Persistence and Change: Marriage and Family Among the
Overseas Indians in the Caribbean
Kiran Jha
Assistant Professor, Department of Social Work, CSJM University, Kanpur
208024
ABSTRACT:
Indians came to the Caribbean
under the system of indenture to augment the labour shortage in the plantations
around the middle of the nineteenth century. Rather than returning after the
contractual period, many Indians stayed on, accepting the Caribbean as their
new found home. Thus began a symbiotic relationship of the Indian culture with
the Caribbean society in the new habitat. This paper outlines the lives of the
overseas Indians with reference to aspects of marriage, including the selection
of spouses, different kinds of marriage and its dissolution. The paper also
discusses the institution of family and its internal mechanisms in terms of
patterns of authority, inheritance, conflicts, the position of women and the
system of kinship. The overseas Indians moved from tradition to modernity, and
from custom to legality. There was also resistance to change and deviations as
some values struggled to be reinforced, while others were discarded. On the
whole, kinship relations remained of vital importance for the sake of mutual
cooperation and social intercourse in a foreign land. Interpersonal relations
helped to regulate and standardize behaviour. In providing these accounts, this
paper seeks to portray the persistence and change of traditional Indian social
intuitions and customs among the overseas community in the Caribbean.
KEYWORDS: Family, Marriage,
Indenture, Overseas Indians, Caribbean.
INTRODUCTION:
The Caribbean is a
heterogeneous group of islands inhabited by ethnically diverse people as it was
a colony of various European countries such as Britain, France, Netherlands and
Spain. After the abolition of slavery in the British territories between
1834-1838, indentured labourers from India were brought into the Caribbean to
augment the labour shortage in the plantations. British Guyana received its
first Indian indentured labourers in 1838, Trinidad in 1845 and Surinam in 1873
(Van der Veer and Vertovec 1991: 149).
Under the system of indenture
the Indians were contracted to work in the sugar plantations for a period of
five years after which they could either opt for staying on for an additional
five years or get a free return passage to India. The colonial government
induced them to stay on in the Caribbean by granting them parcels of land in lieu
of return passage to India (Parija 2021, Roopnarine 2006). Many Indians took up
this offer and accepted the Caribbean as their new found home.
The Indian labourers were
recruited mainly from the eastern districts of United Province and the western
districts of Bihar, some also from the Bombay and Madras Presidencies and from
Andhra Pradesh and Central Provinces (D’Souza 2001, Jayawardena 1980). The main
push factors for them to migrate were the catastrophic famines, the dislocation
of the village life caused by the wars that fragmented the Mughal empire
followed by British conquest and administrative reorganisation. The Indian
labourers were invariably young, male and unmarried (D’Souza 2001, Gillion
1962, Jayawardena 1971, Ram 2020).
Membership in three of the
great world beliefs, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam, had subdivided the
overseas Indians in their host societies. However, a majority were Hindus.
Hence, Hinduism was the dominant religion among the overseas Indians in the
Caribbean. Despite the effort of the Christian missions to convert the Hindus
they made little headway among the Indians in Guyana (Jayawardena 1966: 227).
It cannot be denied that conversion to Christianity provided the Indians with
greater possibilities of social mobility and material gains. However, it
is interesting to note that the converts of earlier generations not only
maintained ties with their original families, but also retained many of the customs,
taboos, attitudes and values of the Hindu community (Klass 1961: 140-44).
This paper is divided into two
main sections. The first section discusses aspects and significance of the
marriage ceremony, the selection of spouses, kinds of marriage and relationships,
and the instability and dissolution of marriage. The second section discusses
the institution of family by focusing on households and its composition,
patterns of deference and authority, division of property and inheritance, the
position of women, intra-familial conflicts and patterns of kinship.
