Got me curious again about matrilineality/matrilocality/matriarchy or traces of any of these in ancient Egypt. I know this has been touched upon before, but it would be nice to maybe go into further detail, and also share any new info.
Posts: 24 | From: Jamaica | Registered: Nov 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ My apologies Asha for the late reply. I’ve been meaning to respond to your thread for a while but have been really busy.
Kinship studies is a sub-field of cultural anthropology that tends to be overlooked or ignored completely by many experts despite its significance in understanding the social workings of a culture and this couldn’t be more true for Egyptology.
Part 13:40 of the video describes matrilocal marriage residence and this custom of the groom “bringing the bundle” seems to describe the dower which was the groom’s financial or proprietary contribution to the bride and her house. In part 50:30 of the video, they seem to be implying that the daughter Merit was heiress to her mother Merit. The topic of matrilocality was discussed before. I used to believe the Egyptians were patrilineal some years back due to the succession of male held offices and occupations going from father to son, but as I did research on the topic I realized there were just too many discrepancies to make the generalization that Egyptians were simply patrilineal or strictly followed patrilineal kinship.
The first discrepancy is the way Egyptian kinship terms are defined or interpreted by Egyptologists. The problem is that the only kin-terms used by Egyptians are words for nuclear family relations which were also used for extended relations. The scholar Troy D. Allen makes this clear in his paper ‘Problems in Egyptology: Ancient Egyptian Kinship’. Interestingly, it is typically in matrilineal cultures where few kinship terms are used and thus they tend to be more vague in context. Then you have the fact that the parent that is portrayed the most consistently in tombs, stelae, murals, and other funerary monuments was the mother, as well as the fact that on most king’s lists the maternal genealogy was more extensive and in some king’s lists the father is not listed at all. And while most kings were succeeded by their sons, there are many examples of kings being succeeded by men who were not their sons but some other male relative or even a non-relative who married a princess. In fact according to many non-Egyptian sources a man has a legitimate claim to kingship of Egypt simply by marrying a royal woman which was verified by royal letters.
Another curiosity was the fact that most of the surviving deeds and titles to lands and estates were in the names of women and were willed to daughters. I remember reading this in a history text book some years ago as well as a paper by Ray Erwin Baber entitled ‘Marriage and Family in Ancient Egypt’. Then there is also the fact that virginity before marriage was never valued the way it is in patrilineal cultures. In fact there appeared to be no sexual double standard and that the only restriction on sexuality was placed after marriage where both men and women were keep fidelity. No expectation of virginity prior to marriage is definitely associated with matriliny.
Then there is the circumstantial evidence that matriliny is either currently being practiced or was historically practiced in the past by neighboring peoples of the Egyptians. The Nubians to the south preserve matriliny, Berber groups to the west of Egypt although patrilineal today were documented to be matrilineal in the past and some Berber groups like the Tuareg of the Sahara still are, and to the east among the Beja are certain matrilineal vestiges even though they officially claim patriliny. These vestiges of matriliny include the importance of avuncular (maternal uncle) relations with children, and greater sexual freedom of women.
Let’s also not forget genetic evidence verifying some of the above such as the DNA findings of the two brothers who are in fact half-brothers sharing the same mother but not father though their father was said to be a governor. This is similar to princes in the royal household said to be sons of the king though not his biological sons though they could be sons of his wife or sister.
Last but not least are the vestiges of matriliny that still exist today in rural communities of Baladi Egyptians. This is documented in detail in such works as Growing Up in an Egyptian Village by Hamed Ammar and The Ancient Egyptian Culture Revealed by Moustafa Gadalla. Both works document customs like matrifocal extended families, matrilocal residence, and avuncular parental rights. These practices vary depending on location with some areas of Egypt being primarily and overtly patrilineal though acknowledging maternal descent while others are primarily but covertly matrilineal but defer to patriliny in public settings as matriliny is considered un-Islamic. While I don’t agree with all the conceptual theories Gadalla writes such as his notion of women representing the sun and carrying “solar blood”, his documentation of kinship practices in Egypt past and present is more accurate. I also recommend the below sources when it comes to kinship studies:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Then there is the circumstantial evidence that matriliny is either currently being practiced or was historically practiced in the past by neighboring peoples of the Egyptians. The Nubians to the south preserve matriliny, Berber groups to the west of Egypt although patrilineal today were documented to be matrilineal in the past and some Berber groups like the Tuareg of the Sahara still are, and to the east among the Beja are certain matrilineal vestiges even though they officially claim patriliny. These vestiges of matriliny include the importance of avuncular (maternal uncle) relations with children, and greater sexual freedom of women.
