See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/298789343

A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu

Marriages

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS READS
0 947

3 authors, including:

Nyna Amin
University of KwaZulu-Natal
28 PUBLICATIONS   43 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Edited book View project

pre-service education View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nyna Amin on 18 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

77-98 Journal of Gender and Religion in Africa Vol. 21 No 2 (December 2015)

A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of

Hindu Marriages
Lokesh Ramnath Maharajh1 and Nyna Amin2

Abstract
Marriage is an important social convention in Hinduism, as it is a vital step on the
path to liberation from the recurrent cycle of life and death. A woman’s most
important role, it transpires, is to support her husband in his quest for moksha.
Sacred Hindu texts mention eight marriage forms: Brahma, Daiva, Arsha,
Prajapatya, Asura, Gandharva, Paisacha and Rakshasa. In seven of the forms,
marriage is an arrangement made by men. Fathers, it can be deduced, play a
critical role in the selection of life partners. It is only in the Ghandarva form that a
female is involved in selecting a marital partner. A critical gender reading makes
apparent the ways in which patriarchy operates jointly with religious values to
oppress women and to subject them to cultural, social and religious norms in at
least five ways. First, accepting gifts by the bride’s family signifies the
commodification, exploitation and vulnerabilities of women and transfer of the
father’s authority over the bride to her husband. Second, unsanctioned Hindu
marriages are legitimised through the complicity of all parties involved. Third,
arranged marriages sublimate romantic love and freedom of choice. Fourth,
Hindu priests disapprove of same-sex marriages and fifth, the possibility for
resistance is compromised by internalised gendering. Finally, the Marxian
concepts, use-value, exchange-value and surplus-value reveal the nature of the
subject positions of women in Hindu marriages.

Introduction
The western view of marriage can generally be divided into two
competing views: the conjugal view and the revisionist view.3 The former
is a union between a man and a woman while the latter accepts
marriage between same or opposite sexes. Hinduism, by contrast offers

1
Dr Lokesh Ramnath Maharajh is a lecturer in the School of Education, University of
KwaZulu-Natal. He teaches assessment and foundations in education and research
methodology. His research interests include assessment in higher education, values and
religion education. Email: <maharajhlr@ukzn.ac.za>.
2
Dr Nyna Amin is a senior lecturer in the School of Education and university distinguished
teacher, University of KwaZulu-Natal. A former Fulbright scholar, she has published articles
in the fields of higher education, teacher education, medical education and gender. Email:
<amin@ukzn.ac.za>.
3
Sherif Girgis, Robert P. George and Ryan T. Anderson, What is Marriage? Man and
Woman: A Defense. New York: Encounter Books, (2012).
78 Maharajh & Amin

eight types of marriage, all of which are consistent with the conjugal
view. Irrespective of religion or belief, the conjugal view implies
differences between the sexes, their roles within marriage and the
impact on individuals within the institution of marriage. Surprisingly, a
report by Zaher in the first decade of the twenty-first century revealed
that women have no legal standing in the United States.4 In the same
decade, a number of studies indicated that there were mutual economic
benefits for husbands and wives with more money, less debt and better
family life.5 6 7 8 Other studies highlight the toxic nature of marriage for
women which include among others, high levels of stress,9 sexual
violence,10 and the development of mental illness.11

Against this backdrop, this article seeks to interrogate the eight forms of
Hindu marriage from a critical gender perspective. In particular, we
describe the eight religious forms of marriage, unpack its gendered
agenda and unveil the sociocultural power lines that impact on Hindu
women in India. In the absence of empirical data, we interpret religious
texts and practices and draw on scholarly works and gender theories to
produce a critical analysis. The focus on texts is important as it
prescribes the purposes of life, the roles and functions of human beings,
social practices, cultural mores and spiritual benefits. Written more than
five thousand years ago, texts like the Rg Veda, the Gita, the Ramayana
and the Manusmriti are central to Hindu ways of life and underpin

4
Claudia Zaher, “When a Woman’s Marital Status Determined her Legal Status: A
Research Guide on the Common Law Doctrine of Coverture,” Law Library Journal 94, no. 3
(2002): 459-486.
5
Sarah Avellar and Pamela J. Smock, “The Economic Consequences of the Dissolution of
Cohabiting Unions,” Journal of Marriage and Family 67, no. 2 (2005): 315-327.
6
Michal Grinstein-Weiss, Min Zhan and Michael Sherraden, “Saving Performance in
Individual Development Accounts: Does Marital Status Matter?” Journal of Marriage and
Family 68, no. 1 (2006): 192-204.
7
Thomas A. Hirschi, Joyce Altobelli and Mark R. Rank, “Does Marriage Increase the Odds
of Affluence? Exploring the Life Course Probabilities,” Journal of Marriage and Family 65,
no. 4 (2003): 927-938.
8
Daniel T. Lichter, Deborah Roempke Graefe and J. Brian Brown, “Is Marriage a
Panacea? Union Formation among Economically Disadvantaged Unwed Mothers,” Social
Problems 50, no. 1 (2003): 60-86.
9
Joyce O. Ogunsanmi and Theresa O. Owuamanam, “Stress among Married Female
Sandwich Undergraduates in Southwest Nigeria,” Journal of Emerging Trends in
Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS) 5, no. 8 (2014): 138-142.
10
Mahesh Puri, Jyotsna Tamang and Iqbal Shah, “Suffering in Silence: Consequences of
Sexual Violence within Marriage among Young Women in Nepal,” BMC Health 11, no. 29
(2012): 11-29.
11
Indira Sharma, Balram Pandit, Abhishek Pathak and Reet Sharma, “Hinduism, Marriage
and Mental Illness,” Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55, no. 12 (2013): S243-S249.
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 79

common law, customary law and the laws of property rights and
inheritance in India and Nepal and social and cultural customs in other
parts of the world where Hindus reside.

