf [Accessed 15.1.2014].
BITTLES, A. H. 2001b. Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. Clincal Genetics,
60, 89-98.
BITTLES, A. H. 2002. The influence of intellectual disability on life expectancy. Journal of
Gerontology: Medical Sciences, 57A (7), M470-472.
BITTLES, A. H. 2003. Consanguineous Marriage and Childhood Health. Developmental
Medicine and Child Neurology, 45, 571-576.
BITTLES, A. H., BLACK, M.L. 2010a. Consanguinity, human evolution, and complex diseases.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States [Online], 107 (1), 1779-
1786. Available: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0906079106 [Accessed 14.6.2012].
BITTLES, A. H., BLACK, M. L. 2010b. Consanguineous marriage and human evolution. Annual
Review of Anthropology, 39 (1), 193-207.
BITTLES, A. H., BLACK, M. L. 2010c. The impact of consanguinity on neonatal and infant
health. Early Human Development, 86 (11), 737-741.
BITTLES, A. H. 2012. Consanguinity in Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BIXLER, R. H. 1982. Sibling incest in the royal families of Egypt, Peru, and Hawaii. Journal of
Sex Research, 18 (3), 264-281.
BLACKMAN, A. M. 1914. The Rock Tombs of Meir, Vol. 1. London: Egypt Exploration Fund
(Archaeological Survey of Egypt, 22nd Memoir).
BLEIBERG, E. 2005. Arts and Humanities through the Eras: Ancient Egypt (2675 B.C.E.–332 B.C.E.).
Farmington Hills (MI): Thomson Gale.
BLEIBERG, E. 1996. The Official Gift in Ancient Egypt. Norman (OK), London: University of
Oklahoma Press.
BLUM, H. P. To what extent do you privilege dream interpretation in relation to other
forms of mental representations? Response by Harold P. Blum. International Journal of
Psychoanalysis, 92 (2), 275-277.
BLUNDELL, S. 1995. Women in Ancient Greece. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
BOANO, R. et al. 2009. Neural tube defect in a 4000-year-old Egyptian infant mummy: a case
of meningocele from the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography of Turin (Italy).
European Journal of Paediatric Neurology, 13 (6), 481-487.
187
BOURBOU, C., THEMELIS, P. 2010. Child burials at ancient Messene. In: GUIMIER-SORBETS,
A. M., MORIZOT, Y. (eds) L’Enfant et la mort dans l’Antiquité I: Nouvelles recherches dans les
nécropoles grecques. Le signalement des tombes d’enfants. Paris: Editions de Boccard, 111-128.
BORGHOUTS, J. F. 1982. Divine intervention in ancient Egypt and its manifestation (b3w).
In: DEMARÉE, R. J., JANSSEN, J.J. (ed.) Gleanings from Deir el-Medina. Leiden: Nederlands
Instituut Voor Het Nabije Oosten, 1-70.
BOSSEN. L. 1988. Toward a theory of marriage: the economic anthropology of marriage
transactions. Ethnology, 27(2), 127-144.
BOSTICCO, S. 1959. Museo Archeologico di Firenze, Vol. 1: Le Stele Egiziane dall’Antico al Nuovo
Regno. Rome: Istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, Libreria dello Stato.
BOTTICINI. M., SIOW, A. 2003. Why dowries? The American Economic Review, 93(4), 1385-1398.
BOURBOU. C. AND THEMELIS, P. 2010. Child burials at ancient Messene. L’Enfant et la mort
dans l’Antiquité I: Nouvelles recherches dans les nécropoles grecques. Le signalement des tombes
d’enfants. Paris: De Boccard.
BOWMAN, A. K. 1986. Egypt after the Pharaohs, 332 BC-AD 642 from Alexander to the Arab Conquest.
London: Guild Publishing.
BRADLEY, E. A., THOMPSON, A., BRYSON, S. E. 2002. Mental retardation in teenagers: prevalence
data from the Niagara region, Ontario. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 47 (7), 652-9.
BRAND, P. J. 2000. The Monuments of Seti I: Epigraphic, Historical, and Art Historical Analysis.
Leiden: Brill.
BREASTED, J. H. 1906. Ancient Records of Egypt, Historical Documents, Vol. 4. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
BRUNTON, G. 1948. Matmar, British Museum Expedition to Middle Egypt 1929-1931. London:
Bernard Quaritch Ltd.
BRUYÈRE, B. 1937. Rapport sur les Fouilles de Deir el Médineh (1934-1935). Deuxième Partie: La
Nécropole de l’Est. Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale.
BUDGE, W. E. A. 1911. Hieroglyphic texts from Egyptian Stelae, etc. in the British Museum, Part 1.
London: Harrison and Sons.
BURG, M. L. et al. 2016. Epidemiology, etiology, and treatment of isolated cleft palate.
Frontiers in Physiology [Online], 1-16. Available: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.00067
[Accessed 21.5.2017].
BURY, R. G. (trans.) 1926. Plato. Laws Vol. 11, Books 7-12. Cambridge (MA), London: Harvard
University Press, William Heinemann (Loeb Classical Library 192).
BUSSI, S. 2002. Mariages endogames en Égypte hellénistique et romaine. Revue Historique de
Droit Français et Étranger, 80, 1-22.
BUTZER, K. 1976. Early Hydraulic Civilisation in Egypt. Chicago, London: University of Chicago
Press.
CAMPAGNO, M. 2014. Patronage and other logics of social organization in ancient Egypt
during the IIIrd millennium BCE. Journal of Egyptian History, 7, 1-33.
CAMPAGNO, M. P. 2009. Kinship and Family Relations. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, Frood,
E., Wendrich, W. (eds) [Online]. Available: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.
do?ark=21198/zz001nf68f [Accessed 4.3.2013].
188
Bibliography
CANNATA, M. 2009. God’s seal-bearers, lector-priests and choachytes: who’s who at Memphis
and Hawara. In: WIDMER, G., DEVAUCHELLE, D. (eds) Actes du IXe Congrès International des
Études Démotiques, Paris, 31 Août - 3 Septembre 2005. Cairo: l’Institut Français d’Archéologie
Orientale du Caire, (Bibliothèque d’Étude 147), 57-68.
CAREY, C. J. 2009. Demotic Papyri from the Memphite Necropolis (P.Dem. Memphis) in the Collections
of the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden, the British Museum and the Hermitage Museum,
Vol. 1. Turnhout: Brepols.
CARLÀ, F., GORI, M. 2014. Gift Giving and the Embedded Economy in the Ancient World, Heidelberg,
Universitätsverlag Winter (Akademiekonferenzen 17).
CARMICHAEL, C. 1995. Incest in the Bible. Chicago Kent Law Review, 71, 123-147.
CARNEY, E. D. Women and dunasteia in Caria. The American Journal of Philology, 126 (1), 65-91.
CARSTEN, J. 2004. After Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CARSTEN, J. 2011. Substance and relationality: blood in contexts. Annual Review of
Anthropology, 40, 19-35.
CARULLA, L. S. et al. 2011. Intellectual Development Disorders: towards a new name,
definition and framework for ‘mental retardation/intellectual disability’ in ICD-11.
World Psychiatry, 10 (3), 175-180.
CARVILL, S. MARSTON, G. 2002. People with intellectual disability, sensory impairments
and behaviour disorder: a case series. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 46 (3), 264-
272.
CASEAU, B., HUEBNER, S. R. 2014. A Cross-cultural approach to succession and inheritance
in the ancient and mediaeval Mediterranean. In: CASEAU, B., HUEBNER, S.R. (ed.)
Inheritance, Law and Religions in the Ancient and Mediaeval Worlds (Monographies 45).
ACHCByz, Collège de France - CNRS, Centre de Recherche d’Histoire et Civilisation de
Byzance, 5-8.
CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA, 1967. New Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
ČERNÝ, J. 1927. Le culte d’Amenophis Ier chez les ouvriers de la nécropole Thébaine. Bulletin
de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 27, 159-203.
ČERNÝ, J. 1929. Papyrus Salt 124 (Brit. Mus. 10055). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 15, 243-
258.
ČERNÝ, J. 1935. Questions adressées aux oracles. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie
Orientale, 35, 41-58.
ČERNÝ, J. 1942. Nouvelle série de questions adressées aux oracles. Bulletin de l’Institut
Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 41, 13-24.
ČERNÝ, J. 1945. The will of Naunakhte and the Related documents. Journal of Egyptian
ČERNÝ, J. 1954. Consanguineous marriages in Pharaonic Egypt. Journal of Egyptian
ČERNÝ, J. 1972. Troisieme série de questions adressées aux oracles. Bulletin de l’Institut
Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 72, 49-69.
ČERNÝ, J. 1973. A community of Workmen at Thebes in the Ramesside Period. Cairo: Institut
Fançais d’Archéologie Orientale (Bibliothèque d’Étude 50).
ČERNÝ, J. 1976. Coptic Etymological Dictionary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CHAMBERLAIN, A. 2006. Demography in Archaeology. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge
University Press.
189
CHAMPLIN, E. 1991. Final Judgments: Duty and Emotion in Roman Wills, 200 BC-AD 250. Berkeley,
Los Angeles, Oxford: University of California Press.
CHISHOLM, J. S., BITTLES, A. H. 2015. Consanguinity and the Developmental
Origins of Health and Disease. Journal of Evolutionary Medicine [Online], 3,
1-4. Available: doi:10.4303/jem/235909 [Accessed 3.4.2017].
CHOWDHURY, S., MALLICK, D., CHOWDHURY, P. R. 2017. Evolution of mehr and dowry
among Muslims in Bangladesh: evidence from natural experiments [Online]. Available:
https://www.isid.ac.in/~epu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/dp17-02.pdf [Accessed
1.6.2017].
CLARK, M. 1999. Flesh and Spirit in the Songs of Homer: A Study of Words and Myth. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
CLARK, P. A., ROSE, M. L. 2013. Psychiatric disability and Galenic medical mix. In: ROSE, M.
L. (ed.) Disabilities in Roman Anitquity. Leiden: Brill.
CLARYSSE, W. 2010. Bilingual papyrological archives. In: PAPACONSTANTINOU, A. (ed.) The
Multilingual Experience in Egypt, from the Ptolemies to the Abbasids. Farnham, Burlington
(VT): Ashgate, 47-72.
CLARYSSE, W., THOMPSON, D. J. 2006. Counting the people in Hellenistic Egypt, Vol.2, Historical
studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
COLLIER, M., DODSON, A., HAMERNIK, G. 2010. P. BM EA 10052, Anthony Harris, and Queen
Tyti. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 96, 242-247.
COLLIER, M., QUIRKE, S. 2004. The UCL Lahun Papyri: Religious, Literary, Legal, Mathematical and
Medical, Vol. 2). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports (BAR S1209).
COLORU, O. 2017. Ancient Persia and silent disability. In: Laes, C. (ed.) Disability in Antiquity.
London, New York: Routledge, 61-74.
COLSON, F. H. (ed.) 1937. Philo, Vol. 7. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press (The Loeb
Classical Library 320).
COOPER, S.-A. et al. 2007a. The prevalence, incidence and factors predictive of mental ill-
health in adults with profound intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in
Intellectual Disabilities, 20 (6), 493-501.
COOPER, S.-A. et al. 2007b. Mental ill-health in adults with intellectual disabilities:
prevalence and associated factors. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190 (1), 27-35.
CRESSY, D. 1997. Birth, Marriage, and Death: Ritual, Religion, and the Life-Cycle in Tudor and Stuart
England. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
CRISCUOLA, L. 2011. Observations on the economy in kind in Ptolemaic Egypt. In:
ARCHIBALD, A. H., DAVIES, Z. H., GABRIELSEN, V. (eds) The Economies of Hellenistic
Societies, Third to First Centuries BC. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 166-176.
CRUM, W. E. 1939. A Coptic Dictionary. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.
CRUZ-URIBE, E. 1985. A 30th dynasty document of renunciation. Enchoria, 13, 41-49.
CRUZ-URIBE, E. 1988. A new look at the Adoption Papyrus. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology,
74, 220-3.
CUMMINGS, L. 2008. Clinical Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
CUMMINGS, L. 2014. Communication Disorders. Basingstoke: New York, Palgrave MacMillan.
CURCHIN, L. A. 2000-1. The Roman family: recent interpretations. Zephyrus, 53-4, 535-550.
DA ROCHA BARRAS, E. M. 2011. How do you conceive of the function of dreams? Do you
distinguish dreams as a result of trauma from other types of dreams? Response by Elias
Mallet da Rocha Barros (São Paulo). International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 92 (2), 270-272.
190
Bibliography
DARWIN, C. 1868. The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication. London: John
Murray.
DARWIN, C. 1876. The Effects of Cross and Self Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom. London:
John Murray.
DASEN, V. 1993. Dwarfs in Ancient Egypt and Greece. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
DAVIES, B. G. 1999. Who’s Who in Deir el-Medina: A Prosopographic Study of the Royal Workmen’s
Community. Leiden: Nederlands Instituut Voor Het Nabije Oosten.
DAVID, A. R. 2002. Religion and Magic in Ancient Egypt. London: Penguin.
DAVID, A. R., 2004. Rationality versus irrationality in Egyptian Medicine in the Pharaonic and
Graeco-Roman Periods. In: HORSTMANSHOFF, H. F. J., STOL, M. (eds) Magic and Rationality
in Ancient Near Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 133-151.
DAVID, A. R. 2008. Egyptian Mummies and Modern Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
DAVID, A. R. 2017. Egyptian medicine and disabilities: from pharaonic to Greco-Roman
Egypt. In: LAES, C. (ed.) Disability in Antiquity. London, New York: Routledge, 75-89.
DEAN-JONES, L. 2013. The child patient of the Hippocratics: early Pediatrics? In: EVANS
GRUBBS, J., PARKIN, T. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Childhood and Education in the Classical
World. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 108-124.
DEMARÉE, R., VALBELLE, D. 2011. Les Registres de Recensement du Village de Deir el-Médineh (le
“Stato Civile”), Leuven, Paris, Walpole, MA, Peeters.
DEMARÉE, R. J. 1983. The 3ḫ iḳr n Rʻ- Stelae: on Ancestor Worship in Ancient Egypt. Leiden:
Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.
DENIC, S., AGARWAL. M. M., NAGELKERKE, N. 2102b. Growth of consanguineous populations:
effect of family and group size. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Disease, S227-S232.
DENIC, S., NAGELKERKE, N., AGARWAL, M. 2010a. Choice of kin in consanguineous marriages:
effects of altruism and ecological factors. Annals of Human Biology, 37 (6), 738-753.
DENIC, S., NAGELKERKE, N., AGARWAL, M.. 2011. On some novel aspects of consanguineous
marriages. Public Health Genomics, 14 (3), 162-168.
DERRY, D. E. 1938. Two skulls with absence of the premaxilla. Journal of Anatomy, 2 (2), 295-
298.
DICKEY, E. 2004. Literal and extended use of kinship terms in documentary papyri.
Mnemosyne, Fourth Series, 57 (Fasc 2), 131-176.
DILLON, M., GARLAND, L. 2015. Ancient Rome: Social and Historical Documents from the
Early Republic to the Death of Augustus. Abingdon, New York: Routledge.
DIXON, M. J. et al. 2011. Cleft lip and palate: understanding genetic and environmental
influences. National Review of Genetics, 12 (3), 167-178.
DO, Q-T., IYER, S., JOSHI, S. 2013. The economics of consanguineous marriage. The Review of
Economics and Statistics, 95 (3), 904-918.
DODSON, A., HILTON, D. 2004. The Complete Royal Families of Ancient Egypt. London: Thames
and Hudson.
DONKER VAN HEEL, K. 2014. Mrs Tsenhor: a Female Entrepreneur in Ancient Egypt. Cairo, New
York: The American University in Cairo Press.
DONKER VAN HEEL, K. 2016. Mrs. Naunakhte and Family: the Women of Ramesside Deir al-Medina,
Cairo, New York: The American University in Cairo Press.
DONOGHUE, H. D. et al. 2005. Co-infection of mycobacterium tuberculosis and
mycobacterium leprae in human archaeological samples: a possible explanation for the
191
historical decline of leprosy. Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Biological Sciences) [Online],
272. Available: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2966 [Accessed 10.3.2017].
DRAKE, R. E. 2015. Anthropology and mental health care. Epidemiology and Psychiatric
Sciences, 24 (4), 283-284.
DRAYCOTT, J. 2015. Reconstructing the lived experience of disability in antiquity: a case
study from Roman Egypt. Greece and Rome, 62 (2), 189-205.
DROUSOU, K., PRICE, C., BROWN, T. A. 2018. The kinship of two 12th Dynasty mummies
revealed by ancient DNA sequencing. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 17, 793-
797.
DSM-5 Intellectual Disability Factsheet, American Psychiatric Association, 2013 [Online].
Available: https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/educational-resources/
dsm-5-fact-sheets. See Intellectual Disability under Updated Disorders [Accessed
10.8.2017].
DUHIG, C. 2010. The remains of Pharaoh Akhenaten are not yet identified: comments
on ‘Biological age of the skeletonised mummy from Tomb KV55 at Thebes (Egypt)’.
Anthropologie, International Journal of Human Diversity and Evolution, 48 (2), 113-115.
DURKIN, M. S. et al. 2000. Prenatal and postnatal risk factors for mental retardation among
children in Bangladesh. American Journal of Epidemiology, 152 (11), 1024-1033.
DZIERZYKRAY-ROGALSKI, T. 1980. Paleopathology of the Ptolemaic inhabitants of Dakhleh
Oasis. Journal of Human Evolution, 9 (1), 71-74.
EBBELL, B. 1937. The Papyrus Ebers. London: Oxford University Press.
EDGERTON, W. F. 1951. The strikes in Ramses III’s twenty-ninth year. Journal of Near Eastern
Studies, 10 (3), 137-145.
EDHS: EGYPT DEMOGRAPHIC AND HEALTH SURVEY, 2014. Ministry of Health and
Population, Cairo [Online]. Available at: https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR302/
FR302.pdf [Accessed 1.11.2016].
EGHIGIAN, G. 2010. The ancient world. In: EGHIGIAN, G. (ed.) Psychiatric Disorder and its
Treatment in Western Civilization. New Brunswick (NJ): Rutgers University Press, 10-46.
EDWARDS, I. E. S. (ed.) 1960. Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum. Fourth Series: Oracular
Amuletic Decrees of the Late New Kingdom (Vol. I Text, Vol. 2 Plates). London: Trustees of
the British Museum.
EL-AMIR, M. 1959. A Family Archive from Thebes: Demotic Papyri in the Philadelphia and Cairo
Museums from the Ptolemaic Period. Cairo: General Organisation for Government Printing
Offices.
EL-AMIR, M. 1962. Monogamy, polygamy, endogamy and consanguinity in Ancient Egyptian
marriage. Bulletin de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 62, 103-107.
ELAHI, M. M. et al. 2004. Epidemiology of cleft lip and cleft palate in Pakistan. Epidemiology
of Cleft Lip and Palate, 113 (6), 1153-1154.
ELLICKSON, R. C., THORLAND, C. DiA. 1995. Ancient Land Law: Mesopotamia, Egypt,
Israel. Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship Series, Paper 410 [Online]. Available: http://
digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/410 [Accessed 15.9.2016]. [Accessed
15.9.2016].
ELL, K. 1996. Social networks, social support and coping with serious illness: the family
connection. Social Science and Medicine, 42 (2), 173-183.
EMERSON, E. et al. 2001. The prevalence of challenging behaviors: a total population study.
Research in Developmental Disabilities, 22 (1), 77-93.
192
Bibliography
EMERSON, E. 2012. Deprivation, ethnicity and the prevalence of intellectual and

