History of The Marriage License: Rome, Barbarians and The Church

 

By D.I. Muhammad 

As empires expanded and cultures merged, marriage became increasingly shaped by legal codes and religious authority. In Rome, marriage was recognized through civil law and family consent, while Germanic customs emphasized kinship alliances and dowry exchanges. Over time, the Christian Church began asserting influence, gradually transforming marriage from a family contract into a sacramental institution. These overlapping traditions laid the foundation for the formal marriage regulations that would later emerge in medieval Europe.

As we move over into Rome, we find that Christianity has slowly entered I to the lives of the people.


The family being considered an intergal, and autonomous mini-state. Rome at that time was guided by Augustus from 27B.C.- A.D. 14. The Barbarians, Germanic people, were also peacefully immigrating onto the land. 

"Coincident with the Great Migrations was the rise of the Christian Church from powerless, persecuted splinter sect to state religion of the Roman Empire. It enjoyed extraordinary success with the barbarians. Where the Roman proletariat came over gradually and the Roman elite tardily and reluctantly, the Germanic invaders of all national persuasions embraced Christianity with innocent enthusiasm,  even though some of its doctrine promised serious conflict with barbarian custom, as it did with Roman law." 

(Marriage and Family, pg. 40, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

The Roman family consisted of a larger group dynamic known as a familia. 

" Like the Greeks, the Roman's gave a name to the parent-child unit but to the larger group contained in the household (Latin familia, Greek oikos).  A poor household might comprise parents, children, and other relatives such as a brother's widow or a grandmother. A middling household might also include three or four servants, whether free or slave. A wealthy household numbered scores of persons, mostly slaves; a very wealthy one, hundreds." 

(Marriage and Family, Ch. 2, pg.40,  Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Roman familia was economic, social, legal, educational, and the religious unit of society. 

" The economic role comes first, because the family's function as chief producing unit was the basis for all the other roles, which flowed naturally from this one. Property was held jointly by the family.  Individual members, blood- related or not, slave or free, owned little property and had few rights as individuals. Crime was punished within the family or settled between families,  public law only rarely intervening on occasions when the security of the state was affected or public order threatened. Religious worship was so strictly centered in home and hearth that a modern writer has described Roman religion as " hardly more than a spiritualization of family life." 

"The "high gods" of the Olympic pantheon were more literary symbols than objects of worship. The function of the temples of Rome was largely restricted to requests for special favors. In contrast, every household had its private altar, whose sacred flame was kept perpetually burning by the vigilant devotion of the women. There the entire household gathered to worship." 

(Marriage and Family, pg.41,  Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


It is important to note how Roman religious life functioned prior to the institutional dominance of the Church, as later ecclesiastical reforms dramatically altered daily practice.


Familia was not those who lived in the home, but the ancestors who were highly acknowledged in their religious observance were considered apart of what is called gens, or clan. 

"...the large kinship group described as consisting of all persons descended from a founding ancestor, real or mythical. The distinctive Roman system of nomenclature was based on it."  "Families belonging to the gens were divided into two classes, the Patricia's or true members, and the clients, who formed an auxiliary underclass. In structure every Roman family was autocratic.  The head of the household,  whether father, grandfather, uncle,  or slave owner in relation to its other members, under the title of paterfamilias occupied the position of petty absolute monarch."

 (Marriage and Family, Ch. 2, pgs. 42-43, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Marriage in Medieval Rome


Just as in Sumeria and Ancient Egypt,  marriage was performed without a need for a clergy member, and was not viewed as a necessary permission by the state. The dowry existed,  but in a sense not for the bride, but for the groom, to help assist with the marriage.

"...the distinctive feature of Roman marriage was its private, familial character. In the time of Augustus nearly all Roman's married without benefit of clergy, and at no time was an official of the state involved. Nevertheless,  Roman marriage had a strongly legal significance.  The principal element in early Roman marriage, the bride purchase ( coemptio), by historic times had dismissed to a token payment. Simultaneously  there appeared the dowry (dos), a payment in the opposite sense, a contribution from the bride's family,  seeming to imply a shift in the marriage market from demand for bride's to demand for husbands. The dowry differs from the bride purchase in another way. Where the purchase price went to the bride's family or Kinsmen, the dowry went to the bridegroom to help support the marriage. " 

(Marriage and Family, pg. 46, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Roman marriages took a step farther as regards to women. It was now the consent not just the consummation that would make a marriage legal between both parties. Wealthy Roman's needed a dowry for the bride. 

" Despite the subordinate position of the bride, Roman marriage custom was in advance of many of its contemporaries in requiring the consent of both principals as a condition of valid marriage,  a rule expressed in the legal formula Nuptias Consensus non concubines facit (consent, not intercourse, makes marriage). And in the third century B.C., a new form of marriage was introduced that wrought a decisive change in favor of women. Known as marriage sine Manu (without power transferred), the new form permitted the bride to retain  membership in her father's Familia despite moving into the home of her husband. By so doing she kept her inheritance rights as a daughter, assuring a considerable degree of independence from her husband. The husband in the marriage sine manu received only the bride's dowry,  and even that conditionally.  Under the Empire marriage  sine manu became overwhelmingly the more popular form." 

(Marriage and Family, pgs. 47-48,Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

"In the marriage of wealthy Roman's, sustaining the "burden of matrimony " was perceived as requiring the assignment of an appropriate amount of income-producing property to the young couple. Under the Republic and early Empire, the bride's dowry remained the most important instrument for this intergenerational transfer of wealth, but under the mature Empire the pendulum swung.  The custom of a substantial marriage gift ( donatio) from the groom's family to the bride was introduced and by the third century A.D. came to exceed the dowry. By mid-fifth century the donatio, pledged and delivered before the marriage ceremony could take place, had grown so large as to constitute an obstacle to marriage for many young men, who as a result tended to delay marriage plans,  whereas young women ( and their families) sought to arrange as early a match as possible." 

