01-22-2006, 05:02 AM
<b>Excerpt #2 of 3</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><span style='color:purple'>Suicide, not murder</span>
That in principle itâs about self-immolation and not murder, is apparent from many British testimonies. For that matter, these are in agreement that this practice only occurred among a few higher castes. They keep stressing that those present continually tried to make the woman give up on her resolve, and that there wasnât a single stigma associated with forsaking this resolution, unless it only happened after the ceremony had started (what might perhaps have been the case with Rup Kanwar).
In Bengal at the start of the 19th century, several cases have been mentioned where the sati was under pressure by the in-laws. A part of the cause was the British reforms of the law of succession, which suddenly made it of interest for the in-laws to not be left with a surviving daughter-in-law. This was therefore an aberration, partly induced by the colonisation, of the general practice where sati was completely voluntary. For that matter, itâs significant that such women did not become the object of worship, as opposed to the many non-suspect sati-women in Rajasthan.
The mentions of sati in mythological, judicial and historical texts of the hindus, are without exception concerned with voluntary self-immolation. The name actually cames from Sati, the beloved of Sjiva, who sets herself on fire in protest against the unjust treatment of her lover by her father, this story therefore has noting to do with widow-burning. It is quite possible that this might be a later-constructed myth to explain the name, and that the practice of sati is much older. Sati actually means âgoodâ or âloyal [woman]â, from <i>sat/sant</i>, âtrue, goodâ. The most famous mention is that of Madri, the favourite wife of Pandu, the father of the five Pandavas from the Mahabharata-epic: she climbed Panduâs pyre, while the other wife, Kunti, declined the honour. The Greek author Diodorus Siculus tells how in 316 B.C. the Indian commander of a hired-army in Iran is killed, upon which his two spouses argue about the privilege of becoming the sati.
From the middle-ages countless examples are known. The Arabian writer Albiruni writes that widows were treated badly and thatâs why they chose self-immolation. Marco Polo, on the other hand, states that they did this âout of love for their husbandâ. A special case is the <i>jauhar</i>, the collective sati of Rajput-women when a city besieged by Muslims no longer had a chance to be saved: the men did a prospectless sally in order to die heroically, and the women were kept out of the hands of the enemy by the fire-death. Much more recent examples are the voluntary immolation of Sjivajiâs wife Putalabai (1680), of Madhavarao Pesjwaâs wife Ramabai, and of the wifes of Ranjit Singh, maharaja of the Sikh-realm, in 1839.
Of more import for the biased westerner is rather, that also the not-to-be-suspected British shared the opinion that the widows involved carried out their sati voluntarily. Before the British rule banned this practice in 1829 on Lord Bentinckâs initiative, it had a report drawn up with the significant title: âThe Report on Hindu Widows and <i>Voluntary </i>Immolationsâ. H.T. Colebrooke, H.H. Wilson, Jonathan Duncan and other British authorities advised against a legal ban on sati, because this ritual does not occur under duress/coercion. A few citations from the in this report collected assessments, and also from other British testimonies, deserve to be heard.
Lord Mountstuart Elphinstone wrote in his <i>History of India</i>: âOn occasion it has been said that the relatives encourage the widow to immolate herself to obtain her possessions⦠People can however be sure that the relatives usually beg the widow not go through with it, and to this end also call in the intervention of friends and figures of authority. If she is of high rank, even the monarch will come to console her and to advise her against it.â
Lieutenant-colonel John Briggs in a letter stated: âWhoever has witnessed the self-immolation of hindu widows, and of their attitude/bearing towards this as I have seen them, will find it hard to free themselves of the idea that these devoted women have reached the highest grade of faith. The justness of the law that robs them of their only religious solace⦠is therefore at the very least doubtful.â When Lord Bentinck in 1829 issued the ban on sati, it was under rather general opposition from his (British) subordinates.