Nature and Structure of
Marriage:
Marriages are generally
considered important events in the life of an Indian. In the life cycle of a
Hindu, marriage is part of one of the four ashrams, the natural periods in the
life of man (Kapadia 1955, Sourav 2012). It is therefore a necessary phase, a
social and religious duty for everyone.
Selection of Spouse:
An important issue in marriage
is the manner of selection of a spouse. This is done through the institution of
caste endogamy, which is an essential feature of the caste system in India
(Ghurye 1969). However, in Trinidad, among the Indian, marriage partners were
selected on the basis of class, status and religion (Nevadomsky 1983:197).
Caste considerations were not important. Though Klass (1961:122) remarks that
preference for town and village exogamy were shown, Nevadomsky (1983:197) who
carried out research in Trinidad reports that more than 50 per cent of the
marriages were endogamous. While Indian marriages before 1940 were said to have
been arranged, in the later decades, marriages were contracted on the basis of
personal choice. By and large, Indians adhered to the rules of local exogamy
while contracting marriage, but because of the factor of personal choice, local
endogamy was quite common.
In the Guyanese Indian
society, caste was a factor in the choice of a marital partner only in Brahmin
families (Bhattacharjee 2012, Shrivastava 2012). But Smith and Jayawardena
(1958: 179) report of instances where even Brahmins married off their daughters
to wealthy or professional so-called low castes. Thus, education and occupation
of a prospective husband were probably the most important attributes. Schwartz
(1967: 130) opines that “the greater the involvement in the wider cash economy,
the less the reliance upon subsistence activities and the higher the frequency
of exogamous marriages among the different economic groups among rural East
Indians in Trinidad.”
There were no preferential
marriages between kin, and marriages between close kin were regarded with
disfavour. Racial and religious endogamy was practiced. Racial endogamy was
common as both Indians and the local population viewed each other with
suspicion and contempt. Indians considered the locals to have a degree of
pollution similar to that of the so-called low castes, so accepting them as
conjugal partners was undesirable. For their part, the locals also took a dim
view of Indians as potential spouses as they considered them to be inferior,
miserly and aloof (Birth 1997, Sharma 2017).
Speckmann’s (1965: 65)
extensive field work in Surinam, reveals that caste endogamy no longer existed
among the Indians there. Marriage to a partner who was a consanguineal or
affinal relative was forbidden. In addition to the real family, fictitious
family relationships could also be regarded as an impediment to marriage.
Marriage partners of the same nationality and religious denomination were
preferred. In the Surinamese Indian society, the authority of the parents in
the process of selection of their child’s spouse was indisputable. However,
children were allowed to offer their opinion. In Paramaribo, since relations
between sexes were free, young people decided on their own marriage partners.
The age of marriage, once
quite low, had risen gradually among the Indian population of Trinidad. The
legal age of marriage was 18 for males and 14 for females. Niehoff (1959:181)
found that well over a third of the women were married before the age of 14.
Nevadomsky’s study (1983) shows that the age of marriage had further risen in
the 1970s, being around 18 for women and 21 for men. The age of marriage among
Indians in Guyana was roughly 16-20 years for females and 20-25 for males
(Smith and Jayawardena 1959: 355). Speckmann’s survey (1965: 76) in Surinam
reveals that the age of marriage for Indian girls was around 15, while the boys
usually married between the ages of 18 and 20. The age of marriage was higher
in towns.
Forms of Union:
An important factor regarding
Indian marriages was that they were not legally recognized until much later. In
Trinidad, the Muslim marriage was legalized in 1939 and the Hindu Marriage
Ordinance was passed in 1946. In Guyana, Hindu and Muslim marriages were placed
under the same footing as Christian marriages in 1957 with an amendment to the
Marriage Ordinance. The Asiatic Marriage Decree came into effect in 1941 in
Surinam, legalizing the Hindu and Muslim marriages. Klass (1961: 108-17)
classifies marital unions of Indians in Trinidad into five different kinds: (a)
Virilocal Exogamous: Where the girl and the boy were from different
villages and after marriage resided in the home of the boy’s father. (b)
Uxorilocal Exogamous: The boy after marriage settled in the girl’s home. (c) Approved Endogamous Union: When a boy and
girl of the local village fell in love and acquired parental approval for the
wedding. (d) Keeper Union: This was a union in which the wife had been
married before. Any woman living with a man who was not her first husband was
called a “keeper”, whether or not she was legally married. (e) Elopement:
An elopement was any union without the approval of parents.