(Marriage and Family, pg. 48, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Interclass marriages


Interclass marriages were frowned upon, but persisted between the two classes who sought to be married.  Second cousin marriages were forbidden as well. Uncle, niece were forbidden until a senate member sought to marry his niece.  The law was then relaxed. Slave marriages were not acknowledged. 

" Most forms of intercession marriage were forbidden or hindered by legal obstacle or social disapprobation. Even when sanctioned,  such a matrimonial non Justus was long handicapped by assignment to the children of the status of the lower-ranking parent. Nevertheless,  intercession marriage persisted, as indicated by repeated legislation.  Slave marriage was not recognized  by law, which  did not prevent slaves from marrying and treating their marriages as serious. Even stronger than the bar to intercession marriage was the proscription against incest or marrying "in". Early Rome forbade marriage between second cousins, but over time the rule was relaxed, and even first cousins were allowed to marry. When the Emperor Claudis (reigned A.D. 41-54) chose for his fourth wife his niece Agrippina, the public was shocked, but the Senate  obligingly  revised the legal definition of incest, and ( according to Suetonius) at least two other uncle-niece marriages were recorded."

"Bethrothal and wedding,  private in the public in the sense of not involving officialdom, were public in the sense of overt. It was important for the community  at large to be informed. Besides the exchange of pledges (dos and donatio) the betrothal ceremony involved the exchange of promises between  groom-to-be and father of the bride-to-be: " Do you promise to give your daughter to me to be my wedded wife?"  " The gods bring luck! I betrothal her."  

The couple kissed and the young man placed an iron ring on the third finger of his fiancee's left hand. A Roman conviction that a vein ran from this finger straight to the heart was passed on by Macrobius (c. A.D.400) to the Middle Ages, whose bridal couples transmitted the tradition of ring and ring finger  to modern times. The wedding ceremony a few days later was also marked by long-lasting symbols: white bridal gown and veil, a best man ( auspex) who pronounced a legal formula, a shower from the wedding guests not of rice but of walnuts, a wedding feast, and carriage of the bride over the threshold of the bridal chamber. Once it had achieved its sine manu state,  Roman marriage changed little over a period of centuries.  Not so its dissolution, which underwent extensive modification under Augustus, not all in accordance with the government's intentions." 

(Marriage and Family, pgs. 50-51,  Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Roman Divorce


Not unlike marriage during Ancient Sumeria and Ancient Egypt,  marriage dissolution was not hard to break from. Divorce was legal if one committed adultery, drunk to much, was preparing  poison concoctions and , 

"counterfeit house keys. The upper elites divorced at will, the women having this privilege  as well because they still belonged to their father, not solely to the husband.  Polygamy  and concubinage only among the elites was legal."  

" Termination  of a Roman marriage had always been possible, and even quite easy for a Roman husband. This legal expression of the inferior status of women was a logical interference from the old marriage cum manu. The cum manu husband who wished to rid himself of his wife summoned a council of his family, to which the wife now belonged and cited his reasons,  among which the custom-honored were adultery, poison concoction, excessive drinking, and counterfeiting household keys. Yet though the husband's right to repudiate his wife was inherent in his legal power over her, the family's approval was evidently more than a formality, and the act of repudiation in the absence of convincing reasons  socially depreciated."  

"...increasing wealth brought to Rome by wars of conquest, did upper-class husband's gradually succeed in appropriating the right to divorce at will.  The prerogative may be seen as a substitute for the institutions of polygamy and concubinage, both practiced by the men of contemporary elites. In Rome concubinage was legal, but two principles of the law deprived it of much of its potential value in Roman eyes: a man could not keep both a wife and a concubine, and children of the latter were ineligible to inherit. Thus concubinage did not do what easy divorce could do. But Roman men did not monopolize the new freedom. At the very time they began practicing divorce at will,  Roman women obtained virtually equivalent license  via marriage sine manu. Since the sine manu wife still belonged to her father's family,  her male guardians could repossess her (abducted uxorem) or even without their intervention, she could exercise her own legal right ( Sul juris) and recover her own liberty. By the close of the Republic a wife could even secure a divorce under marriage cum manu if her husband deserted her, if he was convicted of certain crimes, or if he was made prisoner of war. The paramount consideration was the wife's  property. The husband repudiation his wife pronounced the formula " Tuas res Hbi agito"

 ("Take back what is yours"). The repudiation wife's formula ran "Tuas res tibi hibeto"(Keep what us yours"). ( Marriage and Family, pgs. 51-52, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

"Since it was desirable to facilitate remarriage of divorced couples,  a need was felt for a greater formalization if divorce.  Henceforth seven witnesses were required to attest to the dissolution of a marriage.  The procedure among the upper classes was for the divorcing partner to send a freedman bearing the message to the other spouse."  "Wives,  however were equally capable of breaking off the union " 

(Marriage and Family, pg. 55,  Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Reproductive Health


Abortion was illegal.  Contraception was also practiced, but not with great outcomes. A woman could still end up pregnant.  

