844
7.1 Parties
In contrast to Greek law, both men and woman could form con-
tractual relationships independently under Egyptian law.^128 Children
named as parties to contracts were normally aided by an adult.7.2 Sale
Conveyance by sale was an oral agreement between two parties or
groups of parties. It was completed by “satisfying the heart” (the
verb used is ty mtr) of the vendor with the “purchase price” ( ̇≈, lit.,
“silver”). The phrase “to sell” in Demotic is rendered by “to give
in exchange for silver” (ty ≈b3 ̇≈). Despite this phraseology, money
did not always change hands in Demotic “sales.”7.2.1 Objects of sale were land of various categories^129 —although
usually small plots—houses, tombs, priestly stipends, oxen, cows, don-
keys, and slaves (Early Demotic only). Sales of animals are exceed-
ingly rare in Middle and Late Demotic, although this is probably
because this type of text did not survive within family archives.^130
Animal sales were less formal instruments whereas sales of impor-
tant items such as land were almost always drawn up as formal
notarial documents. The text was recorded by a professional notary
and was written from the point of view of the seller. The contracts
themselves were used as proof of clear title, and all such records
pertinent to the conveyance of a piece of property were handed over
to the buyer at the time of the sale. In the case of a split sale of
property, the documentation remained with the vendor. At least some
of the contractual boilerplate may have been borrowed from Near
Eastern (through the medium of Aramaic, or by Demotic’s contact
with the Near Eastern tradition in the Delta?) law.^131 There was
regional variation in the wording of the legal formula... .,” 198–200. Documents used in evidence were required to have been witnessed.
Some guidance on their use as evidence is treated in the “Zivilprozeßordnung”; see
1.2 above.
(^128) For doubts on the independence of women in Egyptian law, see Pestman,
“Appearance and Reality.. .,” 83–85.
(^129) Manning, Conveyance.. .; Menu, “Questions rélatives...”
(^130) Menu has argued that sales of animals were restricted by the Ptolemies. It is
true that in both Demotic and Greek texts from the Ptolemaic period, there is a
paucity of animal sales, a fact which has been noted but barely commented on.
For Early Demotic animal sales, see Cruz-Uribe, Saite and Persian.. .; Vleeming,
Gooseherds of Hou, texts 6, 8, and 9.
(^131) Muffs, Studies.. .; Porten, “Aramaic-Demotic Equivalents...”
westbrook_f23_819-862 8/27/03 1:34 PM Page 844