In a similar vein, Smith and
Jayawardena (1959:355) have defined four basic types of marriage in Guyana: (a)
Customary Marriage: A marriage celebrated by means of a public Hindu or
Muslim ritual. (b) Legal Marriage: Any marriage which had been legally
registered but where no customary Hindu or Muslim rites had been performed. (c)
Legal and Customary Marriage: Any marriage which had been registered
under the law and for which full public Hindu or Muslim rituals had been
performed. (d) Common Law Marriage: Where a couple lived together
without the union being legal and without the performance of a public Hindu or
Muslim ritual.
Speckman (1965:124)
distinguishes four types of union specifically among the Indians in Surinam:
(a) The Asiatic Marriage concluded before 1941: The marriages were not
legal unless interim provisions made in the Asiatic Marriage Decree was
acquired. (b) The Asiatic Marriages concluded after 1941: These
marriages enjoyed official recognition as a result of the Decree. (c) The
Civil Marriage: This was a union solemnized before the Registrar of Births,
Deaths and Marriages. (d) Concubinage: This was a union where a man and
woman lived together without the benefit of legal marriage.
Marriage Ceremony:
From the Hindu point of view,
marriage is not only a joining together of two people but also fulfilment of a
social and religious duty by the two families concerned. Not only the family
members but also the kin group and friends had certain social and religious
obligations during a wedding. Speckman (1965:13) points out that the family’s
social standing determined the degree to which the neighborhood would help. The
entire network of mutual social rights and obligations found symbolic
expression in the gift. Smith and Jayawardena (1958:192) observe that
“practically every ritual expression of a social relationship is marked by a
gift.” The wedding ritual also gave an insight into the position of the various
members of the family. The entire ceremony revealed the fact that the bride’s
family was in a subordinate position with respect to the family of the groom.
At the wedding the bride’s father acted as the host, whose task was to satisfy
the visiting party in every way. Another aspect that came into fore during the
wedding was the dominant position of men in the Indian community, this was
apparent due to the absence of the bridegroom’s female relatives from the
wedding party.
An Indian wedding is a
lengthy, intricate and expensive affair for both sides. The feast a man gave to
celebrate the wedding of his child was both the index of his prestige and a
validation of it. Smith and Jayawardena (1959: 364) report that the
factors that were important in this respect were the sumptuousness of the feast
itself, the number and status of the guests and the geographical range from
where they came. The bulk of the expenditure in a wedding was on clothes, food
and drink. The observance of the innumerable rituals, the exchange of lavish
gifts and the performance of the marriage ceremony symbolized the position of
the Indians within the wider social system.
Marital Instability:
Jayawardena (1960: 76-100) and
Speckmann (1965:168-182) have given an expansive account of the extent of
dissolution of marriage in Guyana and Surinam. The research shows that 26.5 per
cent of the married males and 25.8 per cent of females had separated in
Blairmont (Guyana) and 15.6 per cent of the married males and 14 per cent of
married females had dissolved their union in Port Mourant (Guyana). The main
causes for marital separation were cruelty, inadequate support of the family,
adultery, drunkenness etc. However, Jayawardena (1960: 99-100) is of the view
that conflicts that lead to marital instability were closely related to the
social system. One major area of conflict lay in the process that integrated
the wife into the local kinship group. The second major reason was the discrepancy
between the cultural supremacy of the husband in the household and the economic
realities where he had to depend on his wife in the management of domestic
affairs. In Surinam, Speckmann (1965:168-77) reports that one third of all
marriages in the Indian community were dissolved. The main reason for
separation was adultery, drunkenness, cruelty, one of the partners neglecting
the household, quarreling between relatives sharing the house etc. Sharma’s
(1986: 31-37) data on marriage among Indians in Trinidad reveals that 86
percent of the marriages were stable. However, a number of his informants felt
that extramarital relationships were increasing which often led to the
dissolution of marriage. Although divorce in the strictly legal sense was
infrequent because of the expense involved, the incidence of permanent
separation was quite high.