" In early times the cult of ancestor worship conferred a mystic value on child birth, which did not however prevent the practice of abortion, socially frowned on and vainly prohibited by the  imperial government in the second century A.D. Previously it had been illegal only if performed without the permission of the paterfamilias.  Contraception was likewise  widely practiced,  though with only mediocre success. Preparations to insert in the vagina to block or kill seven had a long history antedating Rome, as did the rhythm method. Hippocrates, whose oath  contains an explicit condemnation of abortion but not of contraception, erroneously specified that the most fertile period was that immediately following menstruation. " 

(Marriage and Family, pgs. 57-58, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

"In A.D. 318 Constantine,  acting  under the humanitarian influence of the Christian Church,  and also out of a concern for population decline,  made infanticide a capital crime. Infanticide and the sale of children notwithstanding." 

(Marriage and Family, pg. 59,  Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Adultery at a time was viewed solely a, 

"crime only for women. Under the Republic a husband had the right to kill an adultress wife caught in the act, together with her lover, if he was a freedman or slave Augustus's legislation substituted a more humane and more worldly penalty in the shape of a fine based on the size of the woman's dowry. The law also touched on a husband's conduct. A little later the the wronged wife was given the valuable right of recovering her dowry, but not until Constantine three centuries later did Roman adultery become an equal crime for either sex.

Augustus in fact was mainly concerned with husbandly complacency and the thrust of his law was to compel  divorce proceedings.  In a sensational  invasion of traditional privacy, a corps of paid farmers was authorized to provide testimony against erring wives of forgiving husband's. Neither custom, lae, nor Informers prevented wives from continuing to stray I to other arms,  as is indicated by reenactments of legislation by later emperors,  and by a wealth of satiric literature." 

(Marriage and Family, pgs. 60-61,  Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Same sex relationships, as I have shown, have been around since Ancient Sumeria. The practice of it in Rome was among the male elite.  There is no mention of same sex relations among women as it was mentioned in Ancient Egypt.

"The practice of homosexuality  ,especially male, was evidently widespread, at least among the Roman upper classes. Slave boys like slave girls were made to serve their masters' pleasure (and on occasion also that of their mistresses, who by law of Constantine  were threatened with the death penalty for such fornication)." 

(Marriage and Family, pg. 62,  Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Property


Parafamilias were a big part of Roman households. Property was in the control of the paterfamilia only until things were changed, and removed this and gave the individual the control over their property. 

"Throughout the early Republic the parafamilias exercised his unchallenged authority, but as time passed the steady growing power of the Roman state began to impinge on it. A significant  change in family  relationships came about through the wars that formed so conspicuous a feature if the national history. A soldier's booty had always been treated as a legal property  of his paterfamilias  but as conquest extended the booty grew u til the government intervened. Henceforth the veteran solider retained his plunder, which he might use to equip his own estate. For the first time, individual property rights were recognized as opposed to family or clan property rights. The wars also brought a degree of defacto liberation to Roman women by freeing them from the surveillance of absent male relatives and awarding them masculine responsibilities such as running the farm or estate. By the time Augustus, Greek observers were struck by the freedom of upper-class Roman women; where the ladies of Athens remain secluded at home while their husband's socialized, those of Rome  accompanied the men to dinner parties, creating a small but noteworthy revolution,  the world's first elegant mixed society." 

(Marriage and Family, pgs. 44-45, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Barbarian migrants lived among the Roman's. The society that the Germans built among themselves was one of, " the family...the basic unit, economic,  social,  legal, and religious.  Families were aggregated into kin groups for ehich the German term was SIppe, and whose structure, character,  and exact functions have been the subject of extensive controversy and conjecture among modern historians. 

" Before the Migrations, " Tacitus, who had contact with them as an official in the provinces a century and a half later, reported private (individual family) ownership of cropland, along with common ( evidently Sippe) ownership of pasture. By the time of the Migrations,  the German family typically raised wheat or barley, and sometimes flax, peas and beans, and herded a few sheep or cattle. In their new homes I side the Roman Empire they adapted quickly to the more advanced Roman techniques.  The Lombard law code, written down in the sixth century but largely reflecting earlier conditions, mentions vines, fences, mills, animal pastures,  fruit and olive trees, domesticated fowl, beekeeping, pigs, and swine herds. In addition to forming,  Germans engaged in both manufacture and trade. Ironwork, including fabrication of weapons was a male vocation, pottery making, both by wheel and by hand, largely female. Among products long imported into the Roman Empire from the Germanic lands outside it were slaves, furs,  skins, and amber."

 (Marriage and Family, pgs. 67-69, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Barbarian (German) Property

"The barbarian equivalent of the Roman father's patria potestas, sometimes called the mundium, awarded very similar authority  with only one important subtraction: barbarian sons attaining majority ( the age varying among different peoples) acquired legal independence.  Family solidarity was assumed as the basis of law and order, with crime treated as tort and the family and clan given the responsibility for translating individual grievance into resolution by collective action. The injured individual solicited his family's support and the opposing party's  family undertook to defend him or to make suitable amends. To facilitate the process, the Germans had developed an ingenious legal instrument,  the wergeld, or "man-worth," a value attached to every individual  on the basis of sex, age, and status. Pay-off compensation  for a crime against the person was assessed as a fraction or multiple of the victim's wergeld. Thus for a crime of rape the Burgunduan law code exacted nine times the wergeld of the victim. Taciturn reported compensation in kind- cattle, sheep, or chattels- but as the barbarians settled down in the money economy of the Roman empire, gold solidi and silver denari were substituted." 

(Marriage and Family, pgs. 69-70, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)


Marriage


Barbarian marriages were male dominated and Family oriented. Marriages were arranged by male relatives of the bride. The marriage consisted of a promise, of marriage,  a feast, the brideprice. According to Tacitus, 

"The bride...completed the marry a gift of arms to the groom, but it us clear that the main direction of endowment was from the groom. The significant difference between barbarian and Roman practice was the source of the endowment: the barbarian paid for his wife, the Roman contributed for his daughter."

