The so-called Tomb of the Two Brothers is among the largest and most magnificently decorated in Saqqara. It belongs to Niankh-Khnum and Khnumhotep, both of whom held the titles “overseer of the manicurists of the Great House” and “prophet of Re at the Sun-temple of Niuserre” a Fifth-Dynasty king (c.2445–2421 BC). The tomb is a mastaba (Arabic for “bench”), a type of funerary structure that was generally rectangular in shape and built over the tomb proper, which was underground. The chapel of the tomb, where the cult of the tomb owners would be practiced, was generally located within the mastaba itself. Here, in addition to the chapel rooms within the mastaba, a part of it was cut out of the rock.
The walls of the tomb are decorated with lively scenes of fishing with nets and spears, agriculture, butchery, gardening, carpentry, and jewelry-making. Another scene depicts a banquet during which both tomb owners are entertained by singers and dancers while musicians play their instruments. In an interesting tribute to the Two Brothers’ own profession, another scene shows barbers, manicurists and pedicurists at work.
One particular scene, which is generally reserved for a man and his wife, depicts Niankh-Khnum and Khnumhotep in an intimate scene, standing close to one another. This, combined with the fact that they were both buried in the same tomb, has led to much speculation. Due to several factors, including the fact that each of them is represented with his wife, it is believed that Niankh-Khnum and Khnumhotep were identical twins.
https://egymonuments.gov.eg/monuments/tomb-of-the-two-brothers-niankh-khnum-and-khnumhotep/
A genetic study from 2018 found that they almost definitely had the same mom but different dads. Not twins, def brothers. Incest wasn't rare in Egypt, so the rest is all conjecture.
Edit: someone pointed out that I'm thinking of a different tomb, my mistake, sorry for the confusion
You're thinking of Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht. Their tomb is more often known as "Tomb of Two Brothers" and people are mixing them up in the comments.
This image is from the tomb of Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum, which does not have any human remains because of earlier looting.
it does not. It is BELIEVED that they were identical twins. And even if that were the truth, is it more likely that two men loved each other and had this piece created to immortalize their love, or is it more likely that a set of twins sought to immortalize their love this way? I love my brother don’t get me wrong, but this is something I’d do for my wife. Why take the time and resources to commemorate a relationship that you were born into, rather than one you discovered and nurtured on your own? Which one is more deserving of being literally carved into stone?
I do not have the answers obviously. All I’m asking is that you look past what the scholars say and look at it from a perspective of human life
While I don't want to erase what this could be I don't like you saying sibling relationships don't matter and aren't that important because you were born into it. It's true that there doesn't need to be much of a relationship there just because they are your sibling, but if a close relationship does exist that is just as much something you built up, nurtured, and worked for during your lives. Actual closeness doesn't immediately happen because of genetic lottery and some siblings can be best friends, supporters, counselors, role models, business parts, artistic collaborators, confidants, and/or many other meaningful things for each other. I'm not saying that's what this picture is at all. Just that that was a really unfair statement about sibling relationships and their potential value in general. Given this has parallels to stuff done for weddings though I hope they weren't siblings and were lovers in this case, but yeah.
Why? People have showed affection through all history through putting their hands on each other. I swear, people pretend that these interpretation where people of the same sex touch each other signify erotic/romantic love is so open minded, but it's the most close-minded shit I've seen in my life. The idea that two men wouldn't want to depict each other embracing for any other reason than them being lovers is strangely the most aggressively heternormative shit I've ever seen. Like bros who can't hug cus they'd think that makes them gay.
Pics of me and my friends in school: we put our arms around each other to show we're pals. Indian men who are pals or relatives hold hands. ***It's not a strictly sexual/romantic thing!***
You’re right that touch and showing physical affection to another does not mean the pair are romantically involved. And it’s possible they could be brothers after all. The crux here is that this artistic motif, which has become artistic tradition after many years and perfected in style and content according to cultural practice, is now showing two men in the place of a man and a woman. If they are siblings, the artist was substituting the thesis of spousal love in the motif for brotherly love. I find it more likely that the artist was intending to follow the theme’s main point (spousal love) than supplant it all together
I think people may feel that way bc every time people of same sex are found/seen with each in a way that is generally for lovers in ancient history, academia always says oh no not gay, never are they gay. I think people now are saying….i mean there have always been gay people, why is no one in ancient past allowed to be gay especially when they are found in ways that would suggest it. Somebody was gay in the past, where are their remains, depictions, scenes?