developmental disabilities. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66 (3), 218-224.
EUDELL-SIMMONS, E. M., HILSENROTH, M.J. 2005. A review of empirical research supporting
four conceptual uses of dreams in psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy,
12 (4), 255-269.
EYRE, C. 1984. Crime and adultery in ancient Egypt. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 70, 223-
243.
EYRE, C. 1992. The Adoption Papyrus in social context. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 78,
207-221.
EYRE, C. J. 1997. Peasants and “modern” leasing strategies in ancient Egypt. Journal of the
Economic and Social History of the Orient, 40 (4), 367-390.
EYRE, C. J. 2000. Pouvoir central et pouvoirs locaux: problèmes historiographiques et
méthodologiques. In: MENU, B. (ed.) Égypte Pharaonique: Déconcentration, Cosmopolitisme,
Méditerranées, 24. Paris: L’Harmattan, 15-39.
EYRE, C. 2007. The evil stepmother and the rights of a second wife. Journal of Egyptian
EYRE, C. 2013. The Use of Documents in Pharaonic Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
EYRE, C. J. 2015. Economy and society in pharaonic Egypt. In: KOUSOULIS, P., LAZARIDIS,
N. (eds) Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Egyptologists, University of the
Aegean, Rhodes, 22-29 May 2008. Leuven, Paris, Bristol CT: Peeters (Orientalia Lovaniensia
Analecta 241), 707-726.
EYRE, C. 2016. Reciprocity, retribution and feud. In: COLLOMBERT, P., LEFÈVRE, D., POLIS, S.,
WINAND, J. (eds) Aere Perennius. Mélanges Égyptologiques en l’honneur de Pascal Vernus (OLA
242). Leuven, Paris, Bristol (CT): Peeters, 163-179.
EZZAMEL, M. 1997. Accounting, control and accountability: preliminary evidence from
ancient Egypt. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 8 (6), 563-601.
EZZAMEL, M., HOSKIN, K. 2002. Retheorizing accounting, writing and money with evidence
from Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 13 (3), 333–367.
FAKHRY, A. 1942. Bahria Oasis Vol. 1. Bulâq (Cairo): Government Press (Service des Antiquités
de l’Égypte).
FAKHRY, A. 2003. Bahriyah and Farafra. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press.
FALYAZ-Ul-HAQUE, M. et al. 2004. Novel mutations in the EXT1 gene in two consanguineous
families affected with multiple hereditary exostoses (familial osteochondromatosis).
Clinical Genetics, 66 (2), 144-151.
FEINSTEIN, A. R. 1970. The pre-therapeutic classification of co-morbidity in chronic disease.
Journal of Chronic Diseases, 23 (7), 455-468.
FEHR, E., FISCHBACHER, U. 2003. The nature of human altruism. Nature, 425, 785-791.
FILER, J. 1995. Disease. London: British Museum Press (Egyptian Bookshelf).
FINCH, J. L. 2005. Prosthesis or restoration? A detailed study of the left forearm of Durham Mummy,
DUROM 1999.32.1. Unpublished MSc dissertation, University of Manchester.
FINCH, J. 2011. The art of medicine: the ancient origins of prosthetic medicine. The Lancet,
377, 548-549.
FINCH, J. 2012/13. The Durham Mummy: deformity and the concept of perfection in
the ancient world. In: DAVID, R. (ed.) Ancient Medical and Healing Systems: Their Legacy
to Western Medicine. Manchester: Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of
Manchester, 111-132.
193
FINCH, J. et al. 2012. The biomedical assessment of two artificial big toe restorations from
ancient Egypt and their significance to the history of prosthetics. Journal of Prosthetics
and Orthotics, 24 (4), 181-191.
FIORE MAROCHETTI, E. 2013. Gebelein. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, WENDRICH, W.
(ed.) [Online]. Available: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark=21198/
zz002gx90b. [Accessed 15.1.2015].
FISCHER, H. D. A god and a general of the oasis on a stela of the Late Middle Kingdom.
Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 16 (4), 223-235.
FORSHAW, R. 2014. Before Hippocrates: healing practices in ancient Egypt. In: GEMI-
IORDANOU, E., GORDON, S., MATTHEW, R., MCINNES, E., PETTITT, R. (eds) Medicine,
Healing and Performance. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 25-41.
FORSHAW, R. 2013. Cases of oral pathology from the KNH Mummy Studies. World Congress
on Mummy Studies VIII, Museo Nacionale, Rio de Janeiro, 6 - 9 August 2013. Pending
publication.
FORSHAW, R. 2014b. The Role of the Lector in Ancient Egyptian Society. Oxford: Archaeopress
(Egyptology 5).
FOX, J. R. 1962. Sibling incest. The British Journal of Sociology, 13 (2), 128-150.
FOX, R. 1967. Kinship and Marriage: An Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
FOXHALL, L. 1989. Household, gender and property in Classical Athens. The Classical
Quarterly, 39 (1), 22-44.
FOXHALL, L. 2013. Studying Gender in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
FRANDSEN, P. J. 1990. Editing Reality: the Turin Strike Papyrus. In: Israelit-Groll, S.,
Lichtheim, M. (eds) Studies in Egyptology: presented to Miriam Lichtheim I. Jerusalem:
Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 166-199.
FRANDSEN, P. J. 2002. Bwt in the body. In: WILLEMS, H. (ed.) Social Aspects of Funerary Culture
in the Egyptian Old and Middle Kingdoms: Proceedings of the International Symposium held at
Leiden University 6-7 June, 1996. Leuven: Peeters (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 103),
141-174.
FRANDSEN, P. J. 2009. Incestuous and Close-kin Marriage in Ancient Egypt and Persia: an Examination
of the Evidence. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press (CNI Publications 34).
FRANKE, D. 1983. Altägyptische Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen im Mittleren Reich. Verlag Borg
GmbH: University of Hamburg.
FRANKE, D. 2001a. Kinship. In: REDFORD, D. B. (ed.) The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt,
Vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 245-248.
FRANKFORT, H., PENDLEBURY, J. D. S. 1933. The City of Akhenaten, Part II: The North Suburb and
the Desert Altars: the excavations at Tell el Amarna during the seasons 1926-32. London: Egypt
Exploration Society.
FREUD, S. 1919. Totem and Taboo. London: George Routledge and Sons.
FREUD, S. 1913. The Interpretation of Dreams. London, New York: George Allen and Unwin Ltd,
The Macmillan Company.
FRIER, B. W. 2000. The demography of the early Roman Empire. In: BOWMAN, A. K., GARNSEY,
P., RATHBONE, D. (eds) The High Empire, AD 70-192, The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. 11,
2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 787-816.
194
Bibliography
FRIER, B. W. 2001. More is worse: some observations on the population of the Roman Empire.
In: SCHEIDEL, W. (ed.) Debating Roman Demography. Leiden, Boston, Köln: Brill, 139-160.
FRIER, B. W. 2012. Roman Dowry: Some Economic Questions [Online]. Available: http://www.
law.umich.edu/centersandprograms/lawandeconomics/workshops/Documents/
Paper 12.Frier.Roman Dowry- Some Economic Questions.pdf [Accessed 31.8.2016].
FRIER, B. W. (ed.) 2016. The Codex of Justinian, Vol. 1 (Books 1-3). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
FRIER, B.W., McGINN, T.A.J. 2004. A Casebook on Roman Family Law. Oxford, New York: Oxford
University Press.
FROOD, E. 2010. Social structure and daily life: Pharaonic. In: Lloyd, A. B. (ed.) A Companion
to Ancient Egypt, Vol. 1. Chichester, Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 469-490.
FURNELL, E. 1998. Aetiological factors and prevalence of severe mental retardation in
children in a Swedish municipality: the possible role of consanguinity. Developmental
Medicine and Child Neurology, 40 (9), 608-611.
GABLER, K. 2018. Who’s Who around Deir el-Medina. Leuven: Peeters (Nederlands Instituut
Voor Het Nabije Oosten, Leiden).
GALPAZ-FELLER, P. 2008. The widow in the Bible and in ancient Egypt. Zeitschrift für die
Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 120 (2), 231-253.
GAMBRILL, E. 2014. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a major
form of dehumanization in the modern world. Research on Social Work Practice, 24 (1),
13-36.
GARDINER, A. H. 1905. The Inscription of Mes. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, (Untersuchungen zur
Geschichte und Altertumskunde Ägyptens, Vol. 4/3).
GARDINER, A. H. 1941. Adoption extraordinary. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 26, 23-29.
GARDNER, J. F. 1991. Women in Roman Law and Society. Bloomington (IN), Indianapolis (IN):
Indiana University Press.
GARDNER, J. F. 2011. Roman ‘horror’ of intestacy? In: RAWSON, B. (ed.) A Companion to
Families in the Greek and Roman Worlds. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 361-376.
GARLAND, R. 1995, 2010. The Eye of the Beholder: Deformity and Disability in the Graeco-Roman
World. London: Duckworth.
GAYET, E. 1886. Musée du Louvre Stèles de la XII Dynastie, Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études
68. Paris: F. Vieweg, F, Libraire-Éditeur.
GELDER, G. J. H. Van. 2005. Close Relationships: Incest and Inbreeding in Classical Arabic Literature,
London, New York, I.B. Taurus, 361-376.
GELDER, G. J. H. Van. 2012. Incest and Inbreeding, Encyclopaedia Iranica [Online]. Available:
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/incest-and-inbreeding [Accessed 13.11.2015].
GENTILE, J. P., GILLIG, P. M. 2012. Aggression. In: GENTILE, J. P., GILLIG, P. M. (eds) Psychiatry
of Intellectual Disability: A Practical Manual. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 210-248.
GHALIOUNGUI, P. 1963. Magic and Medical Science in Ancient Egypt. London: Hodder and
Stoughton.
GHALIOUNGUI, P. 1987. The Ebers Papyrus: A New English Translation, Commentaries and
Glossaries. Cairo: Academy of Scientific Research and Technology.
GIALLUISI, A. et al. 2013. Persistence and transmission of recessive deafness and sign
language: new insights from village sign languages. European Journal of Human Genetics,
21 (9), 894-896.
195
GIARDINA, A. 2000. The family in the late Roman world. In: CAMERON, A., WARD-PERKINS,
B., WHITBY, M. (eds) The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. 14, Late Antquity: Empire and
Successors AD 425-600. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 392-415.
GILMAN, S. L. et al. 1993. Hysteria Beyond Freud. Berkely, Los Angles, Oxford: University of
California Press.
GLYNOS, J., HOWARTH, D. 2007. Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory.
London: NewYork, Routledge.
GOBEIL, C, 2009. Inhumations d’enfants en zone d’habitat à Balat. Bulletin de l’Institut Français
d’Archéologie Orientale, 109, 161-175.
GOEDICKE, H. 1963. Was Magic Used in the Harem Conspiracy against Ramesses III? (P.Rollin
and P.Lee). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 49, 71-92.
GOLDEN, M. 1985. ‘Donatus’ and Athenian phratries. The Classical Quarterly (New Series), 35
(1), 9-13.
GOODEY, C. F., ROSE, M.L. 2013. Mental states, bodily dispositions and table manners: a
guide to reading ‘intellectual’ disability from Homer to late antiquity. In: LAES, C.,
GOODEY, C. F., ROSE, M. L. (eds) Disabilities in Roman Antiquity: Disparate Bodies a Capite ad
Calcem. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 17-44.
GOODY, J. 1956. A comparative approach to incest and adultery. The British Journal of Sociology,
7, 286-305.
GOODY, J. 1973. The Character of Kinship. London: Cambridge University Press.
GOODY, J. 1976. Production and Reproduction: A Comparative Study of the Domestic Domain.
Cambridge, London, New York, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
GOODY, J. The development of the family and marriage in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
GOODY, J., TAMBIAH, S. J. 1973. Bridewealth and Dowry. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
GORDETSKY, J., O’BRIEN, J. 2009. Urology and the scientific method in ancient Egypt.
Urology, 73 (3), 476-479.
GRANOVETTER, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: the problem of
embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3), 481-510.
GRAVES-BROWN, C. 2010. Dancing for Hathor: Women in Ancient Egypt. London, New York:
Continuum.
GRAY, P. H. K. 1969. A case of osteogenesis imperfecta, associated with dentinogenesis
imperfecta, dating from antiquity. Clinical Radiology, 21 (1), 106-108.
GRAY, P. H. K. 1973. The radiography of mummies of ancient Egyptians. Journal of Human
Evolution, 2 (1), 51-53.
GREGG, J. B. et al. 1981. Craniofacial anomalies in the Upper Missouri river basin over a
millennium: archaeological and clinical evidence. Cleft Palate Journal, 18 (3), 210-222.
GRENFELL, B. P., HUNT, A.S. 1901. The Amherst Papyri, Part 2. London: Henry Frowde, Bernard
Quaritch.
GRIFFITH, F. Ll. 1898. The Petrie Papyri: Hieratic Papyri from Kahun and Gurob. London: Bernard
Quaritch.
GRIFFITH, F. Ll. 1909. Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri in the John Rylands Library Manchester,
Vol. 1, Atlas of Facsimiles. Manchester, London: Manchester University Press, Bernard
Quaritch and Sherratt and Hughes.
196
Bibliography
GRIFFITH, F. Ll. 1909. Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri in the John Rylands Library Manchester,
Vol. 2, Hand-copies of the earlier documents (nos I-IX). Manchester, London: Manchester
University Press, Bernard Quaritch and Sherratt and Hughes.
GRIFFITH, A. S. 1910. Catalogue of Egyptian Antiquities of the XII and XVIII Dynasties from Kahun,
Illahun and Gurob. Manchester: Sherratt and Hughes (The Manchester Museum, Museum
Handbooks).
GROCE, N. E. 1985. Everyone Here Spoke Sign Language: hereditary deafness on Martha’s Vineyard.
Cambridge (MA), London: Harvard University Press.
GROLL, S. 1980. The stenographic style of Papyrus Lee, Papyrus Rollin, Papyrus Varzy and
the Judicial Papyrus of Turin. In: RENDSBURG, G., ADLER, R., WINTER, A.M. (eds) The
Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon. New York: Ktav Publishing House and the
Institute of Hebrew Culture and Education of New York University, 67-77.
GROSEN, D. et al. 2010. A cohort study of recurrence patterns among more than 54,000
relatives of oral cleft cases in Denmark: support for the multifactorial threshold model
of inheritance. Journal of Medical Genetics, 47 (3), 162-168.
GRUBBS, J. E. 2002. Women and Law in the Roman Empire. A Sourcebook on Marriage, Divorce and
Widowhood. London, New York: Routledge.
GRUBBS, J. E. 2015. Making the private public: illegitimacy and incest in Roman Law. In:
CLIFFORD, A., RÜPKE, J. (eds) Public and Private in Ancient Mediterranean Law and Religion
(Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten 65). Berlin, Munich, Boston: Walter de
Gruyter GmbH, 115-142.
GYŐRY, H. 2000. ‘Providing protection to a new-born baby on the day of birth’: extra and
intra-uterine abnormalities in ancient Egypt. Communicationes De Historia Artis Medicinae,
170-173, 130-199.
HAGEN, F. 2005. ‘The Prohibitions’: a New Kingdom didactic text. Journal of Egyptian
HALCROW, S. E., TAYLES, N. 2011. The bioarchaeological investigation of children and
childhood. In: AGARWAL, S. C., GLENCROSS, B. A. (eds) Social Bioarchaeology. Malden, MA,
Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 333-360.
HAMAMY, H. et al. 2011. Consanguineous marriages, pearls and perils: Geneva international
consanguinity workshop report. Genetics in Medicine [Online], 13, 841-847. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GIM.0b013e318217477f [Accessed 17.4.2012].
HAMILTON, W. D. 1964a. The general evolution of social behaviour, Part I. International
Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1-16.
HAMILTON, W. D. 1964b. The general evolution of social behaviour, Part II. International
Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 17-52.
HAMILTON, W. D. 1970. Selfish and spiteful behaviour in an evolutionary model. Nature, 228,
1218-1220.
HARING, B. 2003. From Oral Practice to Written Record in Ramesside Deir El-Medina. Journal
of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 46 (3), 249-272.
HARING, B. 2006. How Mr Anytime has gone unnoticed – every time. Journal of Egyptian
HARRINGTON, N. 2004. From the cradle to the grave: anthropoid busts and ancestor cults
at Deir el-Medina. In: PIQUETTE, K., LOVE, S. (eds) Current Research in Egyptology 2003,
Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Symposium. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 71-88.
197
HARRINGTON, N. 2012. Living with the Dead: Ancestor Worship and Mortuary Ritual in Ancient
Egypt. Oxford, Oakville: Oxbow Books.
HARTLEY, S. L., MACLEAN, W. E. Jr. 2009. Depression in adults with mild intellectual
disability: role of stress, attributions, and coping. American Journal on Intellectual and
Developmental Disabilities, 114 (3), 147-160.
HAWASS, Z. et al. 2010. Ancestry and pathology in King Tutankhamun’s family. The Journal
of the American Medical Association, 303 (7), 638-647.
HEBRON, C. S. 2005. Aspects of Health, Injury and Disease amongst the Non-Elite Workforces of
Dynastic Egypt. Unpublished PhD, University College London.
HEITH-STADE, D. 2010. Marriage in the canons of the council in Trullo. Studia Theologica -
Nordic Journal of Theology, 64 (1), 4-21.
HEMELRIJK, E. A. 1996. Jens-Uwe Krause, Witwen und Waisen im Römischen Reich. I:
Verwitwung und Wiederverheiratung; Jens- Uwe Krause, Witwen und Waisen im
Römischen Reich. II: Wirtschaftliche und gesellschaftliche Stellung von Witwen
(review). L’Antiquité Classique, 65, 508-511.
HENDRICKSON, G. L., HUBBELL, H. M. (trans.) 1962. Cicero, Brutus. Orator. Cambridge (MA),
London: Harvard University Press (Loeb Classical Library 342).
HENDRY, J. 2016. An Introduction to Social Anthropology (3rd edn). London: Palgrave
Macmillan.
HEPNER, G. 2003. Abraham’s incestuous marriage with Sarah a violation of the Holiness
Code. Vetus Testamentum, 53 (2), 143-155.
HOFFMAN, H., HUDGINS, P. A. 2002. Head and skull base features of nine Egyptian
mummies: evaluation with high-resolution CT and reformation techniques. American
Journal of Roentgenology, 178 (6), 1367-1376.
HOBSON, D. 1983. Women as property owners in Roman Egypt. Transactions of the American
Philological Association, 113, 311-321.
HÖLBL, G. 2001. A History of the Ptolemaic Empire. Abingdon: Routledge.
HOLMES, B. 2013. Disturbing connections, sympathetic affections, mental disorder, and
the elusive soul in Galen. In: HARRIS, W. V. (ed.) Mental Disorders in the Classical World.
Leiden, Boston: Brill, 147-176.
HOLY, L. 1996. Anthropological Perspectives on Kinship. London, Chicago (IL): Pluto Press.
HOMBERT, M., PRÉAUX, C. 1952. Recherches sur le Recensement dans l’Égypte Romaine
(P. Bruxelles Inv. E. 7616). Bruxelles: Lugdunum Batavorum, E.J. Brill (Papyrologica
Lugduno-Batava, Vol. 5).
HOPKINS, K. 1966. On the probable age structure of the Roman population. Population
Studies, 20 (2), 245-264.
HOPKINS, K. 1980. Brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt. Comparative Studies in Society
and History, 22 (3), 303-354.
HOPKINS, K. 1983. Death and Renewal: Sociological Studies in Roman History. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
HORNE, P. D. 1976. Histological processing and examination of a 4,000 year-old human
temporal bone. Archives of Otolaryngology [Online], 102 (12), 713-715. Available:
doi:10.1001/archotol.1976.00780170031001 [Accessed: 24.5.2017].
HSIEH, K., SCOTT, H. M., MURTHY, S. 2020. Associated risk factors for depression and
anxiety in adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities: five-year follow up.
American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 125 (1), 49-63.
198
Bibliography
HUE-ARCÉ, C. 2017a. Hiérarchies socio-professionnelles et violence interpersonnelle dans

l’Égypte du Nouvel Empire et d’époque hellénistique. Archimède, 4, 174-183.
HUE-ARCÉ, C. 2017b. Violence against women in Graeco-Roman Egypt: the contribution of
Demotic documents. In: BENSON, J., MATIĆ, U. (eds) Archaeologies of Gender and Violence.
Oxford, Philadelphia: Oxbow Books, 133-150.
HUEBNER, S. R. 2007. ‘Brother-Sister’ Marriage in Roman Egypt: A Curiosity of Humankind
or a Widespread Family Strategy? The Journal of Roman Studies, 97, 21-49.
HUEBNER, S. R. 2013a. The Family in Roman Egypt: a Comparative Approach to Intergenerational
Solidarity and Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
HUEBNER, S. R. 2013b. Adoption and fosterage in the ancient Eastern Mediterranean, In:
Evans Grubbs, J., Parkin, T. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Childhood and Education in the
Classical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 510-531.
HUEBNER, S. R. 2014. ‘It is a difficult matter to be wronged by strangers, but to be wronged
by kin is worst of all’: inheritance and conflict in Greco-Roman Egypt. In: CASEAU, B.,
HUEBNER, S. R. (eds) Inheritance, Law and Religions in the Ancient and Mediaeval Worlds
(Monographies 45). Paris: ACHCByz, Collège de France - CNRS, Centre de Recherche
d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance, 99-108.
HUGHES, G. R. (1969). The cruel father: a demotic papyrus in the library of G. Michaelides.
In: HAUSER, E. B. (ed.) Studies in Honour of John A. Wilson. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilisation No. 35), 43-54.
HUGHES, G. R., JASNOW, R. 1997. Oriental Institute Hawara Papyri: Demotic and Greek Texts
from an Egyptian Family Archive in the Fayum (Fourth to Third Century BC). Chicago (Il): The
Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (Oriental Institute Publications, Vol. 113).
HUJOEL, P. P., BOLLEN, A. M., MUELLER, B. A., 1992. First year mortality among infants with
facial clefts. Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal, 29 (5), 451-455.
HUSSEIN, F. H. 2009. Spinal pathological findings in ancient Egyptians of the Graeco-Roman
Period living in Bahriya Oasis. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 19 (5), 613-627.
HUSSAIN, R. 1999. Community perceptions of reasons for preference for consanguineous
marriages in Pakistan. Journal of Biosocial Science, 31 (4), 449-461.
JAMES, W. 2011. Why Kinship? New questions on an old topic. In: ALLEN, N. J. (ed.) Early human
kinship: from sex to social reproduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 3-20.
JAMILIAN, A., NAYERI, F., BABAYAN, A. 2007. Incidence of cleft lip and palate in Tehran.
Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventative Dentistry, 25 (4), 174-176.
JANSSEN, R. M., JANSSEN, J. J. 1990. Growing Up in Ancient Egypt. London: Rubicon Press.
JANSSEN, R. M., JANSSEN, J. J. 1996. Getting Old in Ancient Egypt. London: Rubicon Press.
JANSSEN, J. J. 1975a. Commodity Prices from the Ramessid Period: An Economic Study of the Village
of the Necropolis Workmen. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
JANSSEN, J. J. 1975b. The rules of legal proceeding in the community of necropolis workmen
at Deir el-Medina. Bibliotheca Orientalis, 32, 291-296.
JANSSEN, J. J. 1997. Village Varia: Ten Studies on the History and Administration of Deir el-Medina.
Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.
JANSEEN, J. J. 1986. Agrarian administration in Egypt during the twentieth dynasty.
Bibliotheca Orientalis, 43, 351-366.
JANSSEN, J. J. 1992. Literacy and letters in Deir el-Medina. Village Voices: proceedings of the
symposium ‘texts from Deir el-Medîna and their interpretation’, Leiden, May 31-June 1, 1991.
Leiden: Centre of Non-Western Studies, Leiden University, 81-94.
199
JANSSEN, J. J. 1994. Debts and credit in the New Kingdom. The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology,
80, 129-136.
JANSSEN, J. J., PESTMAN, P. W. 1968. Burial and inheritance in the community of the
necropolis workmen at Thebes (Pap. Bulaq X and O. Petrie 16). Journal of the Economic
and Social History of the Orient, 11 (2), 137-170.
JANOT, F. 2003. Inhumations d’enfants au Nouvel Empire, à Deir El-Medineh. Memnonia, 14,
173-80.
JAUHIAINEN, H. 2009. ‘Do Not Celebrate Your Feast without Your Neighbours’: A Study of References
to Feasts and Festivals in Non-Literary Documents from Ramesside Period Deir el-Medina.
Unpublished PhD, University of Helsinki.
JEFFREYS, D., TAIT, J. 2000. Disability, madness and social exclusion in dynastic Egypt. In:
HUBERT, J. (ed.) Madness, Disability and Social Exclusion: The Archaeology and Anthropology
of ‘Difference’. London, New York: Routledge, 87-95.
JELÍNKOVÁ, E. A. E. 1957. Sale of inherited property in the first century B.C. (P. Brit. Mus.
10075, Ex Salt Coll. No. 418). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 43, 45-55.
JELÍNKOVÁ, E. A. E. 1959. Sale of inherited property in the first century B.C. (P. Brit. Mus.
10075, Ex Salt Coll. No. 418) (Continued). Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 45, 61-74.
JIN, J., PEI, G., MA, Q. 2017. Social discounting under risk. Frontiers in Psychology [Online], 8,
392. Available: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00392 [Accessed 8.11.2017].
JOHNSON, J. H. 1994. ‘Annuity contracts’ and marriage. In: SILVERMAN, D. P. (ed.) For his Ka:
Essays offered in memory of Klaus Baer. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of
Chicago (Studies in Oriental Civilisation No. 55).
JOHNSON, J. H. 1996. The legal status of women in ancient Egypt. In: CAPEL, A. K., MARKOE,
G., (ed.) Mistress of the House, Mistress of Heaven: Women in Ancient Egypt. New York: Hudson
Hills Press in association with Cincinnati Art Museum, 175-186.
JOHNSON, J. H. 1999. Speculations on Middle Kingdom marriage. In: LEAHY, A., TATE, J.
(eds) Studies on Ancient Egypt in Honour of H.S. Smith. London: Egypt Expoloration Soiety,
169-172.
JOHNSON, J. H. 2003. Sex and marriage in ancient Egypt. In: GRIMAL, L., KAMAL, A., MAY-
SHEIKHOLESLAMI (eds) Hommages à Fayza Haikal. Institut Français d’Archéologie
Orientale, Bibliothèque d’Étude 138, 149-159.
JOHNSON, J. H. 2015. The range of private property envisioned in demotic documents
pertaining to marriage and inheritance. In: HAIKAL, F. (ed.) Mélanges Offerts à Ola el-Aguizy.
Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale (Bibliothèque d’Étude 164), 249-265.
JOHNSON, H. et al. 2012. Social interaction with adults with severe intellectual disability:
having fun and hanging out. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 25 (4),
329-341.
JONES, H. L. 1954 [1930] (trans.). Strabo, Geography, Vol. 7: Books 15-16. London, Cambridge
(MA): William Heinemann, Harvard University Press (The Loeb Classical Library 241).
JOSEPH, S. E. 2007. “Kissing Cousins” consanguineous marriage and early mortality in a
reproductive isolate. Current Anthropology, 48 (5), 756-764.
JOSHI, S., IYER, S., DO, Q. T. 2009. Why Marry a Cousin? Insights from Bangladesh, Washington,
DC, The World Bank [Online]. Available: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3e69/
bfa9dfcf071ab976a4428aa034c8689a8336.pdf [Accessed 16.4.2015].
JUNKER, H. 1921. Papyrus Lonsdorfer I: ein Ehepakt aus der Zeit des Nektanebos. Wien: In
Kommission bei Alfred Hölder.
200
Bibliography
JUST, R. 1989. Women in Athenian Law and Life. London, New York: Routledge.
JUSTEL, J. J., LION, B. 2014. Real estate dowries and counter-dowries in the Kingdom of
Arrapḫe. In: JOANNÈS, F., KARAHASHI, F. (eds) Women’s Role in the Economy of the Ancient
Near East, Report December 31, 2011—December 30, 2014. Tokyo: Francis Joannès (University of
Paris 1) and Fumi Karahashi (Chuo University), 39-41.
KACZMAREK, M., KOZIERADZKA-OGUNMAKIN, I. 2013. Anthropology, Part 2. In:
MYŚLIWIEC, K. (ed.) Saqqara V: Old Kingdom Structures between the Step Pyramid Complex
and the Dry Moat, Part 2: Geology, Anthropology, Finds, Conservation. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo
Neriton, 345-422.
KADUSHIN, C. 2012. Understanding Social Networks: Theories, Concepts and Findings. New York:
Oxford University Press.
KAMAL, H. 1967. A Dictionary of Pharaonic Medicine. Cairo: The National Publication House.
KAMP, K. A. 2001. Where have all the children gone?: the archaeology of childhood. Journal of
Archaeological Method and Theory, 8 (1), 1-34.
KANAAN, Z., MAFOUZ, R., TAMIM, H. 2008. The Prevalence of consanguineous marriage in
an underserved area in Lebanon and its association with congenital anomalies. Genetic
Testing, 12 (3), 367-372.
KANAWATI, N. 1976. Polygamy in the Old Kingdom of Egypt? Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur,
4, 149-160.
KAPELL, D. et al. 1998. Prevalence of chronic medical conditions in adults with mental
retardation: comparison with the general population. Mental Retardation, 36 (4), 269-279.
KELLENBERGER, E. 2017. Mesopotamia and ancient Israel. In: LAES, C. (ed.) Disability in
Antiquity. London, New York: Routledge, 47-60.
KELLEY, N. 2007. Deformity and disability in Greece and Rome. In: AVALOS, H., MELCHER, S.,
SCHIPPER, J. (eds) This Abled Body. Rethinking Disabilities in Biblical Studies, 31-45. Atlanta:
Society of Biblical Literature, 31-45.
KELLEY, R. I. et al. 2002. Amish Lethal Microcephaly: a new metabolic disorder with severe
congenital microcephaly and 2-ketoglutaric aciduria. American Journal of Medical Genetics,
112 (4), 318-326.
KEMP, B. J. 1994. Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilisation. London: Routledge.
KERTZER, D. I. 1991. Household history and sociological theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 17
(1), 155-179.
KHAWAJA, M., TEWTEL-SALEM, M. 2004. Agreement between husband and wife reports of
domestic violence: evidence from poor refugee communities in Lebanon. International
Journal of Epidemiology, 33 (3), 526-533.
KISCH, S. 2008. ‘Deaf discourse’: the social construction of deafness in a Bedouin community.
Medical Anthropology, 27, 283-313.
KITCHEN, K. A. 1980. Ramesside Inscriptions: Historical and Biographical 3, Oxford, B.H. Blackwell.
KITCHEN, K. A. 1983. Ramesside Inscriptions: Historical and Biographical 5. Oxford: B.H. Blackwell.
KITCHEN, K. A. 1986. The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt (1100-650 BC). Warminster: Aris and
Phillips Ltd.
KOLTSIDA, A. 2007. Social Aspects of Ancient Egyptian Domestic Architecture. Oxford: Archaeopress
(BAR International Series 1608).
KOH, K. S., KIM, D. Y., Oh, T. S. 2016. Clinical features and management of a median cleft lip.
Archives of Plastic Surgery [Online], 43 (3). Available: doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.3.242
[Accessed 27.7.2017].
201
KOSKENTAUSTA, T., IIVANAINEN, M., ALMQUIST, F. 2002. Psychiatric disorders in children

with intellectual disability. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 56 (2), 126-131.
KÓTHAY, K. 2001. Houses and households at Kahun: bureaucratic and domestic aspects of
social organization during the Middle Kingdom. In: GYŐRY, H. (ed.) Mélanges offerts à
Edith Varga “Le lotus qui sort de terre”. Budapest: Bulletin du Musée Hongrois des Beaux-
Arts, Supplément 1, 349-368.
KÓTHAY, K. A. 2006. The widow and orphan in Egypt before the New Kingdom. Acta Antiqua
Academiae Sciantiarum Hungaricae, 46, 151-64.
KOVACS, D. 2003. Euripides, Bacchae. Iphigenia at Aulis. Rhesus. Cambridge (MA): Harvard
University Press (Loeb Classical Library 495).
KOZIERADZKA-OGUNMAKIN, I. 2011. Multiple epiphyseal dysplasia in an Old Kingdom
Egyptian skeleton: A case report. International Journal of Paleopathology, 1 (3-4), 200-206.
KOZMA, C. 2006. Dwarfs in ancient Egypt. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 140A (4), 303-311.
KOZMA, C. 2008. Skeletal dysplasia in ancient Egypt. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part
A, 146a (23), 3104-3112.
KOZMA, C. 2010. Genetic disorders in ancient Egypt. In: TEEBI, A. S. (ed.) Genetic Disorders
Among Arab Populations. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 273-295.
KOZMA, C. et al. 2011. The ancient Egyptian dwarfs of the pyramids: the high official and
the female worker. American Journal of Medical Genetics, Part A, 155 (8), 1817-1824.
KRAUSE, J-U. 1994. Witwen und Waisen im Römischen Reich, Vol. I: Verwitwung und
Wiederverheiratung. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.
KROOTH, R. S., MACKLIN, M. T., HILBISH, T. F. 1961. Diaphysial Aclasis (Multiple Exostoses)
on Guam. American Journal of Human Genetics, 13, 340-347.
KUMAR, A., SHANE TUBBS, R. 2011. Spina bifida: a diagnostic dilemma in paleopathology.
Clinical Anatomy, 24 (1), 19-33.
KURASZKIEWICZ, K. O. et al. 2010. The tomb of Nyankhnefertem and connected structures.
In: MYŚLIWIEC, K., KURASZKIEWICZ, K. O. (eds) Saqqara IV, The Funerary Complex of
Nyankhnefertem, Part 2. Warsaw: Editions Neriton, 83-125.
LACEY, W. K. 1968. The Family in Classical Greece. London, Southampton: Thames and Hudson.
LACOVARA, P. 2016. Review of Les Registres de Recensement du Village de Deir el-Médineh
(Le ‘Stato Civile’) by Demarée, R.J., Valbelle, D. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 102, 205-212.
LACOVARA, P., D’AURIA, S., O’GORMAN, T. 2001. New life for the dead. Archaeology, 54 (5),
22-27.
LADISLAV, H. 1996. Anthropological Perspectives on Kinship. London, Ann Arbor (MI): Pluto
Press.
LAES, C., GOODEY, C. F., ROSE, M. L. (eds) 2013. Disabilities in Roman Antiquity: Disparate Bodies
ad Capite al Calcum. Leiden, Boston: Brill.
LAES, C. E. 2017. Disability in Antiquity. London, New York: Routledge.
LAFONT, S. 2003. Mesopotamia: Middle Assyrian Period. In: WESTBROOK, R. (ed.) A History of
Ancient Near Eastern Law, Vol. 1. Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section 1: The Near and Middle
East. Leiden: Brill, 521-564.
LANGE, H. O., SCHÄFER, H. 1902. Grab- und Denksteine des Mittleren Reichs, Theil I, Nos 20001-
20399, Catalogue Général Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Berlin: Reichsdruckerei.
LANGE, H. O., SCHÄFER, H. 1908. Grab- und Denksteine des Mittleren Reichs, Theil 2, Nos 20400-
20780, Catalogue Général Antiquités Égyptiennes du Musée du Caire. Berlin: Reichsdruckerei.
202
Bibliography
LAUC, T. 2003a. Orofacial analysis on the Adriatic islands: an epidemiological study of

malocclusions on Hvar Island. European Journal of Orthdontics, 25 (3), 273-278.
LAUC, T. et al. 2003b. Effect of inbreeding and endogamy on occlusal traits in human
isolates. Journal of Orthodontics, 30 (4), 301-308.
LEAVITT, G. C. 2007. The incest taboo? A reconsideration ofWestermarck. Anthropological
Theory, 7 (4), 393-419.
LEE, A. D. 1988. Close-kin marriage in late-antique Mesopotamia. Greek, Roman and Byzantine
Studies, 29 (4), 403-422.
LELIS, A. A., PERCY, W. A., VERSTRAETE, B. C. 2003. The Age of Marriage in Ancient Rome.
Lewiston (NY), Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press.
LESKO, B. S. (ed.) 1989. Women’s Earliest Records from Ancient Egypt and Western Asia: Proceedings
of the Conference on Women in the Ancient Near East, Brown University, Providence Rhode Island,
November 5-7, 1987. Atlanta (GA): Scholars Press.
LESKO, B. S. 1994. Rank, roles and rights. In: LESKO, L. H. (ed.) Pharaoh’s Workers: the Villagers
of Deir el Medina. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 15-39.
LESKO, B. S. 1996. The Remarkable Women of Ancient Egypt. Providence (RI): B.C. Scribe
Publications.
LESKO, L. H. 1988. The perception of women in pharaonic Egyptian wisdom literature. In:
LESKO, L. H. (ed.) Ancient Egypt and Mediterranean Studies in Memory of William A. Ward.
Providence (RI): Department of Egyptology Brown University, 163-171.
LESKO, L. H. 1994. Pharaoh’s Workers: The Villagers of Deir el-Medina. Ithaca, London: Cornell
University Press.
LESKO, L. H. 2002. A Dictionary of Late Egyptian, 2nd edn, Vol. 1. Providence (RI): B.C. Scribe
Publications.
LESKO, L. H. 2004. A Dictionary of Late Egyptian, 2nd edn, Vol. 2. Providence (RI): B.C. Scribe
Publications.
LEVI-STRAUSS, C. 1969 [1949]. The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Boston: Beacon Press.
LEWIS, N. 1983. Life in Egypt Under Roman Rule. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
LICHTHEIM, M. 1975. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol.1: the Old and Middle Kingdoms. Berkeley,
Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.
LICHTHEIM, M. 1976. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. 2: The New Kingdom. Berkeley, Los
Angeles, London: University of California Press.
LICHTHEIM, M. 1980. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. 3: The Late Period. Berkeley, Los Angeles,
London: University of California Press.
LIPPERT, S. L. 2013. Inheritance. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, Frood, E., Wendrich, W.
(eds) [Online]. Available: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark=21198/
zz002hg0w1 [Accessed 14.4.2015].
LISTON, M. A., ROTROFF, S. I. 2003. Babies in the well: archaeological evidence for newborn
disposal in Hellenistic Greece. In: GRUBBS, J. E., PARKIN, T. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of
Childhood and Education in the Classical World. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press,
62-82.
LITTLE, M. L., PAPADOPOULOS, J. K. 1998. A social outcast in early Iron Age Athens. Hesperia,
67 (4), 375-404.
LLOYD, G. E. R. 1983. Science, Folklore and Ideology: Studies in the Life Sciences in Ancient Greece.
203
LOGAN, T. 2000. The Jmyt-pr document: form, function, and significance. Journal of the
American Research Center in Egypt, 37, 49-73.
LORENZEN, E. D., WILLERSLEV, E. 2010. King Tutankhamun’s Family and Demise. The Journal
of the American Medical Association, 303 (24), 2471.
LÜDDECKENS, E. 1960. Ägyptische Eheverträge. Wiesbaden: Ägyptologische Abhandlungen I.
LUSTIG, J. (ed.) 1997a. Anthropology and Egyptology, A Developing Dialogue. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology 8.
LUSTIG, J. 1997b. Kinship, gender and age in Middle Kingdom tomb scenes and texts. In:
LUSTIG, J. (ed.) Anthropology and Egyptology, A Developing Dialogue. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology 8, 43-65.
EL-AMIR, M. 1959. A Family Archive from Thebes: Demotic papyri in the Philadelphia and Cairo
Museums from the Ptolemaic period. Cairo: General Organisation for Government Printing
Offices.
MAHAR, A. L., COBIGO, G., STUART, H. 2013. Conceptualizing belonging. Disability and
Rehabilitation, 35 (12), 1026-1032.
MAIRS, R., MARTIN, C. J. 2008/9. A bilingual ‘sale’ of liturgies from the Archive of the
Theban Choachytes: P. Berlin 5507, P. Berlin 3098 and P. Leiden 413. Enchoria, 31, 22-67.
MALININE, M. 1973. Une affaire concernant un partage (P. Vienne D 12003 et D 12004).
Revue d’Égyptologie, 25, 192-208.
MANDEVILLE, R. 2014. Wage Accounting in Deir el-Medina. Liverpool: Abercromby Press.
MANNICHE, L. 1978. Symbolic blindness. Chronique d’Égypte, 53 (105), 13-21.
MANNING, J. G. 1995. Demotic Egyptian instruments of transfer as evidence for private
ownership of real property [Online], 71. Available: http://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/
cklawreview/vol71/iss1/10. [Accessed 20.8.2014].
MANNING, J. G. 2003a. Land and Power in Ptolemaic Egypt: The Structure of Land Tenure.
MANNING, J. G. 2003b. Demotic law. In: WESTBROOK, R. (ed.) A History of Ancient Near Eastern
Law, Vol. 1. Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section 1: The Near and Middle East. Leiden, Boston:
Brill, 777-862.
MANNING, J. G. 2005. The Ptolemaic economy, institutions, economic integration, and
the limits of centralized political power: 1-15 (Version 1.0). Princeton/Stanford Working
Papers in Classics, [Online]. Available: https://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/
manning/050604.pdf [Accessed 21.7.2016].
MANNING, J. G. 2010. The Last Pharaohs: Egypt under the Ptolemies 305-30 BC. Princeton, Oxford:
Princeton University Press.
MARCHANT, J. 2011. Curse of the Pharoah’s DNA. Nature, 472, 404-406.
MARLOW, C. A. 2001. Miscarriages and infant burials in the Dakhleh Cemeteries: and
archaeological examination of status. In: MARLOW, C. A., MILLS, A. J. (eds) The Oasis
Papers 1, Proceedings of the First International Symposium of the Dakhleh Oasis Project. Oxford:
Oxbow Books, 105-110.
MARTIN, C. J. 2009. Demotic Papyri from the Memphite Necropolis (P. Dem. Memphis) in the
Collections of the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden, the British Museum and the
Hermitage Museum. Turnhout: Brepols.
MASALI, M., CHIARELLI, B. 1972. Demographic data on the remains of ancient Egyptians.
Journal of Human Evolution, 1 (2), 161-169.
204
Bibliography
MATHESON, C. D. et al. 2014. Molecular confirmation of schistosoma and family relationship

in two ancient Egyptian mummies. In: GOLL-FRERKING, H., ROSENDAHL, W., ZINK, A.
(eds) Yearbook of Mummy Studies, Vol. 2. Munich: Verlag Dr. Friedrich Pfeil, 39-47.
MATIĆ, U. 2017. “Her striking but cold beauty”: gender and violence in depictions of Queen
Nefertiti smiting the enemies. In: MATIĆ, U., BENSEN, J. (eds) Archaeologies of Gender and
Violence. Oxford, Philadelphia: Oxbow Books., 103-121.
MAULIK, P. K., HARBOUR, C. K. 2010. Epidemiology of Intellectual Disability. In: STONE, J. H.,
BLOUIN, M. (eds) International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation [Online]. Available: http://
cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/144/ [Accessed 15.4.2015].
MAULIK, P. K. et al. 2011. Prevalence of intellectual disability: A meta-analysis of population-
based studies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32 (2), 419-436.
MAUSS, M. 1966 (1925). The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. London:
Cohen and West Ltd (orginal edition, L’Année Sociologique n.s.1, 1923/24:30-186).
MAZARITA, M. L. 2012. The evolution of human genetic studies of cleft lip and cleft palate.
Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 13, 263-283.
MAZIAK, W., ASFAR, T. 2003. Physical abuse in low-income women in Aleppo, Syria. Health
Care for Women International, 24 (4), 313-326.
McDOWELL, A. G. 1990. Jurisdiction in the Workmen’s Community of Deir el-Medina (Egyptologische
Uitgaven 5). Leiden: Nederlands Instituut Voor Het Nabije Oosten.
McDOWELL, A. G. 1992a. Awareness of the past in Deir el-Medina. In: Demarée, R., Egberts,
A. (eds) Village Voices. Leiden: Centre of Non-Western Studies, 95-109.
McDOWELL, A. G. 1992b. Agricultural activity by the workmen of Deir el-Medina. Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology, 78, 195-206.
McDOWELL, A. G. 1993. Hieratic Ostraca in the Hunterian Museum Glasgow (The Colin Campbell
Ostraca). Oxford: Griffith Institute, Ashmolean Museum.
McDOWELL, A. G. 1994. Contact with the outside world. In: LESKO, L. H. (ed.) Pharaoh’s
Workers: The Villagers of Deir el-Medina, 41-95. Ithaca (NY), London: Cornell University,
41-59.
McDOWELL, A. G. 1999. Village Life in Ancient Egypt: Laundry Lists and Love Songs. Oxford, New
York: Oxford University Press.
McGUIRE, A. L., WANG, M. J., PROBST, F. J. 2012. Identifying consanguinity through routine
genomic analysis: reporting requirements. Journal of Law and Medical Ethics, 40 (4), 1040-
1046.
MENJÍVAR, C. 2000. Fragmented Ties: Salvadoran Immigrant Networks in America. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
MERSKEY, H., POTTER, P., 1989. The womb lay still in ancient Egypt. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 154 (6), 751-753.
MESKELL, L. 1999. Archaeologies of Social Life: age, sex, class et cetera in Ancient Egypt. Oxford:
Blackwell.
MESKELL, L. 2002. Private Life in New Kingdom Egypt, Princeton, Oxford, Princeton University
Press.
METAWI, D. 2013. A possible father-daughter marriage in the New Kingdom (Cairo Museum
N 129). Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur, 42, 221-232.
METAWI, R. 2013b. The stela of Ḥḏrwt and her two late husbands from the Middle Kingdom:
Cairo CG 20105. Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, 49, 167-176.
205
MIDDLETON, R. 1962. Brother-sister and father-daughter marriage in ancient Egypt.

American Sociological Review, 27 (5), 603-611.
MILLARD, A. 1976, The Position of Women in the Family and in Society in Ancient Egypt, with
Special Reference to the Middle Kingdom. Unpublished PhD, University College London.
MILINSKI, M. et al. 2001. Cooperation through indirect reciprocity: image scoring or
standing strategy? Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Biological Sciences), 268, 2495-2501.
MILLELA, M. et al. 2015. Patterns of irregular burials in Western Europe (1st-5th Century
A.D.). PLoS ONE 10(6): e0130616 [Online]. Available: 0.1371/journal.pone.0130616 [Accessed
2.4.2017].
MILLER, J. 2008. An Appraisal of the Skulls and Dentition of Ancient Egyptians, Highlighting the
Pathology and Speculating on the Influence of Diet and Environment. Oxford: Archaeopress
(British Archaeological Reports 1794).
MISSORI, P., PAOLINI, S., CURRA, A. 2010. From congenital to idiopathic adult hydrocephalus:
a historical research. Brain, 133 (6), 1836-1849.
MITCHELL, P. D. 2011. Retrospective diagnosis and the use of historical texts for investigating
disease in the past. International Journal of Paleopathology, 1 (2), 81-88.
MOBARAK, A. M., RANDALL, K., PETERS, C. 2013. Consanguinity and other marriage market
effects of a wealth shock in Bangladesh. Demography, 50, 1845-1871.
MOBARAK, A. M. et al. 2019. Estimating the health and socioeconomic effects of cousin
marriage in South Asia. Journal of Biosocial Science, 51 (3), 418-435.
MODRZEJEWSKI, J. M. 1993. Die Geschwisterehe in der hellenistischen Praxis und nach
römischem Recht, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Romanistische
Abteilung 81, 1964. In: MODRZEJEWSKI, J. M. (ed.) Status Personel et Liens de Famille dans les
Droits de l’Antiquité. Aldershot, Brookfield (VT): Variorum, 52-82.
MONSON, A. 2008. Agrarian Institutions in Transition: Privatization from Ptolemaic to Roman
Egypt. Unpublished PhD, Stanford University.
MOODY, J., WHITE, D. R. Structural cohesion and embeddedness. American Sociological
Review, 68 (1), 103-127.
MORENO GARCÍA, J. C. 2010. Oracles, ancestor cults and letters to the dead: the involvement
of the dead in the public and private family affairs in pharaonic Egypt. In: STORCH, A.
(ed.) Perception of the Invisible: Religion, Historical Semantics and the Role of Perceptive Verbs
(Sprache und Geschichte in Afrika, 21). Köln: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag, 133-153.
MORENO GARCÍA, J. C. 2012. Households. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, Frood, E., Wendrich,
W. (eds) [Online]. Available: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark=21198/
zz002czx07 [Accessed 17.12. 2014].
MORENO GARCÍA, J. C. 2013a. Conflicting interests over the possession and transfer of
institutional land: individual versus family strategies. In: FROOD, E., MCDONALD, A.
(eds) Decorum and Experience: Essays in Ancient Culture for John Baines. Oxford: Griffith
Institute, 258-263.
MORENO GARCÍA, J. C. 2013b. The ‘other’ administration: patronage, factions, and informal
networks of power in ancient Egypt. In: MORENO GARCÍA, J. C. (ed.) Ancient Egyptian
Administration. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 1029-1065.
MORENO GARCÍA, J. C. 2016. Social inequality, private accumulation of wealth, and new
ideological values in late 3rd millennium BC Egypt. In: MELLER, H., HAHN, H. P., JUNG, R.,
RISCH, R. (eds) Arm und Reich – Zur Ressourcenverteilung in prähistorischen Gesellschaften, 8.
Mitteldeutscher Archäologentag vom 22. bis 24. Oktober 2015 in Halle (Saale). Halle: Landesamt
206
Bibliography
für Denkmalpflege und Archäologie Sachsen-Anhalt (Tagungen des Landesmuseums

