Chapter XXII: Marriage (2)

When a man divorces his wife, the woman’s people usually complain to the naim or council, but if it is decided that the man shall take his wife back, there appears to be no way of compelling him to do so. In any case the husband pays a fine (kwadr) of one buffalo to the wife’s people, just as he would have done if he had refused to take her when she reached the marriageable age, but he receives back any buffaloes he may have given as pòdri. Even if the council decides that the man ought to take his wife back and he refuses, a fine greater than one buffalo cannot be inflicted.

If the divorced woman re-marries, the previous husband does not receive anything, and any buffaloes given become the property of the woman’s family.

THE MOKHTHODITI INSTITUTION

In addition to the regular marriage, there is another recognised mode of union between men and women, which is called mokhthoditi. The man who becomes the consort of a woman in this way is called her mokhthodvaiol—viz., “man who keeps mokh,” [211] and the woman is called sedvaitazmokh—viz., “woman who joins.” The mokhthoditi union differs from the regular marriage in one important respect. It may be, and usually is, formed between Tarthar men and Teivali women, or between Teivali men and Tarthar women. The great majority of instances of which I heard were of this kind. One woman might have more than one mokhthodvaiol, the largest number of which I heard being three. Similarly, a man might have more than one sedvaitazmokh, but as the custom entailed considerable expenses on the man, this was not common, and I did not hear of any instance in which a man had more than two.

The mokhthodvaiol has no rights over any children who might be supposed to be his; they are regarded as the children of the regular marriage. This would be the case even if the husband were dead or separated from his wife. If a Teivali man took a Tarthar widow as sedvaitazmokh, and a child were born, the child would belong to the Tartharol, and would be regarded as the son of the dead husband of the woman, and would belong to his clan. The child might live with the mokhthodvaiol, and be spoken of ordinarily as the child of this man, but yet for all social and legal purposes, the child would be a member of its mother’s husband’s clan. The dead husband is regarded as the father because it was he who last performed the pursütpimi ceremony.

There are two forms of the mokhthoditi union. In one the woman lives with the man just as if she were his real wife, almost the only difference being that any children would be legally the children of the legal husband of the woman or of some man of her division called upon to perform the pursütpimi ceremony. In the other and more usual form the man visits the woman at the house of her husband.

Owing to the restriction on the visits of Teivali women to Tarthar villages, there is a difference in the nature of the mokhthoditi union in the two divisions. A Teivali mokhthodvaiol may take his wife to live with him at one of the Teivali villages, but in those cases in which Tarthar men live permanently with Teivali women, the mokhthodvaiol must live at the woman’s village. There are two examples of this practice at the present time in which Tarthar men live altogether at Teivali villages.

When a man wishes to have a given woman as his sedvaitazmokh he goes to the husband or husbands of the woman and asks for his or their consent. As a sample of the kind of negotiations which ensue, I will give a definite instance. A Tarthar man wished to become mokhthodvaiol to the wife of two Teivali brothers. He went to them and asked for their consent, which they gave, but said they should like to have the agreement confirmed by a third party (nedrvol), and they settled on a nedrvol to whom all went. The nedrvol asked each if he consented to the arrangement, and it was decided that the Tarthar man should give a putkuli worth three rupees annually to the woman’s husbands, and the former became mokhthodvaiol to the woman on that day.

A few days later the two husbands and the mokhthodvaiol went to the woman’s father and brothers (called collectively paiol), and the mokhthodvaiol promised that he would give the woman either a keivali (necklace) or a sin (gold earrings), each worth about thirty rupees. [A poorer man might only give a pulthi (bracelet), worth about twelve rupees]. He also promised that he would give a three-year-old buffalo to the son of the woman, this being called mokh ir kwadrti, i.e., “son buffalo he gives.” After making these promises, the mokhthodvaiol performed the salutation of kalmelpudithti to all the paiol, i.e., he bowed down before each, and placed his head beneath their feet.

