DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0166
THE LAW OF ADOPTION, HISTORICALLY CONSIDERED. 151
of the illegitimate sons of wives and daughters. The Lecture
solution of the problem lies in that desire of male posterity
which comes out so forcibly in the hymns of the Rigveda.
So firmly had this desire been grafted on the minds of the
people, that it continued to operate on the theory and
practice of the priestly lawyers even a long time after the
disappearance of that primitive social organization which
had given rise to it. It has just been seen that it called
forth a form of adoption unknown to most other countries.1
It has given rise equally to some of the most curious
notions regarding paternity.
I may be brief with regard to the son of concealed birth Thesoi»<>f
(Gudhaja Gudhotpanna), i.e., the son of an adulteress ; u
the damsel’s son (Kanina), who may be traced respectively
to the Rahasu2 and Kumariputra of the Vedas;3 and the
son obtained through marriage (Sahodha), i. e., received
by the husband with a pregnant bride. These three may
be grouped together as forming an application, unusually
wide, it is true, of the Roman Law maxim Pater est quern
nuptiar demonstrant. He is the father who is proved
to be so by the marriage rite.
The Gudhaja and Sahodha are both the illegitimate off- The son of
spring of a married 'woman, yet the Gudhaja is almost
universally reckoned among the first six sons who are
capable of inheriting, whereas the Sahodha is usually
referred among the second six who, in general, have no
such right. This difference appears to be due to the special
ignominy attaching to a woman who has been married
while pregnant, as the nuptial ceremony is expressly
reserved for virgins alone.
The Kanina, or damsel’s son, is’by some authors declared Thedam-
to be the son of him who afterwards marries the mother,sel 5 h01>'
whereas others make him the son of his maternal grand-
father.4 The later Jurists have devised divers modes of
reconciling this contradiction.5 Arguing the point on
1 As for the old Athenian custom, which may be compared to the
Lutrikavidhi, see Fustel de Conlanges, La cite’ antique, 83.
2 This term refers, however, to the mother of a Gudhaja. as it denotes
a woman who had given birth to a child in secret'^Max Muller).
3 Rigveda II. 29 ; Vajasaneyi Samhita XXX. 6.
4 Mann IX. 172; Vishnu XV. 10-12; Vasishtha XVII. 22; Narada
XIII. 18; Yajnavalkya II. 129.
5 Thus the Mitakshara says (I. 11, 7), that the Kanina shall be consi-
dered as his maternal grandfather’s son in case his mother remains
unmarried in her father’s house ; but if she marries, he shall belong to
her husband. For other interpretations, see Digest V. 6, cclxiii.
of the illegitimate sons of wives and daughters. The Lecture
solution of the problem lies in that desire of male posterity
which comes out so forcibly in the hymns of the Rigveda.
So firmly had this desire been grafted on the minds of the
people, that it continued to operate on the theory and
practice of the priestly lawyers even a long time after the
disappearance of that primitive social organization which
had given rise to it. It has just been seen that it called
forth a form of adoption unknown to most other countries.1
It has given rise equally to some of the most curious
notions regarding paternity.
I may be brief with regard to the son of concealed birth Thesoi»<>f
(Gudhaja Gudhotpanna), i.e., the son of an adulteress ; u
the damsel’s son (Kanina), who may be traced respectively
to the Rahasu2 and Kumariputra of the Vedas;3 and the
son obtained through marriage (Sahodha), i. e., received
by the husband with a pregnant bride. These three may
be grouped together as forming an application, unusually
wide, it is true, of the Roman Law maxim Pater est quern
nuptiar demonstrant. He is the father who is proved
to be so by the marriage rite.
The Gudhaja and Sahodha are both the illegitimate off- The son of
spring of a married 'woman, yet the Gudhaja is almost
universally reckoned among the first six sons who are
capable of inheriting, whereas the Sahodha is usually
referred among the second six who, in general, have no
such right. This difference appears to be due to the special
ignominy attaching to a woman who has been married
while pregnant, as the nuptial ceremony is expressly
reserved for virgins alone.
The Kanina, or damsel’s son, is’by some authors declared Thedam-
to be the son of him who afterwards marries the mother,sel 5 h01>'
whereas others make him the son of his maternal grand-
father.4 The later Jurists have devised divers modes of
reconciling this contradiction.5 Arguing the point on
1 As for the old Athenian custom, which may be compared to the
Lutrikavidhi, see Fustel de Conlanges, La cite’ antique, 83.
2 This term refers, however, to the mother of a Gudhaja. as it denotes
a woman who had given birth to a child in secret'^Max Muller).
3 Rigveda II. 29 ; Vajasaneyi Samhita XXX. 6.
4 Mann IX. 172; Vishnu XV. 10-12; Vasishtha XVII. 22; Narada
XIII. 18; Yajnavalkya II. 129.
5 Thus the Mitakshara says (I. 11, 7), that the Kanina shall be consi-
dered as his maternal grandfather’s son in case his mother remains
unmarried in her father’s house ; but if she marries, he shall belong to
her husband. For other interpretations, see Digest V. 6, cclxiii.