Search Results

The village of Deir al-Medina has produced many thousands of ostraca telling us all about everyday life in New Kingdom Egypt, at least for this village. The village itself was first excavated between 1905 and 1909 by the Italians under Ernesto Schiaparelli. Between 1922 and 1951 Deir al-Medina was excavated again by the French under Bernard Bruyère.To publish a hieratic papyrus or ostracon we need access to the original source. Egyptologists copy original papyri by tracing the ink markings onto plastic drawing film, the kind that was used to make cartoons in the days before computer animation. Many factors influence how a scribe writes: whether writing material is smooth or uneven (like a limestone ostracon with a rough spot in the middle that will absorb the ink), or whether the addressee has a high enough status that you care about the quality of the handwriting.

Water was essential in these funerary cults. In the Old Kingdom (2575–2134 BCE) people passing the tombs in the necropolis were called upon by the deceased themselves: “You, who are still living on earth and are passing this grave, pour some water for me!” The choachyte (‘water-pourer’) Djekhy son of Tesmontu was part of an ancient Egyptian tradition. The importance of water in Egypt was well known. A low Nile meant starvation. When Djekhy brought his libations—and no doubt beer, bread, and other foodstuffs as well—to the dead in the Theban necropolis this tradition had already spanned thousands of years.

This chapter focuses on marriage in Deir al-Medina. It begins with an overview of the marriage procedure or ceremony in the village, and cites indications that a formal divorce (at least in some instances) required an official statement made in court to dissolve a marriage. It then considers several ostraca describing how the future son-in-law carries some gift to the house of his prospective father-in-law, hoping to marry the latter's daughter, including one that summarizes various marital property arrangements from the ninth century BCE. It also examines an undated text that may contain the remains of an oath on the occasion of a marriage (O. Varille 30) and concludes with a discussion of the marriage between Naunakhte (twelve or slightly older) and Qenhirkhopshef (fifty-something).

This chapter focuses on Naunakhte's first husband, Qenhirkhopshef, a prominent Deir al-Medina scribe who remained in office for approximately forty years (or more). Qenhirkhopshef became Naunakhte's (presumably) first husband when he was fifty-something years of age and she was twelve (or slightly older). Even after his death, Qenhirkhopshef would influence the lives of the sons and daughters of Naunakhte and her second husband Khaemnun. The chapter attempts to piece together parts of Qenhirkhopshef's life—most of which was spent before he married Naunakhte, from his adoption by the senior village scribe Ramose and his wife Mutemwia to his becoming an important man in the village. It asks a number of questions, for example, where Ramose's property went when he died; Qenhirkhopshef's biological parents; and Qenhirkhopshef's character.

This chapter focuses on Naunakhte's second husband, Khaemnun, a workman in Deir al-Medina. It is not clear when Khaemnun was born. There is some speculation that he was already active as a workman at the end of Dynasty 19, and more specifically in year 4 of either Amunmessu (1199 BCE), Sethy II (1196 BCE), or Siptah (1190 BCE). The chapter reconstructs some of the kitchen-table discussions between Naunakhte and Khaemnun and considers the claim of the workman Amunemipet that he has a right to Khaemnun's tomb. It also discusses various stories in the village, from Khaemnun's donkey to agriculture in Deir al-Medina, land leases from the Kushite period (Dynasty 25), and the dispute over donkeys between a workman, a water carrier, and the chief of police Sobekhotep. It also looks at the deals that the policemen and their chiefs were always striking with the workmen.

This book seeks to piece together the parts of Mrs. Naunakhte's life by retracing the steps of her children and her two husbands. Naunakhte, an “average” woman (but not really) from the New Kingdom village of Deir al-Medina, has become a famous figure in Egyptology because of a statement about her inheritance she made in court in year 3 of Ramesses V (1145/44–1142/40 BCE) that denied several of her eight surviving children of their maternal inheritance. In her statement, Naunakhte explained why these children would be disinherited. Two daughters had never bothered to care for her in her old age; one of her sons was a layabout who was always short of money. This chapter looks at the list of Naunakhte's children that was made on the basis of her statement in court.

This chapter focuses on the women of Deir al-Medina and the crimes they committed. It starts with the women from Naunakhte's family, who are not mentioned in connection with any court case except the division of her will. In particular, it cites the adultery between Naunakhte's daughter Menatnakhte and the workman Weserhat, and possibly other scandals in the family. It shows that there are few court cases involving women in Deir al-Medina, in part because women were not always allowed to file suit in court about trifles. It also asks why Naunakhte settled her last will in public and concludes with the argument that women appearing in court did not necessarily mean that they were criminals.