Structure of the Family:
Before we begin our analysis
of family, it would be pertinent to distinguish between the terms “household”
and “family”. The distinction between the two acquires special relevance as
Smith and Jayawardena (1959) have used the terms “household” in their study of
the Indian Guyanese family, while the rest of the authors, such as Davids
(1964), Klass (1961), Nevadomsky (1983), Niehoff (1959) and Schwartz (1965)
have used “family” as their point of reference. A household can be
characterized as a group of individuals who share a common house and dine
together. These activities may be extended; households may vary in size and
stability; households may comprise of individuals without kinship ties and
conversely, members of one family may be distributed over two or more
households. While a household is a co-residential and an economic unit, the
family is a kinship and jural unit. The kinship ties facilitate duties, rights
and obligations between the members. Families can be broadly classified into
two categories, the “extended” and the “nuclear”. The extended family is
composed of immediate family members and it is their rights and obligations
which are emphasized upon (Pradhan 2011).
Household Composition:
A household, i.e., a group of
individuals who live, eat and sleep together in the same dwelling, has an
important place in the analysis of a family structure. In the Guyanese society,
Smith and Jayawardena (1950:336) show that the composition of households is
predominantly nuclear. Of all persons contained in the households, the
proportion of nuclear kin of the head were 81.4 per cent in Windsor Forest,
98.4 per cent in Blairmont and 81.3 per cent in Port Mourant. Extended families
were more frequently established in the rice growing regions of Windsor Forest
and Port Mourant than in the sugar estate regions of Blairmont. On the basis of
his report on Boodram, Schwartz (1965:24) maintains that the nuclear family is
more commonly found than the extended family system in Trinidad.
The overall data in terms of
residency suggests the infrequent occurrence of the extended family household
and the overwhelming presence of the nuclear family household. Schwartz
(1965:25) interprets this as part of structural modification that the Indian
family was undergoing as a result of the adaptive and acculturative processes
at work in Trinidad. Even in the nuclear families with attached lineal
dependents, the head of the nuclear family was the effective head of the entire
unit. This was in direct contrast to the traditional joint family, where the
eldest male was the patriarch.
Deference and Authority:
Among the Indians of Guyana,
the head of the family was normally a male. On him lay the responsibility of
providing food, clothing and shelter for his dependents. He decided how the
household income was to be spent though it was his wife who managed the bulk of
domestic expenditure. According to Smith and Jayawardena (1959: 340-343), in
Guyana, the authority of the household head was greater in the rice farming
areas of Windsor Forest and Port Mourant than in Blairmont. This was so because
amongst the Blairmont population there was little in the way of permanent
property to be managed or to be passed on. The son’s relationship to his father
was never crucial as no property factors were involved and he did not receive
any material gains from his father. In the rice growing areas of Guyana, since
the father gave his sons a start in life by providing them with land and oxen
for farming, his authority was above dissensions. Questions of inheritance had
considerable influence on relationships during life and grown up sons remained
in their parental household when they anticipated considerable bequests.
