Worship of Dûlha Deo, the Bridegroom Godling.
Another great godling of the Drâvidian races is Dûlha Deo, “the bridegroom godling.” In his worship we have an echo of some great tragedy, which still exercises a profound influence over the minds of the people.
The bridegroom on his way to fetch the bride, is, by established Hindu custom, treated with special reverence, and this unfortunate bridegroom, whose name is forgotten, is said to have been killed by lightning in the midst of his marriage rejoicings, and he and his horse were turned into stone. In fact, like Ganymede or Hylas, he was carried off by the envy or cruel love of the merciless divine powers.
He is now one of the chief household deities of the Drâvidian people. Flowers are offered to him on the last day of Phâlgun (February), and at marriages a goat. Among some of the Gond tribes he has the first place, and is identified with Pharsipen, the god of war. In the native States of Rîwa and Sarguja, even Brâhmans worship him, and his symbol or fetish is the battle-axe, the national weapon of the Drâvidian races, fastened to a tree. In Mirzapur he is pre-eminently the marriage godling. In the marriage season he is worshipped in the family cook-room, and at weddings oil and turmeric are offered to him. When two or three children in the same hamlet are being married at the same time, there is a great offering made of a red goat and cakes; and to mark the benevolent character of the deity as a household godling, the women, contrary to the usual rule, are allowed a share of the meat. This purely domestic worship is not done by the Baiga or devil priest, but by the Tikâit or eldest son of the family. He is specially the tribal god of the Ghasiyas, who pour a little spirits in the cook-room in honour of him and of deceased relatives. The songs in his honour lay special stress on the delicacies which the house-mother prepares for his entertainment. Among the Kharwârs, when the newly married pair come home, he is worshipped near the family hearth. A goat is fed on rice and pulse, and its head is cut off with an axe, the worshipper folding his hands and saying, “Take it, Dûlha Deo!”
On the day when this worship is performed, the ashes of the fireplace are carefully removed with the hands, a broom is not used, and special precautions are taken that none of the ashes fall on the ground.
General Sleeman gives the legend of Dûlha Deo in another form.
“In descending into the valley of the Narmadâ over the Vindhya range from Bhopâl, one may see on the side of the road, upon a spur of the hill, a singular pillar of sandstone rising in two spires, one turning and rising above the other to the height of some twenty to thirty feet. On the spur of a hill, half a mile distant, is another sandstone pillar not quite so high. The tradition is that the smaller pillar was the affianced bride of the larger one, who was a youth of a family of great eminence in those parts. Coming with his uncle to pay his first visit to his bride in the marriage procession, he grew more and more impatient as he approached nearer and nearer, and she shared the feeling. At last, unable to restrain himself, he jumped from his uncle’s shoulders, and looked with all his might towards the place where his bride was said to be seated. Unhappily she felt no less impatient than he did, and they saw each other at the same moment. In that moment the bride, bridegroom, and uncle were, all three, converted into pillars, and there they stand to this day, a monument to warn mankind against an inclination to indulge in curiosity. It is a singular fact that in one of the most extensive tribes of the Gond population, to which this couple is said to have belonged, the bride always, contrary to the usual Hindu custom, goes to the bridegroom in procession to prevent a recurrence of this calamity.”[72]
This legend is interesting from various points of view. In the first place it is an example of a process of thought of which we shall find instances in dealing with fetishism, whereby a legend is localized in connection with some curious phenomenon in the scenery, which attracts general attention. Secondly, we have an instance of the primitive taboo which appears constantly in folk-lore, where, as in the case of Lot’s wife, the person who shows indiscreet curiosity by a look is turned into stone or ashes.[73] Thirdly, it may represent a survival of a custom not uncommon among primitive races, where the marriage capturing is done, not by the bridegroom, but by the bride. Thus, among the Gâros, all proposals of marriage must come from the lady’s side, and any infringement of the custom can only be atoned for by liberal presents of beer given to her relations by the friends of the bridegroom, who pretends to be unwilling and runs away, but is caught and subjected to ablution, and then taken, in spite of the resistance and counterfeited grief and lamentations of the parents, to the bride’s house.[74] It may then reasonably be expected that this custom of marriage prevailed among some branches of the Gond tribe, and that as they came more and more under Hindu influence, an unorthodox ritual prevailing in certain clans was explained by annexing the familiar legend of Dûlha Deo.
[1] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 762.
[2] Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” xvii. 141.
[3] Barth, “Religions of India,” 265.
[4] Gubernatis, “Zoological Mythology,” ii. 99 sq.
[5] See instances collected by Tylor, “Primitive Culture,” i. 376 sqq.
[6] “Asiatic Studies,” 13 sq.
[7] Buchanan, “Eastern India,” i. 467; Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 147.
[8] Campbell, “Notes,” 260.
[9] “Legend of Perseus,” i. 173.
[10] “Descriptive Ethnology,” 140.
[11] “Journey through Oudh,” ii. 133.
[12] Campbell, “Notes,” 260.
[13] Buchanan, “Eastern India,” ii. 141 sq.; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iv. 9.
[14] Dowson, “Classical Dictionary,” s.v.
[15] “Gazetteer,” 323.
[16] “Papers,” 16.
[17] Ibid., 23 sq.
[18] Madden, “Journal Asiatic Society Bengal,” 1848, p. 600; Hunt, “Popular Romances,” 73.
[19] Buchanan, “Eastern India,” iii. 38.
[20] Frazer, “Golden Bough,” ii. 225 sqq.; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iii. 181 sq.
[21] Knowles, “Folk-tales from Kashmîr,” 10.
[22] “Original Inhabitants,” 455.
[23] “Central India,” ii. 206.
[24] Tod, “Annals,” i. 67; for other examples see Buchanan, “Eastern India,” ii. 131, 352, 478; “Central Provinces Gazetteer,” 110.
[25] “Panjâb Ethnography,” 114.
[26] Frazer, “Golden Bough,” ii. 83.
[27] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 8.
[28] “Bombay Gazetteer,” iii. 220; “Râjputâna Gazetteer,” iii. 65.
[29] Gomme, “Ethnology in Folk-lore,” 34 sq.
[30] Frazer “Golden Bough,” ii. 233.
[31] “Bhandâra Settlement Report,” 51.
[32] Ganga Datt Upreti, “Folk-lore of Kumaun,” Introduction, vii.
[33] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 220, 281.
[34] “Settlement Report,” 257.
[35] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 268.
[36] Risley, “Tribes and Castes of Bengal,” ii. 58.
[37] Temple, “Wideawake Stories,” 399.
[38] Ibbetson, “Panjâb Ethnography,” 114; “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 518.
[39] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 825.
[40] Channing, “Settlement Report,” 34.
[41] Maclagan, “Panjâb Census Report,” 103 sq.
[42] Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 146.
[43] Sir W. Scott, “Letters on Demonology,” 143.
[44] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 147.
[45] Wilson, “Essays,” i. 21; “Bombay Gazetteer,” xvi. 568.
[46] Jarrett, “Aîn-i-Akbari,” ii. 159; Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 153.
[47] “Annals,” ii. 15.
[48] “Notes,” 147.
[49] MacIagan, “Panjâb Census Report,” 107.
[50] Sherring, “Sacred City,” 119.
[51] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” i. 35.
[52] “Central Provinces Gazetteer,” 259.
[53] For the Celtic Mothers see Rhys, “Lectures,” 100, 899; for Arabia, Robertson-Smith, “Kinship,” 179.
[54] Lubbock, “Origin of Civilization,” 146; Starke, “Primitive Family,” 17 sqq.; Letourneau, “Sociology,” 384.
[55] Benfey, “Panchatantra,” i. 41–52; quoted by Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” ii. 638.
[56] Monier-Williams, “Sanskrit Dictionary, s.v. Mâtrî”; for the Nepâl enumeration, Oldfield, “Sketches,” i. 151; for Bombay, “Gazetteer,” xvii. 715. In the “Katha Sarit Sâgara” (i. 552), Nârâyanî is their leader. There is a very remarkable story of the gambler who swindled the Divine Mothers (ibid., ii. 574 sqq.).
[57] Campbell, “Notes,” 311; “Athenæum,” 6th December, 1879; “Folk-lore Record,” iii. Part i. 117 sqq.
[58] “Bombay Gazetteer,” v. 432 sq.
[59] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 884.
[60] Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” vii. 158.
[61] Growse, “Mathura,” 116, 125; Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 27, 132.
[62] Bholanâth Chandra, “Travels of a Hindu,” i. 38.
[63] “Rig Veda,” viii. 23, 25.
[64] Brand, “Observations,” 331.
[65] “Border Minstrelsy,” 466.
[66] Tod, “Annals,” ii. 363 sq., 763; Conway, “Demonology,” i. 54.
[67] Campbell, “Notes,” 145.
[68] Tod, “Annals,” i. 708; ii. 670.
[69] Hartland, “Legend of Perseus,” i. chap. iv.
[70] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 232.
[71] “Gazetteer,” 276.
[72] “Rambles and Recollections,” i. 123.
[73] Stokes, “Indian Fairy Tales,” 140 sqq.; Temple, “Wideawake Stories,” 109, 302; “Indian Antiquary,” iv. 57; Grimm, “Household Tales,” ii. 400.
[74] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 64; other instances in Westermarck, “History of Human Marriage,” 158 sq.
CHAPTER III.
THE GODLINGS OF DISEASE.
Καὶ γὰρ τοῖσι κακὸν χρυσόθρονος Ἄρτεμις ὦρσεν
Χωσαμένη ὃ οἰ οὔτι θαλύσια γουνῶ ἀλωῆς
Οἰνεὺς ῥέξ.
Iliad ix. 533–535.
We now come to consider a class of rural godlings, the deities who control disease.