CHAPTER 24

1. [“The custom handed down in regular succession since time immemorial among the four chief castes and the mixed races of that country, is called the conduct of virtuous men” (Manu,Laws, ii. 18).]

2. So says Valmiki, the author of the oldest epic in existence, the Ramayana [see p.693above].

3.Les Femmes, leur condition et leur influence dans l’ordre social, vol. i. p. 10.

4. So are some of the Hindu races in the mountainous districts about the Himalaya, and in other parts of India. This curious trait in ancient manners is deserving of investigation: it might throw some light on the early history of the world. [“Each man has but one wife, yet all the women are held in common: for this is a custom of the Massagetae, and not of the Scythians, as the Greeks wrongly say” (Herodotus i. 216). For polyandry in India see Risley,The People of India, 2nd ed. 206 ff.]

5. [Polygamy does to some extent prevail (Census Report, Rājputāna, 1911, i. 157 f.)]

6.Laws, v. 130.

7.Ibid.ii. 33.

8.Digest of Hindu Law, Colebrooke, vol. ii. p. 209 [Manu iii. 55-8].

9. Of all the religions which have diversified mankind, whatever man might select, woman should choose the Christian. This alone gives her just rank in the scale of creation, whether arising from the demotic principle which pervades our faith, or the dignity conferred on the sex in being chosen to be the mother of the Saviour of man. In turning over the pages of Manu we find many mortifying texts, which I am inclined to regard as interpolations; as the following, so opposed to the beautiful sentiment above quoted: “A wife, a son, a servant, a pupil, and a younger brother, may be corrected when they commit faults with a rope, or the small thong of a cane” [viii. 299]. Such texts might lead us to adopt Ségur’s conclusions, that ever since the days of the patriarchs women were only brilliant slaves—victims, who exhibited, in the wreaths and floral coronets which bedecked them, the sacrifices to which they were destined. In the patriarchal ages their occupations were to season the viands, and bake the bread, and weave cloth for the tents: their recreations limited to respire the fresh evening air under the shade of a fig tree, and sing canticles to the Almighty. Such a fate, indeed, must appear to a Parisian dame, who passes her time between the Feydeau and Tivoli, and whose daily promenade is through the Champs Élysées, worse than death: yet there is no positive hardships in these employments, and it was but the fair division of labour in the primitive ages, and that which characterizes the Rajputni of the present day.

10. Manu lays down some plain and wholesome rules for the domestic conduct of the wife; above all, he recommends her to “preserve a cheerful temper,” and “frugality in domestic expenses” [Laws, v. 150]. Some of his texts savour, however, more of the anchorite than of a person conversant with mankind; and when he commands the husband to be reverenced as a god by the virtuous wife, even though enamoured of another woman, it may be justly doubted if ever he found obedience thereto; or the scarcely less difficult ordinance, “for a whole year let a husband bear with his wife who treats him with aversion,” after which probation he is permitted to separate [ix. 77]. It is very likely the Rajputs are more in the habit of quoting the first of these texts than of hearing the last: for although they have a choice at home, they are not ashamed to be the avowed admirers of the Aspasias and Phrynes of the capital; from the same cause which attracted Socrates and made Pericles a slave and which will continue until the united charms of the dance and the song are sanctioned to be practised by thelégitimeswithin.

11. Manu ix. 101.

12. Parmāl or Paramardi Chandel (A.D.1165-1203). He was defeated by Prithirāj Chauhān in 1182.]

13. On the Pahuj, and now belonging to the Bundela prince of Datia. The author has been over this field of battle.

14. [On the Bannāphar sept, from which sprang the heroes Alha and Udal, see Crooke,Tribes and Castes North-West Provinces, i. 137 ff.; their bravery forms the subject of numerous ballads (ASR, ii. 455 ff.).]

15. Hindaun was a town dependent on Bayana, the capital of the Jadons, whose descendants still occupy Karauli and Sri Mathura.

16. [The modern Rohilkhand Division.]

