Private Lives and Public Censure-Adultery in Ancient Egypt and Biblical Israel-Pnina Galpaz-Feller
Nevertheless, neither David nor Bathsheba was sentenced to death for their
actions-the punishment was placed upon the house of David rather than
upon David himself. The ascendancy of their son Solomon to the throne, and
the favor with which the biblical authors appear to look upon Solomon,
suggests that an amelioration of even that penalty was achieved. Perhaps
remorse led to a lesser sentence although it has recently been suggested
that the death penalty stipulated in Leviticus was in fact a polemic against
David since, in the biblical author's view, he should have been subjected to a
greater rebuke for his sin. 1 Whatever the reason for the lack of retribution,
divine or otherwise, the point is made that adultery in biblical Israel was very
much a public rather than private matter regardless of whether or not anyone
was ever executed for committing the crime.
Deir el-Medina is the modern Egyptian name for the remains of an ancient village on the west bank of the Nile
opposite Luxor (ancient Thebes). Workmen who built and decorated the royal’s tombs of the New Kingdom in
the nearby valleys of the Kings and Queens lived in this village from 1525 to around 1080 BCE. Excavations
at Deir el-Medina yielded a huge quantity of written texts on ostraca or papyri that give a fascinating look into
the daily of an ancient Egyptian community.
The story of David and Bathsheba has come to represent the classic depiction of
adulterous love, supplying artists with a motif that has been popular since the
middle Ages. While modem readers might view David's murder of Bathsheba's
husband as the primary crime in this narrative, the prophet Nathan condemns him
equally for killing Uriah and illegally "taking" his wife (2 Sam 12: 1-11). His initial
reproach of David, phrased as a parable, speaks equally of both love and
possession as elements in the marital relationship, suggesting that adultery was
both a crime of property as well a violation of moral duty, and the nature of biblical
law was such that the crimes of murder and adultery were, in fact, equivalent. It
might even be argued that adultery was the more heinous of the two as the
punishment for adultery was death (Lev 20: 10), while that for murder might be
mitigated by certain circumstances (Exodus 21: 12-13).
In biblical Israel, the traditional view of adultery was that it was a violation of
the covenant between the people and their god (Hos 2; 4:10; Jer 5:7-9; 7:916; 29:23). The prohibition against adultery, of course, appears in the Ten
Commandments (Exod 20: 14; Deut 5: 18), but here it serves as part of a
credo or moral guideline, rather than a law to be enforced judicially.2
Elsewhere, the collections of laws in the Bible concerning marital relations
clearly comprise a system of practices and regulations to be enforced by
means of governmental institutions, which underwent changes with time, but
always existed.
The fact that there is no official code of law from ancient Egypt (with the
possible exception of a fragmentary law code written in demotic script from
the third century BCE3 has generally not facilitated direct comparisons of this
culture with biblical Israel. The availability of several Mesopotamian law codes
offers a greater possibility for direct associations.4
Though these legal codes prohibiting adultery may provide for similar penalties as
biblical law, it is also apparent that the way in which adultery was conceived of in
those cultures was quite different. Partly for this reason, many have noted the
difficulty in comparing the laws of the ancient Near East to biblical law.5 For
example, in Babylonian law, the death penalty was prescribed for adultery, but it
was, in essence, the violation of the marriage contract that determined its
consequences. The accused wife and paramour were either spared or executed.6
In the Babylonian law codes, the decision as to how to punish the adulterous
couple was often left to the discretion of the betrayed husband or the "fiancé". It
was obvious that, in Babylon, adultery was regarded as both a private matter and
an act that angered the gods, but the balance between the two-and the effects
that they had upon the consequences of adultery-seems to have been weighted
more toward the private considerations. In general, the purpose of the
Mesopotamian law seems to have been to protect the betrayed husband and to
compensate him monetarily. Thus, if the husband forgave the transgression, it
was erased.7
Because the severity of punishment in Egypt for adultery was generally far less
than that suggested by the legal codes of Babylon or biblical Israel, the
assumption has always been that adulterous behavior was not publicly censured.
