1.9 Procreative
relationship between men and women
In
the entire evolutionary process of modern humans, that spread over thousands of
years till present, marital ties between kin, especially between
father-daughter and brother-sister, done for procreation purpose have vanished
completely from broader societies. However such relationships find their reference
in mythological stories as well as historical literatures related to the land
of ancient civilizations indicating prevalence of such customs till Vedic era
or even till beginning of the middle ages. In anthropology, such relationships
between family members and close relatives are called ‘incest’ or ‘inbreeding’.
In Ancient Egypt and Greek, there are examples of brother-sister and less often
father-daughter marriages in royal families. Most of the time such
relationships were made to maintain blood purity and family control over the
royal property. Ancient India was no different and here too, both mythological
and historical examples of such relationships are found. In Indian mythology, the
most famous incestuous relation is of Brahma with his own daughter Saraswati.
The relationship resulted in five heads of Brahma (later one head was cut by
Shiva) and birth of son Sumridika. In another example he has been shown
seducing his other daughter Usha (dawn)
and through that initiating the process of populating the earth (Rig Veda
1:164). The incestuous relationship between brother and sister is cited by the example
of Yama and his sister Yama where Yama refuses his sister Yama’s argument that
they must relate sexually for procreative purposes (Rig Veda 10:10).
Historically it is believed that Kausalya (meaning the princess of Kosala) was the
first cousin (paternal uncle’s daughter) of King Dasratha. The Dasratha Jatka shows both Rama and Sita as
brothers and sisters [20] [21]. Similarly King
Draupada of Panchala entered into relationship with his own sister to obtain
Dhrishtadyumna and Draupadi (Panchali) [22]. Shakya and Lichchhavi
tribes, who populated northern India in the late Vedic period, practiced relationship
between kin. They did so to maintain purity of their Kshatriya blood and
proudly claimed origin of their community from the marital ties between
brothers and sisters. In the Ambattha
Sutta, Buddha tells the origin of his Shakya clan from the marital ties
between brothers and sisters. In the series of incestuous relationship, the
practice of niyoga or levirate
marriage also comes which was prevalent till pre-modern era. According to it, the
younger brother can enter into a sexual relationship with his brother’s spouse
in situations where the procreation is facing an extreme obstacle such as the death
of brother. Based on the mythological, historical and social evidence, it is
clear that in India (and across the world) marital ties between kin were
present even after Vedic era. Though it can be always argued that the Brahma,
Saraswati, Usha, Yama and his sister Yama or the origin stories of Shakya and
Lichcchavi tribes are part of mythology, but it will remain a fact that the creator
of such myths never saw marital relations between brother and sister as
offensive. It is possible only when such relationships were part of popular
customs. The decline of such relations started only after the permanent
settlements of humans across the world. The permanent settlements gave birth to
need of various social laws to govern the society. It is during which such
close relationships were prohibited and declared as sin or punishable offence. Though
most human groups / societies made such laws across the world but the limit of such
relationships differed from each other. For example in the societies of northern
India, which remained the epicenter of Indo-Aryan civilization and who were
masters in social organizations, such close marital relationships saw a ban
after the creation of Manusmiriti (200 BC – 200 AD). In present time, marital
ties are strictly forbidden between all relations that carry even small traces
of brother-sister (distant cousins) or father-daughter (girl and maternal or
paternal uncles) like relations. However in southern India starting from
Maharashtra, cross-cousin marriages are very common and there are also practice
of marriage between a girl and her maternal uncle. There are still certain
tribes who practice primitive rituals and the customs of inbreeding. The
classic example of this is the panchama
Baiga tribe of central India in which the union of grandparent with
grandchild is practiced and going further south, in Malabar (northern Kerla) Eranadan male takes his eldest daughter
as his second wife [22].
