The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1882-03-04

those OF DCLEatltl and m4lFl44DlN were DEt a
degree less affecting and were in the highest
degree curious. Domestic life appears 10 have
been governed by the :. rule of contrary" A
pleasant fiction Of our own marriage services
makes the Benedict endow his bride with all
his worldly goods" For the much married
ancient Egyptian, such an endowment was no
empty promise witness the following marriage
contract -
The IaricheUte OF Diem, Horus, son OF Pet
nethoP, whose mother Is SeneTIUs, saith 10 the
woman Set-cf-Aukh, daughter Of Psemout, whose
mother Is Isetamen, ] hare accepted thee for my
rife. l give thee ten Grgenteus, IL sekels 80, ten
argenteus IN all, for thy nuptlal gift. l am 10 give
thee "a outen for thy dress money for one year.
That l am to give thee. Thy eldest son, my
eldest son, shall be the master OF all my property
present and to come / UjN establish thee as my
rTe. II l dlsdain thee, If l take unto myself
any other wife than thee, l will pay thee 100
arsenteus over and above the ten argenteus
aoove-named which I give thee for thy nuptial
gift. Inventory Of thy bridal goods, which thou
brlngest with thee into my house one suit Of
clothes, value 30 argenteuS other stuffs, 80 ar
genteus one Golfer, 80 argenteus enc rereh %,
90 argenteus one gold chain, 30 argenteus one
ring and Il seal with two faces, % argenteus one
(), p argenteus in all, 800 argenteus,
IN sekels l, 300, in argenteus 300 in all, with an
alloy OF two III n, value Of thy nuptial goods
which thou bringest with thee. My heart is
satisfied. IrII eSid6iiSh thee as my JCfs II l do
not, l will repay thee thy nuptial goods here
enumerated over and above all that is before
written. The price shall be in silver as written
above. Thou hast no oath to take for thy nup-
tIaI goods here enumerated (as though l should
say, Thou hast not brought them with thee to
my house. 1t Is for thee to claim them.
](Slgned) The Taricheute OF Diem, Horus, &c"
This and other similar contracts, consists of
eight clauses. /. The acceptance of the woman
by the man as his wife e. the nuptial gift from
the man to the woman (3) the promise of a
yearly allowance for dress, particular stress
being laid on the first year a. a declaration
that tina eldest son of both shall inherit all the
husbands property (5) a personal promise on
the mans part, to hereafter establish the woman
as his wife co. an undertaking on the mans
part to pay certain stated damages, if he do not
fulfill clause D % a list of the woman's goods
which she brings with her (8) a mortgage on
all the mans property given to the woman to
guarantee performance of the contract. From
all this, it is evident that acceptance" and
" establishment y as a wife were distinct things,
the former being for one year only. The year of
acceptance was a year of probation, at the end
of which the contracting parties could honora-
bly, separate when once formally q established "
the tie was not only indissoluble, but so stringent
ly contrived that infdelity or polygamous second
marriage on the husbands part involved the loss
u All III pOSStSStj. LII any CdSS whether Dorm
III the year of probation or after the act of estab-
lishment TIE eldest son of the pair was heir to
all the fathers possessions. Marriage therefore
was so serious a matter, that this year of proba-
ton, however contrary to modern nations, was
n reasonable and necessary arrangement to ena-
BILE the man to judge of the fitness of one to
whom he must by and by relinquish the free con-
troll of his property, for it amounted to nothing
less than that. House, land AID securities, were
the " established - wife's, to dispose of at her
sole pleasure, and if the man desired to sell any
part of his OWL estate, he could only do SO In
the name of his eldest son. 1t may be thought
that this yoke was heavy enough, yet others of
these contracts show that it could be made even
more burdensOme and CALLING. In our papyrus
Petorpa assigns to his wife Neshorpschrat not
only his house and landed property, present and
future, but also . his silver and copper money
and furniture leaving himself absolutely
nothing delivered, tied hand and foot, into the
power of his wife, making but one special clause
in his own favor, viz that she shall provide
for him while he lives and pay for his funeral
l~iturgies and the ~embalming of his body when
he dies. Nor Is this a solitary case. In a
papyrus of the eighth year of Ptolemy Sotor
Pchelchons makes a gift of all his property
present and future, to his established wife Mes
chons. Seven years later he inherited houses
and lands at Hermonthis, and in accordance
with the former contract, makes these over to
Neschons by a deed ending thus -
1T is incumbent upon thee to take care of
me during my life, and to charge myself with
the expenses of my ~embalment and my memorial
chapel after my death. Neither son nor
daughter has any concern in this deed. 1t is for
me to protect thee against claims of theirs.
Take, therefore, this surrender of my property
for ever"
Neschons, in truth, stepped into the place
Of Pchelchons, and inherited his property dur
ing his lifetime, he becoming a mere instrument
in her hands, with nothing to do but act as her
agent and obey her commands. 1t is not won
derful that the Greeks found abundant matter
for pleasantly in facts such as these nor that,
while Diodorus kept strictly within the bounds
of truth in stating that Egyptian husbands
promised in their marriage contract to submit
themselves in all things to the power of their
wives, other writer's, as Sophocles and Herodo-
tus, INDUCED in some satirical license when they
averred that the women did all the trading and
marketing, while the men sat at home at the
loom. That the women did trade for themselves,
and upon a considerable scale, is, however. fully
proved by other denote papyri in which they
figure as buyers and sellers, as mortgages, as
money-lenders, and even as contractors with the
State. Yet, further, the Egyptian bridegroom
took the name of his wife, instead of giving his
name to her and Egyptian sons, instead of
being called after their fathers, were designated
(as in the foregoing contracts) by the names of
their mothers, which names are stated immedi-
ately following their own.
Such was the marriage law of Egypt at the
period of the Greek dominion. 1t was then
called d" the old law, and it had doubtless sub
sisted unchanged from the time of the early
Kings. We shall probably never know how
customs so strange and perverse came to be
established among a people famed throughout
antiquity for their wisdom and learning. Still,
there is a room for conjecture and when we
look back to the monuments of the Ancient
Emnire. and there find the daughters and grand