As we have seen earlier, not only are the relatives of the sedvaitazmokh called paiol, the term in use for the relatives of a real wife, but the father of the woman is called mun and her mother mumi, names which are also terms of blood-relationship.

When a man or woman dies, the mokhthodvaiol of the woman and the sedvaitazmokh of the man have definitely assigned duties at the funeral ceremonies. Each wears a ring on the ring finger of the left hand and has to put various things with the left hand into the pocket of the putkuli of the dead person. [212]

The mokhthoditi institution was first described by Ward in 1821, [213] the man being called by Ward the coombhal (the kumbliol, cloak or blanket man). This is the Badaga name, and it has usually been adopted by those who have since referred to the institution.

The custom is said to have originated with the god Kulinkars, who was the mokhthodvaiol of the goddess Nòtirzi, but I could obtain no details of the way in which the custom is supposed to have arisen.

The ceremonial connected with the process of becoming a mokhthodvaiol is very much like that of the real marriage. A garment is given or promised and the salutation of kalmelpudithti is paid to the woman’s relatives. The chief difference is that the gifts are more numerous and expensive for the mokhthodvaiol than for the husband. Further, in some cases the sedvaitazmokh of a Teivali man may live with him exactly in the same way as a wife. Except for the prohibition against Teivali women living at Tarthar villages, and the important difference in the mode of descent of the children there seems to be little essential difference in some cases between the mokhthoditi union and marriage. In describing the institution, one of my informants laid great stress on the disability of a man of one division to perform the pursütpimi ceremony for a woman of the other division and treated this as the essential point of difference. He seemed to regard this ceremonial disability as primary and the other differences as the secondary results, but I do not know how far this is the general Toda view.

SEXUAL MORALITY

From the foregoing account it appears that a woman may have one or more recognised lovers as well as several husbands. From the account given of the dairy ritual, it appears that she may also have sexual relations with dairymen of various grades—that, for instance, the wursol, on the nights when he sleeps in the hut, may be the lover of any Tarthar girl. Further, there seems to be no doubt that there is little restriction of any kind on sexual intercourse. I was assured by several Todas not only that adultery was no motive for divorce, but that it was in no way regarded as wrong. It seemed clear that there is no word for adultery in the Toda language. My interpreter, Samuel, had translated the Commandments shortly before my visit, and only discovered while working with me that the expression he had used in translating the seventh Commandment really bore a very different meaning.

When a word for a concept is absent in any language it by no means follows that the concept has not been developed, but in this case I have little doubt that there is no definite idea in the mind of the Toda corresponding to that denoted by our word ‘adultery.’ Instead of adultery being regarded as immoral, I rather suspected, [214] though I could not satisfy myself on the point, that, according to the Toda idea, immorality attaches rather to the man who grudges his wife to another. One group of those who experience difficulty in getting to the next world after death are the kashtvainol, or grudging people, and I believe this term includes those who would in a more civilised community be plaintiffs in the divorce court.

In nearly every known community, whether savage, barbarous or civilised, there is found to exist a deeply rooted antipathy to sexual intercourse between brother and sister. In savage communities where kinship is of the classificatory kind, this antipathy extends not only to the children of one mother, but to all those who are regarded as brothers and sisters because they are members of the same clan or other social unit. In some communities, such as those of Torres Straits, this antipathy may extend to relatives as remote as those we call second and third cousins, so long as descent through the male line from a common ancestor and membership of the same clan lead people to regard one another as brother and sister.