17. Rao Pajun of Amber, one of the great vassals of the Chauhan, and ancestor of the present Raja of Jaipur.

18. In the original, “the land of the Baghel to that of the Chandel.” Rewa is capital of [or leading State in] Baghelkhand, founded by the Baghela Rajputs, a branch of the Solanki kings of Anhilwara.

19. Antarved, the Duab, or Mesopotamia of the Jumna and Ganges.

20. A district S.W. of Delhi, notorious for the lawless habits of its inhabitants: a very ancient Hindu race, but the greater part forced proselytes to the faith of Islam. In the time of Prithiraj the chief of Mewat was one of his vassals.

21.Jayapattra, or ‘bulletin of victory.’

22. Jaichand was then king of this city, only second to Delhi. He was attacked in 1193 (A.D.) by Shihabu-d-din, after his conquest of the Chauhan, driven from his kingdom, and found a watery grave in the Ganges. [The battle was fought at Chandāwar in the Etāwa District,A.D.1194 (Smith,EHI, 385).]

23. Jagnakh had two villages conferred upon him, besides an elephant and a dress.

24. [CompareIliad, xii. 237 ff.]

25. The phenicopteros. [The great crane,Grus antigone.]

26. A large red duck, the emblem of fidelity with the Rajputs. [The Brahmani duck,Anas casarca.]

27. The jackal.

28. Commander of the succours of Kanauj.

29.Asisis a form of benediction only bestowed by females and priests: it is performed by clasping both hands over the person’s head, and waving a piece of silver or other valuable over him, which is bestowed in charity [the object being to disperse evil influence].

30. This is a very ancient ceremony, and is calledNicharavali[orārti. The Author has frequently had a large salver filled with silver coin waved over his head, which was handed for distribution amongst his attendants. It is most appropriate from the fair, from whom also he has had this performed by their proxies, the family priest or female attendants.

31. The sankh, or war-shell, is thrice sounded, and the nakkaras strike thrice, when the army is to march; but should it after such proclamation remain on its ground, a scape-goat is slain in front of the imperial tent.

32. This picture recalls the remembrance of Hacon and the heroes of the north; with the Valkyries or choosers of the slain; the celestial maids of war of Scandinavia.

33. [Collyrium.]

34. Baghnakh or Naharnakh. [This weapon is best known by its use by Sivaji when he slew Afzu-l Khān in 1659 at Pratāpgarh (Grant Duff,Hist. Mahrattas, 78). Four specimens in the Indian Museum are described, with an illustration, by Hon. W. Egerton (Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms, 115).]

35. Barmala.

36.Mala, a necklace. Thetulasi[the plantOlymum sanctum] orrudraksha[the nuts ofElaeocarpus ganitrus, the former worn by Vaishnavas, the latter by Saivas] had the same estimation amongst the Hindus that the mistletoe had amongst the ancient Britons, and was always worn in battle as a charm.

37. Prithiraj.

38. A Rajput never names his wife. Here it is evidently optional to the widow to live or die, though Alha shows his wish for her society above. See chapter on Satis, which will follow.

39. Sanichar.

40. It was ajantaror phylactery of Hanuman the monkey deity; probably a magical stanza, with his image.

41. A crooked scimitar.

42. One of the names of Mena or Parvati. This passage will illustrate the subject of Satis in a future chapter.

43. “’Tis a pleasure (says Bernier) to see them with the fume of opium in their heads, embrace each other when the battle is to begin, and give their mutual farewells, as men resolved to die.” [Ed. 1914, p. 40. The battle of Dharmāt was fought on the banks of the river Sipra (IGI, xxi. 14 f.) on 15th April, 1658. Manucci was not present, but gives an account derived from Aurangzeb’s artillery officers of the battle at Dharmātpur, about 14 miles from Ujjain (i. 259 f., and see Jadunath Sarkar,Life of Aurangzeb, ii. 1 ff.). The latter (ii. 20 f.) speaks highly of the valour of Jaswant Singh, but Khāfi Khan (Elliot-Dowson vii. 219) says that he acted in a cowardly way. The account quoted by the author is not in the original work of Ferishta, but in Dow’s continuation (ed. 1812, iii. 206 f).].