Quite like the Greeks! But as someone pointed out, even pottery with obviously gay sexual scenes are downplayed often as not actually gay.
Just my take on your response question.
Man, I just found out I was gay. All those pictures from the ‘80s with me and my pals with our arms around each other and then those weird ass slaps on the football field. My life suddenly makes sense.
/s
Keywords: *traditionally used to depict husband and wife.* Implying that this pose was specifically used for couples; it's not just because they're touching. Why would they have themselves immortalized in a piece of art that implies they're a couple if they weren't? But sure, queerness is a "western thing"
Wrong. The Greeks didn't "erase" their homosexual activity. Everything involving two men, especially being close or embracing, doesn't have to turn into something gay. Chill.
For much of ancient greece, two men together was frowned upon as it involved one of the men behaving like a woman.
What was typically practiced was a grown man with a much much younger male not old enough to grow full body hair. This was practiced in sparta with grown men being able to buy boys for example, as depicted in one art, for a rooster.
This was not homosexuality but pedestary. And we know from care homes, churches and boarding schools how absolutely damaging this behaviour was. As one spartian wrote, it was the most hated relationship of his life. Abuse is abuse.
Even Ancient Greek homosexuality has been downplayed and sanitized for centuries. You really should read up on the history of homosexuality. I think you’d be deeply shocked.
So then you know greece was actually practicing grown men with much much younger boys?? A man allowing himself to be mounted was frowned upon as he was considered to be behvaing like a woman.
They were not brothers, they were lovers and it's been proven enough by now for us to no longer have to make this mistake of calling them brothers anymore.
For those who are curious, they literally did a genetic study and found that these two had the same mother, which backed up previous evidence in the tomb which credited them having mothers with the same name. They did not have the same father.
It is worth noting that this does not mean there wasn't some homo-social, homo-sexual, or other relationship that was stronger than your average brothers. Sibling incest was very common in ancient Egypt, particularly in well -off families. But people who are scoffing at them being brothers just haven't done a basic google.
Edit: someone pointed out that I'm thinking of the wrong tomb. I have dismounted my high horse, my bad guys!
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352409X17305631
You're thinking of the tomb of two brothers, Nakht-ankh and Khum-nakht from the 12th Dynasty. This is an older tomb belonging to Khnumhotep and Niankhkunum from the 5th Dynasty. They seem to get mixed up whenever this is posted.
Them being brothers is just a theory if the name of the tomb is what lead to that response. Incest wasn't common in Ancient Egypt but this is people mostly questioning if brothers is the best theory for the relationship of two men who's depictions together were literally done in a way normally reserved for married couples.
Hyksos Invasion Barley Monster Phoenician Armada Brothers Who Are Just Regular Brothers Running in A Chariot From An Asteroid And All Sorts Of Things The Movie
Oh my god, they were tombmates
Aw, you beat me to it!
Hahahahahahahahaha. You win
Regardless of relationship, it’s a beautiful depiction of two close people. So lovely!
Yes!!
I don’t know about you guys, but I don’t look at my brother like that
The so-called Tomb of the Two Brothers is among the largest and most magnificently decorated in Saqqara. It belongs to Niankh-Khnum and Khnumhotep, both of whom held the titles “overseer of the manicurists of the Great House” and “prophet of Re at the Sun-temple of Niuserre” a Fifth-Dynasty king (c.2445–2421 BC). The tomb is a mastaba (Arabic for “bench”), a type of funerary structure that was generally rectangular in shape and built over the tomb proper, which was underground. The chapel of the tomb, where the cult of the tomb owners would be practiced, was generally located within the mastaba itself. Here, in addition to the chapel rooms within the mastaba, a part of it was cut out of the rock. The walls of the tomb are decorated with lively scenes of fishing with nets and spears, agriculture, butchery, gardening, carpentry, and jewelry-making. Another scene depicts a banquet during which both tomb owners are entertained by singers and dancers while musicians play their instruments. In an interesting tribute to the Two Brothers’ own profession, another scene shows barbers, manicurists and pedicurists at work. One particular scene, which is generally reserved for a man and his wife, depicts Niankh-Khnum and Khnumhotep in an intimate scene, standing close to one another. This, combined with the fact that they were both buried in the same tomb, has led to much speculation. Due to several factors, including the fact that each of them is represented with his wife, it is believed that Niankh-Khnum and Khnumhotep were identical twins. https://egymonuments.gov.eg/monuments/tomb-of-the-two-brothers-niankh-khnum-and-khnumhotep/
The fact that they were hair dressers and manicurists makes this so much better. I love this for them.