Hindus and the Institution of Marriage

Hindus throughout the world trace their lineage to various tribes in India.
Despite a common geographical ancestry and due to its polytheistic
features a Hindu way of life can and does take many forms and paths.12
Depending on where Hindus live and even within the same region or
family the practice of Hinduism is discursive, polysemic and
characterized by multiple practices and realities. As a result, Swami
argues that the term, ‘Hindu’, is difficult to describe:
“Hindu” can be an ethnic designation, so that, for example, one might
be both Hindu and Atheist. Alternatively, a Hindu might pursue
oneness with an abstract all-encompassing Supreme reality, or live a
life of pious devotion to a pantheon of colorful gods and goddesses, or
just not bother with any of that and focus on building a successful
13
career in software, medicine, engineering, or popular films.

Nevertheless, the Vedas (a large body of ancient texts in Vedic

Sanskrit), which prescribe some of the most enduring principles of living
a Hindu way of life (Dharma), “must be practiced by man together with
his wife and offspring.”14 Dharma clearly outlines the roles of males and
females in terms of the division of labour, leadership, kinship and family
life. This has gender consequences as the male is the leader of the
family and the chief beneficiary of the practice of Dharma. By contrast,
the laws for single and married women are pernicious, while widowhood
increases their vulnerabilities.15 Marriage, it seems, is imperative for the
spiritual liberation of men, an avenue to grow the Hindu population and
to secure the continuation of its culture, rites and rituals through
procreation. Procreation, however, is strictly promoted within the
institution of ‘vivaha’ (marriage). The concept ‘vivaha’, Kane avers,
originates from the Taittiriya Samhita16 and the Aitareya Brahmana17

12 nd
Julius J. Lipner, Hindus: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (2 ed.), London:
Routledge, (2009).
13
Jayādvaita Swami, Vanity Karma: Ecclesiastes, the Bhagavad- Gītā, and the Meaning of
Life (Los Angeles, Stockholm, Johannesburg, Sydney: The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust,
2015), 12.
14
Paras Diwan, Modern Hindu Law (Allahabad: Allahabad Law Agency, 2008).
15
Sekhar Bandyopadhyay, Caste, Culture and Hegemony: Social Dominance in Colonial
Bengal (New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2004).
16
The Taittiriya Samhita consists of 8 books subdivided into chapters which are further
subdivided into individual hymns.
80 Maharajh & Amin

texts.18 Marriage is pivotal to the continuation of the social structures of

class and caste, conducting the grhastha stage of life and to achieve two
of its aims, namely Dharma and Kama (sensuous pleasure).19 By
contrast, Sharma argues that a marriage in Hinduism serves three, not
two, principal purposes ‒ religious observance, procreation and sexual
pleasure.20 From a particular gender perspective, however, marriage
serves one purpose only, for women to enable men to achieve moksha
(the state of oneness with God and escape from reincarnation ‒ the
eternal cycle of life and death). In reality, Zaher’s description of the
Common Law Doctrine of Coverture captures the reality of marriage for
women in the United States which, we argue, could apply to Hindu
women as well:
To put it more succinctly, upon marriage the husband and wife become
one – him. (Italics in original).21

For a Hindu woman, marriage is immaterial at a personal level as her

fate is tied to that of the family. Enlightened scholars may argue that
Hinduism is gender free as past and future lives (through reincarnation)
ensure that each individual has access to the male form and thereby
male privileges and rewards. This notion of deferred gender justice is
neither tenable nor scientifically verifiable when one considers the
material lives of women who have to endure oppression, repression and
gender obligation during their lifetime.

Problematizing Issues within Religion and Patriarchy:

Some General Observations
The literature indicates that all the major monotheistic religions
(Christianity, Islam and Judaism), as well as polytheistic, monotheistic,
pantheistic and atheistic Hinduisms, are patriarchal in nature, with both
child and adult females regarded as inferior to males.22 23 24 The

17
The Aitareya Brahmana is the sacred prayer (Brahmana) of the Rg Veda, an ancient
Indian collection of sacred texts and hymns.
18
Pandurang Varnan Kane, History of Dharmaśāstra. Vol. I. Part 1. Poona: Bhandarkar
Oriental Research Institute (Government Oriental Series, Class B, No. 6, 1978).
19
Mark A. Yarhouse & Stephanie Kaye Nowacki, “The Many Meanings of Marriage:
Divergent Perspectives Seeking Common Ground,” The Family Journal 15, no. 1 (2007):
36-45.
20
Arvind Sharma, “Marriage in Hindu Religious Tradition,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies
20, no. 1 (1985): 69-80.
21
Zaher, “Woman’s Marital Status,” 461.
22
Mariam George, “Religion, Patriarchy and the Subjugation of Women in India,”
International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Science 3, no. 3 (2008): 21-30.
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 81

inferiority of women is particularly noticeable when it comes to property

and succession rights and gender roles and functions. What occurs in
the household is often not similarly visible. Indeed, the ideas of gender
and marriage of the Medieval period described by Singh25 still capture
the purposes of controlling Hindu women today and echo Foucault’s26
notion of the production of ‘docile bodies’:
Strict control over women’s sexuality and reproductive potential was
essential for the patrilineal transmission of property and for the
maintenance and perpetuation of the endogamous caste structure. The
strengthening of patriarchal authority within the household and the
emphasis on certain norms related to marriage and the chastity of
27
women were the means of effecting such control.