44. Bernier’sHistory of the Late Revolutionofofthe Empire of the Mogul, fol. p. 13, ed. 1684 [ed. 1914, p. 40 f., where a somewhat different version is given].

45. It is deemed unlucky to see this emblem of Ganesa in sleep.

46. The battle-shout of the Rajput. [Hara, a title of Siva.]

47. ‘Half-body,’ which we may render, in common phraseology, ‘other half.’

48. [The impersonation of the female energy.]

49. Delhi [“the city of the witch or sorceress”].

50. [The “Ganore” of the text possibly represents the town of Ganora in the Bānswāra State. There is another place of the same name in Gwalior.]

51. [Several of our best authorities—Sir Lauder Brunton, Sir G. Birdwood, Professors A. Keith and A. Doran of the Royal College of Surgeons—have kindly investigated the question of death by poisoned robes, of which various instances are reported in this work. The general result is that it is doubtful if any known poison could be used in this way. Sir Lauder Brunton remarks that a paste of the seeds ofAbrus precatoriusis used for killing animals. Dr. N. Chevers (Manual of Medical Jurisprudence in India, p. 299) writes: “Any one who has noticed how freely a robust person in India perspires through a thin garment can understand that, if a cloth were thoroughly impregnated with the cantharidine of that very powerful vesicant, theTelini, the result would be as dangerous as an extensive burn.” Fortelini(Mylabris punctum), used as a substitute forCantharis vesicatoria, see Sir G. Watt (Dict. Economic Products of India, v. 309). Manucci (i. 149) says that Akbar placed such poisons in charge of a special officer. The stock classical case is that of Herakles killed by an ointment made from the blood of Nessus. An old writer, W. Ramesey (Of Poisons(1660), p. 14 f.) speaks of poisoning done in this way: but he regards some of “these and the like storeyes to be merely Fabulous ... and rather to be attributed to the Subtilty, Craft, and Malice of the Devill” (12 series,Notes and Queries, i. (1916) p. 417).]

52. The physician (unless he unite with his office that of ghostly comforter) has to feel the pulse of his patient with a curtain between them, through a rent, in which the arm is extended. [See the amusing account by Fryer (New Account of E. India and Persia, Hakluyt Society, ed. i. 326 f.).]

53. [This is a stock story (Risley,The People of India, 2nd ed. 179 f.; Rose,Glossary, ii. 220; cf. Herodotus v. 12).]

54. Sriphala.

55. Literally ‘lamp-holders’; such is the term applied to these handmaids; who invariably form a part of thedaejaor ‘dower.’ [The custom of sending handmaids with the bride, the girls often becoming concubines of the bridegroom, is common (Russell,Tribes and Castes Central Provinces, i. 63, ii. 77). In Gujarāt they are known as Goli or Vadhāran, and are sometimes married to the Khawās, or male slaves of the harem (BG, ix. Part i. 147, 235).]

56. Panch Kalyan is generally, if not always, a chestnut, having four white legs, with a white nose and list or star.

57.Arankanwal, ‘the lotos of the desert,’ fromaranya(Sanskrit), ‘a waste,’ andkamala(pronouncedkanwal), ‘a lotos’: classically it should be writtenaranykamala; I write it as pronounced.

58. The rites to the manes on the completion of the ‘sixth month.’

59. The rites to the manes on the ‘twelfth day.’

60. The greater portion of these anecdotes, the foundation of national character, will appear in the respective annals.

61.Bap ra wair lena.

62. [Khizr Khān, of the Sayyid dynasty of Delhi, was left in charge by Timūr, and diedA.D.1421.]

63. [For this legend see Vol. I. p.308above.]

64. Khizr Khan succeeded to the throne of Delhi inA.D.1414 [or rather, was left in charge of Delhi by Timūr, and diedA.D.1421], and according to the Jaisalmer annals the commencement of these feuds was inA.D.1406.