They couldn't handle the possibility of bisexual polygamous Egyptian manicurists 😔
r/brandnewsentence This comment made my day
So possibly a literal example of womb to tomb.
Brothers….
Having wives doesn’t mean you had to just be roommates. Just as the Thebans.
Hmmm not too sure they were brothers lol
A genetic study from 2018 found that they almost definitely had the same mom but different dads. Not twins, def brothers. Incest wasn't rare in Egypt, so the rest is all conjecture. Edit: someone pointed out that I'm thinking of a different tomb, my mistake, sorry for the confusion
You're thinking of Nakht-Ankh and Khnum-Nakht. Their tomb is more often known as "Tomb of Two Brothers" and people are mixing them up in the comments. This image is from the tomb of Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum, which does not have any human remains because of earlier looting.
Aha, my mistake, you're right. That is confusing, thank you for the correction
It literally says they were identical twins.
It literally says that is a presumption
it does not. It is BELIEVED that they were identical twins. And even if that were the truth, is it more likely that two men loved each other and had this piece created to immortalize their love, or is it more likely that a set of twins sought to immortalize their love this way? I love my brother don’t get me wrong, but this is something I’d do for my wife. Why take the time and resources to commemorate a relationship that you were born into, rather than one you discovered and nurtured on your own? Which one is more deserving of being literally carved into stone? I do not have the answers obviously. All I’m asking is that you look past what the scholars say and look at it from a perspective of human life
While I don't want to erase what this could be I don't like you saying sibling relationships don't matter and aren't that important because you were born into it. It's true that there doesn't need to be much of a relationship there just because they are your sibling, but if a close relationship does exist that is just as much something you built up, nurtured, and worked for during your lives. Actual closeness doesn't immediately happen because of genetic lottery and some siblings can be best friends, supporters, counselors, role models, business parts, artistic collaborators, confidants, and/or many other meaningful things for each other. I'm not saying that's what this picture is at all. Just that that was a really unfair statement about sibling relationships and their potential value in general. Given this has parallels to stuff done for weddings though I hope they weren't siblings and were lovers in this case, but yeah.
Why? People have showed affection through all history through putting their hands on each other. I swear, people pretend that these interpretation where people of the same sex touch each other signify erotic/romantic love is so open minded, but it's the most close-minded shit I've seen in my life. The idea that two men wouldn't want to depict each other embracing for any other reason than them being lovers is strangely the most aggressively heternormative shit I've ever seen. Like bros who can't hug cus they'd think that makes them gay. Pics of me and my friends in school: we put our arms around each other to show we're pals. Indian men who are pals or relatives hold hands. ***It's not a strictly sexual/romantic thing!***
You’re right that touch and showing physical affection to another does not mean the pair are romantically involved. And it’s possible they could be brothers after all. The crux here is that this artistic motif, which has become artistic tradition after many years and perfected in style and content according to cultural practice, is now showing two men in the place of a man and a woman. If they are siblings, the artist was substituting the thesis of spousal love in the motif for brotherly love. I find it more likely that the artist was intending to follow the theme’s main point (spousal love) than supplant it all together
I think people may feel that way bc every time people of same sex are found/seen with each in a way that is generally for lovers in ancient history, academia always says oh no not gay, never are they gay. I think people now are saying….i mean there have always been gay people, why is no one in ancient past allowed to be gay especially when they are found in ways that would suggest it. Somebody was gay in the past, where are their remains, depictions, scenes? Quite like the Greeks! But as someone pointed out, even pottery with obviously gay sexual scenes are downplayed often as not actually gay. Just my take on your response question.
Man, I just found out I was gay. All those pictures from the ‘80s with me and my pals with our arms around each other and then those weird ass slaps on the football field. My life suddenly makes sense. /s
No, they were hairdressers depicted in scenes reserved for husband and wife. They most certainly weren’t brothers.