 (Marriage and Family, pg.71, Ch. 2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

Divorce

Divorce among the women was double sided, even though the women were seen with some sense of value.

“The double standard was even more manifest in German than in Roman attitudes…Despite their subordinate status, barbarian women were valued, and not only for sex and procreation. They possessed particular skills, passed from mother to daughter: besides making pottery, they spun and wove with a skill attested by garments recovered by archaeologists from peat bogs…Legal texts reveal another value: descent was commonly reckoned in the female line for the good reason that female descent could be more reliably determined than made.” 

(Family and Marriage, pgs.72-73, Ch.2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

The Effects of Christianity

The Church would soon find its position of authority among the people. Since the beginning of its presence it captured the attention of the barbarians. It was the Romans who were not so easily swayed.

“In the fourth century, as the Great Migrations swelled toward their climax and the vast military-administrative apparatus of the Roman Empire strained and cracked under the pressure, a new force entered into the turbulent European scene. After struggling through three centuries of persecution and indifference, the Christian religion matured into a position of status and authority, routing the gods from the Pantheon and the Lares from the hearths. Among the Romans it won its converts more rapidly in the cities than in the countryside, where pockets of paganism and remnants of pagan practices survived for centuries, or even permanently, without preventing the triumph of the cult throughout Europe. It gained first official toleration (A.D. 313) and then (A.D. 380), while simultaneously and even more dramatically it captured virtually the entire mass of barbarian invaders as they crossed the frontiers.” 

(Family and Marriage, pg.78, Ch.2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

The Christian community was now forming, aligning itself with the Empire that was crumbling. The Church now had to find a way to silence the teachings of Gnosticism, Manicheism, and Arianism. Doctrine was now designed, 

“to answer esoteric theological questions and to provide rules of conduct for everyday Christian life.” 

(Family and Marriage, pg.79, Ch.2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

Augustine and other Fathers of the Church argued what now would constitute marriage. Everyone had their own opinions. The New and Old Testament of the Bible was considered by some. St. Paul’s view was beyond mutual consent even though regardless of which Testament of the Bible was viewed, the Bible itself did not go against marriage.

“Augustine concluded that marriage for Christians must be regarded as a sacrament (sacramentum), a permanent union. It contained three discernable goods: fides, faith; proles, offspring; and sacramentum, a scared bonding not merely of two persons, but of whole lines of descent, a priniciple, by no means foreign to pagan thought, either Roman or German. As with Romans and Germans, Christian doctrine held that the two relationships of blood and marriage must be kept distinct through the incest taboo and the rules of exogamy. In this direction the Church reinforced the law of Moses (Leviticus 18:6-21, 20: 11-12). With marriage accorded the status of sacrament, a nuptial blessing by the priest seemed no more than logical. Yet the priest’s participation long remained more incidental than central, and not essential for a valid union.” 

(Family and Marriage, pg. 63-64, Ch.2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

Divorce became forbidden and polygamy and concubinage was frowned upon.

“Constintine and succeding Christian empires had acted to restrict the old freedom of divorce, but they had made no attempts to abolish it.” “Augustine rejected all the grounds for divorce allowed by existing secular law, such as prolonged absence or captivity. He was “the workman who put the final hand to the theory of indissolubilty”, according to canon-law authority Adhemar Esmein.” 

(Family and Marriage, pg.85, Ch.2, Roots: Roman, German, Christian)

Conclusion

Marriage in Romanian and Germanian culture was the beginning of the Church coming in and laying new rules on what marriage was in now defined to be. Unlike what the culture was in Sumeria and Egypt were marriage was ruled by consent and consummation the Church now decreed that marriage had to be overseen by a priest to be considered as binding. That certain rituals needed to be performed besides having the permission of the family, having a feast and the consummating the relationship. It was now becoming ruled by the Church and if you chose to become Christian you had to follow the laws of what marriage now looked liked. Divorce was fought over but came to the point of, if your in, your in, there is no easy way out.

We will now travel overseas to explore how the two tribes, the Choctaw and Cherokee dealt with marriage, and how their values would soon be replaced with the Church intervening.

The Church took hold in Rome with the Romans and Germans. It became the ultimate authority in religion among the people. The missionaries were preparing to set sail across the ocean to a new land. The Chahta and Cherokee had no idea what was to come.

Series 4: Marriage of Choctaw and Cherokee Nations (Coming Soon)

History of the Marriage License: Ancient Sumeria and Ancient Eygpt

 

By D.I.Muhammad

Series 2

Long before modern governments issued marriage licenses, ancient civilizations were already regulating unions for social order, inheritance, and property. In Sumeria and later in Egypt, marriage was less about romance and more about contracts between families, economic stability, and lineage. Clay tablets, written agreements, and community recognition served as the earliest forms of marital documentation. These early systems reveal how deeply marriage has always been tied to law, property, and society itself.

Marriage in Ancient Egypt and Sumeria


Marriage has been around since the beginning of time. In Ancient Egypt and Sumeria, marriage was enacted between a couple often through arranged unions designed to strengthen alliances between families and tribes. These unions were rooted in intent, dowries, ritual, and sexual union.


Hammurabi Law

The Hammurabi Law was created by the Babylonian King, Amorite of the first dynasty.
The Hammurabi Law was created as a protection for the man, woman, and children.  It was more so created to protect the man during marriage more than the woman.  The laws therein for the woman was to guard her from more harsher punishment. These laws were meant to not just guard Sumeria, but other countries as well.




