843
6.3.4.4 The “annuity” was paid to the husband. He acknowledged
receipt and paid the wife an annual maintenance. The wife could
claim back the principal sum upon divorce. In all of these payments,
we are not informed about the fate of these gifts if either party died.6.3.4.5 The “gift to a wife” consisted of money or a token amount
of grain. Pestman has proposed that the history of this gift be divided
into three stages. In the first stage, for which there is no documen-
tary evidence, the gift was given by the groom to the father of the
bride, to mark the separation of the bride from the household of
her father to the husband’s household.^123 In the second stage of its
development, this gift was given by the bridegroom to the wife. Later,
in stage three under the Ptolemies, this gift became entirely fictional,
payable only on divorce. The party seeking the divorce was required
to pay a penalty—the husband, an additional amount above this
“gift”; the wife; a sum equaling half of the stated value of the “gift.”- C
Egyptian legal “contracts” were records of oral transactions estab-
lished in writing before witnesses.^124 We follow Pierce in drawing a
distinction between “contracts” which established a legal relationship
between two parties and the legal instrument which formalized it
and which established rights that could be enforced in law.^125 The
latter were either unilateral (sales, loans) or bilateral (leases), and
could take the form of informal agreements in “letter style” as well
as the more typical formal contract drawn up by a professional scribe.
As in other Near Eastern systems, the preserved documentation
reflects only part of the full picture of legal agreements between pri-
vate parties. We may surmise that many transactions occurred with-
out any written documentation, since oral agreements also had the
force of law.^126 Private contracts had positive force as proof of clear
title and could be used as evidence in litigation.^127(^123) Pestman, Marriage.. ., 13–20.
(^124) The Demotic term for this group of texts was simply s§, “writing,” or “text.”
The oral nature of the contract is highlighted by the use of “to say/speak” (≈d)
that begins contracts.
(^125) Pierce, Three Demotic Papyri.. ., 83.
(^126) Smith, Review.. ., 175.
(^127) Martin, “Demotic Contracts.. .”; Pestman, “Démotique comme langue juridique
westbrook_f23_819-862 8/27/03 1:34 PM Page 843