für Vorgeschichte Halle Band 14/I), 491-492.
MORET, A. 1909. Catalogue du Musée Guimet: Galerie Égyptienne: stèles, baś-reliefs, monuments
divers. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
MOSHER Jnr., M. 2010. An intriguing Theban Book of the Dead tradition in the Late Period.
British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan, 15, 123-172.
MOSS, C. R., SCHIPPER, J. (eds) 2011. Disability Studies and Biblical Literature. New York,
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
MOSSEY, P. A. et al. 2009. Cleft lip and palate. The Lancet, 374, 1773-1785.
MOSSEY, P. A., CATILLA, E. E. 2003. Global Registry and Database on Craniofacial Anomalies;
Report of a WHO Registry Meeting on Craniofacial Anomalies, Bauru, Brazil, 4-6
December 2001. Geneva: World Health Organisation.
MOSSEY, P. A., MODELL, B. 2012. Epidemiology of oral clefts 2012: an international
perspective. In: Cobourne, M. T. (ed.) Cleft Lip and Palate: Epidemiology, Aetiology and
Treatment (Frontiers of Oral Biology, Vol. 16). Basel: Karger, 1-18.
MOUSOURAKIS, G. 2012. Fundamentals of Roman Private Law. Heidelberg, New York,
Dordrecht, London: Springer.
MUHLESTEIN, K. 2015. Violence. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, Frood, E., Wendrich, W.
(eds) [Online]. Available: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.do?ark= zz002k6dfb
[Accessed 14.6.2017].
MUHS, B. 2008. Fractions of houses in Ptolemaic Hawara. In: LIPPERT, S. L., SCHENTULEIT, M.
(eds) Graeco-Roman Fayum, Texts and Archaeology: Proceedings of the Third International Fayum
Symposion, Freudenstadt, May 29-June 1, 2007. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 187-197.
MUHS, B. 2016. The Ancient Egyptian Economy 3000-30 BC. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
MUNIR, K. M. 2016. The co-occurrence of mental disorders in children and adolescents with
intellectual disability/intellectual developmental disorder. Current Opinion in Psychiatry,
29 (2), 95-102.
MURDOCK, G. P. 1957. World ethnographic sample. American Anthropologist, New Series, 59
(4), 666-687.
MURRAY, T. A. T. (ed.) 1939. Demosthenes, Orations, Vol. 5. Orations 41-49: Private Cases. Cambridge
(MA): Harvard University Press (Loeb Classical Library 346).
NASSER, M. 1987. Psychiatry in Ancient Egypt. The Psychiatrist, 11, 420-422.
NAUNTON, C. 2009. Mummy in Pittsburgh [Online]. Egypt Exploration Society. Available:
http://egyptexplorationsociety.tumblr.com/post/38589223/mummy-in-pittsburgh
[Accessed 14.3.2016].
NERLICH, A. G. et al. 2000. Ancient Egyptian prosthesis of the big toe. The Lancet, 356, 2176-
2179.
NERLICH, A. G. et al. 2010. Palaeopathological-radiological evidence for cerebral palsy in an
ancient Egyptian female mummy from a 13th Dynasty tomb. In: Cockitt, J., David, R. (eds)
Pharmacy and Medicine in Ancient Egypt: Proceedings of the conferences held in Cairo (2007) and
Manchester (2008). Oxford: Oxbow Books (BAR International Series 2141), 113-116.
NEWBERRY, P. E. 1893. Beni Hasan, Part II. London: Egypt Exploration Fund.
NORTH, C. S. 2015. The Classification of Hysteria and Related Disorders: Historical and
Phenomenological Considerations. Behavioural Sciences [Online] 5, 496-517. Available:
doi:10.3390/bs5040496 [Accessed 4.4.2017].
207
NUNN, J. F. 1996. Ancient Egyptian Medicine. Norman (OK), London: University of Oklahoma
Press with British Museum Press.
NYORD, R. 2009. Breathing Flesh: Conceptions of the Body in the Ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts.
Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.
ODA, R. er al. 2014. Personality and altruism in daily life. Personality and Individual Differences,
56 (1), 206-209.
OELSNER, J. et al. 2003. Mesopotamia: Neo-Babylonian Period. In: WESTBROOK, R. (ed.) A
History of Ancient Near Eastern Law, Vol. 1. Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section 1: The Near
and Middle East. Leiden: Brill, 911-974.
OFFER, S. 2012. The burden of reciprocity: processes of exclusion and withdrawal from
personal networks among low-income families. Current Sociology, 60, 788-805.
OKASHA, A. 1999. Mental health in the Middle East: an Egyptian perspective. Clinical
Psychology Review, 19 (8), 917-933.
OKASHA, A. 2001. Egyptian contribution to the concept of mental health. Eastern
Mediterranean Health Journal, 7, 377-380.
OKASHA, A., OKASHA, T. 2000. Notes on mental disorders in Pharaonic Egypt. History of
Psychiatry, 11, 413-424.
OLABARRIA, L. 2020a. Kinship and Family in Ancient Egypt: Archaeology and Anthropology in
Dialogue. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
OLABARRIA, L 2020b. Ostracon P 2027: family quarrel or support network? In: The Deir el-
Medina and Jaroslav Černý Collections. Prague: National Museum/Narodni Museum.
OLABARRIA, L. 2018. Formulating relations: an approach to the smyt-formula Zeitschrift für
Ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde, 145 (1): 57-70.
OLABARRIA, L. 2018. A question of substance: interpreting kinship and relatedness in
ancient Egypt. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, 17, 88-113.
OLDFATHER, C. H. (trans.) 1933. Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, Vol. 1: Books 1-2.34.
Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press (Loeb Classical Library 279).
OLIVER, M. 1990. The Politics of Disablement. Basingstoke: Macmillan and St Martin’s Press.
OLIVER, M. 2013. The social model of disability: thirty years on. Disability and Society, 28 (7),
1024-1026.
OLIVER, M., BARNES, C. 2012, The New Politics of Disablement. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
OLYAN, S. M. 2008. Disability in the Hebrew Bible:Interpreting Mental and Physical Differences,
Cambridge. New York: Cambridge University Press.
ORTNER, D. J. 2003. Identification of Pathological Conditions in Human Skeletal Remains, 2nd edn.
San Diego, London: Academic Press.
OSIŃSKI, J. 2009. Kin altruism, reciprocal altruism and social discounting. Personality and
Individual Differences, 47 (4), 374-378.
OTTENHEIMER, M. 1996. Forbidden Relatives. Urbana (IL): University of Illinois Press.
OUDSHOORN, J. G. 2007. The Relationship between Roman and Local Law in the Babatha and Salome
Komaise Archives: General Analysis and Three Case Studies on Law of Succession, Guardianship
and Marriage. Leiden, Boston: Brill.
OVERMARS MARX, T. et al. 2014. Advancing social inclusion in the neighbourhood for
people with an intellectual disability: an exploration of the literature. Disability and
Society, 29 (2), 255-274.
OYAMA, O., PALTOO, C., GREENGOLD, J. 2007. Somatoform Disorders. American Family
Physician, 76 (9), 1333-1338.
208
Bibliography
PANTELIADIS, C., PANTELIADIS, P., VASSILYADI, F. 2013. Hallmarks in the history of cerebral
palsy: from antiquity to mid-20th century. Brain and Development, 35 (4), 285-292.
PAPADOPOULOS, J. K. 2000. Skeletons in wells: towards an archeology of social exclusion in
the ancient Greek world. In: HUBERT, J. (ed.) Madness, Disability and Social Exclusion: The
Archaeology and Anthropology of ‘Difference’. London: Routledge, 96-118.
PARK, J. H., SCHALLER, M., VUGT, M. van. 2008. Psychology of human kin recognition:
heuristic cues, erroneous inferences, and their implications. Review of General Psychology,
12 (3), 215-235.
PARKER, R. 1996. Miasma: Pollution and Purification in Early Greek Religion. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
PARKER, S. 1996. Full brother-sister marriage in Roman Egypt: another look. Cultural
Anthropology, 11 (3), 362-376.
PARR, L. R. 2005. Mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis of human remains from the Kellis
2 Cemetery. In: HOPE, C. A., BOWEN, G. E. (eds) Daklah Oasis Project: Preliminary Reports on
the 1994-1995 to 1998-1999 field seasons. Oxford: Oxford Books, 257-261.
PEET, T. E. 1930. The Great Tomb Robberies of the Twentieth Egyptian Dynasty, I Text. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
PEET, T. E., WOOLLEY, C. L. 1923. The City of Akhenaten, Part I. Excavations of 1921 and 1922 at
El-‘Amarneh. London: Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund.
PESTMAN, P. W. 1961. Marriage and Matrimonial Property in Ancient Egypt, Papyrologica Lugduno-
Batava Vol 9. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
PESTMAN, P. W. 1969. The laws of succession in ancient Egypt. In: BRUGMAN, J., DAVID,
M., KRAUS, F. R., PESTMAN, P. W., VAN DER VALK, M. H. (eds) Esays on Oriental Laws of
Succession. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 58-77.
PESTMAN, P. W. 1982. The ‘last will of Naunakhte’ and the accession date of Ramesses V.
In: DEMARÉE, R. J., JANSSEN, J. J. (eds) Gleanings from Deir el-Medina. Leiden: Nederlands
Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 173-181.
PESTMAN, P. W. 1993. The Archive of the Theban Choachytes (Second Century B.C): A Survey of the
Demotic and Greek Papyri Contained in the Archive. Leuven: Peeters.
PETRIE, W. M. F. 1890. Kahun, Gurob and Hawara. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co.
PETRIE, W. M. F. 1909. Qurneh. London: University College and Bernard Quaritch (British
School of Archaeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account. Fifteenth year,
Publication 16).
PHILLIPS, S. M., SIVILICH, M. 2006. Cleft Palate: A Case Study of Disability and Survival in
Prehistoric North America. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 16 (6), 528-535.
PIANKOFF, A. 1930. Le Coeur dans les Textes Égyptienes depuis l’Ancien jusqú á la Fin du Nouvel
Empire. Paris: Librarire Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.
PINCH, G. 2006. Magic in Ancient Egypt, London, British Museum Press.
PÖLÖNEN, J. 2002. The division of wealth between men and women in Roman succession
(c.a. 50 BC - AD 250). In: SETÄLÄ, P., BERG, R., HÄLIKKÄ, M., KELTANEN, J., PÖLÖNEN, J.,
VUOLANTO, V. (eds) Women, Wealth and Power in the Roman Empire (Acta Instituti Romani
Finlandiae 25). Rome: Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, 147-179.
POMEROY, S. B. 1984. Women in Hellenistic Egypt: from Alexandra to Cleopatra. New York:
Schocken Books.
POMEROY, S. B. 1995 [1975]. Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves: Women in Classical Antiquity.
New York: Shocken Books.
209
POMEROY, S. B. 1997. Families in Classical and Hellenistic Greece: Representations and Realities.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
PORTER, B., MOSS, R. 1962 [1937]. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic
Texts, Reliefs and Paintings, Vol. 5. Upper Egypt: Sites. Oxford: Griffith Institute, Ashmolean
Museum.
POSTE, E., WHITTUCK, E.A. (trans. and eds) 1904. Gaius, Insitutes of Roman Law by Gaius.
POSTGATE, J. N. 1979. On some Assyrian ladies. Iraq, 41, 89-103.
POTTER, P. (ed.) 2012. Hippocrates X: Generation. Nature of the Child. Diseases 4. Nature of Women.
Barrenness. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press (Loeb Classical Library 520).
PRADEL, J. 2008. The Survival of the Kindest: a Theoretical Review and Empirical Investigation of
Explanations to the Evolution of Human Altruism. Unpublished PhD, University of Köln.
PREWITT, T. J. 1981. Kinship structures and the Genesis genealogies. Journal of Near Eastern
Studies, 40 (2), 87-98.
PRICE, C. 2016. Archaism and filial piety: an unusual Late Period pair statue from the
Cachette (Cairo JE 37136). In: COULON. L. (ed.) La Cachette de Karnak: Nouvelles Perspectives
sur les Découvertes de Georges Legrain. Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale,
Bibliothèque d’Étude 161, 485-503.
PRÜFER et al. 2014. The complete genome sequence of a Neanderthal from the Altai
Mountains. Nature, 505, 43-49.
PUDSEY, A. 2017. Disability and infirmitas in the ancient world: demographic and biological
facts in the longue durée. In: LAES, C. (ed.) Disability in Antiquity. London, New York:
Routledge, 22-34.
RABINOWITZ, J. J. 1953. Marriage contracts in ancient Egypt in the light of Jewish sources.
Harvard Theological Review, 46, 91-97.
RACKHAM, H. T. (ed.) 1944. Aristotle Politics. London, Cambridge (MA): William Heinemann
Ltd., Harvard University Press.
RAJEEV, B. et al. 2017. The relationship between orofacial clefts and consanguineous
marriages: a hospital register-based study in Dharwad, South India. Journal of Cleft Lip
Palate Craniofacial Anomalies, 4 (1), 3-8.
RAPHAEL, R. 2009. Biblica Corpora: Representations of Disability in Hebrew Literature. London,
New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
RAVEN, M. J., TACONIS, W. K. 2005. Egyptian Mummies: Radiological Atlas of the Collections
in the National Museum of Antiquities at Leiden. Turnhout: Brepols.
RAVICHANDRAN, K. et al. 2012. Consanguinity and occurrence of cleft lip/palate: a hospital-
based registry study in Riyadh. American Journal of Medical Genetics (Part A), 158A, 541-546.
RAY, J. D. 1976. The Archive of Hor, London, Egypt Exploration Society (Texts from Excavations,
Memoir 2).
RAY, J. D. 1978. Observations on the Archive of Hor. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 64, 113-
120.
READ, D. W. 2001. What is kinship? In: FEINBERG, R., OTTENHEIMER, M. (eds) The Cultural
Analysis of Kinship: the Legacy of David M. Schneider, 79-117. Urbana (Ill), Chicago: University
of Illinois Press, 78-117.
REDEN, S. von. 2007. Money in Ptolemaic Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
REDEN, S. von. 2010. Money in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
210
Bibliography
REEVES, N. 1999. The royal family. In: FREED, R. E., MARKOWITZ, Y. J., D’AURIA, S. H. (eds)
Pharaohs of the Sun: Akhenaten, Nefertiti, Tutankhamen. Boston, New York, London: Museum
of Fine Arts in association with Bulfinch Press and Little, Brown and Company, 81-95.
REEVES, N. 2001. Akhenaten: Egypt’s False Prophet. London: Thames and Hudson.
REGIER, D. A., KUHL, E. A., KUPFER, D. J. 2013. The DSM-5: classification and criteria changes.
World Psychiatry, 12 (2), 92-98.
REINSTEIN, D. 2014. The economics of the gift. In: CARLÀ, F., GORI, M. (eds) Gift Giving and the
‘Embedded’ Economy in the Ancient World. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter, 85-101.
REICHENBERG, A. et al. 2006. Premorbid intellectual functioning and risk of schizophrenia
and spectrum disorders. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 28 (2), 193-
207.
REMIJSEN, S., CLARYSSE, W. 2008. Incest or adoption? Brother-sister marriage in Roman
Egypt revisited. The Journal of Roman Studies, 98, 53-61.
RENBERG, G. H. 2015. The role of dream-interpreters in Greek and Roman religion. In:
WEBER, G. (ed.) Artemidor von Daldis und Die Antike Traumdeutung. Berlin: De Gruyter,
Colloquia Augustana 33, 232-262.
RENBERG, G. H. 2017. Where Dreams May Come: Incubation Sanctuaries in the Greco-Roman World.
Leiden: Brill.
REVEZ, J. 2003. The metaphorical use of the kinship term sn “brother”. Journal of the American
Research Center in Egypt, 40, 121-131.
RIDA, A. 1962. A dissertation from the early eighteenth century, probably the first
description of poliomyelitis. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 44B (3), 735-740.
RISKI, J. D. 2013. Cleft lip and palate and other craniofacial anomalies. In: CUMMINGS, L.
(ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of Communication Disorders. Cambridge, New York:
Cambridge University Press, 3-25.
RITNER, R. K. 1993. The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice. Chicago: The University
of Chicago (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilisation, Vol. 54).
ROBERTS, C. A. 2000. Did they take sugar? The use of skeletal evidence in the study of
disability in past populations. In: HUBERT, J. (ed.) Madness, Disability and Social
Exclusion, the Archaeology and Anthropology of ‘Difference’. Abingdon: Routledge, 46-
59.
ROBINS, G. 1979. The relationships specified by Egyptian kinship terms of the Middle and
New Kingdoms. Chronique d’Égypte, 54, 197-217.
ROBINS, G. 1993. Women in ancient Egypt. London: British Museum Press.
ROBINS, G. 1994-5. Women and children in peril, pregnancy, birth and infant mortality in
ancient Egypt. KMT, 5, 24-35.
ROBINSON, J-M. 2017. ‘Your mouth speaks, your feet walk’: representations of physical
abnormalities in ancient Egyptian funerary iconography. Archaeological Review from
Cambridge, 32 (1), 6-33.
ROSE, M. L. 2003. The Staff of Oedipus: Transforming Disability in Ancient Greece. Michigan:
University of Michigan Press.
ROTH, M. T. 1987. Age at marriage and the household: a study of Neo-BabyIonian and Neo-
Assyrian forms. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 29, 715-747.
ROWLANDSON, J. 1995. Beyond the polis: women and economic opportunity in Ptolemaic
Egypt. In: POWELL, A. (ed.) The Greek World. London, New York: Routledge, 301-322.
211
ROWLANDSON, J. 1988. Women and Society in Greek and Roman Egypt: A Sourcebook. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
ROWLANDSON, J. 2004. Gender and Cultural Identity in Roman Egypt. London: Routledge.
ROWLANDSON, J. 2016. Additions to the Philosarapis Archive: the contribution of women to
the family’s wealth. The Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists, 53, 315-353.
ROWLANDSON, J., TAKAHASHI, R. 2009. Brother-sister marriage and inheritance strategies
in Greco-Roman Egypt. The Journal of Roman Studies, 99, 104-139.
ROY, J. 1999. Polis and oikos in classical Athens. Greece and Rome (Second Series), 46 (1), 1-18.
RUDD, N., WIEDEMANN, T. (eds) 1987. Cicero, De Legibus 1. London, Bristol: Classical Press.
RUFFER, M. A. 1921. Studies in the Palaeopathology of Egypt. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
RUFFLE, B. J., SOSIS, R. 2006. Cooperation and the in-group-out-group bias: a field test on
Israeli kibbutz members and city residents. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,
60 (2), 147-163.
RUGH, A. B. 1984. Family in Contemporary Egypt. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
RZEPKA, S. et al. 2011. New Kingdom and Third Intermediate Period in Tell El-Retaba:
results of the Polish-Slovak Archaeological Mission, Seasons 2009-2010. Ägypten und
Levante, 21, 129-184.
SAAD, H. A. et al. 2014. Consanguineous marriage and intellectual and developmental
disabilities among Arab Bedouin children of the Negev region in Southern Israel: a
pilot study, Frontiers in Public Health [Online] 3 (Article 3), 1-3. Available: doi: 10.3389/
fpubh.2014.00003 [Accessed 22.5.2017].
SAADAT, M. 2015. Association between consanguinity and survival of marriages. The
Egyptian Journal of Medical Human Genetics, 16 (1), 67-70.
SABBAGH, H. J. et al. 2014. Parental consanguinity and non-syndromic oral facial clefts
in children: a systematic review and meta-analyses. The Cleft Palate and Cranio-Facial
Journal, 51 (5), 501-513.
SAGGAR, A. K., BITTLES, A. H. 2008. Consanguinity and child health. Pediatrics and Child
Health, 18 (5), 244-249.
SAHLINS, M. 1972 [2017 edn]. Stone Age Economics. London, New York: Routledge Classics.
SALLER, R. P. 1987. Men’s age at marriage and its consequences in the Roman family.
Classical Philology, 82, 21-34.
SALLER, R. P. 1994. Patriarchy, property and death in the Roman family. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press (Cambridge Studies in Population, Economy and Society in Past Time, 25).
SALVADOR-CARULLA, L. et al. 2011. Intellectual developmental disorders: towards a new
name, definition and framework for ‘mental retardation/intellectual disability’ in ICD-
11. World Psychiatry, 10, 175-180.
SÁNCHEZ-MORENO ELLART, C. 2010. ὑπομνήματα ἐπιγεννήσεως: the Greco-Egyptian birth
returns in Roman Egypt and the case of P.Petaus 1–2. Archiv für Papyrusforschung, 56,
91-129.
SANDLER, W. et al. 2014. Language emergence: Al-Sayyid Bedouin sign language. In: SINDELL,
J., KOCKELMAN, P., ENFIELD, N. (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 250-284.
SARRY El-DIN, A. M., El-BANNA, R. A. 2006. Congenital anomalies of the vertical column:
a case study on ancient and modern Egypt. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 16,
200-207.
212
Bibliography
SCHEERLINCK, E. 2011-12. Inheritance disputes and violence in women’s petitions from