Even at present, many Hindu females live under the protection of males:
fathers before marriage, husbands during marriage and a
son/uncle/brother-in-law during widowhood. This gives credence to the
claim that power over females comes not only from above (God) and
outside (culture), it also “comes from below” (e.g. sons).28 In almost all
societies, most females are prohibited from engaging in behaviours that
deviate from the normative religious, moral and social practices, and, at
best, they are restricted to a narrow range of acceptable deviancy and in
some instances, a deviancy may be fatal.29

The failed execution of Malala Yousufzai is, perhaps, the most well-
known contemporary example of the risks women court. The Yousufzai
case, though not directly related to marriage, exemplifies the relationship
between religious belief and treatment of females. Overzealous, religious
fundamentalists viewed the pursuit and promotion of the education of
girls by Malala as heresy, eventuating in the assassination attempt.
However, patriarchal and religious oppression of women under religion is
quite complex and does not apply to all, even to adherents of the

23
Pamela J. Prickett, “Negotiating Gendered Religious Space: The Particularities of
Patriarchy in an African American Mosque,” Gender and Society 29, no. 1 (2015): 51-72.
24
Susan Rakoczy, “Religion and Violence: The Suffering of Women,” Agenda: Empowering
Women for Gender Equity 18, no. 61 (2004): 29-35.
25
Upinder Singh, A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the
th
12 Century. Delhi: Pearson, Longman, (2008).
26
Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Alan Sheridan (trans.)
(New York: Vintage, 1979), 138.
27
Singh, “Ancient and Medieval India,” 295.
28
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction. Robert Hurley
(trans.) (New York: Vintage, 1990) 94.
29
Bandyopadhyay, “Caste, Culture and Hegemony.”
82 Maharajh & Amin

abovementioned major religions. For instance, the attempt to eliminate

Malala was widely condemned by her fellow countrymen and support by
males for the education of girls has since gained traction in Pakistan. In
the United States, Prickett’s study about African American female
mosque attendees provided evidence that even within the narrow
constraints of a religion (Islam), the women who were allotted a
separate, somewhat much smaller space than the men for worship, were
able to resist various kinds of oppressions and more importantly, were
able to negotiate their religious experiences within such confines.30
Anglican women have trumped the taboo that prevented them from
becoming priests, and women of most faiths now have access to sacred
texts. The taboos that prevented Hindu widows from participating in
cultural celebrations have largely been overcome. The many reforms of
Hindu marriage customs have resulted in a number of laws in India to
protect women from social evils. These include XVII Prevention of Sati
Act which made sati a criminal offence, the Dowry Prohibition Act of
1961, which made the husbands and relatives culpable for the death of
wives within the first seven years of marriage and The Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act 43 of 2005. Nonetheless, within
private conjugal spaces and the complicity of community, family and
home, violations of women’s rights and legal protections continue. So,
the relationship between patriarchy and religion and its effects on
females is multifarious, complex, complicated, dynamic and
unpredictable.

An Exposition of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriage

The eight forms of marriage described in this section originated in the
Vedas and are a major topic of discussion in Hindu law books.31 The
forms can also be traced to sacred texts, such as the Grhyasutras
(various recensions of the Vedas) and the Manusmriti. The latter, in
particular, is a critical text that not only constructed a patriarchal
framework of religious laws, it also ordained the social practices and
activities that promote and continue to sustain patriarchy. In this article
we focus on the forms of marriage and the ways in which a marriage
partner, particularly a wife, is acquired. Males play a dominant role in the
negotiation and authorization of marriage. Females are offered as gifts or
sacrificial offerings or as the prize of conquests. There are some debates
regarding the differences regarding the marriage forms. For example,
Altekar argues that “Brahma and Prajapatya are synonymous words and

30
Prickett, “Negotiating Gendered Religious Space.”
31
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra.”
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 83

it is quite possible that the Brahma marriage was originally identical to

the Prajapatya one.”32 Differences between the two forms emerged over
time. The marriage forms are the Brahma, Daiva, Arsha, Prajapatya,
Asura, Gandharva, Rakshasa and Paisacha (in Manusmriti, Chap 111,
Verses 20-35) and are described and interpreted hereunder.

Brahma Marriage
The Brahma form characterizes marriage as a father’s prerogative to gift
his daughter to a suitor he has approved of on her behalf. The marriage
is an arrangement between the men, initiated by the groom’s family. The
acceptance of the groom is based on the qualities the bride’s father
desires of her future husband: learned in the Vedas, of good conduct
and of good family reputation. In return, the groom gains a wife
bedecked with jewels and a substantial trousseau. The Brahma form is
the most popular because it rests on the ideals promoted by parents
about the value of education, the reputation of families, maintaining
Varna purity (of the same class and caste) and the parents’ rights to
choose. While there is no commercial transaction involved in this form of
marriage it certainly is a social transaction that purports to enrich both
parties socially and culturally. The goal of the Brahma marriage is
religious in nature because it supports the dharmic advancement of the
two families. Whilst it may appear to treat the couple more kindly during
negotiations, the personal desires of the couple are sublimated and
sacrificed for the social and cultural advancement of the families.

Daiva Marriage
The Daiva form of marriage is based on the principle of sacrifice. Fathers
seek young Brahmin suitors for their daughters. The Brahmin, a priest,
who is usually approached while he is conducting a sacrificial prayer, is
offered the daughter as a wife and as an item of sacrifice. In other words,
offering a daughter is constituted as the ultimate sacrifice a parent can
make to placate the gods or to fulfill his karmic duty. In Hinduism the
benevolence shown to a Brahmin is looked upon as a supreme act of
devotion and a daughter is the means to do so. The construction of the
father as benevolent giver is simultaneously a dismissal of the daughter
to service male karmic and dharmic ends.

32
Anant S. Alteker, The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization from Prehistoric Times to
nd
the Present Day. (2 ed.) (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1987), 46.
84 Maharajh & Amin

Arsha Marriage
In the Arsha form of marriage, the arrangement is, once again, a
decision between men. The daughter is given away as a bride to a sage
or a rishi (holy man) in exchange for two cows, reminiscent of the
practice of lobola in Africa. The sage is often quite old and receives
nothing in return (except the bride). Parents agree to this type of
marriage when they are unable to pay the costs of a wedding but are still
able to fulfill their duty to marry off a daughter. The groom may or may
not have suitable qualities to be a husband, which appears to be
immaterial to the bride’s family. The exchange of cattle for a bride is thus
an economic transaction which ignores the future aspirations and desires
of a girl and commodifies females. In this type of marriage, the female is
a pawn in the Hindu game of life of a holy man. In order to meet the
requirement of going through the four phases, the sage must also satisfy
the grhastha stage and the acquisition of a wife is an important step in
his quest to achieve his dharmic aims.