Egyptian documents, however, clearly indicated that the act was regarded as a
moral failing and a source of community discord. In that way, the perceptions of
adultery known from ancient Egyptian literature parallel the attitudes represented
in biblical passages dealing with adultery more than has been heretofore
suggested. It seems clear that socio-cultural perceptions of adultery are not to be
extracted from legal documents alone.
Many scholars have noted the difficulty in comparing the laws of the ancient Near
East to biblical law, for various reasons.8 For example, it doesn't necessarily
make sense to examine the legal sanctions in the Bible, the product of centuries
of redaction, in comparison to Near Eastern law codes that are contemporary with
specific and identifiable periods. The treatment of specific cases relating to the
consequences of adultery in ancient Egypt, however, over a period of several
centuries, may shed light on some of the similarities noted to the biblical
traditions.
Adultery in Ancient Egyptian Sources
The documentation from ancient Egypt relating to adultery is not in the form of
judicial precedent. Rather, it consists of anecdotal evidence on cases of adultery
and the ways in which these were responded to in practical terms. Nevertheless,
it is clear that in ancient Egypt, as in the Bible, sexual relations between an
engaged or married woman and a man who was not her husband were indeed
prohibited. Ancient Egyptian documents referring to the practical consequences of
adultery include civil contracts, wills, private letters and folk tales extracted from
various sources, such as didactic literature, the Book of the Dead, and
iconography. This documentation mostly dates to the period of the New Kingdom
or later.
The didactic instructions of ancient Egypt clarify the correlation between the act of
adultery and its consequences, as well as the role of the husband in punishing the
adulterers. Like Proverbs, they are wisdom literature directing people on the
correct path of life and encourage a life of moral values. Nonetheless, they
describe these recommendations by phrasing them in utilitarian terms, counseling
against adultery by emphasizing the severe punishment in store for the adulterer.
In the Instructions of Ptahhotep, from the Sixth Dynasty (2350-2180 BCE), men
are warned not to befriend the married women whom they encounter on a daily
basis, for the act of adultery can
happen in a moment, with no prior
planning, and the practical
consequences, primarily
vengeance on the part of the
humiliated husband, will quickly
follow suit.9 This instruction, like
that of Any, from the Eighteenth
Dynasty (1580-1400 BCE),
stresses that adultery is a moral
flaw,10 and that there will be shame
when the adultery is made known.
In the Instruction of Ankhsheshonq,
from the Ptolemaic period (100
BCE), men are warned not to have
sexual relations with a woman
married to another, for the adulterer
is destined to be killed on the
threshold of his home.11 These
wisdom texts emphasize the
This Funerary Statue of Nenkhefetka and His
punishment that the adulterer can
Wife, Neferseshemes, is from the Old Kingdom,
expect at the hands of the betrayed
Fifth Dynasty, ca. 2400 BCE. Found in a rockhusband, but they also advise men
cut tomb at Deshesheh, located about seventy
miles to the south of modern Cairo, this pairto avoid adultery as a matter of
statue of the mayor and his wife exemplifies, in
moral rather than civil law.
Severe punishments for having
sexual relations with married
women are depicted in Egyptian
folk tales. For example, "The Tale
of the Two Brothers," dating to the
New Kingdom, describes the
punishment of an unfaithful wife.
The elder brother, Anubis,
discovers that his wife has tried to
seduce his younger brother, Bata.
As punishment for this act, he
the pose and relative scale of its subjects, the
standard artistic conventions for the
representation of men and women. Nenkhefetka
strides forward with his left foot and holds his
arms closely at his sides, while his wife is
depicted on a smaller scale and stands with her
feet together. Married women were buried with
their husbands and accorded much higher
status in the afterlife than their single
counterparts. This was a powerful impetus for
married women to avoid the pitfalls of adultery
and subsequent disgrace both in this life and
the next. Photo courtesy of the Walters
Museum, Baltimore, Maryland.
dismembers her body and feeds her limbs to the dogs. 12 Similarly, the Westcar
Papyrus describes what is in store for an unfaithful wife in the story of the wife of
a magician who betrayed her husband. When he learns of his wife's meeting with
her lover, he makes sure to kill both his unfaithful wife and her lover. In these two
stories, the husband is the one who both issues the verdict, and the one who
carries it out.13 These stories also emphasize the seriousness of the adulterous
woman's punishment to Egyptian eyes. In both cases, the strong sanction of
destroying her body, which was necessary to remain whole for the passage of the
deceased to the afterlife, is employed. The adulterous woman's flesh was fed
to dogs, or her body parts were strewn into the river.14 Failure to preserve
the body was a punishment at the hands of both men and gods.