65. The Samnite custom, so lauded by Montesquieu as the reward of youthful virtue, was akin in sentiment to the Rajput, except that the fair Rajputni made herself the sole judge of merit in her choice. It was more calculated for republican than aristocratic society:“On assembloit tous les jeunes gens, et on les jugeoit; celui qui était déclaré le meilleur de tout prenoit pour sa femme la fille qu’il vouloit: l’amour, la beauté, la chastité, la vertu, la naissance, les richesses même, tout cela était, pour ainsi dire, la dot de la vertu.”It would be difficult, adds Montesquieu, to imagine a more noble recompense, or one less expensive to a petty State, or more influential on the conduct of both sexes (L’Esprit des Lois, chap. xvi. livre vii.).

CHAPTER 24

The Immolation of Women.—We now proceed to consider another trait of Rajput character, exemplified in the practice of female immolation, and to inquire whether religion, custom, or affection has most share in such sacrifice. To arrive at the origin of this rite, we must trace it to the recesses of mythology, where we shall discover the precedent in the example of Sati, who to avenge an insult to Iswara, in her own father’s omission to ask her lord to an entertainment, consumed herself in the presence of the assembled gods. With this act of fealty (sati) the name of Daksha’s daughter has been identified; and her regeneration and reunion to her husband, as the mountain-nymph Mena, or Parvati, furnish the incentive to similar [634] acts. In the history of these celestial beings, the Rajputni has a memorable lesson before her, that no domestic differences can afford exemption from this proof of faith: for Jupiter and Juno were not more eminent examples of connubial discord than Mena and Siva, who was not only alike unfaithful, but more cruel, driving Mena from his Olympus (Kailas), and forcing her to seek refuge in the murky caverns of Caucasus. Female immolation, therefore, originated with the sun-worshipping Saivas, and was common to all those nations who adored this the most splendid object of the visible creation. Witness the Scythic Gete or Jat warrior of the Jaxartes, who devoted his wife, horse, arms, and slaves, to the flames; the “giant Gete” of Scandinavia, who forgot not on the shores of the Baltic his Transoxianian habits; and the Frisian Frank and Saxon descended from him, who ages after omitted only the female. Could we assign the primary cause of a custom so opposed to the first law of nature with the same certainty that we can prove its high antiquity, we might be enabled to devise some means for its abolition. The chief characteristic of Satiism is its expiating quality: for by this act of faith, the Sati not only makes atonement for the sins of her husband, and secures the remission of her own, but has the joyful assurance of reunion to the object whose beatitude she procures. Having once imbibed this doctrine, its fulfilment is powerfully aided by that heroism of character inherent to the Rajputni; though we see that the stimulant of religion requires no aid evenin the timid female of Bengal, who, relying on the promise of regeneration, lays her head on the pyre with the most philosophical composure.

Nothing short of the abrogation of the doctrines which pronounce such sacrifices exculpatory can be effectual in preventing them; but this would be to overturn the fundamental article of their creed, the notion of metempsychosis. Further research may disclose means more attainable, and the sacred Shastras are at once the surest and the safest. Whoever has examined these is aware of the conflict of authorities for and against cremation; but a proper application of them (and they are the highest who give it not their sanction) has, I believe, never been resorted to. Vyasa, the chronicler of the Yadus, a race whose manners were decidedly Scythic, is the great advocate for female sacrifice: he (in the Mahabharata) pronounces the expiation perfect. But Manu inculcates no such doctrine [635]; and although the state of widowhood he recommends might be deemed onerous by the fair sex of the west, it would be considered little hardship in the east. “Let her emaciate her body, by living voluntarily on pure flowers, roots, and fruit; but let her not, when her lord is deceased, even pronounce the name of another man.” Again he says, “A virtuous wife ascends to heaven, if, after the decease of her lord, she devote herself to pious austerity; but a widow, who slights her deceased husband by marrying again, brings disgrace on herself here below, and shall be excluded from the seat of her lord.”[1]

These and many other texts, enjoining purity of life and manners to the widow, are to be found in this first authority, but none demanding such a cruel pledge of affection. Abstinence from the common pursuits of life, and entire self-denial, are rewarded by “high renown in this world, and in the next the abode of her husband”; and procure for her the title of “sadhwi, or the virtuous.” These are deemed sufficient pledges of affection by the first of sages.[2]So much has been written on this subject that we shall not pursue it further in this place; but proceed to consider a still more inhuman practice, infanticide.