Asura Marriage
Unsuitable or undesired suitors are accommodated in the Asura form of
marriage. In this form, a man purchases a wife by paying an enormous
sum of money to her family, kinsmen and to the bride. The father gives
his daughter away in exchange for the acquisition of wealth. According to
Kane this form of marriage is “practically a sale of a girl for money” or
money’s worth.33 Kane explains further that the difference between the
Asura and the Arsha forms is that in the former there is no limit to what is
taken from the bridegroom while in the latter a “pair of cattle is offered as
a matter of form.”34 In other words, there is a subtle difference based on
the size of the purse. At a social level, two cows for a bride are
acceptable while a larger payout is frowned upon. From a critical gender
perspective, both token and prodigious payments are objectionable as
daughters are perceived as merchandise to be traded, exchanged or
discarded.

Prajapatya Marriage
The commonality amongst the Brahma, Daiva, Asura and Arsha forms is
that the quest for a bride is undertaken by a groom or his family. In the
fifth form, Prajapatya, by comparison, it is the bride’s father who actively
seeks a marriage partner for his daughter. Although there is no trading or

33
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra,” 519.
34
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra,” 519.
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 85

exchange of gifts as in the Brahma form to which this form is closely

allied, the giving away of the bride by her parents to the groom
(kanyadaana) forms part of this marriage. Despite the exclusion of the
exchange of gifts, the bride, as a daughter is a disposable possession of
her father. Through marriage, the daughter becomes a wife and thus, a
possession of her husband. Within the confines of her marriage, a girl
can access happiness or endure a life of servitude and suffering. When
she is disposed of by her father, her future is determined by the impulses
and desires of her husband and his family.

Gandharva Marriage
The Manusmriti III, 32, describes the Gandharva marriage as the
voluntary union of a maiden and her lover. In the verse (III, 32),
Manusmriti says that such a union springs from desire and has sexual
intercourse for its purpose, ignoring the fact that in all marriages there is
an expectation to consummate the relationship. Sexual activity in the
absence of mutual desire is the norm and the explicitness of sexual
desire signified by the mutual attraction of a couple is an uncomfortable
tension within the confines of a religion that stresses purity, virginity and
eventual renunciation of worldly and emotional ties. For Gupta, the
Gandharva marriage is the nearest to what may be referred to as “free-
choice,” “romantic” or “love” marriage.35 Pandey avers that the
Gandharva marriage is one of the earliest and was the most common
form of marriage in Vedic times.36 A verse in the Atharva Veda suggests
that parents usually allowed a daughter to select her lover.37 According
to the Manusmriti, however, the Gandharva marriage may be suitable for
males from warrior, military, administrator and royal families, suggesting
that free choice is reserved for the upper castes.38 While there is no
consensual theory to explain why Gandharva marriages declined over
time, Meyer maintains that the priestly class of India declared them as
inappropriate because traditional marriages such as the Brahma
marriage were good sources of income.39 Recent trends suggest,

35
Giri Raj Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage, and the Indian Social Structure,” Journal of
Comparative Family Studies 7, no. 1 (1976): 76.
36
Rajbali Pandey, Hindu Saṁskāras: Socio-Religious Study of the Hindu Sacraments
(Jawahar Nagar, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1969).
37
The verse reads thus, “May O Agni! A suitor after our own heart come to us, may he
come to this maiden with fortune! May she be agreeable to suitors, charming at festivals,
promptly obtain happiness through a husband.”
38
Johann Jakob Meyer, Sexual Life in Ancient India: A Study in the Comparative History of
Indian Culture (Jawahar Nagar, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1989).
39
Meyer, “Sexual Life in Ancient India.”
86 Maharajh & Amin

though, that the Gandharva marriage is slowly being revived as more

women become economically independent.

Rakshasa Marriage
The Rakshasa form condones bride abduction following an attack on the
bride’s kinsmen who have been slain or beaten and wounded. The
women are doubly victimized through the loss of family and captured as
prizes of violent conquests. The acquisition of brides in this way means
that there is no recourse to a family that has been slain, and fear of
violence against surviving relatives prevents any acts of agency.

Paisacha Marriage
The Paisacha form occurs through planned dishonourable means or
opportunities available to engage in premarital sexual activity with a
female. The female is raped when she is asleep, intoxicated or in a
disordered state of mind. This can be compared to the modern
description of ‘date rape’. This form takes advantage of the shame
associated with premarital sex and sexual contamination of females and
eventuates in the family disowning daughters or agreeing to the marriage
as a tainted girl is ‘spoilt goods’. The excessive value attached to
virginity and purity makes a girl extremely vulnerable to exploitation by
dishonourable men and abandonment by her own family. Once again,
the future of a female resides in and derives from religious values and
principles of a patriarchal system.

Both the Rakshasa and Paisacha forms of marriage are not sanctioned
by any of the sacred texts. In response to the question about the legality
of the Rakshasa and Paisacha forms of marriage by capture or stealth
Kane avers thus:
What they [ancient sages] meant was that these were the means of
securing wives and that there are not really eight kinds of vivaha, but
rather there are eight ways in which wives may be secured. It is for this
reason that Vatsa says that if a fine girl cannot be secured by any
means she may be approached even in private by stealth and married.
40
The sages condemned in no measured terms the Paisacha.

Interestingly, the Paisacha is acceptable if the girl is approached

privately, without the consent of parents and more worryingly, the
‘fineness’ of the girl justifies the act for procurement. The text is silent on
the qualities of the male.

40
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra,” 520.
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 87

Discussion
In this section, we analyse the forms and interpret them from critical
gender perspectives to bring to fore the implication for and impact on
women’s lives. Five themes constitute this section: i. marriage, exchange
of gifts and commodification of women; ii. marriage rituals: legitimacy
and complicity; iii. arranged marriages and the sublimation of romantic
love; iv. marriage, gender, and heteronormativity; and, v. marriage,
resistance and internalised gendering.