The ceremony of weighing the heart before Maat, the goddess of justice, in
the Temple of Osiris, as described in the Book of the Dead, also
emphasized the religious importance of refraining from adultery. The
deceased was to stand in judgment before forty-two gods and, to convince
them of the purity of his actions, pronounce a "negative confession" in
which he must list the sins that he did not commit so as to be found
blameless and be permitted to pass into the afterlife. Among these sins
was the declaration that he did not have adulterous relations with a married
woman or with another man's wife. 15 The Book of the Dead is part of the
Egyptian women had circumscribed roles in society
and, once married, were regarded, at least with
respect to adultery, as the property of their
husbands. Nevertheless, as wives and mothers
they were given the honorary, if largely
meaningless, title of Mistress of the House, and, as
an extension of that role, they were permitted to
engage in trading activities in the public sphere.
Beyond that the only other title that a respectable
woman might expect to achieve in the New
Kingdom was that of shemayet (musician) in the
temple of a particular god or goddess. They
apparently sang hymns and played a sistrum (a kind
of rattle). Men and women were musicians, but it is
interesting to note that the women musicians came
from all classes in society, while the men were from
the lower class only. This Nineteenth Dynasty
statue depicts the temple musician Enehy sitting on
a chair and holding in her left hand the symbol of
her profession, a sistrum, or cult rattle, used in the
worship of the goddess Hathor. Judging from her
clothing and elegant hairstyle, as well as the scale
and quality of her statue, we may assume that
Enehy was of the upper classes. Walters Museum,
Baltimore, Maryland.
sacred literature, which conveys the ancient Egyptian view on death and
reward, and it is clear from this context that adultery was regarded as a sin
against Maat, who represented morality as the personification of truth,
order and cosmic equilibrium.16
Documents from a different literary genre suggest this perspective as well.
The excavations of the workers' village at Deir el-Medina brought to light
several letters that touch upon the matter of adultery. These documents
allow a glimpse into the marital relations of ancient Egyptian society. In
fact, the documentation of the lives of the workers in Deir el –Medina
probably reflects customs and practices that were not substantially
different from those of New Kingdom Egyptian society generally, as the
material evidence from other contemporary sites in Egypt suggests. The
letters from the workers' Village contain much detail regarding the personal
lives of individuals, their doubts and troubles,17 For example, on one side
of an ostracon found in Deir el-Medina (no. 439) appears a letter from an
anonymous woman to a husband whose wife has betrayed him, and on the
other side is the response of the betrayed husband. The letter states that
the man's adulterous wife has harmed him and committed a deed, which is
"an abomination against the god Monthu." This may be an allusion to a
myth in which the god Monthu was betrayed by his wife, with the result that
this deity regards adultery as a taboo.18 The husband to whom the letter
had been addressed then responds that he has no rights over the
adulterous woman, who had left his house long ago. This private letter
portrays adultery as a grave sin, and in this case, the husband tries to
disassociate himself from the matter.
Adultery is specifically mentioned in the context of several lawsuits against
officials described in documents from the New Kingdom. For example,
there is a letter from the workers' village of Deir el-Medina, which begins
with accusing a man of adultery with a married woman. Several lines are
missing from the text, but the legible section describes a functionary unfit
to hold office in light of a problem that had arisen regarding a shipment of
oils. The context of the letter is unclear, but the accusation of adultery is
apparently brought forth with the intention of substantiating the accused
official's lack of fitness for public service.19
In a papyrus from Deir el-Medina known as Papyrus Salt 124 and dating to
the reign of Seti II, an appeal is made concerning the unsuitable conduct of
an official named Paneb who may well have been one of the most
notorious individuals in the history of the village.20 Among the accusations
main purpose of the letter is to obtain financial assistance. It appears that in
Egypt a woman could demand to be divorced from her husband, and she usually
organized a financial arrangement, enforced by the judiciary, in order to
guarantee her maintenance.24
listed are adulterous relations with married women. The married women are
listed by their first names along with their husbands' names.21 Papyrus Salt is a
draft of a letter of complaint addressed to the vizier, presenting Paneb's criminal
acts. It is not possible to know how the vizier dealt with such complaints.