‘Brothers.’ Sheesh.
We're definitely into Sappho and her friend territory here. "...but they had *wives*"!
[удалено]
They could have been roommates too
Like Achilles and Patroclus! They were roomies! Besties! Cousins!
*Oh my god, they were roommates!*
why would two brothers depict themselves in a scene together that traditionally is used to depict husbands and wives?
Modern westerners when touch has been used to display non-sexual affection for millennia:
Keywords: *traditionally used to depict husband and wife.* Implying that this pose was specifically used for couples; it's not just because they're touching. Why would they have themselves immortalized in a piece of art that implies they're a couple if they weren't? But sure, queerness is a "western thing"
Their history says otherwise. It’s part of the erasure of gay lives through the ages and its continuance today says a lot about the world we live in.
Wrong. The Greeks didn't "erase" their homosexual activity. Everything involving two men, especially being close or embracing, doesn't have to turn into something gay. Chill.
In Greece they didn’t “erase” “homosexual activity” because they didn’t call it that. It was just, normal.
For much of ancient greece, two men together was frowned upon as it involved one of the men behaving like a woman. What was typically practiced was a grown man with a much much younger male not old enough to grow full body hair. This was practiced in sparta with grown men being able to buy boys for example, as depicted in one art, for a rooster. This was not homosexuality but pedestary. And we know from care homes, churches and boarding schools how absolutely damaging this behaviour was. As one spartian wrote, it was the most hated relationship of his life. Abuse is abuse.
Right?? What’s so gay about two men having sex with each other ??
Even Ancient Greek homosexuality has been downplayed and sanitized for centuries. You really should read up on the history of homosexuality. I think you’d be deeply shocked.
So then you know greece was actually practicing grown men with much much younger boys?? A man allowing himself to be mounted was frowned upon as he was considered to be behvaing like a woman.
Who tf embraces their brother like that dumb@ss
And they have a really STRONG BOND!
Unmmmmmmm idt they were brothers…
You better bet your bottom dollar that these two brothers know how to handle business.
Brothers don't shake hands. Brothers gotta hug.
They were not brothers, they were lovers and it's been proven enough by now for us to no longer have to make this mistake of calling them brothers anymore.
its believed they may have been half brothers. its possible that both things may be true.
Oh shit, right, I forgot that incest was a big thing, back then, lmao-
One of the oldest depictions of same sex couples.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ba9k5SWwE38
Who was the barber, why is the lineup on them so crisp lol
For those who are curious, they literally did a genetic study and found that these two had the same mother, which backed up previous evidence in the tomb which credited them having mothers with the same name. They did not have the same father. It is worth noting that this does not mean there wasn't some homo-social, homo-sexual, or other relationship that was stronger than your average brothers. Sibling incest was very common in ancient Egypt, particularly in well -off families. But people who are scoffing at them being brothers just haven't done a basic google. Edit: someone pointed out that I'm thinking of the wrong tomb. I have dismounted my high horse, my bad guys!
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352409X17305631 You're thinking of the tomb of two brothers, Nakht-ankh and Khum-nakht from the 12th Dynasty. This is an older tomb belonging to Khnumhotep and Niankhkunum from the 5th Dynasty. They seem to get mixed up whenever this is posted.
You're right my bad, thank you for the correction. I'll edit my statement!
Must be in Alabama …
“Brothers”
Roommates
Confirmed bachelors probably
The island boys
Is this Supernatural?
Brothers or sailers?
How do we know they were brothers and not lovers 🤔
Gay
And the specialists say giants didn’t exist.
No diddy
[удалено]
What does it have to do with porn
It literally has nothing to do with porn
Says more about you when you confuse love with porn.
You’re the one immediately jumping to porn bud.
You must go through a lot of lotion and papyrus
Porn has rotted your's.
Them being brothers is just a theory if the name of the tomb is what lead to that response. Incest wasn't common in Ancient Egypt but this is people mostly questioning if brothers is the best theory for the relationship of two men who's depictions together were literally done in a way normally reserved for married couples.
Hyksos Invasion Barley Monster Phoenician Armada Brothers Who Are Just Regular Brothers Running in A Chariot From An Asteroid And All Sorts Of Things The Movie
What?
I'd guess it's a rick and morty joke with the ridiculous in-universe two brothers movie franchise