Marriage, Exchange of Gifts and the Commodification of

Women
The exchange of gifts is, in our opinion, closely tied to the
commodification of Hindu women. In the four arranged marriage forms
(Brahma, Daiva, Arsha and Prajapatya), the bride’s father is obligated to
give material gifts to the groom. The bride is regarded as the most
important gift and underpins the ritual giving away (kanyadaana) of the
daughter to a suitable person by her parents.41 Kane cautions that the
word, daana (gift), is used in the sense of ceding the father’s right of
guardianship and control of the daughter to the husband.42 The
exchange of gifts is, in effect, an exchange and a transfer of the
ownership of a woman from one male to another. Furthermore, the
critical observation by Bandyopadhyay is a reminder of the nature of
constructing brides as gifts: “A wife in this discourse thus becomes a
possession, the sole utility of which lay in the reproduction and
immortalisation of the male line.”43 Even worse, is the use of the
institution of marriage for commercial and economic benefits for men, as
narrated by Mahasweta Devi to Gayatri Spivak about the bodily hexes of
tribal women:
Women are just merchandise, commodities. In the border districts of
West Bengal there are women from Bangladesh being sold in the
name of marriage in the bridegroom’s house. For the flesh trade all you
have to invest is two saris, a bit of food, some trinkets and a bit of
44
money for the parents.

In the modern form of marriages that are taking place in India, the
system of giving gifts to the groom has deteriorated to a pernicious form,

41
Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage.”
42
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra.”
43
Bandyopadhyay, “Caste, Culture and Hegemony.”
44
Mahasweta Devi, Imaginary Maps: Three Stories. Gayatri C. Spivak (trans.) (New York:
Routledge, 1995), XX.
88 Maharajh & Amin

namely the dowry system. The donation of a virgin bride, spontaneous

gifts given by the bride’s father to the groom, and unforced giving of gifts
by relatives and friends to the bride, are said to be the source of the
Indian dowry system in its present form.45 46 Dowry in modern times has
not been fully understood (or, perhaps, intentionally misunderstood) in
the context of its emergence ‒ as a saving for use in times of hardship.47
In fact, according to ancient Hindu law, “…men do not receive dowries
from their wives’ families and thereafter use them to secure husbands for
their sisters; nor do parents receive the dowry on behalf of their sons and
then use it for their own purposes…”48 The interpretation one can make
is that in ancient times there was recognition of the subordinate status of
women in marriage and the aim of the dowry was to strengthen her
position and to provide her with resources to negotiate hardships in the
marital home. Over time, the purposes of the dowry were subverted
when women became the nodal point for access to enrichment. The
source of strength became the source of domination and oppression and
the demand for dowry became the opportunity to entrench and normalize
patriarchal expectations. While the dowry is legally banned in India, its
operation is often undetectable due to the complicity of all the parties
involved. In Marxian terms women become the site for the production of
capital.

Marriage Rtuals: Legitimacy and Complicity

Traditional rites and rituals prescribed by religious texts formalize Hindu
marriages. For example, a Gandharva marriage has ‘truncated or
symbolic’ Hindu rituals like the exchange of garlands or walking around
the fire together.49 However, the Smritichandrika declares that in the
Gandharva, Asura, Rakshasa and Paisacha marriage forms, oblations
into the sacred fire as well as the seven steps are necessary.50 In
practice, as exemplified in a Sanskrit drama called Raghuvansa VII, the
poet Kalidasa described how, after the swayamvara (choosing of a

45
Paras Diwan, “Modern Hindu Law.”
46
Padma Srinivasan and Gary R. Lee, “The Dowry System in Northern India: Women's
Attitudes and Social Change,” Journal of Marriage and Family 66, no. 5 (2004): 1108-1117.
47
Sumona Vohra, “The Practice of Dowry from the Context of Hinduism,” Critical Half 1, no.
1 (2003): 33-35.
48
Stanley J. Tambiah, “Dowry and Bridewealth and the Property Rights of Women in South
Asia,” in Bridewealth and Dowry, (eds) Jack Goody and Stanley J. Tambiah (London:
Cambridge University Press, 1973), 62.
49
Ruth Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls: Same-Sex Marriage and Hindu Traditions,” Journal
of Feminist Studies in Religion 20, no. 4 (2004): 119-135.
50
Kane, “History of Dharmaśāstra.”
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 89

suitable husband by a girl of marriageable age) of Indumati, a marriage

could be legitimized through three acts: oblations into the fire, the
circumambulation of the fire and the placing of the bride’s hand into that
of the groom. Walking around the fire can thus be a way to negate the
sanctions placed on the reviled Rakshasa and Paisacha forms of
marriage and paradoxically, legalize such unions. In other words, even
when a bride is procured by deception, illegal and immoral ways,
religious law, rituals and the Hindu Marriage Act 25 of 1955 make the
marriage a legitimate and binding one. Metaphorically, disgraced
marriages arise from fire rituals and are assimilated into the social
sphere just as a Phoenix emerges anew from the ashes of a fire. The
noble efforts of the Indian State to be inclusive and to support multiple
traditions and cultures undoubtedly amount to no more than collusion
and collaboration with misogynists who abuse the institution of marriage.

The forms of marriage are also linked to one’s caste. According to Hara,
“of these eight forms of marriage, the applicability of lawfulness and
unlawfulness differs from one caste to another.”51 For instance, the
Rakshasa form of marriage is approved exclusively for the Kshatriya52
caste. In the Brahma, Daiva, Arsha and Prajapatya forms of marriage a
notion of giving is implied. Hara, therefore, concludes that the Rakshasa
form of marriage should be interpreted in the light of what it means to be
a Kshatriya.53 If we have to accept the explanation that the eight forms of
marriage are caste dependent, then it means that each form is not there
as an artifice to increase the number of forms. It does indicate, though,
that each form is a practice that coheres with intentions that can be
either morally grounded or perverse. The outcome of married life for
Hindu brides depends then on the generosity, beneficence or depravity
of the groom and his family.

