<!-- Pramāṇa, a library of Indian primary sources · https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912.v1.c3.s21.284 -->

[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Reference works](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference) › [Vedic Index of Names and Subjects](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912) › v1.c3.s21.284

# Vedic Index of Names and Subjects v1.c3.s21.284

Vedic Index of Names and Subjects v1.c3.s21.284

- **Language:** English

### [v1.c3.s21.284](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912.v1.c3.s21.284)

\*Wife's Property and Status.\*—We have very little information as to the legal relations of wife and husband after marriage. It may be assumed that the husband appropriated the wife's dowry, if any, as well as her earnings, if any: even in the Epic¹⁰¹ the rise of the recognition of women's property as their own (strī-dhana) is only slow. That the husband was absolute master of a wife as of a slave is not probable, though he doubtless exercised the same power of correction as was expressly allowed in the eighteenth century by English law. The poetical ideal¹⁰² of the family was decidedly high, and we have no reason to doubt that it was often actually fulfilled. Moreover, the wife on her marriage was at once given an honoured position in the house: she is emphatically mistress in her husband's home, exercising authority over her father-in-law, her husband's brothers, and her unmarried sisters.¹⁰³ No doubt the case contemplated is one in which the eldest son of a family has become its head owing to the decrepitude¹⁰⁴ of the parents, his wife then taking the place of the mistress of the joint family while the brothers and sisters are still unmarried. It is not inconsistent with the great stress elsewhere¹⁰⁵ laid on the respect due to a father-in-law, who then is probably regarded as still in full possession of his faculties, and controls the house while his son continues to live with him. The respect would no doubt equally apply if the son had set up a separate family of his own.¹⁰⁶

- [Previous: v1.c3.s21.283](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912.v1.c3.s21.283)
- [Next: v1.c3.s21.285](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912.v1.c3.s21.285)
- [Up: v1.c3.s21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912.v1.c3.s21)

---
Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912.v1.c3.s21.284](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.macdonell-keith-1912.v1.c3.s21.284) · Pramāṇa