However, upon examining the complaint and the accusations, it appears that
Paneb exploited his high rank in the workers' village and caused much disorder.
What is more, he lay with married women.
The writer emphasizes that Paneb also had sexual relations with a mother and
her daughter. Incest, too, was evidently viewed as a severe transgression.
Paneb was found guilty in criminal proceedings, and mention of his sexual
misconduct was intended to emphasize the immorality of his personality and his
unfitness for the office entrusted to him. Yet, it seems that although adultery was
regarded as a contemptible act, it was not in itself a cause for criminal
accusations. Rather, these deeds were documented as part of proceedings
intended to point out the flaws in the personality of the accused.
Huenro's case demonstrates that the cause of the divorce, adultery, was not what
interested the writer of the ostracon. Rather, he was specifically concerned with
the financial arrangement between the spouses. In marriage contracts, which
began to appear from the seventh century BCE on, it was emphasized that if the
woman was found to be adulterous she would be guilty of "a great sin," and she
would therefore forfeit all of her financial rights. The phrase "great sin" brings to
mind the words of Abimelech with reference to adultery (Genesis 20:9). This
phrase is used a few times in the Bible in the context of straying from the ways of
God, which is seen metaphorically as a form of adultery (Exodus 32:21, 30, 31; 2
Kings 17:21 and elsewhere).
The Turin papyrus also describes misconduct in public office and mentions
Paneb's adultery. In this papyrus, too, a community leader, Penanuqet, is
brought to trial because of criminal misconduct, the mismanagement of temple
property, and adultery is mentioned as further proof of his immoral character. In
another case, a worker accused one of his superiors of misappropriating public
building materials for private use, and, incidentally, the affidavit states that he
committed adultery with married women. These examples demonstrate that,
although the courts did not deal with cases of adultery, these were relevant in
showing the character flaws of the person accused of criminal deeds.22
An ostracon dated to the second year of the reign of Set-Nahat mentions the
divorce of a woman named Huenro. The ostracon does not specify the grounds
for her divorce. However, based on the impression formed of Huenro from the
Salt Papyrus and on knowledge of the Egyptian custom regarding an adulterous
wife's loss of economic rights, it can be inferred that adultery was the cause for
her divorce. The ostracon states that Huenro's husband, Hesysenebef, divorced
her. A married woman's betrayal of her husband was regarded as a severe
violation and in many instances led to the wife's complete loss of financial rights.
23 In Huenro's case, it appears that after her divorce she received a monthly
allowance of wheat grains from an unknown man for three years. This ostracon
shows the difficult financial position of a woman found guilty of adultery and the
Papyrus no. 27 from Deir el-Medina deals with a local lawsuit associated with
adultery. The opening lines of the papyrus are missing, but the remaining content
shows that it concerns a couple who intended to marry or had just married and
who established a joint household, but at the time the prospective spouses were
still living in their parents' homes. Marriage ceremonies in Egypt were not held in
public, but were rather a private matter and were marked by the wife moving into
her husband's home. The "fiancé" had visited the home of his beloved and was
surprised to discover that she had slept with Mery-Sekhmet, the son of Menna,
who had come from an educated and wealthy family, as stated in another letter
bearing his name. In the letter, the plaintiff states that, "he had [already) made her
his wife."25 Although the woman was not yet living in her husband's home, she
was regarded as his wife in every respect. As in biblical law, a betrothed woman
was subject to the same laws as a married one. Following the act, the "fiancé"
wishes to have Mery-Sekhmet punished. However, perhaps because of his low
socio-economic status, in contrast to the high social class of the defendant, and
also seeing as the woman had not yet officially moved into his house, he chooses
to address a local court rather than a higher court. 26
The man addresses the court, but surprisingly, he, the plaintiff, is sentenced to
one-hundred lashes. One of the magistrates protests against the injustice
committed against the plaintiff, and Mery-Sekhmet is then required to swear
before the mediators that he will not meet with the woman again: "Then the
scribe of the necropolis of Amen-Nakhte made him swear an oath of the lord ...