Let’s also not forget genetic evidence verifying some of the above such as the DNA findings of the two brothers who are in fact half-brothers sharing the same mother but not father though their father was said to be a governor. This is similar to princes in the royal household said to be sons of the king though not his biological sons though they could be sons of his wife or sister.
Last but not least are the vestiges of matriliny that still exist today in rural communities of Baladi Egyptians. This is documented in detail in such works as Growing Up in an Egyptian Village by Hamed Ammar and The Ancient Egyptian Culture Revealed by Moustafa Gadalla. Both works document customs like matrifocal extended families, matrilocal residence, and avuncular parental rights. These practices vary depending on location with some areas of Egypt being primarily and overtly patrilineal though acknowledging maternal descent while others are primarily but covertly matrilineal but defer to patriliny in public settings as matriliny is considered un-Islamic. While I don’t agree with all the conceptual theories Gadalla writes such as his notion of women representing the sun and carrying “solar blood”, his documentation of kinship practices in Egypt past and present is more accurate.
Is it your feeling that matriliny is an ancestral Afrasan (as in Afroasiatic) cultural trait? I remember Christopher Ehret claiming in his Civilizations of Africa that ancestral Afrasan culture would have been patrilineal, in contrast to the matrilineal traditions of ancestral Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan peoples. Do you think this could be wrong?
posted
Oh my! Thank you so much for this, Djehuti! I wonderful assortment of info! Especially for the paper by T.D. Allen. I've been wanting access to a book of his, but alas, no go. This paper will sate my desire for now! Posts: 24 | From: Jamaica | Registered: Nov 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Your welcome, Asha. I think Allen's book is available on researchgate but it's only accessable if you're a member. I'll have to check back on that.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: Is it your feeling that matriliny is an ancestral Afrasan (as in Afroasiatic) cultural trait? I remember Christopher Ehret claiming in his Civilizations of Africa that ancestral Afrasan culture would have been patrilineal, in contrast to the matrilineal traditions of ancestral Niger-Congo and Nilo-Saharan peoples. Do you think this could be wrong?
It's really hard to say, but I think it's probable proto-Afrasian speakers were matrilineal since historically the speakers of most of its sub-families were matrilineal and it is an established fact that when kinship shifts do occur it is always from matriliny to patriliny and never the other way around. However, what you do see sometimes are vestiges of matriliny or matrilineal practices surviving even in patriarchal cultures. I think Ehret may be basing his conclusions not only on the common assumption of Egyptologists on Egyptian but also on the fact that Semitic speakers were seemingly patrilineal all throughout their history. However, not only are there examples of South Semitic tribes who were matrilineal until recent times, but studies also show vestiges of matrilineal practices from historical Semitic speaking groups in the Middle East including from the Bible itself! The three modern scholars who first wrote extensively on the topic of matrilineal Proto-Semites were Robertson Smith, Robert Briffault, and George Aaron Barton. I suggest you look up their works on the topic. While some of their views have been corrected or rectified over the decades their main premise remains. There are also plenty of other sources written on the topic by female scholars that supplemented the theory.
The Kinship Wars: An Essay on the Prehistory of Social Anthropology by William Y. Adams
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Edit: original completed post lost
Briffault's The Mothers is a gold mine. Approaching it with an anthro background helps.
Tamasheq are so matriarchal, Africa's man-friendly non-martial Amazons.