Lord Holwel, lieutenant-governor of Bengal, wrote: âIf we viewed these women in the correct light, then we would think more openly about them, and admit that they act out of heroic as well as rational and pious principlesâ.
As evidence for the involuntary nature of sati, people constantly refer to the mention of a forced immolation in F. Bernierâs <i>Travels in the Moghul Empire</i>, a travel-report from the pre-colonial time. Pointing to this professor Prabha Dixit said, short after the self-immolation of Rup Kanwar, that âsati is never a voluntary deedâ and âalways took place under brutal pressure/coercionâ. Well, the same Bernier, who stayed in India from 1656 to 1668, writes in the same book: âMostly it was the practice that sati was carried out voluntarily.â
He mentions several voluntary self-immolations, and gives among others this description: âwhen I left Surat for Persia, I witnessed the devotion and fire-death of another widow. Several English and Dutch {people} were present. The woman was middle-aged and not at all ugly. With my limited ability for expression, I do not expect to convey a complete idea of the brash courage or fear-inducing liveliness on the womanâs countenance, of her sure tread, of her freedom from all disturbance, with which she spoke and let herself be washed, of the look of trust or rather carelessness/insensibilty that she gave us; of her easy air, free of doubt, of her distinguished bearing, without any embarrassment, when she searched her seating place, which consisted of thick dry milletstraw mixed with small wood, and when she went to sit on the pyre, placed the head of her deceased husband on her lap, took a torch, and with her own hands set it on fire from the insideâ¦â
Contemporaries of Bernier, like Nicholas Withington, William Hawkins, Edward Terry and others, have left behind a few more eye-witness accounts, and they confirm that it practically always concerned voluntary self-immolation.
General Sleeman described in his <i>Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official </i>(1844) the self-immolation of the widow of a rich landlord: âTowards the family I must show the correctness to mention that all family members exerted themselves to make her give up on her resolve. If she had remained living, she would certainly have been loved and honoured as the most important woman of the house. Because there is no people in the world among whom the parents are more honoured than the hindus, and the grandmother always even more than the mother.â
...
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><span style='color:purple'>Suicide, not murder</span>
That in principle itâs about self-immolation and not murder, is apparent from many British testimonies. For that matter, these are in agreement that this practice only occurred among a few higher castes. They keep stressing that those present continually tried to make the woman give up on her resolve, and that there wasnât a single stigma associated with forsaking this resolution, unless it only happened after the ceremony had started (what might perhaps have been the case with Rup Kanwar).
In Bengal at the start of the 19th century, several cases have been mentioned where the sati was under pressure by the in-laws. A part of the cause was the British reforms of the law of succession, which suddenly made it of interest for the in-laws to not be left with a surviving daughter-in-law. This was therefore an aberration, partly induced by the colonisation, of the general practice where sati was completely voluntary. For that matter, itâs significant that such women did not become the object of worship, as opposed to the many non-suspect sati-women in Rajasthan.
The mentions of sati in mythological, judicial and historical texts of the hindus, are without exception concerned with voluntary self-immolation. The name actually cames from Sati, the beloved of Sjiva, who sets herself on fire in protest against the unjust treatment of her lover by her father, this story therefore has noting to do with widow-burning. It is quite possible that this might be a later-constructed myth to explain the name, and that the practice of sati is much older. Sati actually means âgoodâ or âloyal [woman]â, from <i>sat/sant</i>, âtrue, goodâ. The most famous mention is that of Madri, the favourite wife of Pandu, the father of the five Pandavas from the Mahabharata-epic: she climbed Panduâs pyre, while the other wife, Kunti, declined the honour. The Greek author Diodorus Siculus tells how in 316 B.C. the Indian commander of a hired-army in Iran is killed, upon which his two spouses argue about the privilege of becoming the sati.