saying, ~s Amen endures, as the Ruler endures, if I speak with her, the wife, my
nose (?) and my nostrils and my ears will be [cut off), and I will be exiled to the
land of Kush."27 It appears that this oath was an elegant solution to conflicts
involving divorce, the division of property, or inheritance.
The defendant, however, does not keep his oath, and visits the woman again; this
time she becomes pregnant. The adulterer's father, Menna, is the one who brings
his son to court this second time. Once again, the court declares that the adulterer
must take an oath not to approach the woman's house again. Finally, he swears
that his ear and nose will be cut off if he visits the woman's house again (a similar
punishment to that mentioned in Ezekiel 23:25). The ear and the nose are vital
organs for living, so the adulterer, as it were, is actually sentencing himself to
death; it is possible that without these organs, he will be denied the possibility of
passage into the afterlife. The nose and nostrils were seen as the source of life,
the organs for inhaling and exhaling, given to man by the gods. In ancient
Egyptian culture, a god is "ear-opening" and serves as an instructor who wills the
ear to listen and obey.28
In cases such as this, the local court served more as an institution for mediation
or hearing testimony rather than as a judicial institution with the power to impose
punishment.29 In a village society, however, the involvement of the community.
In matters like these would not be unexpected, and some of the documents, in
fact, bear this out. A papyrus, now in the British Museum, also from the workers'
village of Deir el-Medina, describes a group of young and old people, men and
women, who angrily march at night to protest on behalf of a married woman
whose husband has betrayed her.30 The villagers threaten to take the life of the
offending woman, who has apparently been having sexual relations with the
married man for eight months.
The author of the letter, who might have been the son of the betrayed woman or
the son of the adulterous woman31 proposes that the adulterer go to court and
commit to taking care of his wife's legal rights. Thus, it is clear that it is the man
who is being accused of adultery here and not the woman. After doing so, he will
be able to divorce her and marry his mistress. In this case, the writer's advice to
address the court is meant only to protect the betrayed woman's rights before the
adulterous husband brings his mistress into his home. The writer encourages the
adulterer to divorce his wife and divide their property between them. The act of
adultery itself is not the essence of the problem. Rather, it is concern for the
wife's legal rights to the common property in the event of divorce. The
intervention of the public, described in this papyrus, is related to Village life,
which was characterized by mutual responsibility, as expressed in a number of
letters that show there was considerable mutual involvement and assistance,
especially among the women of the village.32
"After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do"
In the consciousness of biblical writers, Egypt was a land swarming with
debauchery, as can be deduced from the etiological story of Ham (Gen 9: 18-26),
which symbolically accounts for their conduct. As the sons of Ham, Canaan and
Mizraim (Egypt; Gen 10:6), followed in their father's footsteps. The biblical
passages relating to sexual crimes begins with the laws relating to the
abominations of Egypt and Canaan, which include adultery, making it clear that
such behavior resulted in the land rejecting its inhabitants. Hence, the land is
liable to reject the children of Israel, the present inhabitants of the land of Canaan,
if they do not refrain from similar acts, listed in detail throughout the course of the
chapter (Lev 18:25).
The prophecy of Ezekiel describes Egypt as being full of depravity and corruption
(Ezek 16:26; 23: 19-21) and an allusion to this view is also latent in the story of
Joseph and the wife of Potiphar (Gen 39:7) I which undoubtedly reflects the
author's view of the moral standards of Egyptian women, and perhaps also in
Abraham's fear (which proves to be unjustified) of Sarah being taken from him in
Egypt by force (Gen 12:12). Condemnation of adultery in Egypt can also be
found in non-biblical sources, such as the writings of the Greek historian
Herodotus, from the fifth century BCE, and later, in the writings of Diodorus
Siculus, from the first century BCE. Later Jewish philosophers regarded what
they saw as the proliferation of adulterous conduct in Egypt as repulsive and
expressed their disapproval of the lenient reaction displayed towards such
behavior.