Marriage in Sumeria


Marriage in Sumeria was about romance, but it was more about business. It was about keeping and maintaining order.  It is stated that a sacred Prostitution took place in order to marry women off to the highest bidder, that some modern scholars still disagree with that notion.

"In order for women and men to marry it started with the families from both sides of the family to come together and work out  a bride price ( dowry) for the bride and then to have a feast, but what closed the deal that let everyone know that the two were a established couple was the consummation and living together between the two." 

(Love, Sex and Marriage in Ancient Mesopotamia,  http://brewminate.com)

 
The marriage was a legal contract between the bride to the groom, as in the auction where the father was paid the bride price or between two families.

During this time, the State was not involved or concerned about who two people married. Marriage was seen as a business deal between two families. To build alliances.

"Marriages were contracted to formalize business agreements concerning land sales, water rights, mutual protection, or for any agreement the parties understood as mutually beneficial. As business agreements, they were begun with a legal contract signed by the heads of the households in the presence of witnesses, the bride and groom usually had nothing to do with the proceedings, and, afterwards, the ceremony could move forward. From the first moment a union between families was agreed to, the marriage process had five steps that had to be observed in accordance with tradition to be considered valid:

• Engagement/marriage contract

• Payment of the bride-price to father-of-the-bride and of the dowry to father-of-the-groom

• Ceremony and wedding feast

• Bride moves to her father-in-law’s home

• Sexual intercourse the night of the wedding with the expectation the bride would become pregnant."

 (The Family in Ancient Mesopotamia, Joshua Mark, http://worldhistory.org)"

The bride was considered to be a virgin and was not tied legally to another that it would void the marriage. Once the bride price was paid the bride nor the groom was able to intervene.

"Engagements were serious business in Babylonia, especially for those who might have a change of heart. According to Hammurabi’s Code, a suitor who changed his mind would forfeit his entire deposit (betrothal gift) and bride-price. If the prospective father-in-law changed his mind, he had to pay the disappointed suitor double the bride-price. Furthermore, if a rival suitor persuaded the father-in-law to change his mind, not only did the father-in-law have to pay double, but the rival wasn’t allowed to marry the daughter. These legal penalties acted as a potent deterrent against changes of heart and a powerful incentive for both responsible decision making and orderly social behavior."

 (http://worldhistory.org)

"128. If a man take a woman to wife, but have no intercourse with her, this woman is no wife to him." 

(Hammurabi Code of Law, https://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp) 


Sex in Ancient Sumeria was very liberal.  Couples could be intimate in any fashion that they deemed they wanted to with their mate.   Same-sex relationships were also not frown upon. Sex in Ancient Sumeria was not viewed as taboo or disgusting.


Homosexual love could be enjoyed" without fear of social stigma", and texts mention men "preferring to take the female role" in sex.

 Further, he writes, "Various unusual positions could be adopted: 'standing'; 'on a chair'; 'across the bed or the partner'; 

'taking her from behind' or even 'sodomising her', and sodomy, defined as anal intercourse, was a common form of contraceptive. 

He further goes on

it could happen that an eccentric setting was chosen…instead of keeping to your favourite place, the bedroom. You might take it into your head to 'make love on the roof-terrace of the house'; or 'on the threshold of the door'; or 'right in the middle of a field or orchard', or 'in some deserted place'; or 'a no through road'; or even `in the middle of the street', either with just any woman on whom you had 'pounced' or with a prostitute. 

Bottéro further points out:

Making love was a natural activity, as culturally ennobled as food was elevated by cuisine. Why on earth should one feel demeaned or diminished, or guilty in the eyes of the gods, practicing it in whatever way one pleased, always provided that no third party was harmed or that one was not infringing any of the customary prohibitions which controlled daily life."

(Love, Sex and Marriage in Ancient Mesopotamia,  Joshua J. Mark, http://worldhistory.org)

This frame of thought would later transfer over into Islam. In the Quran it states:

Surah Al-Baqarah 2:187: "It is permissible for you to have sexual intercourse with your wives on the nights of fasting. They are garments for you, and you are garments for them". 


Surah Al-Baqarah 2:223: "Your wives are a place of sowing of seed for you, so come to your place of cultivation however you wish and put forth [righteousness] for yourselves". 

Where Islam draws the line  would be homosexuality.  What Muslims use to draw this conclusion is the story of Lut (Lot) which in Al-Afrah says:

"And ˹remember˺ when Lot scolded ˹the men of˺ his people, ˹saying,˺ “Do you commit a shameful deed that no man has ever done before?

You lust after men instead of women! You are certainly transgressors.

But his people’s only response was to say, “Expel them from your land! They are a people who wish to remain chaste!” 

(Chapter 7, verses 80-82)



In Ancient Sumeria homosexuality was not an issue. Couples of the same sex were married, but some of the same privileges a straight couple had they didn't.

"...there were no prohibitions against gay sex and, as Bottero notes, “Homosexual love could be enjoyed” without stigma (101). The goddess Inanna (later Ishtar) was famous for turning men into women and women into men and her clergy were bisexual or transgender in keeping with Inanna’s association with transformation. The only stigma attached to gay sex was engaging in a same-sex relationship with someone of a higher or lower class than oneself but this same applied to opposite-sex couples. Intimacy between classes posed a problem because it violated the rules of social hierarchy but there is nothing in the records condemning gay couples or gay sex except in the case of a man of a higher class “playing the part of a woman” with one of a lower class. Otherwise, as Bottero writes: 'Making love was a natural activity, as culturally ennobled as food was elevated by cuisine. Why on earth should one feel demeaned or diminished or guilty in the eyes of the gods, practicing it in whatever way one pleased, always provided that no third party was harmed or that one was not infringing any of the customary prohibitions which controlled daily life.' 