It is very doubtful whether this widespread, almost universal abhorrence is shared by the Todas. I was told that members of the same clan might have intercourse with one another, and in the preliminary ceremony for the office of palol, a special part was taken by a woman who possessed the qualification that she had never had intercourse with a man of her own clan, and it was said it was far from easy to find such a woman. When I collected this information, it seemed clear that this meant that a woman who, before marriage had belonged to a given clan, had never had intercourse with a man of that clan. But since a woman joins the clan of her husband, and since, marriage taking place at an early age, the woman belongs to her husband’s clan from this early age, it has since occurred to me that an alternative explanation of the restriction is possible, though it does not seem to me to be likely. It is possible that what is meant is that the woman should never have had intercourse with any of her husband’s clan except those who are properly her husbands. If this explanation were the correct one, the prohibition would seem to be directed against practices resembling communal marriage, and would be interesting evidence in favour of the existence of this type of marriage, since there are no prohibitions against what does not exist nor has ever existed. As I have said, however, I think it very unlikely that the prohibition is to be interpreted in this way, but I regret very greatly that it did not occur to me to inquire carefully into this point on the spot.

So far as I could tell, the laxity in sexual matters is equally great before and after marriage. If a girl who has been married in infancy, but has not yet joined her husband, should become pregnant, the husband would be called upon to give the bow and arrow at the pursütpimi ceremony and would be the father of the child, even if he were still a young boy, or if it were known that he was not the father of the child. I only heard of one case in recent times in which an unmarried girl had become pregnant. In this case a man who was a matchuni of the woman was called in to give the bow and arrow, but he did not regard himself as married to the woman and did not live with her. That some stigma was attached to the occurrence may possibly be shown by the fact that this woman remained unmarried for some years, and then only married a man who was certainly below the general standard of the Todas in intelligence. The child, a daughter, of the woman died soon after birth, so that I had no chance of ascertaining whether the irregularity of her birth would have had any influence on her position in Toda society. If, however, a child is born without the pursütpimi ceremony having been performed, it is called padmokh and an indelible disgrace attaches to it throughout life.

From any point of view, and certainly from the point of view of the savage, the sexual morality of the Todas among themselves is very low. It is an interesting subject of speculation how far this laxity is the result of the practice of polyandry, for since low sexual morality brings in its train various factors which tend to sterility, we may have here, as Mr. Punnett has suggested elsewhere, [215] a reason why polyandry is so rare a form of marriage. The practice of polyandry must almost inevitably weaken the sentiment of possession on the part of the man which does so much to maintain the more ordinary forms of marriage.

The low sexual morality of the Todas is not, however, limited in its scope to the relations within the Toda community. Conflicting views are held by those who know the Nilgiri Hills as to the relations of the Todas with the other inhabitants, and especially with the train of natives which the European immigration to the hills has brought in its wake. The general opinion on the hills is that in this respect the morality of the Todas is as low as it well could be, but it is a question whether this opinion is not too much based on the behaviour of the inhabitants of one or two villages near the European settlements, and I think it is probable that the larger part of the Todas remain more uncontaminated than is generally supposed.

That the Todas are perhaps not so black as they are painted is suggested by two considerations. There is little evidence of the existence of many half-breeds. I examined in one way or another over 500 Todas and must have seen nearly the whole of the 800 people who form the Toda population. I saw few who suggested Tamil or Badaga intermixture and only one boy whose appearance suggested European parentage. A more careful examination than I gave might, however, have revealed other suspicious cases, and perhaps in a race which practices infanticide the absence or paucity of half-breeds may not carry much weight.

The other consideration is of a different kind and tends to show not only that the Todas are not so black as they are painted, but that they are not so black as they paint themselves.

By means of the genealogical record I was able to work out the relationship to one another of forty-three individuals suffering from colour-blindness. Since this condition runs mainly in the female line, it does not afford very cogent evidence of paternity; but a full examination of my records seems to show that colour-blind men, or rather males of colour-blind families, had colour-blind descendants more often than perhaps might have been expected if the Todas are in practice quite as promiscuous as their social regulations allow them to be. The record of the affinity of the colour-blind suggests that in spite of the theoretical promiscuity, the husbands are, in practice, very often the fathers of their children.

