sign in sign up
<<
Home , Gopikabai, Kashibai, Krishna Bai Holkar, Mahadaji Shinde, Mastani, Ramabai Peshwa

CHAPTER 3

CHILD BRIDE AND WIFE

For a HinJu, maniage is a Sarriskara or a sacrament. A Hindu marriage is looked upon, as, something which is more of a rehgious dut\’ and less of a physical luxury. A Vedic passage says that a person, who is unmvirried is unholy From the religious point of view he remains incomplete and is not fully eligible to participate in sacraments. This continues to be the view of the society even today; the practice of keeping the bet el nut by one’s side in the absaice of tlie wife is an example of this belief.

Marriage according to the Shastras is the holy sacrament and the gift of the daughter, (Kanyadaan) to a suitable person, is a sacred duty put on the father, after the performance of which the father gets great spiritual benefit. Marriage is binding for life because the marriage rite completed by Sapkipadi (walking seven steps together) around the sacred fire and is believed to create a religious tie which once created cannot be dissolved.

The object of marriage was procreation of children and proper performance of religious ceremonies.

Marriage is not perfonned for mere emotional gratification and is not considered as a mere betrothal. Its context

s religious, and it is not a mere socio-legal contract. The bride on the seventh step of the Saptapadi, loses her triginal Goira and acquires the Gotra of the bridegroom and a kinship is created that is not a mere friendship for ileasure. Therefore, a marriage Was regai ded as indissoluble.

A marriage does not become invalid on the ground that it is effected during the minority of either the

ride v^r the groom. Marriage involves the transfer of dominion of the bride from the father to the husband, Tlie

, ife, on marriage, not only passes to the family of her husband but also adopts his Gotra. She thus severs all ties

'ith her natal family.

.'6 Mfiniase is aiso a legm aiiu sutijii nmuii uciwtcii a mtui tutu « wuuuui, i<^i uit *.o

tamily. It was one of the important sacraments and the following words denote the concept of marriage,

Udvcisa. which means taking the girl out of her pjirental home. Vivalia, which means taking tlie girl away in a

special way or for a special purjjose i.e. for making her one’s wife.; Parinaya or Parinciycuia which means

going cd ound i e. making a Fradakshuia of sacred fire; Upayana which means to bring near and to make one’s

own; PamgraJza which means talaiig the hand of the bride. Although all these words express only one

component element of the rite of the marriage, they are all used to indicate the totality of the several acts that go

to nuike up the ceremony of the marriage

During the period, marriages were ananged by a third party, called Madhyastha, or the

matchmaker(middleman), who being professional, chaiged some fees for his services . There seems to be no

formal procedure for a matrimonial proposal, the middleman knew both the parties well. Some elderly person

from tlie groom’s side, would go to the girl’s house, meet the girl and her family, match the information and if

found suitable, would fix up a date for the marriage

Tlie took more interest and interviewed the girls personally before making tlie final choice. A

Karkun would be disjjatched, he would tour through the region, select few prospective brides that appeared good

and would airajige to send these girls with their parents to the Peshwa for selections i In 1792 A.D. the wife of Peshwa Savai Madhavrao died. The Peshwa had some proposals and

accordingly he had interviewed 2/3 girls. Finally, he ordered that Nana Phadnavis would select one suitable bride

from them. There was no elderly male member in the Peshwa family then to arrange tlie marriage of Savai

Madhawao. Tliere is no record of the fate of those other girls that were interviewed by the Peshwa. To whom

were the>’ married or who bore the expenses of their visit to the Peshwa or their marriage, is not recorded.

^ Bajirao II had many proposals of marriage. He had inteii/'iewed a girl and had ne:irly finalised tlie

proposal. 'Fhen he met Varanasibai, daugliter of Raste, whose horoscope indicated that she would soon beai a son. The Peshwa cancelled the first girl, paid expenses of bofJi the sides and arranged her marriage with the son

of Ganpatrao Krishna Sathe, a distant relation Then the Peshwa married Varanasibai. A groom was a person

who received tlie gift of the bride from her father, which is called Kanyadaan, donation of the daughter by the

father. Importance was to the receiver and the giver, she was just a thing to be gifted, (donated), that she

had no say, choice or feelings is aptly illustrated in the above case. A thing thus donated will have a secondary

or no status of its own.

The man iages wei e fixed by the family, the parties concaned were given little or no say in the choice of

the marriage partner. Practice of pre-puberty marriages prevailed and the bride naturally was too young to have

a say Even the groom, if it was his first marriage would be young, say 11 to 13 years of age. Reading about his

son's disinclination to marry.the girl the father had arranged, Sardar Gopalrao Patwardhan’s father, Govindrao

was much annoyed and wi ote to him that, if he wanted, he mi ght as well marry ten other girls of his choice. But,

^ first, he must nrjry the one his father had arranged, 'fhe illustration needs no further comments except that the

girls were easier to get married to and also that the attitude indicates the insignificant status of marriageable girls

in general

It was customary among the Marathas and such other castes to observe a betrothal ceremony known as

^ Soyarika or Mangani, announcing the fixation of marriage. The bridegroom’s party used to give presents of

dress (Saree and piece for choli or blouse) and ornaments to the girl and money or com to her paients as agi eed

upon on the occasion

However, Soyarika was not the final commitment by the parents of either parties to the marriage. In

1744 - 45 A.D. Bohar Mehar Raghuvanshi of Kolhapur sent Rajman barber to negotiate the mairiage of his

(Bohar) daughter with tlie son of Sukhanand Raghuvanshi of Peth Surji, pargana Anjangaon of Sirkar Govale in

' Prant Berar. Suklianand consulted his caste-rnen and consented to the marriage. The barber was given a dinner

and Rs. 2/- and was sent back. Later. Lachiram, a of Mangrul Peranche forcibly married the girl and took

her away According the Rajput custom, negotiations regarding tiie maniage of Sukhanand's son were completed. Other would not ofter their daughters in marriage to him. Hence, Sukhanand complaints to

the Huzur and orders were issued to the Kamvisadars to reprimand Lachiram and to arrange for the marriage of

rg\ Sukhanand’s son with another girl .

Even when there was no custom to dissolve a betrothal, in certain deserving cases, the State permitted to

marry another. A warning to Naikji Ghatga, who had married his daughter to Ranoji Shinde, suffering from

leprosy and witliout making proper enqui^ ies was ordered to marry her to another suitable boy

.^ o n g the Marathas and others, a practice of Bride-price prevailed. Broughton rqjorts; “With the

Marathas, a father receives instead of giving away a portion with his daughter. Bride-price was exacted evoi in

case of re-marriage of a girl” 'I The form of marriage, in which bride-price was taken is known as Arsha form

and is reckoned below that of Brahma and Do/va, the most approved ones. The Brahmins and such higher castes

practised the Brahma form of marriage in which parents give away to the bridegroom their daughter, bedecked

with ornaments, as a gift {Doj^) and also offer him Varadakshiria or a marriage portion for completing part of

the ritual. Acceptance of Varadakshina on the part of the bridegroom was thus sanctioned as religious custom

and fomied an essential part of the marriage rites. Whereas acceptance of bride-price was regarded as a highly

condemnable act for a Brahmin.