Klass’s (1961:132) study in
Trinidad reveals that ideally the eldest male was the “eldest head” of the
Indian family. The power of the head was derived from the fact that he
controlled the family purse and property and he had the authority since the
time the children were born. Filial disobedience was reprimanded and the threat
of the “father’s curse” was taken seriously. It was believed that if a man had
been cursed by his father and if the curse was not subsequently retracted, he
would never know happiness or success in life. However, if the eldest male was
weak, illiterate, impoverished or a drunkard, then the son usually took over
the control of the family. Here it would seem that the authority in
relationships in the family were determined by economic and social power of the
household rather than by traditional customs.
Niehoff (1959:183) is also of
the opinion that the male head of the family wields considerable authority and
manages the financial affairs in Trinidad. Elders were respected by the younger
members of the family. In some traditional families, the head was also in
charge of the allocation of the earnings of the son. However, a contrasting
image of deference and authority pattern is presented by Nevadomsky (1983:
207-18) in his research on Trinidad. He maintains that the traditional values
governing the authority of the father had weakened and the undisputed hierarchy
of the Indian traditional family had been replaced by ambiguity and rebellion.
As a result, contention, disputes and bickering were quite common within the
household.
Property and Inheritance:
In the sugar estate regions of
Guyana since most of the Indians were wage labourers, there was little in the
way of permanent property. Hence the question of managing and bequeathing
property was irrelevant (Smith and Jayawardena). In the rice farming regions of
Guyana, the ownership of land, tools, oxen and house was normally vested in the
heads of households. They organized and coordinated the farm work and the sons
assisted in ploughing and harrowing. When the eldest sons married, their wives
joined the other women of the household. The sons not only provided labour for
the rice farm but also contributed surplus earnings for their sisters’
marriage. As soon as the head of the household had married off his daughters,
he gave his sons some shares of the capital assets that had been accumulated.
To begin farming, at times land and oxen were also given to them. It was only
after the death of the household head that the entire division of the property
took place (Smith and Jayawardena 1959: 346).
Niehoff (1959:184) maintains
that among the Indian Community in Trinidad, land was normally inherited by the
sons, with the oldest being favoured. Male inheritance depended upon the
treatment children gave their parents and often a girl was favoured if she had
been the primary care giver to her old parents. Wife inherited land from her
husband in the absence of brothers. Klass (1961:134-35) disagrees with Niehoff
in reporting that while distributing his possessions, a man usually favoured
his younger son. He, however, clarifies that there was no conscious rule of ultimogeniture.
The tendency to favour the youngest son was probably due more to the fact that
he was often the last to marry, thus remaining behind to inherit the farm or
house.
Position of Women:
During the indenture period
(1838-1917), Indian women shared a mixed fate. Undoubtedly their experience was
one of multiple oppressions: as a worker in an exploitative indentured system,
as an Indian whose culture was viewed with contempt, as a person prone to
sexual advances by the white overseers and as a wife of the male immigrant who
had to suffer beatings and at times even the loss of her life. Yet, on the
estates, because of their scarcity and their position as wage labourers, some
of the Indian women managed to achieve a measure of independence (Poynting 1987:
231-232).
Indian indentureship in the
Caribbean was characterized by a skewed ratio between the sexes. Though at
times the ratio increased to 1:2 (one woman to two men), by and large the ratio
remained at 1:4 (Reddock 1985: 80-81). The main reason for recruiting fewer
women was the planter’s notion of women being unproductive as labourers. They
were also seen as financial liability due to their reproductive role.
A significant percentage of
the women, who were not wives of migrating husbands, were widows. There were
others who had fallen out with their families and therefore emigrated in order
to escape a life of promiscuity. One of the reasons affecting the status of
Indian women in the Caribbean was their low numbers. This empowered them to
exercise some control over their sexuality. However, it was this freedom which
often made them victims of male jealousy and violence. Murder of unfaithful
wives and mistresses was a common affair among the Indian immigrants (Reddock
1985: 82-83).
From the 1940s, if one
analyses the position of women within the family structure it becomes evident
that there is a clear link between the level of an Indian settlement’s
participation in the cash economy and the extent to which women’s role had
changed. With the rapid expansion in the provision of schooling, attitudes to
education for both boys and girls had changed sharply within the Indian
community. There was a greater acceptance of the contribution the women could
make as a wage earner to the family’s participation in the consumer economy.
According to Malik (1971: 28),
“the most significant change in the Indian social structure in Trinidad has
occurred in the status of women, who enjoy more freedom than their counterparts
in India.” The spread of education and the influence of western culture,
especially in the urban areas saw a marked improvement in the position of
women. However, in the rural areas where the dictates of the traditional family
system held strong, women occupied an inferior status. Various scholars (Davids
1964: 392, Dwivedi 2014, Niehoff 1959:183) are of the opinion that the relative
position of Indian men and women in Trinidad resembled that in India, though
the stricter forms of seclusion and protection of women was not found in
Trinidad. Women had more say in their marriages, were mistresses of their own
houses and held the family money. However, intermixing of the sexes was not
allowed.
Smith and Jayawardena
(1959:337) do not make any direct reference to the position of women in the
Indian community in Guyana. But while discussing the eating arrangements of the
Indians they reveal the inferior position of women. The head of the household
and other adult males were served before women. While the men ate at the table,
women and children ate their food sitting on the floor. It appeared that the
comparatively higher status of women, caused by their smaller numbers during
the indenture period was gradually undermined as parity in the sex ratio was
reached and some of the values of the family structure were reinforced.
Intra-Familial Conflicts:
Schwartz (1965: 31) in his
paper on the Indian family organization categorizes the various intra-familial
conflicts. He maintains that these disputes occurred between individuals
occupying the following positions: (a) Mother–Son’s wife, (b) Father–Son, (c)
Brother’s wife–Brother’s wife, (d) Brother–Brother’s wife, (e) Brother–Brother,
and (f) Mother–Son. Some of the above conflicts were a direct result of others
rather than a separate form of conflict. Many altercations between mother and
son were directly related to squabbles between the mother and son’s wife.
Almost all the authors reported about the quarrels between the mother-in-law and
the daughter-in-law. Conflicts between father and son and between brothers
arose out of dispute regarding division of property, management of property,
inheritance etc. Most of these conflicts within the extended family resulted in
their disintegration (Baskaran et al 2015).
However, all the authors agree
on the fact that a relationship of respect existed between father and son
(Jayawardena 1962: 47, Klass 1961: 132, Speckmann 1965: 252). While studying
the Indian community in Guyana, Jayawardena comments, “Sons are expected to be
deferential to their fathers and avoid expressions of familiarity.” In Surinam,
he reports that though the father was still the central figure in the Indian
household, his attitude was less autocratic. The father-son relationship was
marked by mutual dependence and the social distance between the two had
diminished.
Role of Kinship:
Kinship relations were of
vital importance for the overseas Indians in the Caribbean and governed
everyday social interactions. Jayawardena (1962:62-63) emphasises the fact that
“adherence to certain kinship institutions is at the heart of being ‘Indian’
and places definite limits on the extent of deviations.” The Indians had no
distant relatives, they only had relatives with whom they associated more and
those whom they saw only on rare occasions. While discussing the kinship
terminology among the Indians in Trinidad and Surinam, both Klass (1961: 94)
and Speckmann (1965: 254) are of the view that the Indian kinship terminology
had largely survived unchanged.
Klass (1961) is also of the
view that kinship relations were of great significance in the life of the
Indians. The first allegiance belonged to the family, and thereafter to wider
network of kin. Each relationship had a term and underlined an appropriate
behaviour. Interpersonal relations hence helped to regulate and standardize
behaviour.
In Surinam and Guyana, the
picture was slightly different. In Surinam, changes were recorded in the whole
gamut of relationships. Joking relationships and avoidance relationships were
not observed strictly, the character of the father-son relationship had
undergone considerable change and the relationship between husband and wife had
become more direct and personal (Speckmann 1965:249-55).
In Guyana, no kinship group
wider than the nuclear or three-generation family had any effective or
exclusive function (Jayawardena 1962: 21). Kinsmen were expected to help one
another and live in harmony, but they were not obliged to do so. The family
performed few functions distinct from those of friends and neighbours. Roles
assigned to certain classes of kin were easily performed by friends standing in
for kin. Kin relations did not have any special significance, except that a
special deference was shown to the older generation and a certain restraint
observed towards women. Behaviours in this community of kin was governed by the
same values of mutual respect and cooperation as between fellow labourers.
Thus, Jayawardena (1962: 22) maintains that kinship terms were means of
establishing equality of status.
CONCLUSION:
The institution of marriage
had metamorphosized in the overseas Indian community of the Caribbean but
continued to play a significant role in regulating the social discourse. There
were several forms of marriage. However, Marriages were largely stable and
adhered to the rule of local exogamy. The ritually rich and ostentatious
wedding ceremonies seemed to appear as markers of a separate identity in the
segmented society of the Caribbean.
The family and kin relations
remained the bedrock of Indian ethnic identity even though they had undergone
tremendous changes over time to adapt to the needs of life in the Caribbean.
The ideal extended family structure came under pressure during the period of
indenture weakening the line of brothers, and only the bond of father and son
survived. As indenture ended, land again became the mark of social power, and
once again an extended family organization came into being with the patriarch
as its head.
On the whole, it can be said
that as far as family and marriage was concerned, the traditional Indian
customs and traditions underwent a transformation over a period of time, yet
the Indian overseas community in the Caribbean was able to project a distinct
cultural identity.
REFERENCES:
1.
Baskaran M., Usha Sekar, N. Kokilavani. Conflict and
Conflict Resolution. International Journal of Advances in Nursing Management.
2015, 3 (4): 377-378.
2.
Bhattacharjee Monalisa. Discourse of Colonial Thought
and Anthology in Indian Caste Peculiarity: A Study on Colonial Ethnography.
Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2012, 3 (4): 409-421.
3.
Birth Kevin. Most of Us are Family Some of the Time:
Interracial Unions and Transracial Kinship in Eastern Trinidad. American
Ethnologist. 1997, 24 (3): 585-601.
4.
Clarke Colin. East Indian in a West Indian Town—San
Fernando, Trinidad, 1930-1970. Allen and Unwin, Boston and Sydney. 1986.
5.
D’Souza Eugene J. Indian Indentured Labour in Fiji.
Proceedings of the Indian History Congress. 2001, 61 (2): 1071-1080.
6.
Davids Leo. The East Indian Family Overseas. Social
and Economic Studies. 1964, 13 (3): 383-396.
7.
Dwivedi Anurag. Gendered Identity and Social
Inequality in India in the 21st Century. International Journal of Reviews and
Research in Social Sciences. 2014, 2 (4): 235-238.
8.
Ghurye GS. Caste and Race in India. Popular Prakashan,
Mumbai. 1969, 5th ed.
9.
Gillion KL. Fiji’s Indian Migrants: A History to the
End of Indenture in 1920. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. 1962.
10. Jayawardena Chandra. Culture and Ethnicity in Guyana
and Fiji. Man (New Series). 1980, 15 (3): 430-450.
11. Jayawardena Chandra. Religious Belief and Social
Change: Aspects of the Development of Hinduism in British Guiana. Comparative
Studies in Society and History. 1966, 8 (2): 211-240.
12. Jayawardena, Chandra. Family Organization in
Plantations in British Guiana. International Journal of Comparative Sociology.
1962, 3 (1): 43-64.
13. Kapadia KM. Marriage and Family in India. Oxford
University Press, Calcutta. 1955.
14. Kaul Vineet. Linguistic Diversity and Cultural
Identity. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2013, 4 (4):
550-571.
15. Klass Morton. East Indians in Trinidad: A Study of
Cultural Persistence. Columbia University Press, New York. 1961.
16. Malik Yogendra K. East Indians in Trinidad: A Study in
Minority Politics. Oxford University Press, London. 1971.
17. Nevadomsky Joseph. Changes Over Time and Space in the
East Indian Family in Rural Trinidad. In Overseas Indians, edited by
George Kurian and RP Srivastava. Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi. 1983,
180-213.
18. Niehoff Arthur. The Survival of Hindu Institutions in
an Alien Environment. Eastern Anthropologist. 1959, 12 (3): 171-187.
19. Parija Susmita. A Journey through the Realms of the
Great Indian Diaspora and India’s Diaspora Engagement Policy. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2021,
12 (2): 71-75.
20. Poynting Jeremy. East Indian Women in the Caribbean:
Experience, Image and Voice. Journal of South Asian Literature. 1986, 21 (1):
133-180.
21. Pradhan Mayank. Changing Family Structure of India. Research Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2011, 2 (2):
40-43.
22. Ram Umashankar. The British Rule and its Effect upon
Social, Cultural and Economic Status of Rural India. Research Journal of
Humanities and Social Sciences. 2020, 11 (4): 345-349.
23. Reddock Rhoda. Freedom Denied: Indian Women and
Indentureship in Trinidad and Tobago, 1845-1917. Economic and Political Weekly.
1985, 20 (43): 79-89.
24. Roopnarine, Lomarsh. Indo-Caribbean Social Identity.
Caribbean Quarterly. 2006, 52 (1): 1-11.
25. Schwartz Barton M. Patterns of East Indian Family
Organizations in Trinidad. Caribbean Studies. 1965, 5 (1): 23-36.
26. Schwartz Barton M. The Failure of Caste in Trinidad.
In Caste in Overseas Communities, edited by Barton M. Schwartz. Chandler
Publishing Company, California. 1967, 117-147.
27. Sharma Bhavna. Role of State in Balancing Conflicting
Interests in Regards to Rights and Policies. International
Journal of Reviews and Research in Social Sciences. 2017, 5 (2): 63-72.
28. Sharma KN. Changing forms of East Indian Marriage and
Family in the Caribbean. Journal of Sociological Studies. 1986, 5 (1): 20-58.
29. Shrivastava Mitike. Different Forms of Social
Stratification in the Indian Society. Research Journal of Humanities and Social
Sciences. 2012, 3 (1): 30-37.
30. Smith Raymond T. and Chandra Jayawardana. Hindu
Marriage Customs in British Guyana. Social and Economic Studies. 1958, 7 (2):
178-194.
31. Smith Raymond T. and Chandra Jayawardana. Marriage and
the Family Amongst East Indians in British Guyana. Social and Economic Studies.
1959, 8 (4): 321-376.
32. Smith Raymond T. Marital Stability in two Guyanese
Sugar Estate Communities. Social and Economic Studies, 1960, 9 (1): 76-100.
33. Sourav Suman. Marriage: It’s Changing Nature. Research
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2012, 3 (1): 73-80.
34. Speckmann Johan D. Marriage and Kinship Among the
Indians in Surinam. Van Gorcum, Netherlands. 1965.
35. Van der Burg Cors and Peter Van der Veer. Pandits,
Power and Profit: Religious Organizations and the Construction of Identity
among Surinamese Hindus. Ethnic and Racial Studies. 1986, 9(4): 514-528.
36. Van der Veer Peter and Steven Vertovec. Brahmanism
Abroad: On Caribbean Hinduism as an Ethnic Religion. Ethnology. 1991, 30 (2):
149-166.
Received on 03.06.2021
Modified on 25.06.2021
Accepted on 11.07.2021 ©AandV Publications
All right reserved
Res. J. Humanities and
Social Sciences. 2021; 12(3):186-192.
DOI:
10.52711/2321-5828.2021.00033