This chapter focuses on divorce in Deir al-Medina. It begins with the observation that divorce in the village was easy: a man could “throw his wife out” of the house and a woman could just as easily decide to “go away,” although this would have emotional and financial consequences. A departing wife would receive real estate. It was always the woman who left the house because a house in the village was state property and directly connected with the husband's job. However, there are also cases where it was the man leaving the house to live with another woman. The chapter considers one such case, P. Geneva D 409 + P. Turin Cat. 2021 recto, which involved the vizier, and the problems that it highlights, namely the future of the family property and the children, apart from their personal grief. It also discusses marriage in Deir al-Medina.

This chapter examines how Deir al-Medina fathers protected their daughters. It begins with a discussion of how a Deir al-Medina girl who married a workman from the village would remain close to her family, and from time to time would flee their husbands back to the parental home. This is evident in a limestone ostracon involving the workman Telmontu, who complained to the chief workman Khonsu and the scribe Amunnakhte son of Ipuy about his son-in-law, evidently in defense of his daughter. The chapter considers another case of a father coming to the rescue of his daughter: an ostracon containing a statement by the workman Horemwia to a person who seems to be his daughter. Finally, it cites another ostracon containing a case of theft from some storehouses.

This chapter examines the possible exact location of the main administrative building in Deir al-Medina. It considers the so-called khetem en Pa Kher “enclosure of The Tomb,” or pa khetem “the enclosure,” the most important office for the administration of Deir al-Medina. “The Tomb” was the standard designation of the (work on) the royal tomb and the organization responsible for building and monitoring it. Although the translation “enclosure” for khetem is correct, “main office” appears to be more accurate. The chapter also discusses the notion, based on O. Cairo CG 25831 (Dynasty 19), that women were not allowed to roam around, and the case of eight menstruating women roaming about, described in O. Oriental Institute Museum 13512. Finally, it evaluates a number of theories regarding the location of the administrative center, including those put forward by Christopher Eyre, Günter Burkard, Raphael Ventura, and Jack Janssen.

This chapter examines the Will of Naunakhte from the perspective of one of Naunakhte's daughters, Menatnakhte. The Will of Naunakhte is the most famous case of a Deir al-Medina woman dividing her inheritance. It consists of four papyri, two of which were acquired by Alan Gardiner sometime after 1928 and are now kept at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford. The two other papyri were found in situ during the excavations in Deir al-Medina in 1928. In her last will, Naunakhte states that some of her children will not inherit from her, because they had not looked after her when she was old. The inheritance divided by Naunakhte included the property of her first husband, Qenhirkhopshef and the property acquired by her and her second husband, Khaemnun. This chapter considers the possibility that Naunakhte's will had created some dissent in the family.

This chapter examines an ostracon, O. Cairo CG 25705 + O. IFAO 1322 + O. Varille 38 (or O. Cairo CG 25705+), showing what appears to be a women's drinking party in Deir al-Medina. At first glance, O. Cairo CG 25705+, dated to the reign of Ramesses III or IV, seems to deal with a women's drinking party in honor of the goddess Hathor. The text also mentions Telmontu, who was related to Naunakhte through marriage: her son Neferhotep was married to his daughter. However, this might not be the goddess Hathor after all, but the birthday girl herself (or perhaps a girl who had just had her first menstruation or child). The personal name Hathor is actually not all that uncommon in Deir al-Medina. In theory this drinking party could even refer to a memorial service for a deceased Hathor. This chapter considers the possibility that Naunakhte's daughters and sons, and even her husband Khaemnun, attended similar events.

This chapter discusses the behavior of women in Deir al-Medina, focusing on those who caused trouble. It begins by wondering how the Deir al-Medina men viewed their own behavior as compared to female behavior. It then cites the Maxims of Ptahhotep, which offer some sound advice about the treatment of women. From a male point of view, Ptahhotep's teaching suggests that a woman could apparently cause much trouble, and women knew how to use this to their advantage. The chapter also considers the Wisdom of Any, which contains some maxims that could have been written with Naunakhte in mind, and instances in which wives committed adultery. Finally, it examines the Turin Indictment Papyrus, which describes the charges brought against the priest Penanuqet aka Sed of the temple of Khnum.

This chapter focuses on the Five Walls of Pharaoh in Deir al-Medina. It first considers the possibility that movement in the necropolis area was at least partially restricted and that the workmen usually had free access to the Valley of the Kings and the Valley of the Queens. It then discusses the presence of checkpoints in the necropolis area to monitor the incoming and outgoing traffic, probably also in the Valley of the Kings and the Valley of the Queens. These checkpoints in the necropolis area have always been associated with the Five Walls of Pharaoh. In year 29 of Ramesses III, the workmen passed these checkpoints more than once in search of their rations. The chapter also examines a number of theories regarding the location of the Five Walls, including those suggested by Egyptologists Raphael Ventura, Paul John Frandsen, Andreas Dorn, and Günter Burkard.