L There are some references to Hunda (dowry) transactions taking place during the Peshwa period. Sardar

Tulshibaugwale’s diaiy mentions a dowry of Rs. 800/- given to one Deshpande and of Rs. 1,500/- given to

Sawkaj Vaidya Macdonald’s account contains a report about the dowry, as high as Rs. 25,000/- in cash and

a village yielding an annual revenue of about one thousand rupees, given to the adopted son of Nana Phadnavis

Tins case was however, as late as 1830' .'\nother case shows withdrawal of the demand of Hunda (of

^ Rs 200'-) by the groom's paity on their being convinced of the other party’s inability to pay it

A few instances refer, if not to the actual acceptance of dowry, to negotiations between the parties over

tlic nniount the bride's fnthcr was iikcly to spend on account ol . us daughter’s marriage

7 0 'Hie Peshwa tried to check the practice of accepting the bride-price that had crept among the Br^diniin

caste, especially of the Konkan region. In her letter of 1772 A.D. , urges Nana Phadnavis to take

ome stj ong measures to effectively put aii end to this evil practice, since such previous attempts had been rather

^bortive*^’^'l

Peshwa Bajirao II issued a strict order forbidding the acceptance of bride-price in any form by the

Brahmins and enjoined heavy punishments of fine and ex-communication on the transgressors, including the

groom’s party and the matchmaker, if they happened to be a party to the designs Yet, sometimes, the bride’s

party, out of greed, took advantage of this bride-price, even though no such custom prevailed in the community,

[n 1770-71 A.D., a Brahmin widow, Bhiubai Vyas, married her daughter, twice to two different grooms. This

^ tabled her , the mothei', Bhiubai to collect tlie double amount of bride price. The Peshwa Government, having

:i lonnation, airested the motlier, daughtei' and her brother and imprisoned them at Fort

I Further details of the above case were not available, but the question arises, which of the two marriages

vas a valid one'? The entire family, the mother, the bride and her brother, all were imprisoned at Fort Shivneri,

vhich indicates tliat the fainily was ex-communicated. Tlieie was no prescribed punishment for a particular

>ffence, most of them were punished witli Hnes. Those who could not pay them were imprisoned. Even the

ll^iration of the imprisonment was not fixed. The bride in this case was punished for no fault of hers.

There ai e mariy papa's of marriage transactions, however, the issue of Hunda is rarely discussed in them,

iinilarly, we haidly come across any instance pointing to tlie plight of the bride’s fatlier on account of the

ressure of demands for dowiy', or, a father woiried by the tliought of dowoy. On the contrary, we find tliat they

/ere otfei ed a bride-price. It is possible that the bride-price wa^ offered in cases where the groom was too old or

'as rnanying with one or two earlier living spouses. It may be said that the practice of dowry among the

j^-.ilunins was not unknown. Perhaps it was confined to tlie rich, like nuuiy other tilings of luxuiy; and even vv itli

lem it must have been rather a matter of social prestige Forrfis ofMojriaze: A stir(I form : r

Under this form, the groom used to get a bride by paying a reasonable price for her. The idea probably was

that it would be disgraceful for a girl and her family if she was given in marriage for nothing. It would also

mean that she was not worth any price and that her family had no status and respectability. The price paid by the

groom was originally a compensation to tlie bride's family for the loss of her serv’ices , but a portion of it soon

began to be returned to the bride as a marriage gift. Tfie price was paid in cash or in kind.

In some uncivilised communities, the bridegroom agrees to serve his would be father-in-law for a number

of years in lieu of the pavment qf the bride-price. On the banks of the river Vainganga, in Pawar family, a poor

' groom serves in his future father-in-law’s house in lieu of such bride-price

In Warli community, a groom from ver>’ low economic level, would be a or a son-in-law

staying with the his in-laws. Such a gjo«..in was called Gliaroree. He would be employed in the fields, stay in the

house and during his stay, would court the daughter. If she approved him, tliey would live together as husband

- and wife. A groom, who could not afford to spend for the marriage expenses, would give her father whatever

amount he could spare and bring the bride with him to his house This marriage form, presupposes a

recognition by the society of the fact that woman had value and had to be paid for. It gave the wife a better

status. had a wife called Lakshimibai. She survived him. Once Maliadaji went to Tuljapur,

where he canit across a beautiful and orphaned girl of 12 years old. He was attracted to her and he paid her

paternal umleJahagir worth Rs. 10,000/- and married her the next day

'nio.'X men, whose wives died one ailer the otiiei, had no otlier alternative but to pay and buy a bride for

tliemselves, Atleast this was th^ normal course for ordinaiy men.

SI Bayajabai was tlie beautiful, young dauglitcr of Sarjerao Ghatge. Daulatiao Shinde, althougli powerful

and rich, was an illegitimate child that was adopted b>’ Maliadaji Shinde before Mahadaji's deatli. He felt he was rlow in status and respectability(Kulin). He gave Sarjerao money and promised that he would appoint Sarjerao as

i his Dr van. Daulatrao married Bayajabai. Chatrapati of Kolhapur, was against this marriage on the grounds that

Daulatrao was inferior in status aiiJ as a protest had carried Bayajabai to Samnagarh for some days but to no

avail Tliis marriage was also a PnUilonui Vivalui wherein the bride belongs to a higher caste or status than

the gioorn.

r Rakshasa or Kshatra form Marriage:

In this form, the victor carried away the bride and married her. It was effected by forcible c^ture of the

bride Sometimes men with wealth and power, tried to securc brides from higher castes with the support of their

, riches and power

In 1776 A.D., Mahadaji Shinde, wished to marry the daugliter of Tanpure Patil of Rahuri. Patil, on being

' inlbrmed of Mahadaji’s intentions secretly transferred the girl to a safe place. Mahadaji then sait his forces to V Patil’s hi.>use to guard tlie house a.id the family. Evei^day an Officer would visit the Patil to make inquiries of

Patil’s decision on the matter, on behalf of Shinde Tliere is no record of what happaied in the end.

Shidoji Nimbalkar, Sarlashkar, had given a proposal of marriage to the daughter of the Kolhapur Raja,

which was refused. On receiving the refusal, Nimbalkar marched on Kolhapur, defeated tlie Raja, took tlie girl

by force and married her

^ A complaint was made by Jano MiinkeshwiU' Kulkanii, tliat his 5 yeais old daughter was tiiken for lunch

by Siddlianath Medhekai'. Later, she was taken to tlie woods and then to a temple where a Bralimin and a widow

82 IIKUllCU flCJ. iVlcUlclUdlCMiWcU 011(11 vviU' )/JUUULCU uv Jciuu rvLurwcuiii, uui'.'ic Ulc ijim u iiiu ^ K n vvai, u i t

officiating priest and was found guilty by them. He was ordered to be fined. Kulkami was directed to many the

_ girl to an>’ suitable groom. Kulkaini took the letter from the Brahmins and came to the Peshwa. Medliekar was

01 dered to give Yajicipalra (sodchithi-- his claim over tlie girl) and ttie Peshwa ordered tliat such marriage was

^ void and the permission to many the daughter to any other suitable person of his (Kulkami’s) choice was

C'l - confirmed by the Peshwa .

Sadashiv Gabaji of Bamni, forcibly took away the daughter of Jagannath Shamji, of Jaitapur in pargana

Kanad and married her to his.son. He had also inflicted some wounds to Jagannath. Rajaram Shivram Kulkami

of Jaitapur, having given information of this occunaice, the Kulkami vatan of 5 villages of Sadashiv was

- attached by the Government

w In 1764 - 65 A.D., Krishnaji Ganesh of Mouze Basedare, represented that Govinda Danda Naik of Siur,

^ forcibly took his daughter andlmarried her to Ramji Danda Naik and prayed that the offender be punished. The

Kamvisadar of Kanad Fulambari was directed to call before him the two Naiks, the Patels, and tlie Brahmins of

_ tlie village to inquire into the matter. He was also directed to inflict fine on the persons found guilty of marring

tiie girl forcibly. The fine was to be deposited to tlie Government

In 1775 - 76 A.D., Sadashiv Bhat Kamiarkar of Satara forcibly took away tlie daughtei' of Bapuji Appaji

Kelkar and married her to Gopal Krishna Kanitkar. 'fhe girl was about two to two and quarter years of age and

^ the groom was a dumb son of Gopal. In return of this service, Gopal Krishna’s daughter was married to the

brother of Sadashiv Bhat.

Bapuji Appaji had an elder unmarried daughter and therefore the marriage of younger daugliter before the

elder one was improper, Sadashiv Bhat’s and Gopal Krishna’s families were therefore excommunicated and their

properties were attached. Further, the Toshis and the officiating priests of the marriage were also summoned to /

theHuzur Ill 1777 - 78 A.D., Govemineiit was informed that Trimbak Dharap of Birwadi in Taluka Birwadi,

iorcibly took away Hari Mahadeo Kannarkar’s daughter outside the village and married her. A certain Joshi

-officiating as a priest and Abaji Babaji Dharap were also witli him. The officer of Birwadi was informed that the

offence was very serious and was directed to attach the Joshi’s vatan and to said the three offenders to the

Huzur^^^l

In 1779 - 80 A.D., Sadashiv Nagnath, an inhabitant of Anantgaum in pargana Ambe-Jogai went on a

pilgrimage of Godavari, leaving behind his wife and daughter at home. Naro Bawaji and Keso Bawaji, taking

advantage of his absence, entered Sadashiv’s house and with the assistance of 10 peons whom th ^ had hired for

the purpose, forcibly carried away the daughter. They took her into the compound of Satwaji Patil of the village

and made her stand before Keso Naro, holding a cloth between them. Sheshambhat chanted the hymns sung on

the occasion of marriage, tied the auspicious thread, (Mangalsutra) around the girl’s neck and put an ornament

on her nose. They then set the girl free and went away. Her father, on his return represented the matta- to the

Peshwa. The Brahmin community of the sacred place of Ambe-Jogai was rqjrimanded for not having reported

the facts to the Government. The community was now directed to excommunicate Naro, Keso and Sheshmbhat

and to report the facts of the occurrence in details after inquiry. Later, the Peshwa decided that the above

mentioned marriage was not valid and directed Sadashiv to marry his daughter to another suitable groom of his

choice's'll

Tlie Peshwa Government, in all the above cases gave punishments, like attaching the property, fine and

excommunicating the offenders. But what about the girls that weie married forcibly"? Were marriages by force

considered valid? According to the Shastras, if all the ceremonies were completed, thej' were valid. In above two

cases the fatliers of the brides made complaints and the marriages were directed as void. There may be many

such non-recorded marriages, where the girls and their families were compelled to accept such marriages and tlic

p.irls had to live with the husband.

84 k'h'»nH'i Af.44*A***fcV\'fnin’inn«> <'VhnrinHMr-?>nl'k\ —141/ •>

Khanda means an old historical weapon. Khandeiai, a nobleman of Prithviraj Chauhan made it and hence

derives its name from him. It is .^aid that this weapon was used in large number on the battle-field of .

This sword like weapon is made from shining steel and tlie inside of its handle is covered with velvet. Tlie blade

is very' thin and very sharp.

In the olden days, the Rajput men practised polygamy. If any man, after his betrotlial was engaged on the

battle-field and therefore could noi attend his owti marriage, he would send his KJuinda to his bride as a prox>’.

The bride would accept this proxy and be married to the Khanda. Such bride was known as KJiandarani r Malharrao had a Kliandai'ani, Harkubai. Though a Rajput and higher in caste than Malharrao

Holkar, who was a £>/jij/2aga/'(Shepherd) caste, she did not die as Sati as was then the tradition. The reason is not

known. Tukoji Holkar, who succeeded Malharrao on the seat of Holkarshahi, too had a Khandarani, called

Yamunabai. She was the mother of Vithoji and Yashwantrao, who were treated as illegitimate sons of

Malhanao.

Bajirao II had married 11 times; 6 wives before he lost the Peshwaship and 5 times after he was abdicated.

Yet, he had married the daughter of Lala Pardeshi, Radhabai, att\ i ding to the rites of Kaiyar Vivaha .similar to

the Khanda Vivaha

85 Ceremonies of Marriage:

Kanyadaan

Kaiiyadaan was the most nuportaiit ca emony. ITiis v\ as giving away of the bride (Kairya) by the father to

tlie groom , at the time of marriage. Till tlieri, she was the father’s property and his consent bdiind the giving

away was implemented in Kanyadaan. The approved forms of marriage, the Brahnta, ( the father or some other

guardian gives away the bride without receiving any consideration, the bride being decked in costly clothes and

ornaments), the Daiva ( a bride was given away to the officiating priest at the sacrifice perfonned by her father in

lieu of the Dt ihliina or fee payable to tlie priest,) tlie Ars fui (the groom is requested to deliver one or two pairs

of cows to the bride’s father' to be utilised for religious purposes only. The cows were returned with the bride),

and the last, the Prajapatya (in which the father gives away the bride and enjoins the couple with an oath that

the%' are now marriage partners.)

I ’he other forms are; the Asum fthe groom pays her father a bride price), the Rakshasa (the groom

forcibly takes the bride away), the Paishacl'ia (the groom ravishes the bride under the influence of intoxication or

when she is asleqj) and the Gcvidharva, where the bride and the groom, mutually accept each other witliout

I-'crfomiing the religious ceremony.

^ Kanyadaan was also considered as a great religious merit, equal to donating of tlie universe, Prithvi-

daana. It could be that there we|^e many obstacles in manying a girl rather than a boy. A poor father could not

many his daughter if he had one, if he had many it was still more difficult. With a view to gain such religious

merit, rich and persons having no daugliters, tried to help by giving aid for marriages. The or the

Peshwas were not tlie first to set this tradition, in the first centuiy, A.D. Ushavadat, son-in-law of Nahpana,

would personally pei-form the Kanyadaana of poor Bralimin girls The tradition was continued in the period

^ under stud}' Chatrapati Shahu ananged a niarringe and then attaided the ceremony perj^onally. Thie marriage

look place between the daughter of Kedaji Kesaikai and the son of Lingubai, a female attendant employed in

his housc-hold

6 6 Women of tlie Peshwa fariiiiy too gave aid for maiTiages and helped to perfomi mass man iages of their

dependants. 'ITie Peshwas gave financial aid but did not take the entire responsibility of the marriage; the>’ gave

an amount to the girl’s fatha-. Havaldar Yesaji Lornbat of Fort Visapur was given Rs. 200/- for his daughter’s

marriage states a record in Peshwa Diary r

Nanasaheb had peifonned a Tuladaatui (tiie donation to Bralimins of gold, silver, etc. equal in weight

one’s own body) informed his Phadnis that 5000 gold mohurs had been sent with Bahirji Babar for distribution.

Itie money should be utilised as aid to perform marriages and thread co-emonies of the needy. Also, the money

was to be distributed in the month of Vaishakh, the peak season for these ceremonies and the list of the

beneficiaries should be sent to the Peshwa, after making due enquiries, as to whether the ceremony was

perfonned ' ■ . But then, this aid of the Peshwas was for the benefit of a restricted class.

In Kanyadaana, the father, i.e. the doner and the husband, i.e. the donee were the important persons, 'fhe

daugliter was just a thing to be donated. Even in the case of her reman iage ,which was permitted by the caste

regulations, the circumstances did not change.

Homa:

llie parties to the man iage, are informed that their union is brought about at the behest of the god Sun. In I tlie marriage sacrifice oblations are offered unto Pushan, Bhaga and ^'^ryaman, because tliey ai e the presiding

deitiu,. over prosperity, good luck and conjugal fidelity respectively.

Saptapadi:

It is also another important ritua! "Fhe bride and the bride-groom walk seven steps together around the

sacred fire and it is hoped and prayed that tlieir future life will be full of love, brilliance, opportunities,

nrosperity, bliss, progeny and holiness.

87 Marriage was regarded as a great event of rejoicing ajid a supreme occasion for a happy gathering of

amily and friends. Marriage celebrations used to continue for many days, incurring considerable expenses,

?o-opeiation and participation of one’s village was notable, the balutedars, tlie village artisans, had specific

ifcties to perform on this occasion and also a riglit to enjoy certain privileges.

Great pomp and show marked the celebrations among the rich and noble families. James Forbes notes that

iie lettei uf inviVdtion{Nima/iira/i-J'airika) to the wedding of Fatehsinghrao Gaikwad was written on silver

paper, flowered with gold, sprinkled witli saffron and enclosed under a cover of gold brocade

When , son of was married, the marriage expenses were about four to five lakhs of rupees states a biographer in Saptaprakranatmak Charitra, page 121. Daulatrao Shinde married the beautiful

daughter of Sarjerao Ghatge, Bayajabai and over two crores were spent on the marriage celebrations . llie

adopted son of Mainabai Pawar was married and the expenses were over Rs. 3,25,395/- (39) .

Although marriage sacrament was paformed only once for a woman, a man could marry any number of times. Veiy few spent mone>’ on large scale for every marriage performed. Peshwa Bajirao II married 11 times.

Every marriage was an occasion for giving charity and lakhs of rupees were spent for that purpose. His fourth man iage to Varanasibai was perfOimed on 18^* June 1806 A.D. and the food expenses were above Rs. 16,000/-, the Dakibhina (cash given to poor in charit>) distributed was over Rs. 26,000/- and clothes worth Rs.

5,000/- were distributed in charity. Ihis was the expense of one mairiage and money spent on charity. Bajirao IJ married eleven times and this gives a fair idea of marriage expenses.

Tliese were the cases of rich and powerful people but there is a record which gives the details of the expenses incurred in connection with the marriage of Babusingh, son of Yesu, a female attendant of the Peshwa.

It further gives the names of ornaments tlien in use, the marriage ceremonies gone tlirough and the prices of vai'iou,> ailicles. 'Hie total expenditure was Rs, 3748/-

8 8 Pi oliibitionjj on Maniage ;

Hindu law imposes certain prohibitions in respect of marriage; such as a man could not marry' tlie girl of

^anie Gotra i.e. an agnate or pravvara, on Uie (Jieor)' that his fatlier and girl’s father were both descendants of a

common ancestor in the male line and all such marriages were held invalid.

"Fhe second prohibition was that the parties should not be not Sapindas of each another. Sapinda

relationship with any person extends as far as tiie third generation (inclusive) in the time of ascent through the

mother, and the fifth (inclusive) in the line of ascent through the father, the time being traced upwards in each

case from tlie person concerned, who is to be counted as the iirst generation. Tlie Smriti writers agi ee that the

rule of tlie Sapinda relationship was not followed in the southern parts of . Although the Brahmin

community' in did not accept the custom of marrymg the maternal uncle’s daughter, there was not a

subcaste in ttie community who did not follow it. Tlie origin in addressing the Father-in-law by the

groom as Mamaji, (maternal uncle^i and the daughter-in-law addressing the mother-in-law as Atyeebai (paternal

aunt) may be found here.

The Dharmashashtras state tliat one should not give one's daughter in exchange to anotlier’s son and

receive that otliei ’s daughter in marriage for one’s son. This dictum was held as merely recommendary In

^some of these families there was a custom of m?irriages between the cross cousins. Yesubai, daughter of

Pilajirao Shirke was married to Sambhaji, son of Shivaji. Rajkunvar, daughter of Sagunabai and Shivaji, step­

sister of Sambhaji was married to Ganoji, brother of Yesubai.

AltJiougli the custom was not prevalent amongst tiie Yajun/edi Brahmins of Vasai, some of them

married their maternal uncle’s daughters. The Peshwa decided it nqainst the rule and fined each of them with Rs.

50/. and also ordered to excomnjunicate them 'Ihe origin of this custom can be traced to the rite of the

i i ^■■iread oweiTion}', v\hen fhe BaJu or Uie boy leaves Oic home to go to Kashi for studies. His maternal uncle

promises him the hand of his daughter on his return.

89 Lastly, it v\ as customaiy to tally the horoscopes of the bride aiid the groom before an aiiging tlie marriage

and unless the\’ showed the minimum required degree of compatibility, the match was regarded as undesirable

and hence avoided. A girl selected for Peshwa Madnavrao 1, was rejected on the ground tliat hei' horoscope

(4 3) I)eu ayed a particuuu ly unlucky sign

Clilld Manlage or Pre-pubeitv M airiages:

One of the conspicuous fe;trures of the rnan iage system of the period under study was the prevalence of

chi Id-marriage or pre-puberty marriage. Hindu law-givers highly recommended pre-puberty marriage and laid

down that parents who failed to give away their daughters in marriage before puberty incurred great sin.