 (http://worldhistory.org)

The structure of marriage  was distinct.  Those in a same sex relationship in Sumeria were able to have there union, but it was the only union that was allowed.  The state only acknowledged heterosexual unions the luxury of marriage.  This was considered a time of sexual liberation. Even before the Church enters stage right, the system in place expressed what and who was worthy of marriage.



Women of Sumeria during this time had equal rights to men, were able to have property, file for divorce, but with stipulations. 

"Women had nearly equal rights throughout most of the history of ancient Mesopotamia but if a woman deserted her husband and took a lover, she was severely punished while the same did not apply to a man. If a woman were caught in the act of adultery, she would be bound to her lover and thrown into the river or otherwise executed. A woman could divorce a man if she found he were gay and had no interest in sleeping with her. As procreation was the goal of marriage, a man who refused to sleep with his wife was thought to have broken the marriage contract." 

(http://worldhistory.org)


Divorce in Sumeria could be viewed as unfair and cruel to the woman.  The man, if he decided to leave could, but he had to return the wife's property.  If the woman decided she wanted to leave without legal grounds she was forced from the house to live on the streets.  She would not be entitled to any type of restitution. If there was legal grounds for leaving she was able to file for a divorce.

"If a man chose to leave his wife, he had to provide for her (except in cases of adultery or abandonment) by returning her property (dowry) and, as noted, could have as many sexual partners as he could afford but if a woman even expressed the thought of leaving her husband, unless there were legal grounds, she could be forced from the family home to live on the streets, often with no choice but to make a living as a prostitute. At the same time, a woman could initiate divorce proceedings if she had legal grounds, own her own land, enter into business contracts, buy and sell slaves, and operate businesses. The first brewers in Mesopotamia were women and there are records of women owning taverns, farms, and other enterprises." 

(http://worldhistory.org)

The following on Divorce is from the Hammurabi Code of Law.

"137) If a man wish to separate from a woman who has borne him children, or from his wife who has borne him children: then he shall give that wife her dowry, and a part of the usufruct of field, garden, and property, so that she can rear her children. When she has brought up her children, a portion of all that is given to the children, equal as that of one son, shall be given to her. She may then marry the man of her heart. [Source: Translated by L. W. King]

138) If a man wishes to separate from his wife who has borne him no children, he shall give her the amount of her purchase money and the dowry which she brought from her father's house, and let her go.

139) If there was no purchase price he shall give her one mina of gold as a gift of release.

140) If he be a freed man he shall give her one-third of a mina of gold.

141) If a man's wife, who lives in his house, wishes to leave it, plunges into debt, tries to ruin her house, neglects her husband, and is judicially convicted: if her husband offer her release, she may go on her way, and he gives her nothing as a gift of release) If her husband does not wish to release her, and if he take another wife, she shall remain as servant in her husband's house. 

 

142) If a woman quarrel with her husband, and say: "You are not congenial to me," the reasons for her prejudice must be presented) If she is guiltless, and there is no fault on her part, but he leaves and neglects her, then no guilt attaches to this woman, she shall take her dowry and go back to her father's house.

143) If she is not innocent, but leaves her husband, and ruins her house, neglecting her husband, this woman shall be cast into the water." 

(https://africame.factsanddetails.com/article/entry-1012.html#chapter-2)


Marriages in Ancient Egypt


Ancient Egyptian Society was about family. There was respect for one's family and lineage.  Love was in the air. There were many love poems written during this time to potential lovers, and some successful lovers who were caught.


The author, Barbara Wattersin, tells the story of the children of King Mernebptah, who wanted to marry his son, Nenferkaptah, " to the daughter of s General and his daughter, Ahwere, to the son of a general."  In the story both the son and the daughter  did not want to marry who King Mernebptah had selected for them. They wanted to marry one another.

Ahwere, was unhappy by the decision when her father stated, 

"

It is you who distress me. If it so happens that I have only two children is it right to marry one to the other? Should I not rather marry Neneferkaptah to the daughter of a general and Ahwere to the son of another general, so that our family may increase!" 

( Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 104, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)


Ahwere did marry Neneferkaptah after
being , 

" summoned to dine with her father she quoted his own words back to him and won her cause. The King set aside his plans, allowing Ahwere and Neneferkaptah  to marry each other." 

( Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 105, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)


The author notes that scholars disagree with the interpretation of this story of sibling marriage.  According to Douglas J. Brewer, Neneferkaptah married Setne taking her to his home to live with her.

"the story of Setne, "I was taken as a wife to the house of Naneferkaptah [that night, and pharaoh] sent me a present of silver and gold . . . He [her husband] slept with me that night and found me pleasing. He slept with me again and again and we loved each other" 

(Ancient Egyptian Society and Family Life, Douglas J. Brewer and Emily  Teeter, Session1: Marriage and Family,  https://fathom.lib.uchicago.edu/2/21701778/)


Marriage between siblings was not common among ordinary Egyptians. I tell this story to show how women in Egyptian Society were able to petition for marriage.

" In Ancient Egypt a woman, not being kept on seclusion from men, had opportunities for meeting members of the opposite sex and falling in love." 

( Women of Ancient Egypt,  Barbara Watterson,  pg. 101, Chapter 4, Love and Marriage)


Sex among the unmarried was not frowned upon, but once married there was the obligation of the couple to stay committed to one another.