Despite all of these injunctions against behaving like Egyptians, Egyptian
sensibilities concerning sexual practices were not that far removed from those
depicted in the biblical passages as the forgoing discussion indicates. The biblical
authors also condemned what they believed to be widespread incest in ancient
Egypt although there were actually very few cases of incest among common
people of Egypt.33 As for adultery, it was common, but it was certainly not looked
upon forgivingly, and the adulterer was forced to deal with the consequences of
his actions.
Biblical passages by no means provide directly comparative material in terms of
actual case studies like the Egyptian literature does. Rather, it is through the
laws, wisdom literature and prophetic visions in the Bible that one is able to get
some sense of the development of cultural perceptions of adultery in the society.
The biblical laws view the involvement of the public in punishing the adulterers as
a reinforcement of the covenant between the people and their god. Public
intervention as described above in the papyrus from Deir el-Medina is different
from the involvement of the public described in Deuteronomy 22:24, which derives
from a more moral approach. Nevertheless, in both instances, the public is
caught up in the case because the offense is deemed to be a disruption in the
social fabric. The law in Deuteronomy 22:22-24 emphasizes the role of the public
in carrying out the death sentence placed upon adulterers.34 The public holds
itself responsible for the actions of the individual, and is therefore committed to
the hands-on reinforcement of the covenant by actively excising evil from the
community.
The biblical laws that deal with marital relations distinguish between women of
various marital statuses: unmarried women, married women, betrothed virgins,
and virgins who are not betrothed. A distinction is also made between two
essentially different norms of transgression: rape and seduction. The law in
Leviticus that deals with adultery is part of the Holiness Legislation with the
concomitant implication that adultery is regarded as a sin against God, the
consequences of which apply both to the man and to the woman who committed
the act. According to the Holiness Legislation, composed later than the Priestly
Code, the fate of the nation will be influenced by its sexual conduct, including acts
of adultery (Lev 18:20,25-30).
The laws prohibiting adultery appear again in Leviticus 20:10, where adultery is
included among a group of transgressions that lead to divine punishment-in this
case death-and where the people are responsible for putting the divine decree
into effect. In Ezekiel's parable of Aholah and Aholibah (Ezek 23), the prophet
illustrates the history of the Israelites through the story of to two sisters: SamariaAholah, and Jerusalem-Aholibah. In the parable, Aholibah is adulterous, and is
punished by having her nose and ears cut off (Ezek 23:25). Toward the end of
the account of Aholah and Aholibah, they are both sentenced "after the manner of
adulteresses, and after the manner of women that shed blood" (Ezek 23:45) . In
this metaphorical account, the execution is carried out by stoning (Ezek 23:47),
similar to the punishment for adultery specified in Deuteronomy: "Ye shall stone
them with stones that they die" (Deut 22:24).
These passages all suggest that the participation of the betrayed husband in
determining the punishment is negligible-he can neither increase nor decrease its
severity. In Proverbs 6:32-35, however, it is stressed that the husband may sue
the adulterer. The wisdom literature seeks to deter the potential adulterer in a
practical utilitarian manner by emphasizing that such conduct is not in his best
interest, and severe punishment will be in store for him from the husband of the
adulterous woman. Adultery . was regarded as both a personal and social
transgression and as such had both private and public consequences.
Morality in Law and Practice
Frequently the idea of adultery as a moral failing, subject to public censure and
religious consequences, is explicitly lacking in collections of laws of the ancient
Near East. The biblical sources have traditionally been considered as exceptional
in this respect. Though the lack of a legal code in ancient Egypt has made
comparison between the two societies difficult in terms of their relative positions
on adultery, the social and cultural aspects of adultery in ancient Egypt are
strongly interwoven into literature that emphasizes that adultery will incur
punishment at the hands of the gods. Therefore, in addition to the immediate
consequences of this transgression imposed by the betrayed husband, adulterers
could also expect punishment and ill treatment from on high. The punishment for
adultery on moral grounds, however, was the province of the gods and not a
matter to be dealt with in human courts. Egyptian sources, including the didactic
literature and the Book of the Dead, as well as papyri and ostraca from Deir elMedina, reveal that the biblical perception of Egypt as a land of sexual license
These solid-cast Canaanite figurines from the
Middle Bronze Age, which served as votive
offerings, represent a divine couple. The male
figure represents Baal, god of life and
fertility, bringer of the autumnal rains and
suppressor of the destructive flood waters.
