In the middle of the 5th dynasty of Egypt, the tomb of two men who would become one of the most famous same-sex couples in ancient history was built. The tomb of Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum was uncovered in 1964 and has been a fierce debate topic ever since. They have been said to be twins, lovers, brothers, and close friends. These two men and their relationship with each other became most controversial long after their deaths.

It is known based on hieroglyphs that Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum were chief manicurists of the king and the palace. Being of equal rank, there is little to no possibility of one being buried with the other to serve in the afterlife. It is also clear that both men had wives and children; their wives are regularly found in the background rather than the foreground. One depiction that had Khnumhotep’s wife removed during construction. It is often Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum next to each other, holding hands, sitting together, standing nose to nose, or embracing in a way that was most often used to depict a married couple.

Generally, Khnumhotep is put in place the wife would usually occupy. There are symbols used for him traditionally saved for women. There is gender-ambiguous terminology used to describe both men. While there does not seem enough evidence to suggest Khnumhotep may have identified with womanhood himself, it is not uncommon for same-sex couples to be expected to conform to the roles of heterosexual relationships.

It is also relevant to note that the names we have for them are not their given names, but how people referred to them; their names together roughly translate out to “joined in life, joined in death.”

Interpretation of these facts is the subject of much debate amongst historians. While there is a group that believes the two men were lovers, there are far more who believe the two men were brothers. However, it was rare for brothers to be buried together. Rarer still is the emphasis of sibling love above wife and children. Some have suggested the men are twins to explain how often the men are shown in vaguely mirrored positions. The possibility of the two being conjoined twins has been brought up to explain away their many intimate portraits. One issue with this theory is that they are not joined in one spot through every portrait but switch between portraits.

Despite the rather apparent issues with this theory, their tomb is often called “The Tomb of Two Brothers.” Many historians still fight tooth and nail against the implication that these two men were not related but in a romantic relationship.

If a man and woman shared the tomb, the conclusion of a romantic relationship would have been reached immediately. No one would have suggested fraternal conjoined twins, loving siblings, or friendly colleagues.

The truth does not require a leap of logic but a small, sensible step forward.

The facts require no twists or wild assumptions to be understood.

Most historians who interpret them as brothers struggle with the idea that there could have been a gay couple who lived with little evidence of the same homophobia that plagued Europe when the tomb was uncovered. All indicates that these two were respected. If they were in a relationship, then it was one that people chose to immortalize through the tomb. To do so would require multiple people to honour the men and the love they shared.

This goes directly against the assumption that evidence of homophobia within ancient Egypt meant universal discrimination against queer people. Greg Reeder has addressed this concern writing:

“Space here does not permit a detailed survey on the subject of homosexuality in Ancient Egypt. Sufice it to say that the few references there are, appear to refer to a certain antipathy towards the specific sexual act of anal intercourse rather than male to male intimacy and affection in this phallocentric society. The ideal Egyptian family consisting of father, mother, and children was central to society and official discourse. But sometimes we see glimpses of other relationships existing in spite of official attitudes. Cherpion (1995) suggests that during the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Dynasties there was much experimentation in the ways that affection could be represented between husband and wife on official monuments. It was during this window of opportunity that two men, manicurists to the king, were able to construct their own monument.”

References and Further Reading

Disclaimer: some of the sources may contain triggering material

McCoy, J. (1998, July 20). Evidence of gay relationships exists as early as 2400 B.C. The Dallas Morning News. http://www.egyptology.com/Niankhkhnum_Khnumhotep/dallas.html

Reeder, G. (2000a). Same-sex desire, conjugal constructs, and the tomb of Niankhkhnum and Khnumhotep. World Archaeology, 32(2), 193–208.

Reeder, G. (2000b). Same-sex desire, conjugal constructs, and the tomb of Niankhkhnum and Khnumhotep. World Archaeology, 32(2), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438240050131180

Salvo, V. (n.d.). Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum aka Overseers of the Manicurists. In O. Keehnen (Ed.), Legacy Project Chicago. Retrieved March 23, 2021, from https://legacyprojectchicago.org/person/khnumhotep-and-niankhkhnum-aka-overseers-manicurists

Wilford, J. N. (2005, December 20). A Mystery, Locked in Timeless Embrace. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/science/a-mystery-locked-in-timeless-embrace.html