Although custom sanctions, and religion rewards, a Sati, the victim to marital selfishness, yet, to the honour of humanity, neither traditionary adage nor religious text can be quoted in support of a practice so revolting as infanticide. Man alone, of the whole animal creation, is equal to the task of destroying his offspring [636]: for instinct preserves what reason destroys. The wife is the sacrifice to his egotism, and the progeny of her own sex to his pride; and if the unconscious infant should escape the influence of the latter, she is only reserved to become the victim of the former at the period when life is most desirous of extension. If the female reasoned on her destiny, its hardships are sufficient to stifle all sense of joy, and produce indifference to life. When a female is born, no anxious inquiries await the mother—no greetings welcome the newcomer, who appears anintruder on the scene, which often closes in the hour of its birth. But the very silence with which a female birth is accompanied forcibly expresses sorrow; and we dare not say that many compunctious visitings do not obtrude themselves on those who, in accordance with custom and imagined necessity, are thus compelled to violate the sentiments of nature. Families may exult in the Satis which their cenotaphs portray,[3]but none ever heard a Rajput boast of the destruction of his infant progeny.

The Origin of Infanticide.—What are the causes, we may ask, sufficiently powerful to induce the suppression of a feeling which every sentient being has in common for its offspring? To suppose the Rajput devoid of this sentiment would argue his deficiency in the ordinary attributes of humanity: often is he heard to exclaim, “Accursed the day when a woman child was born to me!” The same motive which studded Europe with convents, in which youth and beauty were immured until liberated by death, first prompted the Rajput to infanticide: and, however revolting the policy, it is perhaps kindness compared to incarceration. There can be no doubt that monastic seclusion, practised by the Frisians in France, the Langobardi in Italy, and the Visigoths in Spain, was brought from Central Asia, the cradle of the Goths.[4]It is, in fact, a modification of the same feeling which characterizes the Rajput and the ancient German warrior—the dread of dishonour to the fair: the former raises the poniardto the breast of his wife rather than witness her captivity, and he gives the opiate to the infant, whom, if he cannot portion and marry to her equal, he dare not see degraded [637].