From the middle-ages countless examples are known. The Arabian writer Albiruni writes that widows were treated badly and thatâs why they chose self-immolation. Marco Polo, on the other hand, states that they did this âout of love for their husbandâ. A special case is the <i>jauhar</i>, the collective sati of Rajput-women when a city besieged by Muslims no longer had a chance to be saved: the men did a prospectless sally in order to die heroically, and the women were kept out of the hands of the enemy by the fire-death. Much more recent examples are the voluntary immolation of Sjivajiâs wife Putalabai (1680), of Madhavarao Pesjwaâs wife Ramabai, and of the wifes of Ranjit Singh, maharaja of the Sikh-realm, in 1839.
Of more import for the biased westerner is rather, that also the not-to-be-suspected British shared the opinion that the widows involved carried out their sati voluntarily. Before the British rule banned this practice in 1829 on Lord Bentinckâs initiative, it had a report drawn up with the significant title: âThe Report on Hindu Widows and <i>Voluntary </i>Immolationsâ. H.T. Colebrooke, H.H. Wilson, Jonathan Duncan and other British authorities advised against a legal ban on sati, because this ritual does not occur under duress/coercion. A few citations from the in this report collected assessments, and also from other British testimonies, deserve to be heard.
Lord Mountstuart Elphinstone wrote in his <i>History of India</i>: âOn occasion it has been said that the relatives encourage the widow to immolate herself to obtain her possessions⦠People can however be sure that the relatives usually beg the widow not go through with it, and to this end also call in the intervention of friends and figures of authority. If she is of high rank, even the monarch will come to console her and to advise her against it.â
Lieutenant-colonel John Briggs in a letter stated: âWhoever has witnessed the self-immolation of hindu widows, and of their attitude/bearing towards this as I have seen them, will find it hard to free themselves of the idea that these devoted women have reached the highest grade of faith. The justness of the law that robs them of their only religious solace⦠is therefore at the very least doubtful.â When Lord Bentinck in 1829 issued the ban on sati, it was under rather general opposition from his (British) subordinates.
Lord Holwel, lieutenant-governor of Bengal, wrote: âIf we viewed these women in the correct light, then we would think more openly about them, and admit that they act out of heroic as well as rational and pious principlesâ.
As evidence for the involuntary nature of sati, people constantly refer to the mention of a forced immolation in F. Bernierâs <i>Travels in the Moghul Empire</i>, a travel-report from the pre-colonial time. Pointing to this professor Prabha Dixit said, short after the self-immolation of Rup Kanwar, that âsati is never a voluntary deedâ and âalways took place under brutal pressure/coercionâ. Well, the same Bernier, who stayed in India from 1656 to 1668, writes in the same book: âMostly it was the practice that sati was carried out voluntarily.â
He mentions several voluntary self-immolations, and gives among others this description: âwhen I left Surat for Persia, I witnessed the devotion and fire-death of another widow. Several English and Dutch {people} were present. The woman was middle-aged and not at all ugly. With my limited ability for expression, I do not expect to convey a complete idea of the brash courage or fear-inducing liveliness on the womanâs countenance, of her sure tread, of her freedom from all disturbance, with which she spoke and let herself be washed, of the look of trust or rather carelessness/insensibilty that she gave us; of her easy air, free of doubt, of her distinguished bearing, without any embarrassment, when she searched her seating place, which consisted of thick dry milletstraw mixed with small wood, and when she went to sit on the pyre, placed the head of her deceased husband on her lap, took a torch, and with her own hands set it on fire from the insideâ¦â
Contemporaries of Bernier, like Nicholas Withington, William Hawkins, Edward Terry and others, have left behind a few more eye-witness accounts, and they confirm that it practically always concerned voluntary self-immolation.
General Sleeman described in his <i>Rambles and Recollections of an Indian Official </i>(1844) the self-immolation of the widow of a rich landlord: âTowards the family I must show the correctness to mention that all family members exerted themselves to make her give up on her resolve. If she had remained living, she would certainly have been loved and honoured as the most important woman of the house. Because there is no people in the world among whom the parents are more honoured than the hindus, and the grandmother always even more than the mother.â
...
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->