Scholarlink

<p>In a context of conflicting legal traditions, how did women in early medieval Kashmir assert, protect, and symbolically express their property rights? What messages regarding gendered authority were communicated through ritual acts, legal writings, and tangible symbols? This article approaches <i>Strīdhana</i> (women’s property) and widow’s inheritance through the lens of legal semiotics, examining not only the normative frameworks of the <i>Manusmṛti</i> (Laws of Manu), <i>Mitākṣarā</i> (Mitakshara), and <i>Dayabhāga</i> (Dayabhaga inheritance treatise) but also the lived negotiations captured in the <i>Rājataraṅgiṇī</i> (River of Kings), epigraphic inscriptions, and temple endowments. It treats law not as a fixed code but as a dynamic, meaning-making system, shaped by caste, class, marital status, and the symbolic language of property. The study highlights how Queen Didda’s coinage, temple patronage, and toponymic legacies operated as legal signs, embedding her authority in Kashmir’s socio-political and sacred geography. By situating these acts within a plural legal order—Brahmanical jurisprudence, Buddhist donation practices, Islamic inheritance principles, and local custom—it invites a reconsideration of how women navigated, and sometimes redefined, the symbolic and material boundaries of <i>dharma</i> (normative order). In doing so, the article contributes to broader debates on gendered legal subjectivity, the semiotics of law, and the contested production of authority in South Asian history.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Gendered Legal Signs: Property and Authority in Early Medieval Kashmir

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月21日

查看全文
  • Syed Saima Showkat,
  • Tabish Hashmi

摘要

In a context of conflicting legal traditions, how did women in early medieval Kashmir assert, protect, and symbolically express their property rights? What messages regarding gendered authority were communicated through ritual acts, legal writings, and tangible symbols? This article approaches Strīdhana (women’s property) and widow’s inheritance through the lens of legal semiotics, examining not only the normative frameworks of the Manusmṛti (Laws of Manu), Mitākṣarā (Mitakshara), and Dayabhāga (Dayabhaga inheritance treatise) but also the lived negotiations captured in the Rājataraṅgiṇī (River of Kings), epigraphic inscriptions, and temple endowments. It treats law not as a fixed code but as a dynamic, meaning-making system, shaped by caste, class, marital status, and the symbolic language of property. The study highlights how Queen Didda’s coinage, temple patronage, and toponymic legacies operated as legal signs, embedding her authority in Kashmir’s socio-political and sacred geography. By situating these acts within a plural legal order—Brahmanical jurisprudence, Buddhist donation practices, Islamic inheritance principles, and local custom—it invites a reconsideration of how women navigated, and sometimes redefined, the symbolic and material boundaries of dharma (normative order). In doing so, the article contributes to broader debates on gendered legal subjectivity, the semiotics of law, and the contested production of authority in South Asian history.