________________
2
as is the case among other nations. How far these restrictions ought to be respected in the future is a problem for reformers to solve. But I wish here merely to point out that the prohibition of intermarriage based on considerations of Pravara and Gotra, though originally founded on cogent grounds when the members of each gotra-group formed a small community occupying continuous portions of territory, has no longer any reason to recommend it, now that each gotra consists of persons who are found in all parts of the great continent of India and often have less in common with oneanother than with members of other gotras in whose midst they happen to live. For instance, the idea that the members of my family should not for all time intermarry with those of my friend Dewan Bahadur R. Raghunátha Rao, because both of us had presumably a common male ancestor in Bharadvája some 3,000 years ago, is, to say the least, unreasonable. No case has as yet come before the courts in which the question of the validity of a marriage between Brahmans belonging to the same Pravara or Gotra is involved; but when a case of the kind does come before them, as no doubt it will sooner or later, they will have to consider whether by a too rigid enforcement of an ancient rule which has lost, by change of circumstances, much of its meaning, they will not be throwing obstacles in the way of the progress of the community.
My grateful acknowledgments are due to Mr. Mahadeva S'ástri, B. A., and Panditaratnam K. Rangáchárya for their assistance in getting through the work.
P. CHENTSALRAO.