" I am president of an association for single women but you should know that Tuareg society is matriarchal. The woman is in charge of everything, man, child, and common goods. And the Tamasheq woman is very independent and she doesn't like sharing. There are no co-wives for example. Among us, Tamasheq, when a man gets married he owns a tent but if he gets divorced he loses everything. The wife keeps the tent and all the joint property from the marriage. "
Dadia, an Adrar des Ifoghas aMazight in Kidal Mali.
__ originally included info on town settled Tamasheq of nomad origins, nation vs confederacy, applicability of Dadia's statement to current non-Ifoghas Tamasheq confederates, Sanhadja and alMurabitun historic south Sahara societies.
posted
From what I have learned, most Africans are matrilineal and patrilineal. It depends on what's handed down. Matrilineality is more common with monarchy/kingship. If that's the standard I guess you could say that most are matrilineal.
Posts: 1256 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
Most cultures globally are unilineal. Of course there are two types of unilineal descent-- agnatic or strictly patrilineal and enatic or strictly matrilineal.
While the majority of societies in the world are unilineal, in certain regions of the world including those in Africa, Europe, parts of Asia and in the Americas, they are cognatic meaning they practice a combination of both.
There are different types of cognatic descent.
One is bilineal descent also called 'double descent', which is a hybrid system wherein every individual is a member of his or her mother's matrilineage and father's patrilineage.
As a result, everyone, except siblings potentially have a unique combination of two unilineal family lines, as shown in the diagram below. Note that parents only share either their children's matrilineal line or patrilineal line of descent.
The Yäko of southeastern Nigeria are an example of a society with bilineal descent. Their important portable property, including livestock and money, are inherited matrilineally. Fixed property, such as farm plots, pass down through the patrilinal line as do rights to trees and other forest products. It is not surprising that they have patrilineally inherited obligations to cooperate in cultivating their fields. Obligations to perform funerals and pay bride price for sons are inherited through the matrilineal line.
Another form of cognatic descent is parallel or paralineal descent where men trace their ancestry through paternal lines only and women trace theirs through maternal lines only. Unlike bilineal descent, each individual is a member of only one descent group depending upon the person's sex.
A rare form of cognatic descent is ambilineal descent where descent either from males or females is recognized, but individuals can select only one line to trace descent. Since each generation can choose which parent to trace descent through, a family line may be patrilineal in one generation and matrilineal in the next.
The reason for choosing one side over the other often has to do with the relative importance of each family. In other words, ambilineal descent is flexible in that it allows people to adjust to changing family situations. For instance, when a man marries a woman from a politically or economically more important family, he may agree to let his children identify with their mother's family line to enhance their prospects and standing within the society.
While ambilineal descent is the rarest form of cognatic descent, the most common form practiced today is bilateral descent where descent is traced from all biological ancestors regardless of their gender and side of the family. In addition, all male and female children are members of both their father's and mother's families.
Everyone shown in red below is a bilateral relative of ego.
Bilateral descent is the predominant form of kinship practiced in Europe and the greater Western Society by and large. Although there is patrilineal bias with family names being passed patrilineally, matriline kinship is still acknowledged. Interestingly, records show matrilineal surnames were used by European women in Iberia and Germanic lands up until the Middle Ages. In Germanic tradition the matriline was called the "distaff" or "spindle" side of the family while the patriline is the "sword" side of the family.
While there is no inherent gender bias in the bilateral descent principle, there often is a slight male bias in marriage practices and in the creation of families. This can be seen in North America today when a man's last name is used by his wife and children. With this exception, however, there usually is no other similarity with patrilineal descent.
Bilateral descent is rare among the societies of the world, though, it is common if you count people instead of societies. It is characteristic of large agricultural and industrial nations as well as hunters and gatherers in harsh, relatively nonproductive environments such as deserts and arctic wastelands. It is also found among some transhumance click this icon to hear the preceding term pronounced pastoralists living in poor environments...
How Many Relatives do you have?
The specific type of descent system employed has a major effect on the number of people who are recognized as ancestors. With unilineal descent, there is only one direct ancestor in each generation. However, with bilateral descent, there is a doubling of ancestors with each generation further back in time.
see diagram here Given the fact that bilateral descent results in many ancestors in just a few generations, it is not surprising that few people in North America know the names of all eight of their great grandparents, let alone the names of their sixteen great great grandparents...