In Ancient Egypt marriages were arranged, which was used to regulate property. 

"Marriage was purely a social arrangement that regulated property. Neither religious nor state doctrines entered into the marriage and, unlike other documents that related to economic matters (such as the so-called "marriage contracts"), marriages themselves were not registered. Apparently once a couple started living together, they were acknowledged to be married. " 

(Ancient Egyptian Society and Family Life, https://fathom.lib.uchicago.edu/2/21701778/)

"...it seems that most marriages in

ancient Egypt were arranged.  In societies where this is the custom, the choice of spouse is usually made by parents in order to give the greatest social and financial advantages to their offspring. As for a daughter is concerned,  a rich and duccessfuk man, even if much older than the prospective bride, is a desirable son-in- law; as is a man able to offer his wife a better position in society than that of her parents. Occasionally  a son will be married to an older woman for the same reasons." 

(Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 106, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)



Marriage at a young age in Egypt

"Many Egyptians seem to have embarked on marriage at what, to us, seems to be an early age- usually fifteen for boys, twelve for girls...Ancient Egyptians, like their modern descendants,  matured early and until quite recently,  especially, among the fellahin (peasants), marriage at a young age was not unusual. " 

( Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 108, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)

"The intent of marriage in ancient Egypt was that the wife must live in the same home as the man and to consummate the relationship to be viewed as a marriage.  There were marriage contracts needed, only that a house was set up for the woman.  " grp pr, or ' set up a household ', and this perhaps is an indication of what marriage meant in ancient Egypt: the setting up of a communal household. " 

(Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 112, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)


Even though the marriage contract was not needed, the couple still needed to present themselves to have it recorded by officials. This was not the state entering into the marriage bond, it was making this  official on the record, as married.

" An important part of getting married was probably an appearance before officials,  who noted the names of the couple and recorded the details of the marriage settlement.  Up to the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, it seems usually to have been the groom and the father of the bride who made the appearance; after that time, the bride in person is party to the settlement.  The marriage settlement was solely concerned with questions of property. " 

( Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 113-114, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)



Marriage Settlement

"Marriage  settlement were usually drawn up between a woman's father and her prospective husband,  although sometimes the woman herself was the contracting partner. The higher the social status of the woman, the greater were the demands in the way of financial and legal safe guards for her.  The settlements have a standard form." 

(Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 117, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)


Marriages were entered into because of love for one another as in Ahwere and Neneferkaptah  and Inanna and Fumuza. Some, 

"men preferred to arrange a ' year of eating', a trial Marriage, in order to ascertain whether a woman could have children." 

( Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 123, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)


Contracts would be drawn up stating how much silver was given to the woman,  how long she would be in his home, stipulations on if she should leave before the nine months was up that the money that was given be paid back. If the husband should release her he would forfeit the amount paid.


By and far ancient Egyptians were monogamous, but polygamy was practiced apart from the priests. The practice was rare because a lot of men were not in a financial position to take of more than one wife, except for the King.


Concubines were permissible if a man could afford to have them and it was approved by the women of the household, especially the wife.

" Legally, if not always domestically,  the status of a married man's concubines did not match that of his wife. For this reason it seems probable that any woman in a position to bring property to a partnership,  and therefore able to demand marriage, was not likely to forego the privileges of a wife for the lesser status of concubine. Permitted concubines apart, a wife could expect her husband to be faithful to her, for infidelity in a married man was not considered socially acceptable, neither was philandering,  even among bachelor's." 

(Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 127, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)



But unlike the women in Sumeria, women in Ancient Egypt, had more rights, greater freedoms than their counterparts of Sumeria.

"Egyptian women had greater freedom of choice and more equality under social and civil law than their contemporaries in Mesopotamia or even the women of the later Greek and Roman civilizations. Her right to initiate divorce was one of the ways in which her full legal rights were manifested. Additionally, women could serve on juries, testify in trials, inherit real estate, and disinherit ungrateful children." (Ancient Egyptian Society...)

"Legal texts indicate that each spouse maintained control of the property that they brought to the marriage, while other property acquired during the union was jointly held." 

( Ancient Egyptian Society and Family Life,  Douglas J. Brewer, Session 1: Love and Family,  https://fathom.lib.uchicago.edu/2/21701778/)

"Property passed through the woman, and infidelity/adultery on part of the woman was seen as a horrific crime. Men who committed adultery with the consent of a woman, " the law required that he should receive a thousand blows with the rod, and that the woman should have her nose cut off, punishments reminiscent of those sometimes carried out in some Islamic societies today."

(Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 129, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)


Divorce


Divorce in ancient Egypt was not just thrown around. There were reasons and laws that governed a divorce legal or illegal, and had financial stipulations attached.  Divorce could have been initiated because of adultery,  the woman was not able to bear children, the husband wanted another wife or the wife did not please him. It was frowned upon to divorce because of the stipulations,  financially, that were agreed to during the marriage settlement,  or it could have been family who tried to keep the couple together.

" A wife might divorce her husband for cruelty, either physical, or on modern parlance,  mental.  Although it seems to have been accepted that a husband might beat his wife,  he was not allowed to do it to excess. If she considered that he had abused the right, a wife could take her husband before a tribunal and complain.

After that, he was usually given  a warning, but if ignored, then he could be sentenced to a hundred lashes; and in addition , would have to forfeit everything that his wife had contributed to their joint estate...If a man divorced his wife, he had to return her dowry, and give her the 'marriage portion' that had been agreed in their marriage settlement; and he had also to pay her compensation and give her a share( usually a third, but sometimes a half) of any property that they had acquired during their marriage." 

(Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 133-134, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)

"If the divorce originated with the wife, then she seems to have forfeited her right to a share of the communal property and she was the one who paid compensation." 

(Women of Ancient Egypt, Barbara Watterson, pg. 134, Chapter 4 Love, and Marriage)

"In Ancient Egypt women didn't hold positions of power in the state or in the pitiful realm, but her presence was felt. Children were given the last name of their mother known as the matrilineal line.  Property was passed from mother to daughter. " The reason for such a role seems to have been based on the assumption that one can be certain only of who one's mother mother is- maternity is a matter of fact, paternity is a matter of opinion!" 

( pg. 53, Ch. 2, Women in Society 1- Social and Legal Position, Women of Egypt)

"Women are depicted taking part with their husband's in their business activities inspecting estates, at the cattle-count, watching craftsmen at work or inspecting labourers in the fields. Some women are depicted undertaking business of their own...Peasant women looked after their children, cleaned their houses, cooked for their families and washed clothes" 

(Ch.2, pgs. 59-60, Women in Society 1- Social and Legal Position, Women of Egypt)


The women in ancient Egypt  still held the same rights as men under the law.

"An Egyptian  woman was legally capax and enjoyed full rights under the law. She was her own mistress, and whether she was married or not, could act on her own behalf without being obliged to have a guardian act for her." 

(Ch. 2, pg.61,  Women in Society 1- Social and Legal Position, Women of Egypt)

" She could bring an action to law; she could act as a witness to legal documents and as an executrix of wills, she could adopt children in her own name and she could be a partner in legal contracts - for instance she could sign her own marriage contract. A woman could buy and sell: if a woman own property she could dispose of it, whether it consisted of land or possessions, as she wished." 

(Ch. 2, pgs. 61-62, Women in Society 1- Social and Legal Position, Women of Egypt)

"A married women in ancient Egypt had the same rights to own, inherit and dispose of property as one who was unmarried: her property did not automatically pass into the hand of her husband on marriage...A married woman had the right to protect her own property, and when engaged in a lawsuit was considered to be a completely independent legal personality,  as in the papyrus quoted below which dates to about 1786 BC, in which it is a married woman who is recorded as plaintiff and not her husband:

My father has committed an irregularity.  He had in his possession certain objects belonging to me which my husband had given me. But he ( my father) made them over to his second wife, Senebtisi. May I obtain restitution thereof. " 

( Ch. 2, pg. 68, Women in Society 1- Social and Legal Position, Women of Egypt)

"Women could obtain property by purchasing it, it being given to her for work she did for someone, through inheritance from parents,  brothers, and if married from her husband. " Normal legal conditions decreed that after her husband's death a wife was entitled to one third of his property,  with the other two thirds divided between the couple's children and his brothers and sisters.. If a husband wished his wife to inherit more than the third of his property to which she would normally be entitled, it was possible for him to take steps before his death to donate property to her."

( Ch. 2, pg. 69, Women in Society 1- Social and Legal Position, Women of Egypt)

During the period of the Annunaki there was union, but union was for a stipulated period. They consented to be together, and the union was consummated. When they were ready to leave, they walked away. Lilth walked away. Ninmah walked away.  I would have liked to have come across the laws they had that signaled Council from their home world to get involved.

A time were love was free.  It was so free that it was recorded how husband and wives would make love.  Islam would come about and use this as advise that husbands and wife were free to love one another in accordance to how each mutually felt to make love. Then as we travel to Sumeria were there are laws, Hammurabi wanting his laws to travel beyond his land.  The women have some rights, but marriage for them is agreed upon and set up my father in the family.  She has a say until the bride price is paid and then she is locked into the marriage.  If she doesn't marry she reduced to Prostitution.  If she divorces from her husband without a good reason,  she is tossed on the street like she was nothing. Those who had a little property had something to fall back on.

Then as we travel to Egypt things get a little better. They enjoyed more rights then the women in neighboring Greece.
People like to showcase the Pharaoh's and the Queens,  but women in Egypt were able to hold property, sell their property,  go to court alone to retain the rights to her property. The society was Matrilineal.  Children automatically obtained the mothers last name,  and the mother had custody of the children after divorce. 

Conclusion

During the period of the Annunaki there was union, but union was for a stipulated period. They consented to be together and the union was consummated. When they were ready to leave, they walked away. Lilith walked away. Ninmah walked away. No court. No council. No consequences unless a law was broken.

Then we travel to Sumeria where laws now govern everything. Hammurabi wanted his laws to reach beyond his own land. Women had some rights, but marriage was agreed upon and set up by the father of the family. She had a say until the bride price was paid and then she was locked in. If she didn't marry she was reduced to prostitution. If she divorced without sufficient reason she was tossed into the street like she was nothing. Those who held property had something to fall back on. Everyone else had the street.

Then we travel to Egypt and things get better. People like to showcase the Pharaohs and the Queens, but the everyday Egyptian woman could hold property, sell her property, and walk into a courtroom alone to defend her rights. The society was matrilineal. Children carried the mother's name. After divorce the children stayed with her.

What we know as the pre-nuptial was started here. What I feel is the real true basis of a what we have in modern times as a marriage contract. Presenting the marriage to the state to be recognized started here, in Egypt. The state was never involved in the way we know to go register with City Hall. There's was just just to recorded who was married to who and that was it. Other than that the state didn't care. No other country of women had the same status as an Egyptian woman.

Series 3: Rome, The Babarians and the Arrival of the Church.  (Coming Soon)

Cain and Abael: A Sumerian Tale