Ptolemaic Egypt. Papyrologica Lupiensia [Online], 20-21. Available: http://siba-ese.
unisalento.it/index.php/plup/article/view/12670 [Accessed 3/9/2016].
SCHEIDEL, W. 1995. Incest revisited: three notes on the demography of sibling marriage in
Roman Egypt. The Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists, 32 (3/4), 143-155.
SCHEIDEL, W. 1996a. Measuring Sex, Age and Death in the Roman empire: Explorations in Ancient
Demography, Ann Arbor (MI): Journal of Roman Archaeology (Supplementary Series
Number 21).
SCHEIDEL, W. 1996b. Brother-sister and parent-child marriage outside royal families in
Ancient Egypt and Iran: a challenge to the sociobiological view of
incest avoidance? Ethology and Sociobiology, 17 (5), 319-340.
SCHEIDEL, W. 2001. Death on the Nile: disease and the demography of Roman Egypt. Leiden: Brill.
SCHEIDEL, W. 2002. Brother-sister and parent-child marriages in pre-modern societies.
In: AOKI, K., AKAZAWA, T. (eds) Human Mate Choice and Prehistoric Marital Networks:
International Symposium 16, November, 2000. Kyoto: International Research Center for
Japanese Studies, 33-47.
SCHEIDEL, W. 2004. Ancient Egyptian sibling marriage and the Westermarck effect. In: WOLF,
A. P., DURHAM, W. H. (eds) Inbreeding, Incest, and the Incest Taboo: the State of Knowledge at
the Turn of the Century. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 93-108.
SCHEIDEL, W. 2007. Roman funerary commemoration and the age at first marriage. Classical
Philology, 102 (4), 389-402.
SCHEIDEL, W. 2009. A peculiar institution? Greco–Roman monogamy in global context. The
History of the Family, 14 (3), 280-291.
SCHEIDEL, W. 2011. Monogamy and polygamy. In: RAWSON, B. (ed.) A Companion to Families
in the Greek and Roman Worlds. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 108-115.
SCHEIDEL, W. 2012. Epigraphy and Demography: birth, marriage, family, and death. In:
DAVIES, J., WILKES, J. (eds) Epigraphy and the Historical Sciences, Proceedings of the British
Academy, 177. Oxford: Oxford University Press (for The British Academy), 101-129.
SCHREDL, M. et al. 2000. The use of dreams in psychotherapy: a survey of psychotherapists
in private practice. The Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 9 (2), 81-87.
SCHUSKY, E. L. 1965. Manual for Kinship Analysis. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
SCHUSKY, E. L. 1972. Manual for Kinship Analysis, 2nd edn. New York, Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
SCHWIMMER, B. 1998a. Canon Degree [Online]. Available: https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/
arts/anthropology/tutor/descent/cognatic/canon.html [Accessed 4.10.2016].
SCHWIMMER, B. 1998b. Civil Degree [Online]. Available: https://umanitoba.ca/faculties/
arts/anthropology/tutor/descent/cognatic/civil.html [Accessed 4.10.2016].
SCHWIMMER, B. 2003a. Glossary [Online]. Available: https://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/
arts/anthropology/tutor/glossary.html. [Accessed 28.1.2018].
SCHWIMMER, B. 2003b. Variations in American Marriage Prohibitions [Online]. Available:
http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/tutor/marriage/usa-ncst.
html [Accessed 20.10.2016].
SCOTT, D. A. et al. 1995. Nonsyndromic autosomal recessive deafness is linked to the DFNBI
locus in a large inbred Bedouin family from Israel. American Journal of Human Genetics,
57 (4), 965-968.
213
SHAKESPEARE, T. 2013. The social model of disability. In: DAVIS, L. J. (ed.) The Disability
Studies Reader, 4th edn. New York, Abingdon: Routledge, 214– 221.
SHAW, B. D. 1987. The age of Roman girls at marriage: some reconsiderations. Journal of
Roman Studies, 77, 30-46.
SHAW, B. D. 1992. Explaining incest: brother-sister marriage in Graeco-Roman Egypt. Man,
New Series, 27, 267-299.
SHAW, B. D., SALLER, R. P. 1984. Close-kin marriage in Roman society? Man, 19 (3), 432-444.
SHAW, I. 2003. The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
SHAWKY, R. M. et al. 2011. Consanguineous matings among Egyptian population. The
Egyptian Journal of Medical Human Genetics, 12 (2), 157-163.
SHAWKY, R. M. et al. 2013. Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. The Egyptian
Journal of Medical Human Genetics, 14 (2), 157-164.
SHAWKY, R. M., SADIK, D. I. 2011. Congenital malformations prevalent among Egyptian
children and associated risk factors. The Egyptian Journal of Medical Human Genetics, 12
(1), 69-78.
SHEPHER, J. 1971. Mate selection among second-generation kibbutz adolescents and adults:
incest avoidance and negative imprinting. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1 (4), 293-307.
SHEPHER, J. 1983. Incest: a Biosocial View, New York, London, Academic Press.
SHERIDAN, E. et al. 2013. Risk factors for congenital anomaly in a multi-ethnic birth cohort:
an analysis of the Born in Bradford study. The Lancet, 382, 1350-1359.
SHERMAN, E. J. 1981. Djedḥor the Saviour statue base OI 10589. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology,
67, 82-102,
SHOR, E., SIMCHAI, D. 2009. Incest avoidance, the incest taboo, and social cohesion: revisiting
Westermarck and the case of the Israeil kibbutzim. American Journal of Sociology, 114 (6),
1803-42.
SHOR, E., SIMCHAI, D. 2012. Exposing the myth of sexual aversion in the Israeli kibbutzim: a
challenge to the Westermarck hypothesis. American Journal of Sociology, 117 (5), 1509-13.
SHORE, A. F., SMITH, H.S. 1959. Two unpublished demotic documents from the Asyut
archive. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 45, 52-60.
SHPRINTZEN, S. H. 2002. Terminology and classification of facial clefting. In: MOONEY,
M. P., SIEGEL, M. I. (eds) Understanding Craniofacial Anomalies: the Etiopathogenesis of
Craniosynostoses and Facial Clefting. New York: Wiley-Liss, 17-28.
SILK, J. A. 2008. Putative Persian perversities: Indian Buddhist condemnations of Zoroastrian
close-kin marriage in context. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 71 (3),
433-464.
SIMON, G., ZORAB, P.A. 1961. The radiographic changes in alkaptonuric arthritis. The British
Journal of Radiology, 34, 384-386.
SIMPLICAN, S. C. et al. 2015. Defining social inclusion of people with intellectual and
developmental disabilities: an ecological model of social networks and community
participation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 38, 18-29.
SIMPSON, J. (ed.) 2018. The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SIMPSON, W. K. 1974. Polygamy in Egypt in the Middle Kingdom? Journal of Egyptian
SIVERTSEN, A. 2008. Familial risk of oral clefts by morphological type and severity:
population based cohort study of first degree relatives. British Medical Journal, 336, 432-
434.
214
Bibliography
SKRZYPIŃSKA, D., SZMIGIELSKA, B. 2018. Dreams in cognitive-behavioral therapy. In:

ŞENORMANCI, Ö., ŞENORMANCI, G. (eds) Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Clinical
Applications. IntechOpen [Online]. Available: https://www.intechopen.com/books/
cognitive-behavioral-therapy-and-clinical-applications [Accessed 20.1.2020].
SMALL, N. et al. 2017. Endogamy, consanguinity and the health implications of changing
marital choices in the UK Pakistani community. Journal of Biosocial Science, 49 (4), 435-
446.
SMITH, H. S. 1995. Marriage and the family in ancient Egypt I: marriage and family law.
In: GELLER, M. J., MAEHLER, H. (eds) Legal Documents of the Hellenistic World. London:
Warburg Institute, University of London, 46-57.
SOBER, E., WILSON, D. S. 1998. Unto Others: the Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior.
Cambridge (MA), London: Harvard University Press.
SPENCE, K. 2013. Ancient egyptian houses and households: architecture, artifacts,
conceptualization, and interpretation. In: MÜLLER, M. (ed.) Household Studies in Complex
Societies: (Micro) Archaeological and Textual Approaches. Chicago (Il): The Oriental Institute
of the University of Chicago, (Oriental Institute Seminars Number 10, 83-100).
SPERLING, J. 2004. Marriage at the time of the Council of Trent (1560-70): clandestine
marriages, kinship prohibitions, and dowry exchange in European comparison. Journal
of Early Modern History, 8, 67-108.
SPIGELMAN, M., BENTLEY, P. 1998. Bilateral congenital hip disclocation: skeletal changes in
a skeleton from 18th Dynasty Saqqara, Egypt. Paleopathology Newsletter, 102, 6-12.
STAAL, H. M. et al. 2014. Current knowledge on exostoses formation in hereditary multiple
exostoses: where do exostoses originate and in what way is their growth regulated.
Hereditary Genetics 3, 1-8 [Online]. Available: Doi: 10.4172/2161-1041.1000134 [Accessed
25.5.2017].
STARCK, W. J., EPKER, B. M. 1994. Surgical repair of a median cleft of the upper lip. Journal of
Oral Maxillofacial Surgeons, 52 (11), 1217-1219.
STECK, S., STECK, B. 2016. Brain and Mind: Subjective Experience and Scientific Objectivity. Cham:
Springer.
STEPHENS, D. 2006. Deafness and its treatment in ancient civilisations. Audiological Medicine,
4 (2), 85-93.
STOL, M. 1995. Women in Mesopotamia. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient,
38 (2), 123-44.
STOL, M. 2016. Women in the Ancient Near East. Boston, Berlin: De Gruyter.
STOL, M. 1993. Epilepsy in Babylonia. Groningen: Styx Publications (Cuneiform Monongraphs
2).
STRONG, A. 2005. Incest laws and absent taboos in Roman Egypt, Ancient History Bulletin, 19
(1-2), 31-41.
STROUHAL, E. 2010. Biological age of skeletonised mummy from tomb KV55 at Thebes.
Anthroplogie, 48 (2), 97-112.
SUTTON, V. R., ALFORD, R. L. 2011. Medical Genetics in the Clinical Practice of ORL. Basel: Karger.
SWEENEY, D. 1993. Women’s correspondence from Deir el-Medina. In: ZACCONE, G. M., DI
NETRO, T. R. (eds) Sesto Congresso Internazionale di Egittologia: Atti 2. Turin: Tipographica
Torinese, 523-529.
SWEENEY, D. 1998. Friendship and frustration: a study in Papyri Deir el-Medina IV-VI.
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 84, 101-122.
215
SWEENEY, D. 2006. Women growing older in Deir el-Medina. In: DORN, A., HOFMANN, T.
(eds) Living and Writing in Deir el-Medine, Aegyptiaca Helvetica 19. Basel: Schwabe Verlag,
135-153.
SWEENEY, D. 2008. Gender and oracular practice in Deir el-Medîna. Zeitschrift für Ägyptische
Sprache und Altertumskunde, 135, 154-164.
SZPAKOWSKA, K. 2001. Through the Looking Glass. In: BULKELEY, K. (ed.) Dreams: A Reader on
religious, cultural and psychological dimensions of dreaming. New York: Palgrave Macmillan,
29-43.
SZPAKOWSKA, K. 2003. Behind Closed Eyes: Dreams and Nightmares in Ancient Egypt. Swansea:
The Classical Press of Wales.
SZPAKOWSKA, K. 2008. Daily Life in Ancient Egypt: Recreating Lahun. Malden: Blackwell
Publishing.
SZPAKOWSKA, K. 2009. Demons in ancient Egypt. Religion Compass, 3/5, 799-805.
SZPAKOWSKA, K. 2011. Dream Interpretation in the Ramesside Age. In: COLLIER, M., SNAPE,
S. (eds): Ramesside Studies in Honour of K.A. Kitchen. Bolton: Rutherford Press, 509-517.
TADMOURI, G. et al. 2009. Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs. Reprod
Health [Online], 6 (17). Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7314241.
[Accessed 6.2.2013].
TASSÉ, M. J. 2016. Defining intellectual disability: finally we agree...almost [Online] http://
www.apa.org/pi/disability/resources/publications/newsletter/2016/09/intellectual-
disability.aspx. Accessed 18.8.2017.
TEEBI, A. S. (ed.) 2010. Genetic Disorders in Arab Populations, 2nd edn. Berlin, Heidelberg:
Springer-Verlag.
TEMTAMY, S. A. 1994. An epidemiological/genetic study of mental subnormality in Assiut
Governorate, Egypt. Clinical Genetics, 46 (5), 347-351.
TENNEJI, N. H. et al. 2009. Markers for aggression in inpatient treatment facilities for adults
with mild to borderline intellectual disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30
(6), 1248-1257.
TERDAL, L. G. 1981. Mental Retardation. In: LINDEMANN, J. E. (ed.) Psychological and
Behavioural Aspects of Physical Disability: A Manual for Health Practioners. New York and
London: Plenum Press, 179-216.
THÉODORIDÈS, A. 1971. The concept of law in ancient Egypt. In: HARRIS, J. R. (ed.) The
Legacy of Egypt, 2nd edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 291-322.
THÉODORIDES, A. 1976. Le droit matrimonial dans l’Égypte pharaonique. Revue Internationale
des Droits de L’Antiquité, 23 (3rd Series), 14-55.
THEODOROU, Z. 1991. The Presentation of Emotion in Euripidean Tragedy. Unpublished PhD
dissertation, King’s College London.
THIELMANN, I., HILBIG, B. E. 2014. Trust in me, trust in you: a social projection account
of the link between personality, cooperativeness, and trustworthiness expectations.
Journal of Research in Personality, 50, 61-65.
THIERFELDER, H. 1960. Die Geschwisterehe im Hellenistisch-Römischen Ägypten (Fontes et
Commentationes: Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Epigraphik an der Universität Münster. Heft 1).
Münster: Verlag Aschendorff.
THOMPSON, D. J. 1988. Memphis under the Ptolemies, Princeton NJ, Princeton University
Press.
216
Bibliography
THOMPSON, H. F. H. 1934. A family Archive from Siut: from papyri in the British Museum, including
an account of a trial before the Laocritae in the year BC 170. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
TILLEY, L. 2015a. Theory and Practice in the Bioarchaeology of Care (Bioarchaeology and Social
Theory). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
TILLEY, L. 2015b. Accommodating difference in the prehistoric past: revisiting the case of
Romito 2 from a bioarchaeology of care perspective. International Journal of Paleopathology,
8, 64-74.
TILLEY, L., CAMERON, T. 2014. Introducing the Index of Care: A web-based application
supporting archaeological research into health-related care. International Journal of
Paleopathology, 6, 5-9.
TILLEY, L., SCHRENK, A. A. (eds) 2016. New Developments in the Bioarchaeology of Care: Further
Case Studies and Expanded Theory (Bioarchaeology and Social Theory). Cham: Springer
International Publishing
TILLION, G. 1983 [1966]. The Republic of Cousins: Women’s Oppression in Mediterranean Society.
London: Al-Saqi Books.
TOCHERI, M. W. et al. 2005. Roman period fetal skeletons from the East Cemetery (Kellis 2)
of Kellis, Egypt. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 15 (5), 326-341.
TOIVARI, J. 1997. Man versus woman: interpersonal disputes in the workmen’s community
of Deir el-Medina. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 40 (2), 153-173.
TOIVARI-VIITALA, J. 2001. Women at Deir el-Medina: a study of the status and roles of the female
inhabitants in the workmen’s community during the Ramesside Period. Leiden: Nederlands
Instituut Voor Het Nabije Oosten (Egyptologiche Uitgaven XV).
TOIVARI-VIITALA, J. 2003. O. DeM 764: A note concerning property rights. Göttinger Miszellen:
Beiträge zur ägyptologischen Diskussion, 195, 87-96.
TOIVARI-VIITALA, J. 2011. Deir el-Medina (Development). UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology,
Wendrich, W. (ed.) [Online]. Available: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.
do?ark=21198/zz002b227q [Accessed 27.11.2012].
TOIVARI-VIITALA, J. 2013. Marriage and divorce. UCLA Encyclopedia of Egyptology, Frood,
E., Wendrich, W. (eds) [Online]. Available: http://digital2.library.ucla.edu/viewItem.
do?ark=21198/zz002cbdg5 [Accessed 27.3. 2013].
TREGGIARI, S. 1991. Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian.
TRENTIN, L. 2011. Deformity in the Roman Imperial Court. Greece and Rome, 58 (2), 195-208.
TRIVERS, R. L. 1971. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46
(1), 35-57.
TYLDESLEY, J. 1994. Daughters of Isis: Women of Ancient Egypt. London: Viking.
TYLDESLEY, J. 2000. Ramesses: Egypt’s Greatest Pharaoh, London, Penguin.
TYRER, F., MCGROTHER, C. 2009. Cause-specific mortality and death certificate reporting in
adults with moderate to profound intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability
Research, 53 (11), 898-904.
TYRER, F., SMITH, L. K., MCGROTHER, C. W. 2007. Mortality in adults with moderate to
profound intellectual disability: a population-based study. Journal of Intellectual Disability
Research, 51(7), 520-527.
UYTTERHOEVEN, I. 2009. Hawara in the Graeco-Roman Period: Life and Death in a Fayum Village.
Leuven: Peeters (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 174).
217
VALBELLE, D. 1975. La Tombe de Ḥay à Deir el-Médineh, No 267. Cairo: Institut Français
D’archéologie Orientale du Caire.
VALBELLE, D. 1987. Les recensements dans l’Égypte pharaonique des troisième et deuxième
millénaires. CRIPEL, 9, 33-49.
VALDERAS, J. M. et al. 2009. Defining comorbidity: implications for understanding health
and health services. Annals of Family Medicine, 7 (4), 357-363.
VAN VEELEN, M. et al. 2017. Hamilton’s rule. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 414, 176-230.
VANDORPE, K. 2002. The Bilingual Family Archive of Dryton, his Wife Apollonia and their Daughter
Senmouthis (P. Dryton). Brussels: Publicatie Van Het Wetenschappelijk Comité Klassieke
Studies, Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten
(Collectanea Hellenistica 4).
VANDORPE, K., WAEBENS, S. 2009. Reconstructing Pathyris’ Archives: A Multicultural Community
in Hellenistic Egypt. Brussels: Publicatie Van Het Wetenschappelijk Comité Klassieke
Studies, Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten
(Collectanea Hellenistica 3).
VEITH, I. 1965. Hysteria: The History of a Disease, Chicago and London, The University of
Chicago Press.
VIERROS, M. 2008. Greek or Egyptian? The language choice in Ptolemaic documents from
Pathyris. In: DELATTRE, A., HEILPORN, P. (eds) ‘Et maintenant ce ne sont plus que des villages’,
Thèbes et sa Région aux Époques Hellénistique, Romaine et Byzantine, Actes du Colloque tenu à
Bruxelles les 2 et 3 Décembre 2005. Bruxelles: Association Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth
(Papyrologica Bruxellensia 34), 73-87.
VOGT, A. M. 2013. Plato on madness and the good life. In: HARRIS, W. V. (ed.) Mental Disorders
in the Classical World. Leiden: Brill, 177-192.
VOLLAN, B. 2011. The difference between kinship and friendship: (field-) experimental
evidence on trust and punishment. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40 (1), 14-25.
VYCICHL, W. 1983. Dictionnaire Étymologique de la Langue Copte. Leuven: Peeters.
WAERZEGGERS, C. 2002. Endogamy in Mesopotamia in the First Millennium BC. In:
WUNSCH, C., WALKER, C. B. F. (eds) Mining the Archives. Festschrift for Christopher Walker
on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday. Dresden: ISLET, 319-342.
WAGEMAKERS, B. 2010. Incest, infanticide and cannibalism: anti-Christian imputations in
the Roman Empire. Greece and Rome, 57 (2), 337-354.
WAGNER-HASEL, B. 2014. Karl Bücher and the birth of the theory of gift-giving. In: CARLÀ,
F., GORI, M. (eds) Gift Giving and the ‘Embedded’ Economy in the Ancient World. Heidelberg:
Universitätsverlag Winter, 51-69.
WALLS, N. H. 2007. The origins of the disabled body: disability in ancient Mesopotamia.
In: AVALOS, H., MELCHER, S., SCHIPPER, J. (eds) This Abled Body: Rethinking Disabilities
in Biblical Studies, Issue 55 of Semeia Studies. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 13-30.
WALMSLEY, J. 2001. Normalisation, emancipatory research and inclusive research in
learning disability. Disability and Society, 16 (2), 187-205.
WALTER, A., BUYSKE, S. 2003. The Westermarck effect and early childhood co-socialization:
sex differences in inbreeding-avoidance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21,
353-365.
WARD, W. A. 1994. Foreigners living in the village. In: LESKO, L. H. (ed.) Pharaoh’s Workers: the
Villagers of Deir el-Medina. Ithaca (NY), London: Cornell University Press, 61-85.
218
Bibliography
WATSON, A. T. (trans.) 1985. The Digest of Justianian, Vol. 2. Philadelphia: University of

