Note 99 — G

Polyandry. 7. Another social arrangement arising from the same cause is polyandry, of which we have perhaps the only well established instance among the Hindus of the plains. On this subject Râja Lachhman Sinh, who is a most competent authority regarding the Hindus of the Bulandshahr District, has kindly furnished the following note:—“I was assured on the spot that in almost every Gûjar village in the vicinity of the Jumna, in the Bulandshahr District, polyandry was a fact. The custom was mainly due to the scarcity of women in the tribe, and this scarcity was the result of female infanticide, which several sections of the caste practised very largely before the passing of the Infanticide Act of 1870. Polyandry was not recognised as an acknowledged or legal custom; but if adopted in a village the neighbours made no objection to it, nor was it considered a serious scandal. It was to the benefit of the married brother and his wife that all the brothers should live together, and that the joint earnings should be enjoyed by the single wife and her children. It was through this feeling of self-interest that the wife and her real husband permitted the other brothers to share her favours. The custom prevailed only among the poorer families, the male members of which found it difficult to get married in consequence of the scarcity of girls in the caste, and also from the natural desire of parents to marry their daughters to as affluent persons as possible. Brothers only and not other relations or strangers were allowed to be the joint husbands. The wife was formally married to one of the brothers, usually to the eldest, if he were not too old, and her children were known as his children only, though he as well as the other brothers knew that she was at the disposal of all of them. Now as the Infanticide Act has put a stop to the murder of infant girls the scarcity of women is no longer felt, the custom of polyandry is dying out, and will soon be a thing of the past. While making these enquiries I was struck with the fact that polyandry did not, as might have been expected to be the case, affect the child-bearing powers of the women who practised it, that is to say, these women gave birth to as many children as those who had but a single husband. I questioned my informants on this subject, and was informed that the visits of the brothers were not so frequent as to produce any effect of this kind.”99