A few histories of individuals may be given as examples of the various marriage customs which have been described in this chapter. One of the most married of Toda women is Puvizveli of Kusharf (65). She was married in infancy to Singudr (55), of the same clan as Sinkòrs, the mother of Puvizveli, and the two were probably the matchuni of one another, though only in a distant way. Puvizveli was taken from Singudr by Madsu and Koboners (58), who gave for her three buffaloes. From them she was transferred to Kangudr of Piedr (62), it being arranged that he should pay eleven buffaloes. Soon after joining Kangudr, Puvizveli became ill, and since there is a prohibition of marriages between the clans of Piedr and Kusharf, it was agreed that the pair should separate, and the woman was taken by Tütners and Etamudri (58). The eleven buffaloes had never been paid by Kangudr, so Tütners and his brother gave their buffaloes directly to Madsu and Koboners, but only four instead of eleven. All these transactions took place while Puvizveli was still young, but by her new husbands she had a son who died soon after birth. During her second pregnancy, she was taken by Perpakh and Tebkudr (68), who gave six buffaloes. The transference took place before the pursütpimi ceremony had been performed. Perpakh gave the bow and arrow, and the daughter since born is regarded as the child of Perpakh and Tebkudr. Puvizveli has also a Tarthar mokhthodvaiol.

Edjog of Kuudr (56) was married in infancy to Nargudr (62), the son of her mother’s brothers, and therefore her matchuni in the nearest sense. From him Kiudners (70) and his two brothers took her for five buffaloes, Kiudners died before the buffaloes had been paid, and Edjog was taken by Mavòdriners (65), who arranged to pay the five buffaloes to Nargudr. He did not do so, but after having a son by Edjog, he sent her back to the father, paying a kwadr of one buffalo. So far, Nargudr had not received his five buffaloes, but he now obtained them from Kaners and Kudrievan (63), who took the woman although she was the granddaughter of their sister Narskuti. The marriage met with disapproval among the Todas on this account, though there does not appear to be any definite regulation against such a marriage; and at the time of my visit Edjog, a young woman of about twenty-seven, was still the wife of the two old men, aged about seventy and sixty-seven respectively.

Kuriolv of Kuudr (52) first married Punaveli (65), by whom he had two children. He then took to live with him Pilimurg (7), a Tarthar woman, giving to Pepners (44), the husband of the woman, fifteen buffaloes. Though Pilimurg is only legally his sedvaitazmokh, Kuriolv treats her as a wife. She lives at one of the Kuudr villages, while Punaveli lives at another. Pilimurg has had one son, Meilitars, since she has been living with Kuriolv, and Kuriolv always speaks of the boy as his son, though legally he is the son of Pepners, and his name will be found in the genealogies among the children of this man.

Recently Kuriolv has also married Sintharap (68), sharing her with Ònadj (57), of the same clan as Kuriolv, but belonging to a different family. Sintharap has had three children, for the first of whom Kuriolv performed the pursütpimi ceremony, and since no one has performed this ceremony for the succeeding children, they are also regarded as the children of Kuriolv. One of these children was Sinerani, whose funeral ceremonies have been described.

Kuriolv’s son, Kulpakh (52), married Toridz (65), sharing her with Kiladrvan (60), of the same clan as Kulpakh, but of a different family. At the first pregnancy Kulpakh gave the bow and arrow, and was regarded as the father of that child and of two succeeding children who were born while Kulpakh was alive. After the birth of the third child Kulpakh died, and Toridz has since continued to live with Kiladrvan and has had two more children. Kuriolv, the father of the dead man, succeeded in preventing Kiladrvan from performing the pursütpimi ceremony before the birth of either of these children, and consequently they are regarded as the children of the dead Kulpakh and belong to Kuriolv’s division (pòlm) of the clan and not to that of Kiladrvan. Here, by virtue of the pursütpimi ceremony, a dead man is the legal father of two children who are known to be really the sons of his fellow-husband.

In the preceding cases the people belong to the Teivaliol. Among the Tartharol there are similar histories.