Infanticide.—Although religion nowhere authorizes this barbarity, the laws which regulate marriage amongst the Rajputs powerfully promote infanticide. Not only is intermarriage prohibited between families of the same clan (khanp), but between those of the same tribe (got); and though centuries may have intervened since their separation, and branches thus transplanted may have lost their original patronymic, they can never be regrafted on the original stem: for instance, though eight centuries have separated the two grand subdivisions of the Guhilots, and the younger, the Sesodia, has superseded the elder, the Aharya, each ruling distinct States, a marriage between any of the branches would be deemed incestuous: the Sesodia is yet brother to the Aharya, and regards every female of the race as his sister. Every tribe has therefore to look abroad, to a race distinct from its own, for suitors for the females. Foreign war, international feuds, or other calamities affect tribes the most remote from each other; nor can war or famine thin the clans of Marwar, without diminishing the female population of Amber: thus both suffer in a twofold degree. Many virtuous and humane princes have endeavoured to check or mitigate an evil, in the eradication of which every parental feeling would co-operate. Sumptuary edicts alone can control it; and the Rajputs were never sufficiently enamoured of despotism to permit it to rule within their private dwellings. The plan proposed, and in some degree followed by the great Jai Singh of Amber, might with caution be pursued, and with great probability of success. He submitted to the prince of every Rajput State a decree, which was laid before a convocation of their respective vassals, in which he regulated thedaejaor dower, and other marriage expenditure, with reference to the property of the vassal, limiting it to one year’s income of the estate. This plan was, however, frustrated by the vanity of the Chondawat of Salumbar, who expended on the marriage of his daughter a sum even greater than his sovereign could have afforded; and to have his name blazoned by the bards and genealogists, he sacrificed the beneficent views of one of the wisest of the Rajput race. Until vanity suffers itself to be controlled, and the aristocratic Rajput submit to republicansimplicity,[5]the evils arising from nuptial profusion will not cease. Unfortunately, those who could check it find their interest in stimulating it, namely, the whole class of Mangtas [638] (mendicants), bards, minstrels, jugglers, Brahmans who assemble on these occasions, and pour forth their epithalamiums in praise of the virtue of liberality. The Bardais are the grand recorders of fame, and the volume of precedent is always recurred to, in citing the liberality of former chiefs; while the dread of their satire (visarva, literally ‘poison’)[6]shuts the eyes of the chiefs to consequences, and they are only anxious to maintain the reputation of their ancestors, though fraught with future ruin. “The Dahima emptied his coffers” (says Chand, the pole-star of the Rajputs) “on the marriage of his daughter with Prithiraj; but he filled them with the praises of mankind.” The same bard retails every article of thesedaejasor ‘dowers,’ which thus become precedents for future ages; and the “lakh pasarna,”[7]then established for the chief bardai, has become a model to posterity. Even now the Rana of Udaipur, in his season of poverty, at the recent marriage of his daughters bestowed “the gift of a lakh” on the chief bard; though the articles of gold, horses, clothes, etc., were included in the estimate, and at an undue valuation, which rendered the gift not quite so precious as in the days of the Chauhan. Were bonds taken from all the feudal chiefs, and a penal clause inserted, of forfeiture of their fief by all who exceeded a fixed nuptial expenditure, the axe would be laid to the root, the evil would be checked, and the heart of many a mother (and we may add father) be gladdened, by preserving at once the point of honour and their child. When ignorance declaims against the gratuitous love of murder amongst these brave men, our contempt is excited equally by its short-sighted conclusions, and the affected philanthropy which overlooks all remedy but the “sic volo.” Sir John Shore,[8]when acting on the suggestions ofthe benevolent Duncan for the suppression of this practice amongst the Rajkumars, judged more wisely as a politician, and more charitably in his estimate of human motives. “A prohibition,” says he, “enforced by the denunciation of the severest temporal penalties, would have had little efficacy in abolishing a custom which existed in opposition to the feelings of humanity and natural affection”; but “the sanction of that religion which the Rajkumars professed was appealed to in aid of the ordinances of civil authority; and an engagement binding themselves to desist from the barbarous practice was prepared, and circulated for signature amongst the Rajkumars.” It may well be doubted how far this influence could extend, when the root of the evil [639] remained untouched, though not unseen, as the philanthropic Duncan pointed out in the confession of the Rajkumars: “all unequivocally admitted it, but all did not fully acknowledge its atrocity; and the only reason they assigned for the inhuman practice was the great expense of procuring suitable matches for their daughters, if they allowed them to grow up.” The Rajkumar is one of the Chauhan sakha, chief of the Agnikulas, and in proportion to its high and well-deserved pretensions on the score of honour, it has more infanticides than any other of the “thirty-six royal races.” Amongst those of this race out of the pale of feudalism, and subjected to powers not Rajput, the practice is fourfold greater, from the increased pressure of the cause which gave it birth, and the difficulty of establishing their daughters in wedlock. Raja Jai Singh’s enactment went far to remedy this. Conjoin his plan with Mr. Duncan’s, provide dowers, and infanticide will cease. It is only by removing the cause that the consequences can be averted.[9]

As to the almost universality of this practice amongst the Jarejas, the leading cause, which will also operate to its continuance, has been entirely overlooked. The Jarejas were Rajputs, a subdivision of the Yadus; but by intermarriage with the Muhammadans, to whose faith they became proselytes, they lost their caste. Political causes have disunited them from the Muhammadans, and they desire again to be considered as pure Rajputs; but having been contaminated, no Rajput will intermarry with them. The owner of a hyde of land, whether Sesodia,Rathor, or Chauhan, would scorn the hand of a Jareja princess. Can the “sic volo” be applied to men who think in this fashion?