Arranged Marriages and the Sublimation of Romantic

Love
With the exception of the Gandharva form, the rest do not include the
element of love as a precondition for marriage. The Brahma, Daiva,
Arsha and Prajapatya forms are arranged marriages without consulting
or confirming the choice of marriage partner with females. Though

51
Minoru Hara, “A Note on the Rakshasa Form of Marriage,” Journal of the American
Oriental Society 94, no. 3 (1974): 296-306.
52
According to Rossen (2002), Kshatriya is made up of two words: ‘kshat’, which means
hurt and ‘trayate’, which means to give protection. A Kshatriya is therefore one who
protects from harm or violence.
53
Hara, “Rakshasa Form of Marriage.”
90 Maharajh & Amin

reported in Hindu literature, sacred books and scriptures, infatuation and

romantic love is discouraged in all except the Gandharva form of
marriage.54 Vanita, however, makes the point that “marriage by individual
choice is also attested in pre-modern texts and is prevalent in modern
India.”55 However, Gupta asserted that love was not considered to be a
strong basis for marriage as the presence of love had the potential to
overshadow the suitable qualities in spouses.56 Nonetheless, in South
Africa there seems to be a weakening of the tradition of arranged
marriages. Even where marriages are arranged, partners date after
being introduced by parents, family or friends. Among the Hindus in
South Africa, a love marriage may involve a couple who date first, and
then seek the consent of their parents after a period of courtship. The
widespread trend of love arrangements without the involvement of
parents and family in South Africa hints at similar strengthening of the
trend on the Indian subcontinent as women pursue education and
become economically independent.

Marriage, Gender, and Heteronormativity

In the eight forms of marriage mentioned above, reference is only made
to the man-to-woman relationship. In fact, the man-to-woman
relationship is one of the most important subjects dealt with in the Rg
Veda, with instructions on how to build a sound and stable society, and
where righteousness can prevail. For example, one of the verses of the
Rg Veda says: “In this new family of your husband, may you be happy
and prosperous along with your offspring” (Rg Veda, X, 85.27). None of
the eight forms of marriage make provision for same-sex relationships or
marriages. In 2009, a Hindu priest in South Africa conducted a gay
wedding by Hindu rites.57 Hindu community leaders criticized the
elaborate wedding of the two young men. The priest who conducted the
ceremony chose to remain anonymous, probably fearing sanction by his
peers. He conducted a truncated ceremony that required the
performance of the ceremonial fire prayer and one person tying a
pendant of Ganesha (the Hindu elephant head god) around the other
person’s neck. The truncated ceremony, as well as the disapproval of
the Hindu leaders, pointed to an important presupposition and moral
value that marriage can only take place between a man and a woman.

54
Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage.”
55
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls.”
56
Gupta, “Love, Arranged Marriage.”
57
Religioscope, www.religion.info
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 91

However, some of the Hindu scriptures contain examples of variation of

both sex and gender. Many of the deities are androgynous or
transgender. For example, the folk story of the heroic king Bhagiratha,
who brought the sacred river Ganga from heaven to earth, narrates how
he was miraculously born to and raised by two co-widows. The king was
named Bhagiratha because bhaga means vulva and he was the progeny
of two vulvas (co-widows). Mathematician Shakuntala Devi, in the book
“The World of Homosexuals,” interviewed Srinivasa Raghavachariar,
head priest of a temple, who said, “Same sex partners must have been
cross sex partners in a former life. The sex may change but the soul
retains its attachments; hence love impels them toward one another.”58
Similarly, Vanita interviewed a Shaiva priest from India who conducted a
wedding of two women in Seattle.59 She quotes him as follows,
“marriage is a union of spirits, and the spirit is not male or female.” This
implies the point made by Sugirtharajah that spiritual equality and
inseparability of male and female is a vested belief of Hinduism.60 Yet,
Sheela and Audinarayan (2003) maintain that the main purpose of the
marriage forms is the performance of Dharma and the continuation of the
family and the lineage.61 Vanita, however, disagrees with these
purposes:
Contrary to texts that identify procreation as the sole aim of sexual
activity, the fourth century Kama sutra, also a sacred text, while giving
procreation due importance, also emphasises pleasure and joy as
aims of intercourse and states that sexual desire finds its finality in
62
itself.

If there is an insistence “that the purpose of marriage is procreation then

why is marriage allowed between infertile people, people past the age of
reproduction and people who do not intend to procreate?” These are
questions, according to Vanita, to which opponents of same sex
marriages need to respond.63

58
Shakuntala Devi, The World of Homosexuals (Mystic, Connecticut: Lawrence Verry
Incorporated, 1977).
59
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls.”
60
Sharada Sugirtharajah, “Hinduism and Feminism: Some Concerns,” Journal of Feminist
Studies in Religion 18, no. 2 (2002): 97-104.
61
J. Sheela & N. Audinarayana, “Mate Selection and Female Age at Marriage: A Micro
Level Investigation in Tamil Nadu, India,” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 34, no. 4
(2003): 497-508.
62
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls,” 125.
63
Vanita, “Wedding of Two Souls.”
92 Maharajh & Amin

Ultimately, the construction of women as bad and unholy in Hindu texts

has served to sanction male attitudes to women and to entrench their
lowly status in a marital relationship. The lowly status of women is not
accidental; Leslie traced evidence in the Manusmriti in which women are
described as weak and impure.64 The Mahabharata also declared that
women should never remain unmarried.65 However, women have not
always been depicted as bad and unholy in Hindu texts. In fact, the Rg
Veda does not disqualify women from ritual acts and up to the
Upanishad period, women were still not denied religious activities.66 It is
much later, in the ages of the Epics and Puranas, that the position of
women became vulnerable to the toxicity of patriarchal dominance. A
response captured by Omvedt bears testimony to the ideas that make
Hindu women dependent on men for liberation. Men in this construction
are cast as gods to be worshipped:
There were contradictory statements about almost everything … but
there were two things on which all those books the Dharmasastras, the
sacred epics, the Puranas and modern poets, the popular preachers of
the present day and orthodox high caste men agreed, that women of
the high and low caste, as a class were all bad, very bad, worse than
demons, as unholy as untruth and that they could not get moksha like
men. The only hope of their getting this much desired liberation from
karma and its results, that is, countless millions of births and deaths
and untold suffering, was the worship of their husbands [Pandita
67
Ramabai].

Pandita Ramabai’s perspective then is that Hindu women are only

guaranteed liberation if they are married. By implication, this means that
unmarried women are excluded from liberating themselves from the
cycle of birth and death. However, there is evidence from Hindu
scriptures that women need not necessarily marry to obtain liberation. In
the Rg Veda, the goddess Vak has no consort. The goddess of learning,
Saraswati, enjoys full autonomy as a goddess without a consort.
Sulabha is a symbolic figure who appears in different Hindu texts and
“she represents the female scholar par excellence.”68 Additionally, the

64
Isobel Julia Leslie, “Essence and Existence: Women and Religion in Ancient Indian
Texts,” in Women’s Religious Experience: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, ed. Pat Holden
(London: Croom, 1983), 89-112.
65
Alteker, “Women in Hindu Civilization.”
66
Gail Omvedt, “Towards a Theory of Brahmanic Patriarchy,” Economic and Political
Weekly 35, no. 4 (2000): 187.
67
Leslie, “Essence and Existence.”
68
Vanita, “The Self is not Gendered, Sulabha’s Debate with King Janaka,” NWSA Journal
15, no. 2 (2003): 79.
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 93

superior cognitive abilities of women were exemplified in a philosophical

debate that occurred between King Janaka and Sulabha in the
Mahabharata which Sulabha wins (since Janaka is unable to answer
her). This depiction of the single woman as an intellectual “defies the
dictum that a woman should always be under the protection of a man.”69
So while it may be generally accepted that a woman’s emancipation is
through devotion to her husband, the debate between Sulabha and
Janaka shows that Hindu thought is not unified on this issue. Vanita
avers that “It is possible and desirable for Hindu woman to attain
emancipation by renunciation. The Atman (Self/Spirit) is gender neuter in
Sanskrit, and is the same in all beings.”70

Marriage, Resistance and Internalised Gendering

Vanita’s assumption of “same in all beings” must be viewed in the
context of feminist idealism about emancipation from servitude and
suffering and engaging in resistance politics. In some spaces resistance
is limited by “internalised gendering.”71 Spivak’s analysis of Mahasweta’s
narrative of a tribal woman, Doulati, captures poignantly the reasons for
continued bondage and the absence of agency:
Yet sweet, innocent, responsible Doulati is not a subject of resistance.
Mahasweta dramatizes that difficult truth: internalised gendering
perceived as ethical choice is the hardest roadblock for women all over
the world.72

Ethical choice, choosing between self-liberation on the one hand and

being the good wife, daughter, Hindu and community member on the
other hand, is complicated and perplexing. The temptation of freedom is
most often tempered by the sanctions that follow (banishment,
ostracisation and punishment). Spivak (in Devi) argues that an individual
act of resistance is not advisable; collective resistance, whether passive
or active has greater potential to change society and improve women’s
lives.73 Furthermore, those women who engage in risky resilience tactics
may become victims of honour killings which are mainly directed at
women for, “… refusing to marry one’s first cousin, wanting to choose

69
Vanita, “The Self is not Gendered,” 78.
70
Devi, “Imaginary Maps,” 81.
71
Devi, “Imaginary Maps,” 107.
72
Devi, “Imaginary Maps,” xxvii.
73
Devi, “Imaginary Maps.”
94 Maharajh & Amin

one’s own husband, choosing a socially ‘inferior’ or non-Muslim (or non-

Sikh or non-Hindu) husband; or leaving an abusive husband.”74

Conclusion
In this article we have described and unveiled the ways in which each
form of Hindu marriage (apart from the Ghandarva marriage)
compromises and complicates women’s lives when a groom or his family
relegates them to the subject position of exploitation and bondage.
Parents, particularly fathers, play a vital role in marriage and are
complicit in the commodification and disposal of daughters. The different
forms of marriage discussed here indicate the religious and patriarchal
arrangements of marriage (both sanctioned and non-sanctioned) in
Hinduism which attain their legality through the simple ritual of
circumambulation of fire. The forms of marriage and the pathological
construction of women illustrate the ways in which power flows and
circulates for the benefit of men. There seems to be an objectification
and victimization of (and in some instances, a total disregard for) women
in the eight forms of marriage described.

Despite Spivak’s critique of Marxism for “inadequate evidence,” Marx

offers conceptual tools that are instructive for interpreting women’s value
in marriage: use value (marriage for the purpose of supporting and
ensuring the husband’s quest for moksha), exchange value (when given
in marriage in return for payment by the groom and his family) and
surplus value (when her body becomes the site for the production of
capital and is sold into bonded labour).75 Spivak reminds us that
resistance and defiance may not always be possible due to internalized
gendering, a mind colonized by naturalized ideas of husband devotion
and procreation roles. Additionally, honour killings, ostracizasation,
banishment and punishment are common approaches to discourage
women from defying cultural and religious marriage norms. As long as
the sacred and ancient texts have currency with regard to the ways in
which wives are acquired, there is little hope for productive change on a
wide scale. While more women are being educated, and the numbers
who have freedom to marry a partner of choice have increased, the vast
majority of Hindu women are trapped within a religion-influenced system
that works against them.

74
Phyllis Chesler, “Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings,” Middle East Quarterly 17, no. 2
(2010): online.
75
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, In Other Worlds (New York: Routledge, 1998), 107.
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 95

