DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.31218#0091
CASTE, SUBCASTE, AND MaRRIAGE
quiries, \ve now know that infant marriage exists among
savages in all quarters of the globe.1 This fact disposes
of the picture of the savage wooing his bride with a
battle-axe, and (like the wicked sailor in Robinson
Crusoe) indifferent to her looks provided she is useful.
Since savage races elsewhere have developed this custom
independently of contact with a higher race, it becomes
possible that our low castes have similarly developed it :
and it is now necessary to examine cases of infant marri-
age in low castes.
Unfortunately, it is impossible to obtain clear evidence
in the United Provinces, for there are no castes which are
still entirely free of Hindu influences. Infant marriage,
though a common, is not an invariable custom amongst
savages, and we cannot ignore entirely the chance that a
low caste may have acquired it in the process of Hindui-
zation ; indeed a low caste, formerly addicted to adult mar-
riage, probably would adopt infant marriage as a part
of that process. It is worth noting, however, that the
practice is extremely common amongst low castes, and
also commoner in the east of the Provinces, where the
low castes and the lower branches of widespread castes
principally reside, than in the west.
The marriage age of various low castes is given in the
table below. Where it is not stated, the boy’s age is
greater by a year or two than the girl’s. When two sets of
figures are given, the second is that reported in 1911,
the first that given by Mr. Crooke (1895). It will be
noticed that the second is invariably lower than the first,
a change which can only be attributed to the process of
Hinduization.
Caste Girls Boys
Agariya ... 5-10 —
Aheriya ... 7-10, 5-9 5-12
Ahir ... 7-12 10-16
1 Hartland, Primitive Paternity. Curiously enough this writer, being
apparently ignorant of the prevalence of the custoxn amongst low castes,
regards Indian infant marriage as exceptional because it is practised by
a civilized race.
77
quiries, \ve now know that infant marriage exists among
savages in all quarters of the globe.1 This fact disposes
of the picture of the savage wooing his bride with a
battle-axe, and (like the wicked sailor in Robinson
Crusoe) indifferent to her looks provided she is useful.
Since savage races elsewhere have developed this custom
independently of contact with a higher race, it becomes
possible that our low castes have similarly developed it :
and it is now necessary to examine cases of infant marri-
age in low castes.
Unfortunately, it is impossible to obtain clear evidence
in the United Provinces, for there are no castes which are
still entirely free of Hindu influences. Infant marriage,
though a common, is not an invariable custom amongst
savages, and we cannot ignore entirely the chance that a
low caste may have acquired it in the process of Hindui-
zation ; indeed a low caste, formerly addicted to adult mar-
riage, probably would adopt infant marriage as a part
of that process. It is worth noting, however, that the
practice is extremely common amongst low castes, and
also commoner in the east of the Provinces, where the
low castes and the lower branches of widespread castes
principally reside, than in the west.
The marriage age of various low castes is given in the
table below. Where it is not stated, the boy’s age is
greater by a year or two than the girl’s. When two sets of
figures are given, the second is that reported in 1911,
the first that given by Mr. Crooke (1895). It will be
noticed that the second is invariably lower than the first,
a change which can only be attributed to the process of
Hinduization.
Caste Girls Boys
Agariya ... 5-10 —
Aheriya ... 7-10, 5-9 5-12
Ahir ... 7-12 10-16
1 Hartland, Primitive Paternity. Curiously enough this writer, being
apparently ignorant of the prevalence of the custoxn amongst low castes,
regards Indian infant marriage as exceptional because it is practised by
a civilized race.
77