Similar
to sexual relationships between kin, the selection of mating partner could have
been random as well as multiple in the primitive humans. However after permanent
settlements, such relationships slowly took shape of monogamy, polygamy and
group marriage (a form of polyamory). In social anthropology, monogamy refers
to sexual relationship between one male and one female while polygamy refers to
sexual relationships of one with many. When a male makes relationships with
many females then it is termed as polygyny and when a female makes
relationships with many males then it is termed as polyandry. Depending on the
type of the society, the system of polyandry flourished in two forms –
fraternal polyandry and non-fraternal polyandry. When a female enters into
sexual relationships with males who are brothers then it is known as fraternal
polyandry and when a female is free to make sexual relationships with two or
more individual males not related to each other then it is known as
non-fraternal polyandry. On the basis of succession, it can be further divided
into patriarchal polyandry and matriarchal polyandry. The third form ‘Group
marriage’ refers to an arrangement in which many males and females (usually 3-6
couples) enter into a sexual relationship with each other and share all social
responsibilities as well as liabilities together. In Indian subcontinent till
Vedic era, all human races practiced one or more than one form of such
relationships in their societies. The Indo-Aryan society was largely monogamous
except Kings who used to be polygamous. Most Kings used the institution of
polygyny to convert political relationships into family relationships. The
other form of polygamy i.e. polyandry was practiced by a section of Mongoloid
population who were settled in the hilly areas of northern and north-eastern India.
The custom was adopted by some Dravidians and Aryans too after cultural fusion
between them. The famous epic example of polyandry is the matrimonial
relationship of Draupadi with five Pandava brothers, which is also an example
of fraternal polyandry. As per Mahabharata, before she was married to all
brothers, only Arjuna won her through his valor. When Yudhisthira proposed her
to become wife of all five brothers, a short conversation took place between
him and Drupada (father of Draupadi). In the conversation, Drupada termed one
wife between many brothers against to traditions but Yudhisthira justified it
as part of his family customs. Based on the social and literary evidences, historians
believe that as Pandava brothers were born and brought up in the Himalayan
regions, they inculcated many cultures of Himalayan Mongoloid tribes and thus
shared common wife between them. The institution of polyandry being alien to
Indo-Aryan civilization is also confirmed by the fact that it was the same relation
that created suspicion in Kuravas of Hastinapura (Kuru) about the ancestry of
Pandavas and made the latter subject of sarcastic comments. However it must be
noted that before Pandavas, the system of polyandry was already adopted by the initial
lot of Indo-Aryans who migrated and settled in Himalayan regions. The same is evident
from the presence of Khasa tribe who still practice fraternal polyandry, has
Indo-Aryan origin and settled in these regions much before the migration of the
Vedic Aryans. In present time, the system of polyandry is practiced by certain
tribes living in the Himalayan regions such as Laddakh in Jammu and Kashmir,
Kangra, Chamba, Kullu, Mandi in Himachal Pradesh, Chakrata in Uttar Pradesh and
Siang district in Arunachal Pradesh. In central India, the system existed in
Oraons, Santhals, Bhuiyas and Korkus tribes but now totally disappeared. In
southern India, polyandry exists in tribes of the Nilgiri Hills in Tamilnadu
and the upper part of Kerla and they include Todas, Kotas, Kurumbas, Uralis etc.
The Nairs or Nayars of Kerla also practiced polyandry especially of non-fraternal
and matriarchal nature. In their society, the female entered into relationships
with male of the same caste or upper caste like Nambudiri Brahmins who used to
visit at her home. Since Nairs has matriarchal society, the child born from
such relationships were recognized as Nairs only [23].
1.10 Position of different occupational classes and assimilation of aboriginals
The
Rig Veda and Atharva Veda, the texts that
describe two major civilizations of the subcontinent by early Vedic
period, do
not talk about sharp divisions between its members. The Rigvedic society
dominated
by Aryans was, however, divided into four classes depending on the
occupation
namely warrior, priest, trader and laborer. The boundaries of the class
system were
invisible and people moved from one class to another depending on their
occupation. Weavers, tanners, carpenters, printers and others, whose
occupations are quite dignified in the Rig Veda, were apparently
practiced by the
respected members of Aryan society including the warrior and priestly
classes.