..One further trait of bilateral descent deserves mention. Families using this system have a potential for recognizing far more collateral descendants than would those using one of the unilineal patterns. This is not due to producing more offspring but to having descent lines continued by both male and female children every generation.Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So what was the kinship system of the ancient Egyptians??
We know it wasn't unilineal because all Egyptian records show kinship and lineage reckoned through both parents.
So it had to be one of the cognatic systems, but which one?
It couldn't be ambilineal because again descent from both parents was recognized and there was no shift from one lineage to another. We also know that it wasn't paralineal because each individual recognized descent from both parents. So the only options left is either bilineal or bilateral descent.
The author makes a pretty compelling argument that the Egyptians had bilateral descent since records show that Egyptian family relations were both extensive and inclusive of members related through both mother and father. Despite this fact, they curiously had very few kinship terms with the words for father and mother (jit and mut) being used for grandparents; son and daughter (sa and sat) also being used for grandchildren and the words for brother and sister (sen and senet) not limited to siblings but also used for cousins as well as nephews and nieces and even uncles and aunts. Not surprisingly, this has caused much confusion and headache for Egyptologists.
Interestingly, the terms for kinship groups are feminine. The word abet for household or nuclear family, the word m'hut for extended family or clan, and the word w'hyt used for village-mates or townspeople. Not to mention the word for nome or province is sepat which was likely the word for tribe. All these terms along with the fact that land titles were passed from mother to daughter seem to indicate that matrilineal descent which was also segmentary was primary in contrast to say ancient Israelite society which also had bilateral descent with patrilineal descent being primary or precedent (for anyone interested in that see Family and Society in Ancient Israel).
I already cited Troy D. Allen's paper Problems in Egyptology: Ancient Kinship in my initial post, but those interested in his book The Ancient Egyptian Family: Kinship and Social Structure you can read it here.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In ancient Egypt, especially during the New Kingdom there was the royal title of iry-pat which is commonly translated as crown prince or prince who was next in line to the throne. However, there was the female equivalent title of iryt-pat which is often translated as "hereditary princess". What has puzzled some Egyptologists is that records show that many women who bore that title were not daughters of kings which led some of those Egyptologists to conclude they were "non royal". Yet those same women who bore that title had the power to grant the husbands they marry a claim to the throne and thus the next king! In fact this was the exact reason why royal women were restricted in marriage prospects as these Amarna letters show. In fact, I believe this was the major reason for the practice of incestuous marriage in Egyptian royal families-- it was a way to reconcile paternal succession with matrilineal inheritance, thus marriage of full siblings and widowed fathers to their own daughters!
Even then this may not have been enough for a king to secure the throne his biological son as there were some cases (it was some years ago so I forgot which ones specifically) where a king was succeeded by a prince who was described as "son of the king but not of his body" but that same prince was also described as being "born of the king's wife". This would indicate that such a prince was a stepson of the king, yet interestingly records indicate these princes were born at or even after the time their mothers were married to the king suggesting they were the result of extramarital relations yet not only were there no accusation of adultery but these princes were adopted as legitimate heirs of the king!
The Queen's Husband Records show that pharaohs had several "wives" of different standing within the royal bloodline. It would appear to be also the case that an heiress-queen could both be "married" to the pharaoh and also be married and have children with another man, a consort-king. The children of the pharaoh and his wives, and the children of heiress-queen and her consort-king, would all refer to the pharaoh as "father" and the heiress-queen as "mother." Evidence of this is the way that the pharaoh is always the "son" of his predecessor, even though there may be no physical link.
Lastly, in the royal archives there is a tradition in the kings' list where the mothers of the kings are always listed, even when the fathers are not. This is especially the case in Old Kingdom kings' lists. The significance of queen-mothers is shown not just textually but pictographically as well all throughout royal artwork, particularly in the form of sacred cows as Nancy Luomala shows in her work below.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic