Sati, the Victims, and the Abolition

During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries women were not considered equal among men. Women became dependent on either their husband or their family because of this indifference. Women were in a sense governed by their society. In some religions such as Hinduism, women were required to perform certain rituals that men did not have to perform. Widow burning, or sati, is one such practice that singled out women from men. Sati is a cruel and inhumane religious practice that affected women in Hindu India. With the help of the British Empire and some inspiring individuals, sati was abolished in Hindu India.

According to “Hinduism, Christianity, and Liberal Religious Toleration,” the Hindu Religion in India is a religion that is more based on ritual practices rather than being faith based.[1] Ritual practices are more important than belief and these practices are often done socially and performed with others. However, some ritual practices are performed alone. Church is normally a voluntary thing for people but often in the Hindu Religion leaving the religion and its ritual practices can be very difficult. When one is born Hindu, he or she normally stays Hindu. Hinduism does not give much freedom to its own adherents but the religion is very tolerant to non-Hindus in their religious practices and beliefs.[2] Hinduism is concerned with legitimizing hierarchical social relationships. Hinduism is divided into castes. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution” states that Brahmans are considered the highest in social rank and therefore the highest caste.[3] After the Brahmans the next highest caste would be the Kshatriyas followed by the Vaishyas, and the Shudras.[4] In the Hindu Religion, one can celebrate Christmas, pray a Muslim prayer, or incorporate other practices from different religions and still remain a Hindu as long as he or she performs Hindu rituals. A Hindu “may be a theist, pantheist, atheist, communist and believe whatever he likes, but what makes him into a Hindu are the ritual practices he performs and the rules to which he adheres, in short what he does.”[5]

Ritual practices are very important to members of the Hindu religions. Although non-Hindus may join in these ritual practices, Hindus rarely join into practices of other religions even though Hindus are allowed to by Hinduism. Ritual practices consist of goals such as aiming to keep the deity happy or to receive a material item. Some ritual practices have less of a meaning such as reciting mantras. Although some Hindus do pursue salvation, it is not salvation that marks a Hindu but rather its that social ritual practices mark them.[6] Salvation, the way a Hindu prays, and what deities a Hindu prays to are important to Hinduism but certain social ritual practices are more important and hard to escape. Some of the social practices are not equally applied to certain members of the religion, especially women. One such ritual practice is the self-immolation of widows known as widow burning, suttee, or sati.[7]

India is a Hindu-dominated country where sometimes non-Hindus face discrimination.[8] It is particularly difficult for a Hindu in India to leave Hinduism. Only a relatively small number convert to Christianity or Islam. India is the home to thousands of Hindu temples.[9] Some of the temples are small and others are large and wealthy. Hinduism originally allowed child marriage and did not allow widow remarriage. These practices are still being performed in rural India. Sati, or suttee, is a ritual practice that has occured in India as far back as the fourth century B.C.[10] According to Sati and Social Reforms in India, besides India, the custom of Sati has been practiced during ancient times in Europe, central and western Asia, and the Far East.[11]

According to Empire by Niall Ferguson, sati is the act of self immolation when a Hindu widow is burned alive on her husband’s funeral pyre.[12] Between 1813 and 1825 a total of 7,941 women died by being burned alive with their husbands in Bengal, India alone.[13] According to Sati and Social Reforms in India, the origin of Sati came from Hindu mythology.[14] The name Sati was the given to the wife of Lord Shiva. Sati became angry with her father for not inviting Lord Shiva to a Yogya (worship of Fire followed by offerings) and as a result consumed herself in the holy pyre in the presence of the assembled Gods.[15] In this case Sati was not burned with her husband but it is where Sati got its name. Being burned alive is the most common form of Sati. There were scriptural rules that did not allow certain women to be burned alive. If a woman was menstruating, pregnant, or had to care for her young children then she was not allowed to be burned on her husband’s funeral pyre.[16] If the husband was away and died then the widow would be burnt with some of his personal belongings.[17] Some castes, such as the Brahmans, did not allow a widow to be burnt so therefore the widow would be buried alive.[18] Many women died on their husband’s funeral pyre before sati was abolished.

According to Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution, the Hindus believed that the widow was responsible for her husband’s death.[19] It was believed by the Hindus that the widow had committed a sin in a previous or past life. The Hindus believed that the normal course of life was for the woman to die first. Women were not predicted to be able to live without a man because of the lifetime of strictness. Sati was primarily based in the belief that women are by nature sexually unreliable and incapable of leading a life without a husband to control her.[20]

According to History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos, there is no greater virtue for a woman than to be burnt with her husband on his funeral pyre.[21] A woman will be purged of all of her sin once she is burnt with her husband. When it becomes known that the husband will die, the wife lets her husband know of her resolution to be burnt with him.[22] At this time family and neighbors begin to bring her delicate food and other things. When the husband dies, the wife then makes a resolution again to be burnt with her husband. The widow breaks a small branch from a mango tree and takes the branch with her to her husband’s body. A barber then paints her feet red and she bathes and puts on fresh clothes. During this process a drum is beat at a certain sound to allow others to know that a widow will be burnt with her husband’s corpse.[23] As the village hears the sound they gather for the Sati. The son, or other relatives if there is no son, will then provide the articles necessary for the ritual practice.[24] A hole is then dug while stakes are driven into the ground and greens are laid about so that it appears as a bed. The officiating Brahman then asks the widow to pray.[25] The widow then gives ornaments to her friends, ties on red cotton to each of her wrist, puts two new combs into her hair, and paints her forehead.[26] The husband’s dead body is covered in butter and dressed in new clothes while prayers are repeated over it. The son then takes rice that has been prepared and offers it in the name of his father. Ropes and more cloth are spread upon the funeral pyre and the husband’s dead body is placed on it. The widow walks around the funeral pyre seven times while spreading parched rice and kourees as she walks. Some spectators try to catch the rice and kourees because they believe it will cure diseases.[27] The widow then ascends to the fatal pile and throws herself to the side of the dead body. Some ornaments are laid upon her and the widow and her husband are tied together and covered with a cloth. The son then lights fire to his father’s face while other people are lighting the funeral pyre at different locations. Two bamboo levers are placed across the bodies so that the bodies do not ascend into the air.[28] While several people are holding the levers, others are pouring water onto the funeral pyre so that the bodies do not get scorched. The pile is normally burnt in around two hours but it is believed that the widow dies within minutes.[29] At the close of the Sati, the remaining people bring up a burning stick and place it on the fire. The bones are then thrown out. The area where the bodies were burnt is washed with water. The son then brings two balls of boiled rice to give in the name of his father and his mother. This ceremony was necessary for the sake of the husband’s soul and to also keep the widow from being reborn as a female animal.[30] Occasionally a woman would be burnt with her son. This form of sati is considered to be the highest form practiced.[31] On rare occasions a sister is burnt with her brother.

Once a widow signifies that she will burn with her husband, it is not easy for her to change her mind because of the risk of disgracing her family. Many measures are taken by her family and officiating priest to assure that she will follow through with the ritual practice. Certain actions such as constructing scaffolds that tilt towards the fire, piles designed so that the exits were blocked, and the roof designed so that it would collapse on the widows head were taken by the family to assure her death.[32] The family would also tie her down or weight her down with bamboo poles and firewood. If all of these actions failed and the widow escaped then she would be dragged back to the pile by force and sometimes by her own son.

According to William Ward’s History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos, he was the eye witness of two instances of a widow being burnt with her husband.[33] On once occasion he states that he saw two women burnt together. He states that one woman possessed great resolution while the other was terrified.[34] He also saw a widow burnt to death in 1812 in Serampore, India. She was the wife of a banker, Ramu-nidhee.[35] The natives did not attempt to hide what Ward called murders but rather they glorified this ritual practice.[36] Ward had an eyewitness, Ram-Nat’hu, tell him of a time when thirteen women were burnt with their husband Mooktua-ramu. After the pile, which was very large, had been set on a fire another one of his wives decided she wanted to burn with her husband. After getting close to the fire she then decided that she did not want to burn. Her son forced her into the fire and as she was falling into the fire she grabbed the hand of another woman, who was also a wife of the dead, and they both perished in the fire.[37]

Ramu-Huree, a Brahman, had three wives at the time of his death. One of his wives was deranged and another he had not seen since the wedding ceremony. He had a son with one of his wives, and she made a promise to him that she would burn with him at the time of his death.[38] She also promised him that if he died where his employer lived that she would have his body sent back to their village. The wife who agreed to burn with her husband failed on her resolution and stayed in her house weeping. In a harsh manner, her son ordered her to proceed to the funeral pyre as she promised.[39] She still failed to keep her promise and remained weeping in her house. The deranged wife found out that her husband had died and she decided that she would like to be burnt with her husband since the other wife would not burn. The deranged wife and another wife made their way to the funeral pyre to be burnt. The deranged wife then said that was not her husband and said that the village was going to burn her with a dead cow. The other wife was then devoured by the pyre.

One of the most horrific murders that has been recorded occurred in 1796 in Mujil-pooru near Calcutta, India.[40] After all the ceremonies were performed a wife was sent at a late hour to be burnt with her husband. As the woman began to be scorched she detangled herself from the dead body and slid out from under the fire and hid among some brush-wood.[41] Some of the ones watching the ceremony discovered that only one body was on the pyre. The son went out looking and dragged his mother back to the funeral pyre and told her she would either burn with her husband, be hung, or drowned. She refused to be hung or drowned so the son tied her up and had her thrown back onto the funeral pyre where she was burnt to death.[42] Another instance showing a widow being forced to die is explained in the book Empire by Niall Ferguson.[43] A widow named Radhabyee tried to escape twice from a burning pyre. The first time the widow tried to escape her legs were burnt but she managed to run away from the fire. She was then forced back onto the fire and escaped after her whole body was burnt. Three men then decided to drown her to insure that she would be burnt with her husband.[44]

According to Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—the Abolition of Suttee, British humanitarians of the early nineteenth century began to be troubled by some of the practices of the Hindus.[45] Sati began to be a major concern for these humanitarians. The humanitarians’ drive for the abolition of Sati was drawing its strength from an alliance between utilitarian and evangelical propagandists who encouraged the British public to have a sense of responsibility for the welfare of the women committing this practice.[46] Some missionaries such as William Carey and William Ward were using persuasive and propagandistic techniques to help contribute to the abolition of sati.[47] During the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century these humanitarians, missionaries, and reformists were offset by the decision of the East India Company to be indifferent. The East India Company had made a decision at the turn of the century to have a policy of noninterference with native “religious usages and institutions” which gave protection to sati.[48] After this decision was made by the East India Company, Governor-General Cornwallis would not allow a Collector at Shahabad to advise against a sati victim. At this point some of Governor-General Cornawallis’ successors, Lord Wellesley and Lord Hastings, began to contemplate at great length about having sati abolished.[49] The Supreme Government in Bengal began prescribing strict limitations upon the ritual practices of sati because of the Regulations of 1813.

Although some of the regulations that the Supreme Government placed on Sati were interpreted by some as official government approval of sati, these regulations were not only passed in Bengal but also in Calcutta.[50] Governors Elphinstone and Malcolm in Bombay were not as inclined as the Supreme Government to interfere with the religious customs of the Hindus.[51] Therefore in western India the toleration of sati was a lot more common due to more tolerable restrictions.[52] Hindu advocates of sati began to petition the East India Company for the removal of the restrictions that were put on sati in 1813.[53]

The procrastination of the abolition of sati was a continual problem in British India. It is conceivable that sati would have continued for several more decades if not for certain individuals who took a powerful stand on the controversial subject of sati. Lord William Bentinck was well known for his reputation as an enlightened social reformer.[54] His humanitarianism was very advanced for his day. His reputation as a humanitarian and social reformer comes largely from his help in the abolition of sati. Bentinck was only sent to India by the East India Company as an economic reformer.[55] Then due to heavy expenses in China, the East India Company began to consider Bentinck for the Governor-Generalship.[56] In 1828, because of the growing debt and the need to renew its charter, the East India Company offered the Governor-Generalship to Bentinck.[57] Bentinck accepted the position. With a history as a humanitarian, Bentinck already knew before he accepted his position that he wanted to tackle the social problem of sati. He expressed his thoughts:

The dreadful responsibility hanging over my happiness in this world and the next, if as the Governor General of India I was to consent to the continuance of this practice for one moment longer, not than our security, but than the real happiness and permanent welfare of the Indian population rendered indispensable. I determined therefore, before I came to India that I would instantly take up the question, that I would come to as early a determination upon it, as a mature consideration, involving so many and such distant references would allow, and having made my decision, aye or no, to stand by it and set my conscience to rest. So I have proceeded.[58]

Sati was a very controversial subject. The British feared that they would not have support for the abolition of sati. Bentinck had his military secretary prepare a circular for forty-nine officers in the army who had a reliable reputation to determine if the Native Army would agree to a gradual abolition of sati.[59] The officers were required to answer four questions. The first question was asking whether or not abolition of sati would provoke the officers to revolt or start a disagreement among the government.[60] The officers were almost unanimous in their response that in their observation the Hindu soldiers showed a lack of concern.[61] In one letter a sepoy (a native of India who was a soldier allied to a European power) wrote that, “his loyalty was limited to his pay check, pension, and special privileges.”[62] The next question asked whether or not the abolition of sati would bring about, “so great a hardship as to cause amongst them manifestations of disgust or irritation or illwill and disaffection to the State?”[63] Most of the officers ignored this question and only warned that power of the Indian newspaper editors was great and that they would possibly stir up trouble. Bentinck’s third question was concerned with whether the abolition of sati would cause dislike to the State’s authority.[64] Bentinck’s fourth and final question was asking the sepoys if they believed the abolition of sati would make them feel as though the State had abandoned its policy of noninterference with the native religion and its customs.[65] A small amount of the officers professed their disapproval on the abolition of sati. The sepoys who disapproved did so because they believed that not only were the British interfering with the religion and its customs but believed that they were forcing Christianity at the Hindus.[66]

After Bentinck sent out his circular and received his responses, he was uncertain on whether or not to continue with the abolition of sati. On February 16, 1829, Bentinck sent out another circular to thirteen civilian company servants to discover their reaction on possibly coupling the abolition of sati with the repeal of the pilgrim tax.[67] The pilgrim tax was being collected when pilgrims visited certain religious centers. The civilians who received the second circular did not agree to his plan. The civilians felt as though the Hindus would see this act as a bribe.[68] Throughout the rest of the year, Bentinck continued with his plans to carry out the abolition of sati. On November 8, 1829, Governor General Bentinck approached the Council with the draft of Regulation XVII which would abolish sati.[69] Bentinck had the support of many when he finally approached the council. Regulation XVII was made into a law on December 4, 1829 in Bengal.[70] About six months after the law was passed, Bombay and Madras passed the same law.[71] Bentinck was only petitioned one time after the law passed and that was by Calcutta. The petition was thrown out and the law that abolished sati was sustained.[72] Although Regulation XVII was passed to abolish sati, the thought remains of whether or not these women committed sati because they wanted to or whether they committed sati because they were forced to do so.

In the Hindu religion a widow has only two choices that she can make when her husband dies. The widow will either choose a painful, but somewhat brief, and heroic death or choose to live a miserable and humiliating life as a regretful sinner.[73] In the book History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos, William Ward discusses the widow’s options after the death of her husband:

The desire of Hindoo women to die with their husbands; and the calmness of many in going through the ceremonies which precede the terrible death, are circumstances almost, if not altogether, unparalleled. It is another proof of the amazing power which this superstition has over the minds of its votaries. Among other circumstances which urge them to this dreadful deed we may rank the following: First, the vedus, and other shastrus, recommend it, and promise the widow that she shall deliver her husband from hell, and enjoy a long happiness with him in heaven; secondly, long custom has familiarized the minds to the deed; thirdly by this act they escape the disgrace of widowhood, and their names are recorded among the honourable of their families; fourthly, they avoid being starved and illtreated by their relations; and lastly, the Hindoos treat the idea of death with comparative indifference, as being only changing one body for another, as the snake changes his skin. If they considered death as introducing a person into an unalterable state of existence, and God, the judge, as requiring purity of heart, no doubt these ideas would make them weigh well a step pregnant with such momentous consequences.[74]

In this strict religion it is not hard to see why a painful death may be preferred over widowhood. After the death of her husband a widow would have to bear certain instructions such as that she could not eat more than one very plain meal a day.[75] She would also have to perform or complete the most tedious tasks. She was not allowed to sleep in a bed, she must wear nothing but the most drabbest clothes and of course she was not allowed to wear jewelry. She was only allowed to leave the house when she was going to temple and she was to keep out of sight at festivals because she was considered inauspicious to everyone but her own children. [76] One of the most embarrassing things that a widow would have to endure is that she would have her head shaved every month by an untouchable male barber.[77] In theory the widow was allowed to refuse to go through all of these embarrassing practices. She was however considered under a great amount of pressure to complete these practices. A Portuguese chronicler once noted that “the mourning finished their relations speak to them, advising them to burn themselves and not to dishonor their generation”.[78]

According to the Hindu religion, the widow, her husband, her husband’s family, her mother’s family, and her father’s family would be in paradise for thirty-five million years no matter how sinful they may be as long as the widow commits the ritual of sati.[79] The widow will also be able to rejoin her husband in paradise, despite any reluctance on his part. When a young Hindu girl marries a man, her family no longer has any moral responsibility for her future maintenance. Once she is widowed she is no longer of any value to her in-laws. She actually becomes a burden because they begin to fear that she will become pregnant which will bring up the problem of her previous children being illegitimate. Therefore, the death of a widow would insure that her children would have proper guardianship and there would be no dispute over her children. [80]

Although sati was a cruel and inhumane religious ritual practice, this type of practice was part of the Hindus culture and life. The Hindu religion was strict and made it hard for one to leave. Hinduism is centered on all of its ritual practices. Some of these practices were not equal for women. Women were forced to participate in the ritual practices and many of them died while committing sati. The British Empire fought for the rights of these women after having witnessed just how cruel this ritual practice could be. The abolition of sati was a long and hard process that took many humanitarians, missionaries, and reformists to come together to fight to help save these Hindu women from such a tragic and unfair ritual practice.

Bibliography

Cassels, Nancy G. “Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—The Abolition of Suttee.” The Journal of British Society 1, no. 5 (1965): JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

Ferguson, Niall. Empire. New York: Basic Books, 2002.

Gaur,Meena. Sati and Social Reforms in India. Jaipur ;1989.

Mani, Lata. Contentious Traditions- The Debate on Sati in Colonial India. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.

Spinner-Halev, Jeff. “Hinduism, Christianity, and Liberal Religious Toleration.” Political Theory 1, no. 33 (2005): JSTOR [Database online.] William Carey University. December 1, 2008.

Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

Ward, William. History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos. Serampore: Mission Press, 1815.

---

[1] Spinner-Halev, Jeff. “Hinduism, Christianity, and Liberal Religious Toleration.” Political Theory 1, no. 33 (2005): 35. JSTOR [Database online.] William Carey University. December 1, 2008.

[2] Ibid 36

[3] Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): 254. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[4] Ibid 254

[5] Spinner-Halev, Jeff. “Hinduism, Christianity, and Liberal Religious Toleration.” Political Theory 1, no. 33 (2005): 36. JSTOR [Database online.] William Carey University. December 1, 2008.

[6] Ibid p.36

[7] Ibid p.37

[8] Spinner-Halev, Jeff. “Hinduism, Christianity, and Liberal Religious Toleration.” Political Theory 1, no. 39 (2005): 36. JSTOR [Database online.] William Carey University. December 1, 2008.

[9] Ibid 33

[10] Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): 253. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[11] Gaur,Meena. Sati and Social Reforms in India. (Jaipur 1989), 45.

[12] Ferguson, Niall. Empire. (New York: Basic Books, 2002), 141.

[13] Ibid 141

[14] Gaur,Meena. Sati and Social Reforms in India. (Jaipur 1989), 45.

[15] Ibid 45

[16] Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): 253. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[17] Ibid 253

[18] Ibid 253

[19] Ibid 255

[20] Ibid 255

[21] Ward, William. History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos. (Serampore: Mission Press, 1815) 299.

[22] Ibid 300

[23] Ward, William. History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos. (Serampore: Mission Press, 1815) 300.

[24] Ibid 300

[25] Ibid 300

[26] Ibid 300

[27] Ibid 301

[28] Ward, William. History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos. (Serampore: Mission Press, 1815) 301.

[29] Ibid 301

[30] Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): 255. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[31] Ibid 255

[32] Ibid 255

[33] Ward, William. History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos. (Serampore: Mission Press, 1815) 301.

[34] Ibid 302

[35] Ibid 302

[36] Ibid 302

[37] Ibid 303

[38] Ibid 303

[39] Ward, William. History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos. (Serampore: Mission Press, 1815) 303.

[40] Ibid 303

[41] Ibid 303

[42] Ibid 303

[43] Ferguson, Niall. Empire. (New York: Basic Books, 2002), 141.

[44] Ferguson, Niall. Empire. (New York: Basic Books, 2002), 141.

[45] Cassels, Nancy G. “Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—The Abolition of Suttee.” The Journal of British Society 1, no. 5 (1965): 78. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[46] Ibid 78

[47] Ibid 78

[48] Ibid 77

[49] Cassels, Nancy G. “Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—The Abolition of Suttee.” The Journal of British Society 1, no. 5 (1965): 77. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[50] Ibid 77

[51] Ibid 77

[52] Ibid 77

[53] Mani, Lata. Contentious Traditions- The Debate on Sati in Colonial India. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 45.

[54] Cassels, Nancy G. “Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—The Abolition of Suttee.” The Journal of British Society 1, no. 5 (1965): 78. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[55] Ibid 78

[56] Cassels, Nancy G. “Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—The Abolition of Suttee.” The Journal of British Society 1, no. 5 (1965): 78. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[57] Ibid 78

[58] Ibid 79

[59] Ibid 80

[60] Ibid 80

[61] Cassels, Nancy G. “Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—The Abolition of Suttee.” The Journal of British Society 1, no. 5 (1965): 80. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[62] Ibid 80

[63] Ibid 80

[64] Ibid 80

[65] Ibid 81

[66] Ibid 81

[67] Ibid 81

[68] Cassels, Nancy G. “Bentinck: Humanitarian and Imperialist—The Abolition of Suttee.” The Journal of British Society 1, no. 5 (1965): 81. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.Ibid 81

[69] Ibid 81

[70] Ibid 84

[71] Ibid 84

[72] Ibid 84

[73] Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): 255. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[74] Ward, William. History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos. (Serampore: Mission Press, 1815) 310.

[75] Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): 255. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[76] Ibid 255

[77] Ibid 255

[78] Stein, Dorothy K. “Women to Burn: Suttee as a Normative Institution.” Signs 2, no. 4 (1978): 255. JSTOR. [Database Online.] William Carey University. December 2, 2008.

[79] Ibid 255

[80] Ibid 255