The word Shudra appears only towards the
end of the period of the Atharva Veda when a Purusasukta version of
their origin might have been inserted into
the 10th book of the Rig Veda. Thus the later literatures, which
talk about Dasas instead of slaves or
laborers, indicate that by this time Dravidians were assimilated in the
Aryan
society. Though no Vedic literatures are available citing the
assimilation
process but it is believed that most of the aborigines were reduced to
the
level of labor class or Shudras in Aryan dominated society except some
of their
priestly and warrior population who were assimilated in the same class
but with
lower ranks. It is the same time when majority Aryans, having the
occupation of
priest and warrior, slowly dissociated them from certain types of work
that required
manual labor and therefore shifting these industries fully in the hand
of Dasas (Dravidians), known as shudras in the Varna system. However
some
populations from both classes, who could not dissociate them from such
types of
work and also got influenced from the culture of aboriginal’s, were
tagged as
Vratyas of that class. Other than these Aryans, others of the same race
who
were dispossessed and impoverished due to continuous fight over land,
cattle
and other resources and started menial works to support their
livelihood, were tagged
as shudra by the orthodox Aryans of Kuru-Panchala. Due to these
developments, shudra
class which earlier had a population of mostly Dasas or non-Aryan origin
(i.e.
Dravidians and Mogoloids) now included some degraded Aryan race people.
However
till early Vedic period, there were no wide scale social restrictions
regarding
food and marriage with shudras. Some example of flexible class system
and social
relations between them -
- Vishwamitra was Kshatriya
by birth but later known as sage or Brahmin.
- Valmiki, the poet of
epic Ramayana, was Shudra by birth but later became sage.
- Sumitra, the wife of
king Dasratha and mother of Lakshmana, was Shudra by birth but after marriage
she became a Kshatriyani.
- Vashistha born from Shudra
father and Kshatriyani mother was Rajguru
of Ayodhya.
- The grandson of
Vashistha was Parasara who was of Shudra origin but known as sage.
- Parasara with his
union from Shudra fisherwoman Satyavati (also known as Matsyagandha which means ‘having fishy smell’) in her maidenhood
near River Yamuna gave birth to black-skinned Vyasa. Later Vyasa became the writer
of epic Mahabharata and considered to be scriber of both Vedas and Puranas.
- Satyavati
(Matsyagandha) became Kshatrayani after marriage with King Shantanu of epic
Mahabharata. The union had two sons Chitrangada and Vichitravirya. Chitrangada
was killed by the Gandharvas and Vichitravirya became king. He died without
having any child. Satyavati then called her elder son Vyasa and from the union
of him with the widows of Vichitravirya, the clan of Kaurvas and Pandavas came.
This way the families of Pandavas and Kaurvas have their origin from Kshatriyas
and Shudras.
- Agastya was a Shudra but
bacame sage or Brahmin [24].
- A shudra soldier
always accompanied the horse of Ashvamedha yajna (Strot Sutra XX.5.13; XX.50;
XIV.1.46).
- There were armies of
Shudras as per Mahabharata. (Mahabharata 7.66 and 19.7)
By
the end of late Vedic period i.e. between 1000-600 BC, the idea of
ceremonial
impurities of shudras appeared. The first of such ceremonial impurity is
mentioned in Satapatha Brahmna (I
1.3, 12) where a carpenter’s touch is said to impart ceremonial
impurity [25]. They were allowed to participate in certain rituals and yet restricted
from
some specific rituals and Vedic sacrifices. In other words, the position
of
shudras turned ambiguous in society in this period as mentioned in the
Samhitas and Brahmnas. Though the word shudra is not mentioned in the
Pali
texts, but it talks about the miserable condition of people having the
profession of weaver, carpenter etc and therefore indicating towards
their
social and economic degradation by the 6th century BC.
Even
though the priestly and warrior classes of Aryans tried to distance them from the
aboriginals or Shudras, the process seems to have started in the form of strict
religious codes and conduct somewhere in the late Vedic period. By that time
enough advances were already made on interbreeding front evident from the dark
skinned priestly and warrior personalities in both epics Ramayana and
Mahabharata. By the time of Manu i.e. after 800-1000 years from the Satapatha Brahmna text and nearly 2000
years after the first lot of Aryan invasion, when these codes and conducts
became rigid turning class system into Varna / caste system and therefore
restrictions on inter-class marriages, a significant portion of the early Aryan
population was already mixed with the aboriginal populations belonging to
Negroid, Australoid and Mongoloid races irrespective of their classes. It can
be easily guessed that after labor class, the maximum interbreeding could have
happened between the warrior clans of all human races. It is because they
exercised sovereign rights over everything coming under their territory
including women and entered into matrimonial relations to convert political ties
into family ties. However, the condition was totally different to a new lot of Indo-Aryans.