Girls were married before the age of ten. Eleven was the maximum limit. Only in rare cases, owing to

some unavoidable difficulties, marriages of girls seem to have been delayed up to eleven Parents used to

start wonying if tlie girl crossed lier tenth year. Parshurambhau Patwardhan is seen expressing his anxiety over

the marriage of his 9 years old niece, Manee. She was engaged to be married to the son of Govindpant

Abhyankar. In the meantime, her father, Vaman Govind Patwardhan expired and according to the religious

iniunctions, she had to be married either the very year or tl)e one following the next. Now, if Abhyankar rejected

her, anotlier groom had to be fixed up. By then, she would be too old for marriage. “If her marriage is postponed

for anotlier year,” says he, “she will cross tenth, quite old for marriage; it is better if she is married soon”

This aaxiety prevailed in Muslim community also. Hence, widow of Samsherbahadur, urges her son,

Alija Baliadur "to find a match for Pyaribai, the Brahmin community around would criticise if she is not

maiTied” . Her letters to her son are p'ti'lished in Marathi Daflar, Rumal 3.

Tlie Brahmin Peshwas, who considei ed tliemselves tlie custodians of tlie Hindu law and religion, were

^ v'ciy particular about its obscr\'ance, so much .so {ha/ even tiic prisoners were released on bail as .special case, fo

enable them to get their daughters married in time. Govind Appaji, in service of Mirjapharkhan, was in

inipriaonincnt ot Chandwnd. Hia fnmily was in Sivc. His two daughters had rcachcd the marriageable age; one

o n wns 10 yeais old arid the other, ill yeais old. Their maniages could not be postponed. Hence, an order to

release the family consisting of female relations, the two girls and his brother Annaji Appaji was issued to the

local ofllcers. Further, theie were instructions to spend Rs, 1000/- from the faniily estates for the ornaments

/and oiliei expenses Peshwa- Bajirao II had issued an order enjoining the Brahmins to get their daughters

maiTied before the age of nine

Shivaji’s first marriage to Saibai took place on 16^'April 1640 A.D. when he was 10/13 years old, Saibai

must have been 6/8 years old; Yesubai was bom in 1659 A.D. and was married to Sambhaji in 1667 A.D.;

Kajaram was married to Janakibai, daughto" of Prataprao Gujar, Commander-in-chief of the , in

March 1680 A.D. Rajaram was 10 years old at the time of 'he marriage Gopikabai was bom in 1725 A.D.

Her father, who was a Savkar (money-lender) in Satara, invited Chatrapati Shaliu for a Diwali feast. Shahu met

tliis girl and ordered Bajirao to marry her to his son Balaji Bajirao alias Nanasaheb. 'Hie man iage was performed

' at Wai, on 10^‘ January 1730 A.D.

Thougti ceiling on mairiagcable age of girls was thus fixed, there was no minimum age mentioned. Five

was perhaps observed as a practicable minimum. In one instance, for example, the father refused to give his

. consent to the marriage of his three years old daughter, saying, that she had not yet attained marriageable age

We do come across a few instances in which two and half and tiuee years old girls were married. Tliey were,

however, cases of forced marriages, and hence, we cannot say that such infant marriage was a mle Perhaps

the pre-puberty marriage was pailiculai ly in vogue among tlie higher castes and classes.

Boys, too were married at an early age from 8 to 13 yeais. Peshwa Nanasalieb, when manied to

Gopikabai, was only 8 years of age; Peshwa Savai Madhavrao was married at tlie age 9, and Peshwa Bajirao II, at

the age of 1 1. There are instances of thread ceremony

- "■ However., the custom of child-man iage was applicable to men only in a resti icted sense. For there was no

ccili .! as such on the marriageable age of men, since they could remarry and practice polyganty.

91 This restriction on the marriageable age of the girls, which should be about 8 years, led to another serious evil in the society. The bride-groom in a child-marriage would be about 11 to 13/14 years old and the bride was usually not older than 10/11 years. If unfortunately his wife died after some yeai s, he was allowed by custom to remairy, and as the girls older tlian 8/9 years were not usually available, he would marry a second wife of a veiy young age. This practice resulted in majriages where age difference between the couples was very much. This was ctAYcA Bala-Jaratha VivaJia, ( a marriage between a child and a decrepit) in which the groom would be old enough to the bride’s grand-father.

.%! illustrative case of such marriage is that of Sant Bahinabai, who was married when she was three years old to a learned man Ratnakar Pathak, age 30 years. In the 5^‘ Abhanga of her autobiography, the first of its kind in Marathi literature, she introduces her husband. Perhaps her parents were anxious to get rid their responsibilit)' and secure the merit of Kan)'adaana, They were not bothered by the age difference ,or the happiness of their daughter for that matter. Even. Bahinabai, herself has no complaint against it. She calmly accepts the situation and tlie husband.

Another example is tliat of the famous military leado-, Sardar Gopalrao Patwardhan. In 1761 - 62 A.D.

Gopalrao v\ as 30/35 years old and had just lost his w'ife. His fatlier, Govind Hari Patwai dlian had approved a girl of 9 years and had negotiated the marriage. Gopalrao did not like the girl as she was too young for him, but the father, admonishes him, “You may marry ten other girls of your choice, but must first marry this girl”. When a man of tliirty years old had no choice in selection, what must be the bride’s condition is well understood. Govind

Haii's words, marry ten girls of your choice, indicates tiie condition of marriageable girls of this period. They were easier to get than a commodity in the open market. Gopalrao, later was married to another girl who must be

9/lOyeais old and died after 7/8 yeais leaving behind a widow of 17/18 years, to lead a life of an inauspicious, insignificant being

Tlie husbands in the above mentioned man iages had to patiently await till the child-wife attained pubeily to eaioy tJieir coaiugal rielits. S 'Uie waited, others who couldn’t, had mistiesses or Atigavasiras. Marjis.

Q? kfjkshis, Naiaksiiaias etc. or eveii visited prostitutes. Most of tlie time, these child wives became poor victims of their husband’s forcible sexual relationships even before attaining puberty’. Bhagirathibai, first wife of

Peshwa Bajirao II was such a victim. She died in 1793 A.D. when she was merely 14 years old. There are rcforcnces of Bajirao harassing her sexually, found in Peshwa Daflars.

Tliese are well described in tlie biographical novel, Onkai , in Marathi. , his motlier had once bealLTi him for causing such trouble to his child wife. Even the Indian Penal Code of 1860, did not constitute the forcible intercourse of husband with the wife of 10 years old as rape. TTiis indicates that the wife, on marriage, consents to be the property of the husband, to be used as he wishes, even if she was not capable of understanding the meaning of the consent nor its consequences.

Girls of 12 to 14 years usually attained puberty; and there was a tradition of performing GarbJzadaari or conception ceremony, (Impregnation) immediately after their Menarclie or first menstmaiion. A woman’s first menstrual period was a nature's sign tliat she was now capable of bearing a child, the most important function of her life-time.

Tlie girls were married at the age of 9 or 10, the consummation of the marriage naturally took place some years atlerwards. A separate Sanskara called garbhadaana was prescribed for this occasion It was performed on the attainment of puberty by the bride. Alberuni, a foreign traveller, describes that this Sanskara was quite common in the 11^‘ century A.D.