Pennsylvania Press.
WATTERSON, B. 1994. Women in Ancient Egypt, Stroud, Alan Sutton.
WEDEKIND, C., MILINSKI, M. 2000. Cooperation through image scoring in humans. Science,
288, 850-852.
WEEKS, K. R. 1970. The Anatomical Knowledge of the Ancient Egyptians and the Representation of
the Human Figure in Egyptian Art. Yale University: New Haven.
WEHMEYER, M. L., OBREMSKI, S. 2010. Intellectual Disability. In: Center for International
Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange (CIRRIE), International Encyclopedia of
Rehabilitation. Kansas, University of Kansas. [Online]. http://www.cirrie.buffalo.edu/
encyclopedia/en/article/15/ [Accessed 20.4.2015]
WEINREB, A. A. 2008. Characteristics of women in consanguineous marriages in Egypt,
1988-2000. European Journal of Population, 24 (2), 185-210.
WENTE, E. F. (trans.), MELTZER, E. S. (ed.) 1990. Letters from Ancient Egypt. Atlanta: Scholars
Press (Writings from the Ancient World, Vol. 1).
WEST, S. A., GRIFFIN, A. S., GARDINER, A. 2007. Social semantics: altruism, cooperation, mutualism,
strong reciprocity and group selection. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 20, 415-432.
WESTBROOK, R. 2003. Mesopotamia: Old Bayblonian Period. In: WESTBROOK, R. (ed.) A
History of Ancient Near Eastern Law, Vol. 1. Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section 1: The Near
and Middle East. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 361-430.
WESTBROOK, R. 2005. Penelope’s dowry and Odysseus’ kingship. Women and Property in
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean Societies, Centre for Hellenic Studies (Conference 2003)
[Online]. https://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/displayPdf/387 [Accessed 13.7.2016].
WESTERMARCK, E. 1891. The History of Human Marriage. London, New York: Macmillan and
Co.
WHALE, S. 1989. The Family in the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt. Sydney: The Australian Centre
for Egyptology Studies.
WHITE, D. R., JORIAN, P. 1992. Representing and computing kinship: a new approach.
Current Anthropology, 33 (4), 454-463.
WHITE, P. et al. 2005. Prevalence of intellectual disability and comorbid mental illness in
an Australian community sample. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 39,
395-400.
WILEMAN, J. 2005. Hide and Seek: The Archaeology of Childhood. Stroud: The History Press.
WILFONG, T. 1997. Women and Gender in Ancient Egypt: from Prehistory to Late Antiquity. Ann
Arbor (MI): Kelsey Museum Publications.
WILFONG, T. 2001. Marriage and divorce. In: REDFORD, D. B. (ed.) The Oxford Encyclopedia of
Ancient Egypt, Vol. 2. New York: Oxford University Press, 340-345.
WILFONG, T. 2009. Gender in ancient Egypt. In: WENDRICH, W. (ed.) Egyptian Archaeology.
Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 164-179.
WILKINSON, T. A. H. 2000. Royal Annals of Ancient Egypt: The Palermo Stone and its Associated
Fragments. London, New York: Kegan Paul International.
WILLEMS, H. 1983. A description of Egyptian kinship terminology of the Middle Kingdom,
c. 2000-1650 B.C. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 139 (1), 152-168.
WILLEMS, H. 2015. Family life in the hereafter according to Coffin Texts spells 131-146: a
study in the structure of ancient Egyptian domestic groups. In: FRANDSEN, P. J., POTTS,
219
D. T., WESTENHOLTZ, A. (eds) Lotus and Laurel: Studies on Egyptian Language and Religion in
Honour of Paul John Frandsen. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press (CNI Publications,
Vol. 39), 447-472.
WILNER, P. 2007. Cognitive behavioural therapy for people with learning disabilities: focus
on anger. Advances in Mental Health and Learning Disabilities, 1 (2), 14-21.
WINAND, J. 2018. Words of thieves. In: CROMWELL, J., GROSSMAN, E. (eds) Scribal Repertoires
in Egypt from the New Kingdom to the Early Islamic Period. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
127-152.
WITTE, J. 2012. Church, state, and marriage: four early modern Protestant models. Oxford
Journal of Law and Religion, 1 (1), 151-168.
WOLF, A. P. 1966. Childhood association, sexual attraction, and the incest taboo: a Chinese
case. American Anthropologist, 68 (4), 883-898.
WOLF, A. P. 1968. Adopt a daughter-in-law, marry a sister: A Chinese solution to the problem
of the incest taboo. American Anthropologist, 70 (5), 864-874.
WOLF, A. P. 1970. Childhood association and sexual attraction: a further test of the
Westermarck hypothesis. American Anthropologist, 72 (3), 503-515.
WOLF, A. P. 1993. Westermarck redivivus. Annual Review of Anthropology, 22, 157-175.
WOLF, A. P. 2005. Explaining the Westermarck effect, or what did natural selection select
for? In: WOLF, A. P., DURHAM, W. H. (eds) Inbreeding, Incest, and the Incest taboo: the State of
Knowledge at the turn of the Century. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press, 76-92.
WOODS, C. G. et al. 2006. Quantification of homozygosity in consanguineous individuals
with autosomal recessive disease. American Journal of Human Genetics 78 (5), 889-896.
WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION, 2016. Fact Sheet Number 370, updated September 2016
[Online]. Available: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs370/en/ [Accessed
14.1.2017].
WORTH ESTES, J. 1989. The Medical Skills of Ancient Egypt. Canton (MA): Science History
Publications/Watson Publishing International.
WRESZINSKI, W. (ed.) 1912. Der Londoner Medizinische Papyrus (Brit. Museum nr. 10059) und der
Papyrus Hearst in Transkription. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs.
WUNSCH, C. 2005. Women’s property and the law of inheritance in the Neo-Babylonian
Period. Women and Property in Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean Societies, Centre
for Hellenic Studies (Conference 2003) [Online]. Available: https://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/
article/display/1219 [Accessed 29.1.2017].
YIFTACH-FIRANKO, U. 2003. Marriage and Marital Arrangements: a History of the Greek Marriage
Document in Egypt, 4th century BCE – 4th century CE. München: Beck.
YOUNG, E. 1965. A possible consanguineous marriage in the time of Philip Arrhidaeus.
Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, 4, 69-71.
ZACCAGNINI, C. 2003. Mesopotamia: Nuzi. In: WESTBROOK, R. (ed.) A History of Ancient Near
Eastern Law, Vol. 1. Handbook of Oriental Studies, Section 1: The Near and Middle East. Leiden:
Brill, 565-617.
ZAKRZEWSKI, S. 2014. Palaeopathology, disability and bodily impairments. In: METCALFE,
R., COCKITT, J., DAVID, R. (eds) Palaeopathology in Egypt and Nubia, A Century in Review.
Oxford: Archaeopress (Egyptology 6), 57-68.
ZAKRZEWSKI, S. 2015. ‘Behind every mask there is a face, and behind that a story’: Egyptian
bioarchaeology and ancient identities. In: IKRAM, S., KAISER, J., WALKER, R. (eds)
Egyptian Bioarchaeology. Leiden: Sidestone Press, 157-167.
220
Bibliography
ZIE, Z. H. et al. 2008. Sampling survey on intellectual disability in 0-6 year old children in
China. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 52 (12), 1029-1038.
ZILLHARDT, R. 2009. Kinderbestattungen und die Soziale Stellung des Kindes im Alten Ägypten:
Unter besonderer Berucksichtigung des Ostfriedhofs von Deir el-Medine. Göttingen: Göttinger
Miszellen.
ZISKIND, J. R. 1988. Legal Rules on Incest in the Ancient Near East, Revue Internationale des
Droits de L’Antiquité, 35 (3rd Series), 79-109.
ZLOTOGORA, J. 1997. Genetic disorders among Palestinian Arabs: 1. Effects of consanguinity.
American Journal of Medical Genetics, 68 (4), 472-475.
221

AE29 - Robinson - Blood Is Thicker Than Water. Non-Royal Consanguineous Marriage in Ancient Egypt. An Exploration of Economic and Biological Outcomes

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

AE29 - Robinson - Blood Is Thicker Than Water. Non-Royal Consanguineous Marriage in Ancient Egypt. An Exploration of Economic and Biological Outcomes

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

‘Blood is thicker than water’

© J-M Robinson and Archaeopress 2020

Chapter 1 Ancient Egyptian marriage and kin terms, definitions of

Chapter 2 Consanguinity in historical context: evidence from select sources for

Chapter 3 The use of inheritance and matrimonial goods as economic strategies

Chapter 4 Consanguineous marriage in Deir el-Medina and economic impacts:

Appendix 1 Table of probable or possible non-royal consanguineous marriages

Appendix 2 Details of consanguineous and affinal links between

Table 2.1: Incidence of consanguineous marriages in the Roman census returns in

I am grateful to Leire Olabarria for her encouragement and valuable comments on

affinity: related through marriage

agnatic: see patrilineal

cognatic: related by genealogical ties without particular emphasis on patrilineal or

cross cousin: child of a father’s sister or mother’s brother

endogamy: inmarriage, marriage to an individual within a defined social group, category,

exogamy: outmarriage, marriage to an individual outside a defined social group, category,

kin group: a social group based on kinship ties

kin type: a unique, uncategorised kinship relationship

matrilateral: related through a mother, mother’s side

matrilineal (uterine): related by tracing common descent exclusively through female

neolocal residence: establishment of an independent household

partible inheritance: an inheritance system which subdivides a person’s property amongst

patrilateral: related through a father, father’s side

polyandry: marriage involving one woman to more than one man

polygamy: marriage of a person to more than one spouse

polygyny: marriage involving one man to more than one woman

taboo: something prohibited, often because of association with a wider system of

Early Dynastic Period Third Intermediate Period

Second Intermediate Period

Ancient Egyptian marriage and kin terms,

Bureaucratic requirements sometimes dictated the naming of family and household

Exploring non-royal consanguineous marriage: aims, limitations and hypotheses

i. consanguineous marriage mitigates the fragmentation of moveable and immoveable

Ancient Egyptian marriage

grg pr – to found a house (or family)

Ancient Egyptian kin terms

Extended meaning using Euro-American

Legend: M = mother, F = father, S = son, D = daughter, B = brother, Z = sister

* s3/t and sn/t are counted as two basic terms

Consanguinity and consanguineous marriage

A consanguine is someone who is defined by the society as a consanguine, and ‘blood’

As a working definition, unions contracted between persons biologically related as

Biological Coefficient of Coefficient of

Genetic relationships are classified in terms of coefficient of relationship (r), which

Categories of consanguineous marriage

Legend: mother father brother sister son daughter

cross first cross first maternal parallel paternal parallel

Rome to refer generally to polluting or unchaste behaviour, including sexual intercourse

Incest avoidance: the incest taboo

Identifying genetic markers for consanguinity in human remains

Methodology and structure

relatives, but also allows an evaluation of preferences within consanguineous families

Consanguinity in historical context: evidence from

This summary of consanguineous marriages in regions (and religions) outside Egypt

Consanguineous marriage in ancient Egypt

Royal consanguineous marriages

Non-royal consanguineous marriages

Distribution Number from

Complex pedigrees of relationships were created in Hawara through intermarriage, for

The Pharaonic Period

Late Period and Third Intermediate Period

Frandsen (2009: 39-41) discusses a possible father-daughter marriage based on inscriptions

Names of both Mothers only named