The new lot had minimal chances of interacting with the aboriginals because the
latter were already displaced from the northwestern regions towards east and
south. Further they must have restricted themselves only to the priestly and
warrior professions from the fear of turning religiously impure, though to
certain extent crossbreeding could have happened as the rules were fully forced
only from the Gupta Empire of 5th century AD. The entire discussion
on shaping of the civilization across the subcontinent by end of Vedic period also
indicates towards the formation of heterogeneous distribution of different Varna
/ castes across it. Though many social, religious and political factors arising
in the medieval period must have influenced the distribution but the pattern
was largely seeded by late Vedic period and shaped completely after the Brahmna
texts started influencing the Aryan dominated regions. As Britishers considered
Brahmanism and its religious
codes-conducts as standard to classify the entire (H)indus population on Varna
ladder, clearly the region of Kuru – Panchala should have the highest percentage
of the upper caste population. This is because the region remained the center
of the creation of many Brahmanic rituals and Aryan civilization. The
percentage of upper castes should drop on moving into eastern and southern
directions as these regions emerged as the epicenter of
Dravidian-Mongoloid-Negroid civilizations. The last caste based census of India
in 1931 beautifully captures this heterogeneous distribution (see also, chapter 6.6.1). Across India, the
states having highest percentage population of upper castes (Brahmin, Kshatriya
and Vaishyas) were Rajasthan followed by Uttar Pradesh with numbers being 24.2%
and 21.1% respectively. The percentage decreased while going in eastern
direction with Bihar, Bengal and Orissa recording approximately 12.7%, 6.5% and
6% upper castes populations only. The regions which now constitute Maharasthra
i.e the southern periphery of Aryavrata, had only 6.6% upper caste population. In
entire Southern India, the upper caste population was recorded around 5% and
less only with rest population belonging to Shudra and despised castes. It should be noted
that the upper caste population in absolute number in the regions corresponding
to undivided Uttar Pradesh was recorded more than the double of the total upper
caste population found in southern India including the states of Maharashtra
and Orissa. It, therefore, indicates that the region was the epicenter of
Indo-Aryan and Brahmanic civilization from the Vedic period.
Fig: 1.10 Upper Caste population as per census of 1931; southern India has upper caste populattion in the range of 4-6%.
Concluding
the section, it can be said that the entire period between 1900 and 500 BC
witnessed clashes and cultural fusion of different civilizations, the creation
of early religious texts such as the Vedas, Brahmnas, Samhitas etc, development
of Sanskrit and Prakrit form of Indo-Iranian language and seeding of the rigid
class system from flexible one within Aryan dominated regions. Though till
Vedic period, the political and religious center of Indo-Aryan society was
spread over the regions of Kuru-Panchala and Kosala, later it shifted towards the
eastern part of Aryavrata i.e. todays eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar after the
birth of Buddha, Mahavira and rise of Magadha Empire.
********************************************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************************************
References:
[20] Upadhyaya, B. S. (1941). Women in Rig Veda, p. 124.
[21] Das,
S. K. (2005). A History of Indian Literature, 500-1399: From Courtly to the
Popular. Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.
[22] Kapoor, S. (2002). The Indian Encyclopedia,
p. 3100. New Delhi: Cosmo.
[23] Vidyarthi,
L. P., Rai, B. K. (1976). The Tribal Culture of India, pp. 395-398. New Delhi:
Concept.
[24] The
Foreign quarterly review, Volumes 18-19, p. 122, 1837
[25] Sharma, R. S. (1990). Sudras in Ancient
India: A Social History of the Lower Order Down, p. 85. (Rev. 3rd
ed.). Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
********************************************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************************************
Index Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 Chapter 9 Chapter 10
Give your feedback at gana.santhagara@gmail.com
If you think, this site has contributed or enriched you in terms of information or knowledge or anything, kindly donate to TATA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
online at https://tmc.gov.in/ and give back to society. This appeal has
been made in personal capacity and TATA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL is not
responsible in any way.
****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************