It was also believed that the Shastras ordered she must be pregnant immediately and hence must be sent to ilie bridal bed within 16 days of her menai che. If tliis rule was violated for any reasons, it was believed not only her parents but their ancestors too would sutTer in the hell. Hence the Garbhadaan ceremon)' was peifoiTned as an emergenc}' (56) . =

D'the husband was on an important military campaign or mission, he would be called immediately to rotuni and peifonn tlie religious rites.

93 Various Bakhar writers and records in the Daftars give details of the RutudarsJmn cerernon>’ or menarche

of the wives of the political leaders and administrators. Krishnaji .■\nant Sabhasad, describes such ceremony’

witli details. It seems immaterial whethei’ this Bakliar was written at a later stage or whether the incidents had

historical truth or not. It indicates how tl\e ceremony was perfomied with haste and urgency. Shivaji marched

on Shivappa of Bednur in 1662 A.D. he left in a palanquin and as he was about to leave, tliere was a message that

Soyarabai, his wife, had her menarche. Once set out, it was inauspicious to return. He ordered to let her

accompany in another palanquin. Both travelled togetho' till they reached Malwan Sindhudurga. There the

ceremony was performed and Soyarabai was sent to Raigad. She was pregnant and later Rajaram was bom

Anotiier record in Marathi Daftar shows “the wife of Appa Balwant had her menarche and hence he

remained behind to peiform the ceremony”

Since the girls were mn'ried at the age of 9 or 10 years, the consummation of the marriage naturally took

place after she attained puberty. The husband and all the family anxiously awaited for this occasion. When the

wife of Savai Madhawao attained puberty, the happy news was delivered to the Peshwa husband by a clerk

Naropant Godbole. 'Fhe Peshwa, while expressing his joy, gave the messenger the dress that he, the Peshwa was

\ eai’ing. Such present was considered as a great honour and was called UtaracM Vastre. Later, Naropant,

presented the Duppata, a shawl like piece, worth Rs. 500/- made of Paithani, rich in gold, to his favourite

mistress. This present did not remain a secret for a long time and on disclosure, tlie Peshwa dismissed him

through Nana Phadnavis

Another evil caused by this marriage was that the child-bride had to suffer forcible sexual intercourse many times. This premature sexual relationship miglit have been a cause of high rate of mortality'. Itie gi oom

would be too young to understand tlie implication or importance if it was his first marriage, and the in-laws, pen ents everv^ one ai ound Vvas anxious to perfonn tlie ceremony. A girl even from her biith, is always considered

as a woman, never a child, sister or a friend. With marriage vows she accepted a matured status. Nobod}' would call hei'a child.

94 Since child rnaiTiages were in vogue mjkj uic '.JfJJ UJillVWIlJlWi.v, ------^ ^

Menarche, the girl attained motherhood at a ver}' early age. Gopikabai, wife of Peshwa Nanasaheb, was mamed

when she was 5 years old, attained puberty when she was mere 14 and 2 years later was bom. She

must have been 16/17 years old then. This was the case of Nanasaheb’s first marriage. The wives of subsequent

marriages suflered a worst fate.

Polygaitiy;

ft is tRie that monogamy nonnally prevailed in the society. The word Dampaiti means “two joint owneis

of Liie household” and excludes a third person from the conjugal life. T^ie ritual too, does not provide for the

association of more than one wife in the normal sacrifice. In practice, however, polygamy prevailed in the rich

and tJie njling sections of the society.

It was fairly common among kings and nobles, who often found it a useful instiument in strengthening

their political power by contracting numerous but judicious matrimonial alliances. Shivaji married eight wives

between 1640 to 1657 A. D. in 17 years, from the age of 12/13 to 30 years. He was married to Saibai on

16 April 1640 A.D. and Shahajiraje, his father took him to Bijapur. The Badshaha of Bijapur, on the news of the man iage was disappointed as he could not attend it, ordered Shajiraje to arrange for another. In order to please the Badshaha, a second marriage was arranged in Vijapur. Shivaji was married in the same month of 1640 A.D

and the ceremony- went on for four days Out of his eight brides from 7 families, 4 died before his

coronation, one died as Sati and the rest were easily forgot! .n. Even history has not taken their notice.

Chatrapati Shahu nii^ied 4 wives, 3 died before him and Sakawarbai died as Sati. He had no son and had man>' mistresses in addition to the four wives.

Nana Phadiiavis married 9 wives; 7 died before him, one Bagabai died 14 days after him and Jiubai, who u’as year? old, siu’vived him for a long time. He was past 40 years when he man'ied for tlie fifth time, yet he m ajTied tour more times in hope of begetting a son he beheved that some evil and unlucky stars in his horoscope

95 suited in the deaths of his wives, one by one. VVIien he died, he was survived by two 7/9 years old widows

Men could marry as many wives as they chose. Plurality of wives tended to strain the ties of conjugal

>ve and man’s dominion over the wife. Peshwa Nanasaheb was bom on 16^ December 1721, married to

k-ipikabai on January 1730 A.D. wh«i he must have bccn 9 years old, had 5 sons, 2 died in infancy, eldest

''i'hwasrao on t!ie battle-fields of Panipat and 2 survived him. Yet, on 27^^ December 1760 A.D., few months

efore his death, he married Radhabai, 9 years old daughter of Savkar Naik Wakharkar of Paithan. Radhabai died

>n 19 November 1770 A.D. at the tender age of 19 years without tasting the joys of marital relationships, jopikabai felt insulted which w; natural and this strained the relationship between the husband and wife was loticed and marked by Nana Phadnavis when he met the Peshwa on the banks of river Narmada. Nana had

etumed from the battle-fields of Panipat and mentions it in his autobiography Later the loss at Panipat, the defeat, death of son Vishwasrao and the disappearance of Sadashivraobhau, all these tragic events brought them close together but the Peshwa could not bear tlie tragedv' and died on 23'^'^ June 1761 A.D. leaving bdiind two widows.

It is true that monogamy prevailed in the society. Normally he, tlie husband married second wife, only after tlie death of his first wife. He had one wife at a time but the Peshwas themselves violated this rule. It was veiy likely that the husband after contracting a new mairiage turned rather cold or inattentive to tlie earlier spouse. Bajirao I met when he had a son Nanasaheb, old enough to marry, (married in 1730 A.D.),

Kashibai was weak by constitution and had some disease of the leg, she was no match to him sexually, peihaps; yet, he was not inattentive towards her. ’s son Ragliunath and Mastani’s son Samsherbahadur were of tlie same age, later, there was another son Janardlianpant bom in 1735/36 A.D. to Kashibai. '^Die relations between Kashibai and Mastaiii were very tender and affectionate Kashibai was a sUong moral support to

Mastani during tlie family’s and society’s opposition to Bajirao-Mastani relationship. Kashibai was like an elder sistei' (0 Mnsfftni in the alien iaiid and amongst aiien people, i'hcir relationship could be a subject of a romfintic novel.