Pupidz of Kwòdrdoni (35) was married in infancy to two brothers, Kalgeners and Kinagudr, belonging to the same clan as the mother of Pupidz, so that she would probably have called them matchuni, though they were not nearly related. From these boys Pupidz was taken by Patser (26), who gave for her three buffaloes. From Patser she was taken by Siriar (20) for five buffaloes. Some time later Pepob (44) wished to marry Pupidz, but both she and Siriar were unwilling to be separated. Pepob, however, persuaded the council to arrange that he should have the woman for three buffaloes, and soon after five or six men carried off the woman by force, entering Siriar’s hut at night. Two of the men held Siriar while the others carried off his wife, who became pregnant by Pepob, but Siriar, who had been trying to get back his wife, succeeded when she was about at the sixth month. The hand-burning ceremony had already been performed, but Siriar gave the bow and arrow, and is therefore the legal father of the boy born afterwards, although Pepob is known to have been the real father. Siriar had to give Pepob eleven buffaloes, though he had only received three, and had given five to the previous husband.

Nanbarvan of Kars (7) first married Pothenir (47), by whom he had one son. Nanbarvan went to England with a party of Todas, and Pothenir then married Kutadri, Nanbarvan’s first cousin. On his return from England, Nanbarvan married Sindod (38), by whom he had a second son. Then he fell ill, and in consequence sent Sindod away, and since that time he has had no wife, though he claims that Iraveli, his brother’s wife, is also his. There seems to be no doubt, however, that he does not live with his brother in the same way as in most cases of polyandry, and is a wanderer with no regular home of his own, but I could not discover the cause of this.

A dispute about a marriage was in progress while I was on the Hills, which I did not understand completely, but it appeared that Oselig (24), who had been first married to Teigudr (4), was then taken by Punog (14). Punog was said to have treated his wife badly, and to have failed to perform his duties when there was a funeral in the family of Nertiners, the brother of Oselig. He had not given the proper pödri, nor had he taken part in the cloth-giving ceremony, so Oselig ran away from him and took refuge with her brother. After a month Punog demanded back his wife and also twelve buffaloes which he had left with Nertiners for grazing purposes. Nertiners refused to send back his wife, and returned only eight of the buffaloes. He also proceeded to arrange that Oselig should marry Udrchovan (36), and Punog accused Nertiners of having got up the whole quarrel in order that Oselig should make this marriage. The matter was referred to the council, and it was decided that Oselig should become the wife of Udrchovan, but I did not hear for how many buffaloes, nor how the other disputes about buffaloes and pödri were settled.

At this time Udrchovan had another wife, Pandut (45). She had been the wife of Udrchovan and his brother Popners from infancy, and after having three children, who died young, she had been sent away and Udrchovan married Kavener (3), while his brother married Silkot (10). Later Kavener was taken from Udrchovan by Kudrvas (11), and Udrchovan remarried Pandut, who in the meantime had had two other husbands.

To the foregoing accounts, which I give as exceptional and not as typical examples of the uncertainty of Toda married life, I add one taken from the book published by Captain Harkness in 1832, p. 121. The notes are added by myself.