The female is probably Anat, a fertility
goddess who is the sister and consort of Baal.
Anat was later supplanted in popularity as the
mistress of Baal by Asneran, at least
according to the Bible. Canaanite sexual
practices relating to the worship of these two
deities, in particular, were condemned by the
law-makers of biblical Israel. The biblical
passages relating to sexual crimes begin with
the laws relating to abominations of Egypt
and Canaan, which include adultery. Photo
courtesy of the Walters Museum, Baltimore,
Maryland.
was ill-founded. Though adultery was not a capital offense, it was a clear moral
failing, subject to public censure if not criminal sanctions. If the courts were
involved, it was in order to divide common property in the event of a divorce, or to
punish a public official whose dubious morality, including the commission of
adultery, was mentioned along with his malfeasance. Though the biblical sources
emphasize that adultery as a disruption of the covenant between man and God
was punishable by death. Thus, whereas in Egypt punishment of adultery as a
moral failing was in the hands of the gods to be imposed during the transition to
the afterlife, in Israel, the punishment generally manifested in this world. For the
The Sotah
The case of the Sotah [straying woman1 (Num 5: 12-31), which belongs to the Priestly
Code, describes a ritual that is to be performed in order to solve a legal problem: a
husband suspects that his wife has committed adultery, but there is no conclusive
evidence. In this case, the woman is paraded before the priest, and perhaps the
community as well and is forced to consume a drink consisting of water mixed with the
charred remains of a meal offering (described as a "jealousy offering"), the dust of the
Tabernacle and other water used to blot out a curse on the woman that the priest has
written. If her belly doesn't swell and her thigh rot away (an allusion that suggests both
pregnancy and sterility) as a result of imbibing this repulsive beverage, she is deemed
to be innocent. Some scholars see the passage about the Sotah as one unit, while
others view it as a collection of various sources. For lack of evidence, the biblical
author is careful to avoid use of the Hebrew root that would imply that there is
certainty regarding the wife's deed. This case stresses that trial by ordeal is what
determines the verdict of the woman suspected of adultery. Nevertheless, even if the
woman is found guilty by the ordeal, she is not executed since the drink, as described,
is not poisonous. This seems to contradict the penalties mentioned elsewhere in the
Bible. What this passage actually demonstrates is that judgment in cases of adultery
is considered to be, at least partly. in the hands of God. When there is doubt regarding
the woman's guilt, the law seeks to protect her from her husband and from the
enraged public, who might try to kill her. Even so. the fate of the woman who silently
consented to adultery, who is "found" guilty by the ritual, has been determined she will
be sterile for the rest of her life. 35
Egyptians, worldly punishment comprised only reparations for the betrayed
husband or wife, an approach that was similar to that found in the Mesopotamian
sources.
In both ancient Egypt and biblical Israel, however, this aspect of morality is not
addressed as a matter of law but rather of practice. Thus, even though the public
consequences for the transgression were very different, the public aspect of it in
both cultures was similar. In small communities especially, these kinds of
relationships were perceived as a threat and a disruption that had to be dealt with.
Perhaps that is why the charge brought forth by the "fiancé" from Deir el-Medina
annoyed the mediators, and why the priestly code in biblical Israel prescribes
such an unusual method to determine the guilt of a suspected adulteress (the
Sotah ritual). In any event, as this analysis focusing on anecdotal rather than
legal literature demonstrates, social attitudes toward adultery in Egypt and biblical
Israel may have had more similarities than the consequences accorded to the
behavior would appear to express.
Source. Galpaz-Feller, Pnina. “Private Lives and Public Censure – Adultery in
Ancient Egypt and Biblical Israel, Near Eastern Archaeology, 67:3 (2004)
Printed from JSTOR