Raghunath Bajirao, bom in 1734 A. D., was niiirried to Janakibai, daughter of Ganeshpant Barve, in

1742 A.D. She died on 22''*^ August 1755 A.D. hence he married .Anandibai, on 17^^ Decembei' 1755 A.D., bai elv 3/4 months afler tlie death of the first wife. married Mathurabai, daughter of Bhikajipant

Pendse, in 1779 A.D. Mathurabai died of small-pox on 5^' June 1780 A.D. In addition to these three marriages,

Raghunathrao had numerous mistresses and his widow, .Anandibai took good care of all of them till her own death on 27^^^ March 1794 A.D.

All the surviving wives were not so lucky in been taken care of A letter of Ahilyabai Gaikwad, the widow of Fatehsinghrao Gaikwad to Daulatrao Babaji Shinddescribes their fate. The letter is dated 25 January

1795 A D., Fatelisinghrao died on 9 January' 1790 A.D. and he had adopted a son Manajirao, who looted the property’ woith 25/30 laklis belonging to the widows. 'Ihe widows were first promised the allowance

Rs 10,000/- which was immediately stopped. Fatehsinghrao had 160 wives, out of which only 4 were his favourites, and were given some respect, tlie rest were driven away from Uie house. These four had kept their jew'cllery, worth Rs. four lakhs, with a paternal uncle, Naroji Deshmukh and w'ent for a pilgrimage to Jejuri.

Ille jewellery was forcibly taken and the women were paupers, the>' had nothing, not even the travel expenses

She further appeals to consider her as a sister and to help her

/Vniongst these 160 wives, four vveie tlie favourite, KJiaslia of the husband, who must have shared him amongst themselves for the major part of the year, the rest 156 waiting for their turn. Monogamy was tlie ideal form of marriage but it was prescribed only for women, men could marry any number of women. A man could marry attei the death ot one wife or even during tlie life time of tiie t'lrst wife. Muslim Law pemiits polygamy but

A 1th a iCbU icLion o fio u r vvivea at a time llie s e 1 56 unlucky ones must have waited for their Lord and Master’s visit all tiieir lile, the>' weie in.^ignificfint, nobocfy took notice ■ Ihcm. Tliese recorded cases aje alv\ ,.ys like tips

97 of iceberg; only a tip is visible and noticed, tiic rest unseen

■d\w uvs in tJie dark, unknown and insignificant.

One after another, the wives would die and the husband manried one after another. There was no time even to gj ieve for nor to mourn for tlie wife. Bajirao H married Bhagirathibai, on 16 July 1786 A.D. and she died in

1793 A.D.. Immediately, on 18'^ June 1793 A.D. he married Sarasvvatibai, who passed away on 6'^'January

1797 A.D., in the imprisonment at Jamb. He married Radhabai, on 16 February 1797 A.D., who was ver>’ beautiful and hence a great favourite. She died on 19 May 1806 A.D. The cause for the deaths of first three wives was contributed to Bajirao suffering from Venial Disease which he had contacted at the age of 13 years of age. ITie references could be found in Peshwa Daftar No. 4 and Marathi Riyasat Uttar VibhagNo. 3. He married

Varanasibai, on 18'“^ June 17806 A.D., barely aftei' ?? montli, at Menavali, the residence of Nana Phadnavis.

She dica after his abdication at Vithur, in 1740 A.D.. Bajirao mairied Venubai on 3 June 1708 A.D., she gave birth to a son who died immediately and she too died within a couple of months. He was married next, to

Sarasvvatibai, before he left for Vithur, on 31^^ December 1818 A.D. She was the youngest and hence favourite o f all. W^ien she died at Vithur, Bajirao built a temple called Sartesw ar and buried her ashes beneatli the temple.

The seventh was Satj'abhamabai and the eighth Gangabai, who gave birth to two daughters, Yogabai and Bayabai.

'['he w ives number 9, 10 and 1 1 were man’ied when he was in Vithur and died some time at\er 1896 A.D he married 11 times; 5 wives before he went to Vitliur. Even after he had lost the Peshwaship, he needed a son to continue the family name. One wife had a son who died in infancy, and the motlier followed tlie son. Nowhere do we find the records of her grief or death.

Tlie deatJi rate of tlie wives of tliese rich and poweiful men in young age was veiy higli. Wives of

Chimajiappa, his son Sadashiiraobhau, Savai Maclliavrao, Bajirao II and Chimajiappa II ;u e the examples of men irom the Peshwa family, Tlie ages of these wives were between 15 to years. A husband could desert a wile on a veiy minor or no excuse or on such a ridiculous ground as failure fo

bear him a son Sainbhaji H of the Kolhapur State left seven wives vviien he died. He was the last direct

descendent of Shivaji and had no male heir. Wlien he died on 20^^ Decembei' 1760 A.D., his louith wife Kusabai p was pregnant and hence he wished that none of his wives should die as Sati, even Uiough it was a family tradition.

Later, Kusabai gave birth to a daughter and his widow adopted a son.

In addition to tliese numerous wives, men had mistresses called Natakshalas, Rakshas, Marjis and

Upastreyas and illegitimate children. All men were not pu’vgamous, there were exceptions to p; we the rule,

such as, Chimajiappa, got married to Raklimabai, who died leaving behind a son Sadashivrao, and later

' .\nnapoomabai who died as Sati, the first Sati in the Peshwa family. Sadashiwaobhau, was married to Umabai,

who died very early. There are letters from Bhau to Dhondiba Purandare, wherein he expresses delicate feelings

of marital love towai ds his wife Umabai. Peshwa Madhavi ao requested liis wife Ramabai to accompany him to

' tlie funeral pyre and she died as Sati. Narayanrao and his posthumous son, Savai Madhavrao belonged to this

monogcimous category and could be called the examples of total marital unity.

Altliough society had accepted the custom of polygamy, tlie Govanment would punish the offender if

there happened to be any injustice towards women in general, e.g. Timaji Nalawada had deserted his wife and

contracted a M uhurta or a remarriage with a woman belonging to lower caste. Timaji, and his newly wedded

second wife were sent to the Huznr for further enquiries

A vvift. n hetlier the senior one or the subsequent one, always lived in a fear, that the husband may, at any

time mmiy another. It made her more subservient and helpless. She must have been desperate and fatalistic by

nature that she must have neglected her own existence. If her husband conti acted anotlier marriage without any

m ound-, she must have been un msciously raging against everytliing that came across her. Gopikabai must have

had undergi./ne tiie same sufferings when Nanasalieb majxied a 9 years old girl, of Deshatha iubcaste, tov\ aid.s tlie

end of his life, (iopikabai was beautiful, her natal family was equally rich, she had given birth to sons. She must

have been sc disgusted with all these pleasures tlrat during her widowhood, once she had left Shaniwarwada, the family residence in , she nevei' returned to it.

Nanasaheb’s attitude was representative of all men, regarding tlieir wives in general. When a wife died, a man could mairv’ before her mourning was over, he had no time nor feelings towards a wife who had shared his

life even for a short duration. This was the tendency when the wife was middle-aged; if she was a child bride, it

was no wonder that she was forgotten within seconds, after her death.