Bibliography
Alteker, Anant S. The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization from
Prehistoric Times to the Present Day. Second edition. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass, 1987.
Avellar, Sarah and Pamela J. Smock. “The Economic Consequences of
the Dissolution of Cohabiting Unions.” Journal of Marriage and
Family 67, no. 2 (2005): 315-327.
Bandyopadhyay, Sekhar. Caste, Culture and Hegemony: Social
Dominance in Colonial Bengal. New Delhi: Sage Publications,
2004.
Chesler, Phyllis. “Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings.” Middle East
Quarterly 17, no. 2 (2010): 3-11.
Devi, Mahasweta. Imaginary Maps: Three Stories. Gayatri C. Spivak
(trans.). New York: Routledge, 1995.
Devi, Shakuntala. The World of Homosexuals. Mystic, Connecticut:
Lawrence Verry Incorporated, 1977.
Diwan, Paras. Modern Hindu Law. Allahabad: Allahabad Law Agency,
2008.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Alan
Sheridan (trans.) New York: Vintage, 1979.
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction.
Robert Hurley (trans.). New York: Vintage, 1990.
George, Mariam. “Religion, Patriarchy and the Subjugation of Women in
India.” International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Science 3,
no. 3 (2008):21-30.
Girgis, Sherif, Robert P. George and Ryan T. Anderson. What is
Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense. New York: Encounter
Books, 2012.
Grinstein-Weiss, Michal, Min Zhan and Michael Sherraden. “Saving
Performance in Individual Development Accounts: Does Marital
Status Matter?” Journal of Marriage and Family 68, no. 1 (2006):
192-204.
Gupta, Giri Raj. “Love, Arranged Marriage, and the Indian Social
Structure.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 7, no. 1 (1976):
75-85.
Hara, Minoru. “A Note on the Rakshasa Form of Marriage.” Journal of
the American Oriental Society 94, no. 3 (1974): 296-306.
96 Maharajh & Amin

Hirschi, Thomas A, Joyce Altobelli and Mark R. Rank. “Does Marriage

Increase the Odds of Affluence? Exploring the Life Course
Probabilities.” Journal of Marriage and Family 65, no. 4 (2003):
927-938.
Kane, Pandurang Varnan. History of Dharmaśāstra. Vol. I. Part 1.
Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (Government
Oriental Series, Class B, No. 6), 1978.
Leslie, Isobel Julia. “Essence and Existence: Women and Religion in
Ancient Indian Texts.” In Women’s Religious Experience: Cross-
Cultural Perspectives, edited by Pat Holden, 89-112. London:
Croom, 1983.
Lichter, Daniel T, Deborah Roempke Graefe and J. Brian Brown. “Is
Marriage a Panacea? Union Formation among Economically
Disadvantaged Unwed Mothers.” Social Problems 50, no. 1
(2003): 60-86.
Lipner, Julius J. Hindus: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. Second
edition. London and New York: Routledge, 2009.
Meyer, Johann Jakob. Sexual Life in Ancient India: A Study in the
Comparative History of Indian Culture. Jawahar Nagar, Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1989.
Ogunsanmi, Joyce O. and Theresa O. Owuamanam. “Stress Among
Married Female Sandwich Undergraduates in Southwest Nigeria.”
Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy
Studies (JETERAPS) 5, no. 8 (2014):138-142.
Omvedt, Gail. “Towards a Theory of Brahmanic Patriarchy.” Economic
and Political Weekly 35, no. 4 (2000): 187-190.
Pandey, Rajbali. Hindu Saṁskāras: Socio-Religious Study of the Hindu
Sacraments. Jawahar Nagar, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
Publishers, 1969.
Prickett, Pamela J. “Negotiating Gendered Religious Space: The
Particularities of Patriarchy in an African American Mosque.”
Gender and Society 29, no. 1 (2015): 51-72.
Puri, Mahesh, Jyotsna Tamang and Iqbal Shah. “Suffering in Silence:
Consequences of Sexual Violence within Marriage among Young
Women in Nepal.” BMC Health 11, no. 29 (2012): 11-29.
Rakoczy, Susan. “Religion and Violence: The Suffering of Women.”
Agenda: Empowering Women for Gender Equity 18, no. 61
(2004): 29-35.
 A Gender Critique of the Eight Forms of Hindu Marriages 97

Steven J. Rossen (ed.). Holy War: Violence and the Bhagavad Gita.
Virginia, USA: Deepak Heritage Books, 2002.
Sharma, Arvind. “Marriage in Hindu Religious Tradition.” Journal of
Ecumenical Studies 20, no. 1 (1985): 69-80.
Sharma, Indira, Balram Pandit, Abhishek Pathak and Reet Sharma.
“Hinduism, Marriage and Mental Illness.” Indian Journal of
Psychiatry 55, no. 12 (2013): S243-S249.
Sheela, J. & N. Audinarayana. “Mate Selection and Female Age at
Marriage: A Micro Level Investigation in Tamil Nadu,
India.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 34, no. 4 (2003):
497-508.
Singh, Upinder. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the
Stone Age to the 12th Century. Delhi: Pearson, Longman, 2008.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. In Other Worlds. New York: Routledge,
1998.
Srinivasan, Padma, and Gary R. Lee. The Dowry System in Northern
India: Women's Attitudes and Social Change. Journal of Marriage
and Family 66, no. 5 (2004): 1108-1117.
Sugirtharajah, Sharada. “Hinduism and Feminism: Some
Concerns.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 18, no. 2
(2002): 97-104.
Swami, Jayādvaita. Vanity Karma: Ecclesiastes, the Bhagavad-Gītā, and
the Meaning of Life. Los Angeles, Stockholm, Johannesburg,
Sydney: The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, 2015.
Tambiah, Stanley J. “Dowry and Bridewealth and the Property Rights of
Women in South Asia.” In Bridewealth and Dowry, edited by Jack
Goody and Stanley J. Tambiah, 59-169. London: Cambridge
University Press, 1973.
Vanita, Ruth. “The Self is not Gendered: Sulabha’s Debate with King
Janaka.” NWSA Journal 15, no. 2 (2003): 76-93.
Vanita, Ruth. “Wedding of Two Souls: Same-Sex Marriage and Hindu
Traditions.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 20, no. 4
(2004): 119-135.
Vohra, Sumona. “The Practice of Dowry from the Context of
Hinduism.” Critical Half 1, no. 1 (2003): 33-35.
Yarhouse, Mark A. & Stephanie Kaye Nowacki. “The Many Meanings of
Marriage: Divergent Perspectives Seeking Common Ground.” The
Family Journal 15, no. 1 (2007): 36-45.
 98 Maharajh & Amin

Zaher, Claudia. “When a Woman’s Marital Status Determined her Legal

Status: A Research Guide on the Common Law Doctrine of
Coverture.” Law Library Journal 94, no. 3 (2002): 459-486.

View publication stats