THE HISTORY OF PINPURZ KUTAN

“I was not seven years old, when my father, taking a child’s garment, in value about a quarter of a rupee, and selecting one of the best of our herd, desired me to accompany him to the morrt [216] of Kinōri. This Kinōri had, a month or two before, a daughter born to him. Soon after we had arrived at the morrt, it being understood that Kinōri gladly consented to the propositions which had been made by my father, I was directed to bow myself down, and in the presence of the whole family to ask his foot. This I did; and touching it with my forehead, the buffalo and the garment were presented him, and I was considered to be affianced to his daughter. We remained there for some days, during which period it was agreed upon, what number of kine I was to receive in dower, on my intended spouse coming of age, and we again set out to return to our own morrt. I had no brothers, or they also would have been affianced to my intended, as this was part of the agreement, in case of my father having any more sons born to him. In this case Kinōri’s daughter would have been wife to us in succession as we arrived at manhood, and we should have formed one united family—the supreme authority, however, still resting with me. The next year, my father presented to my intended bride a garment, double in value to the first which he had presented, and in each succeeding year, one proportionately increasing in value. We also sacrificed a buffalo, and presented a kutch [217] on every occasion of a death among any of the relations of my intended’s family, and one also at their obsequies. In case of any accident of the kind in our family, we expected the same to be observed towards us, except the presenting of the kutch, from which my bride’s father was exempted on account of the dower he had to give with her, which would greatly exceed in amount any expense which I could be to my father. My father died, and when I had attained man’s estate, I was not pleased with my betrothed; and presenting her father with three kine, the contract was by mutual consent dissolved. Had the reverse been the case, and the bride or her father had declined to allow of consummation, I could have claimed of the latter a fine equal to fifty kine, and till this fine was paid the former could not marry any other. Freed from my contract with my first bride, I sought to affiance myself in a manner more to my own inclinations, and wishing to be connected with the family of my present wife, Pilluvāni, who was then only six years of age, I spoke to her father, and, obtaining his consent, presented her with a garment in value, according to her age, of about a rupee and a half, and a milch buffalo. I continued to present her with a garment every succeeding year; and on the occurrence of a death among any of the relations of her family, and at the obsequies, I always sacrificed a buffalo, and presented the kutch. Pilluvāni was afterwards betrothed to two others, Khakhood and Tūmbŭt. When she had arrived at a certain age, and had for eight days been living with one of her female friends in a dwelling separate from those of the family, [218] intimation was sent to me, and I went to her father’s morrt, that is, Kerjwan’s, her second father, the first one being dead. I was feasted and bedded; and after a few days, Kerjwan, laying on his hands, gave us his blessing, and I returned with my wife to my own morrt, receiving with her in dower four buffalo kine; her father also presented to her on this occasion a pair of ear-rings, a pair of armlets, a necklace, a brazen salver, and five rupees.

“Now, according to our customs, Pilluvāni was to pass the first month with me, the second with Khakhood, and the third with Tūmbŭt; and the two latter, waiting in succession on the father-in-law, were to ask his blessing and claim their privilege in right. I was to give her raiment the first year, Khakhood the second, and Tūmbŭt the third. I had the option of claiming the first three children, Khakhood the second three, and Tūmbŭt the third three; when the option again revolved to me. It was my place to go to her father two or three months prior to the birth of a child, and, delivering to him a small piece of wood, which we call a billu, [219] to claim the forthcoming infant, whether male or female, and acknowledge before him and his relations that I would protect and nourish it; and that, whatever might happen, I allowed this to be in satisfaction of one of my claims. On this occasion, also, I was to present him either five or ten rupees, and in return he was to allow me to select, if I presented him five rupees, three; if ten rupees, six of the best kine of his herd. If the child proved a boy he would have to present me with a heifer, and another one also on the birth of each son, but not on the birth of a daughter, as it is supposed that she will soon be betrothed, and that a fortune will accrue to her in that way.

“After the third birth the same observance and privilege would have fallen to Khakhood and Tūmbŭt successively, or if I chose to give up any of my rights the two latter would successively have had choice of adoption, &c., &c. We all three should have been equally bound to protect the whole of the children, to marry, and to give them in marriage; but the superior authority would always have rested with me.

“The case of Pilluvāni and myself, however, was at variance with this custom. We were very fond of one another and determined not to separate. I offered to pay the usual fines, but the other party would not accept of them. I had been unfortunate. A murrain had attacked my herd; the greater part of Korrorr, [220] and which belonged to my fathers, had been forsaken by the Marvs and Cūvs, [221] from the oppression of some of their rulers, and from being a leading man among my own people I was now reduced, but principally by the oppressions of my wife’s relations, to comparative poverty.”