■71', "'6 ft Status of Wife:

Wives were looked upon as a kind of husband s personal property’, rather than a companion or a life

partner. 'Fhe husband was the Lord and Master, who could do no WTong. Once married, she accepted him as

God, no matter whether he deserved to b ' ^o. e.g. .^andibai Raghunath, was the most unfortunate woman in the

Peshwa ftimily. She had to bear the cross of her husband’s evil acts on her shoulders. She was and is still

accused for tlie assassination of Peshwa Narayanrao, who was like a son to her. Riyasatkar Sardesai remarks in

the preface to tlie 4^ volume of tlie Peshwa Daftar, devoted to the “Reports about Anandibai, September

1786 A.D. to October 1788 A.D.” thus,

“If she had beoi wedded to a better husband, theie s^-ems a little doubt that she would have figured as one

of tlie most palj iotic members of the Peshwa Family. As matters stand, however, she has suffered in populai'

estimation, not so much for her own drawbacks as for those of her husband and of circumstances beyond her

control. It is creditable to her that thr ough thick and thin, she honestly helped her husband’s cause and did all that

a (lutif'iil w ife could do, to retrieve his fallen fortunes ”,

Anandibai is still remembered for chiinging the order of "to anest” into “to kill” Peshwa Narayanrao.

Ramshastri Prabhune, the noted chief judge, investigated the matter. Iri all tlie Maratha correspondence papeis, tfiere was not a single piece of evidence against her, none of the witnesses ever cited her name. Ragliunatlu ao,

!t^, swilly t*:) tkaUi by ptJiiyncts (D^luxnin-Pruyiijicluxita). Wliilt; ptu-fonnitig a penaiKc, theguiit had to be openly corilessed.

Yel, only Aiiaiidibai is still accused for Llie deed she did not peiforni. Even the suciety pai doned Raglioba

Gopikahai, the unluck7 motJier of the victim, met him as an act of lier pardon before Kagluinathrao’s death

Woman's possessions, her life, her happiness, joys, beauty, toilette, everytfiing was for tlie pleasure of her

husband.

I'here is a legend, that Ramabai, wife of Peshwa Madhavrao, was fond of eating betel leaves with all its

seasonings, aN was tiie custom. Once she ordered to fetch betel leaves. Nana Phadnavis, who was then the

K aibluu i or the manager of tlie Peshwa household, did not like it. He infonned her tliat a married woman

' should not eat these leaves in absence of her husband, for it brings a blot on her Satiiava or her loyalty towards r her husband. She was insulted for having had to learn such customs from a man. She totally gave up eating betel

leaves in her hfeAt that time, Madhavrao was on the campaign of Karnataka. Absence of the husband for

an}' reason, resulted in having restrictions in her daily life, such as dressing up in rich clothes, weai'ing heavy'

jewellers', donning llowers in tlie hair or eating betel leaves.

Nanasaheb Peshwa was on the militarj’ campaign of Karnataka, and had sent a copper glass of the regional

vaiiLiy and some sweets {Moongcial Lndhoos) from the encampaignment. He writes to his secretary, not

directly to tlie wife, Gopikabai, tha^ he (Nanasaheb) wishes she should drink water from the glass and taste tlie

sweets. Perhaps these simple things would remind her of her husband Nanasalieb’s attitude was to share

ever\' small joy with his wife, even tlie daily routine.

Most of the women during the stud)’ period, gained importance during widowhood and minority of their

sons. But tiiere were two cases, curiously from the same family and by husbands of same luune, who U eated tliew

wi\L with equality. Mahaiani Yesubai was tlio first such woman. She was married to Sanibhaji, son of Shivaji,

when she wa:> 7/8 ye'cirs old. Yesubai gi ew u]) in her marital Inane uiidtT the guidajice of Jijabai, gi ;uk1 nuithei of

Sambhaji. Her husband loved her dearly and althougli there was family tradition of polygarrn,', he remained monogamous. He trusted Yesubai, who could control hi.', angei' and his rash acts vei^ well. /\l1.er his

coronation, Sambhaji presented her the seal with letters to the elt'ect .S7//w Saklii Radni Jnyaie which nie:int

(TV' ■'the Queen was also a companiorr” ' . When he realised that he could commit hamiful deeds under intoxication

in fits of uncontrollable anger, he gave her the right to issue all orders. She would sign her name as a

caretaker, on all the orders issued

Jijabai was the wile ,one amongst seven of ChaUapati Sambhaji of Kolhapur, giandson of Shivaji and son

of Rajaram. She was married to him some time in 1726 A.D. She came from Torgalkiir Shinde f:unily and he

was already on the throne when they were manied. Li 1750 - 51 A.D., Sairibhaji lost interest in tlie

administration and gave her the authority to rule. Sambhaji informs Sadashivraobhau, in a letter, that he had

Thanded over the administration to his fourth wife ^ "I The reason was however not kriowTi. Jijabai ruled her

state till her death in 1773 A.D.

Tlicse were the cases fron. lie royal family of Dhonsale. However, all women must not be judged by

these cases, lliere were few cases found in the Peshw'a Daftar which throw light on the condition of w'omen

from common, ordinary stock.

Wife w'as considered a properly of tlie husband so much so that he could at times keep hei‘ as ransom for

ills debts. A case of 31 May 1788 A.D., states that Ranoji Mali of Khangaon Vasti, had contracted a debt of

R^. 25/-. As he could not pay tlie debt, he kept his wife as ransom, promised to return witliin 8 days and

absconded. TTie creditor, later,-kept her as his mistress, (RaJis-ha). Som e tim e later, tJiere was som e discoid

between tliem and therefore he, the creditor, killed her by hanging. He confessed his guilt and wa." fined

Ks. 9,0f)0 '- ‘ . If the liusband, a servant or a holder of Vatan, committed an offence and tlien absconded, his

vvife, infant children were kept in the custody' as a ransom. Such example was found in the Peshwa Daftar,

^volume 1. 'Itie wife had no other ii iglit than that of maintaiance. In tlie joint family set up, wife w as regarded as

one oi Uie dependants. It was the duty of a Kfu1a of the I'amily to maintain the dependants. VVive.s vvci'c expected to show complete obediaicc to tJieii' liu:sbaiid.s, so much so that the\ should in.it hesitate to obe>’ the orders even if their masters bade them to swallow poison or jump into iJie well ^

Divorcf :

During the period under stud>’, the practice of divorce was confined only to economically lower castes.

Fi-t tlie Brahmins and other higher castes, man iage was a sacred tie, hence it was considered irrevocable. Thus, we find, tliai even in cases of forced man rages the plea for revocation of the mairiage could not be accorded to, unless it was proved that the man iage was concluded hastily without proper nifiniage rites

lli e tenn Gfuiiasphota, today, signitles divorce. Ihe few documents of the period mentioning

Ghatasphota of Brahmin couples, therefore, are of great interest. A Brahmin widow, guilty of habitual adultery, was punished with Ghatasphota. Her two sons, aged 8 yeais and 6 yeais, whose tluead ceremony had been performed, were allowed to luiiain in tiie caste, lliis case seems to be a case of pcnnanent ostracisation ratlier tJian divorce

In another case, Naro Yaslnvant infoims Ramshastri tliat he had executed Shasti'i’s orders regjirding the penance, in connection with the unauthorised reconversion of his cousin, Naraliari. Narahari ha