Johar.—Having thus pointed out the causes of the sacrifice of widows and of infants, I shall touch on the yet more awful rite of Johar, when a whole tribe may become extinct, of which several instances have been recorded in the annals of Mewar. To the fair of other lands the fate of the Rajputni must appear one of appalling hardship. In each stage of life death is ready to claim her; by the poppy at its dawn, by the flames in riper years; while the safety of the interval depending on the uncertainty of war, at no period is her existence worth a twelve-month’s purchase. The loss of a battle, or the capture of a city, is a signal to avoid captivity and its horrors, which to the Rajputni are worse than death. To the doctrines of Christianity Europe owes the boon of protection to the helpless and the fair, who are [640] comparatively safe amidst the vicissitudes of war; to which security the chivalry of the Middle Ages doubtless contributed. But it is singular that a nation so refined, so scrupulous in its ideas with regard to females, as the Rajput, should not have entered into some national compact to abandon such proof of success as the bondage[10]of the sex. We can enter into the feeling, and applaud the deed, which ensured the preservation of their honour by the fatal johar, when the foe was the brutalized Tatar. But the practice was common in the international wars of the Rajputs; and I possess numerous inscriptions (on stone and on brass) which record as the first token of victory the captive wives of the foeman. When “the mother of Sisera looked out of the window, and cried through the lattice, Why tarry the wheels of his chariot—have they not sped? have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two?”[11]we have a perfect picture of the Rajput mother expecting her son from the foray.

The Jewish law with regard to female captives was perfectly analogous to that of Manu; both declare them “lawful prize,” and both Moses and Manu establish rules sanctioning the marriage of such captives with the captors. “When a girl is made captive by her lover, after a victory over her kinsman,” marriage “is permitted by law.”[12]That forcible marriage in the Hindu lawtermed Rakshasa, namely, “the seizure of a maiden by force from her house while she weeps and calls for assistance, after her kinsman and friends have been slain in battle,”[13]is the counterpart of the ordinance regarding the usage of a captive in the Pentateuch,[14]excepting the “shaving of the head,” which is the sign of complete slavery with the Hindu.[15]When Hector, anticipating his fall, predicts the fate which awaits Andromache, he draws a forcible picture of the misery of the Rajput; but the latter, instead of a lachrymose and enervating harangue as he prepared for the battle with the same chance of defeat, would have spared her the pain of plying the “Argive loom” by her death. To prevent such degradation, the brave [641] Rajput has recourse to the johar, or immolation of every female of the family: nor can we doubt that, educated as are the females of that country, they gladly embrace such a refuge from pollution. Who would not be a Rajput in such a case? The very term widow (rand) is used in common parlance as one of reproach.[16]

Manu commands that whoever accosts a woman shall do soby the title of “sister,”[17]and that “way must be made for her, even as for the aged, for a priest, a prince, or a bridegroom”; and in the admirable text on the laws of hospitality, he ordains that “pregnant women, brides, and damsels shall have food before all the other guests”[18]; which, with various other texts, appears to indicate a time when women were less than now objects of restraint; a custom attributable to the paramount dominion of the Muhammadans, from whose rigid system the Hindus have borrowed. But so many conflicting texts are to be found in the pages of Manu, that we may pronounce the compilation never to have been the work of the same legislator: from whose dicta we may select with equal facility texts tending to degrade as to exalt the sex. For the following he would meet with many plaudits: “Let women be constantly supplied with ornaments at festivals and jubilees, for if the wife be not elegantly attired, she will not exhilarate her husband. A wife gaily adorned, the whole house is embellished.”[19]In the following text he pays an unequivocal compliment to her power: “A female is able to draw from the right path in this life, not a fool only, but even a sage, and can lead him in subjection to desire or to wrath.” With this acknowledgment from the very fountain of authority, we have some ground for asserting thatles femmes font les mœurs, even in Rajputana; and that though immured and invisible, their influence on society is not less certain than if they moved in the glare of open day.

Back to Index Next