(vi)The prohibition of marriage with ego’s mother’s uterine sister.

On the face of it, there seems to be some substance in the argument of Hutton, particularly in the use of the suffix li which is derived from ail, `a girl’. According to the phonological rules of the Sema language, the pro-clitic a automatically drops out when word is suffixed to another one. And as far as the original Sema names are concerned, it is this suffix li that distinguished the personal name of a female being from a male being. It also marks the female birds that has not laid eggs. Further li is also the III peson feminine personal pronoun in the singular. Therefore, the possibility of having a connection between female beings and the place/community names etc. having li suffix cannot be ruled out.

It may also be noted that it has been the custom amongst the grown up children of the Sema village chiefs to move out of the village for establishing new villages. And usually the newly established villages are named after the person who established it and consequently becoming its chief. (The village chieftainship among the Semas is a hereditary position). It could therefore be quite probable that in some instances the daughters of the village chiefs also moved out and established villages and subsequently naming the villages after them. The feminine suffix li found with certain villages, clans etc., may be a relic of this. The probability of such an occurrence can be ruled out only if Naga women had not taken to arms. Even comparatively recently being that of Miss A. Gaidiliu, popularly known as Naga Rani `Naga Queen’, who organized warfare against the British in 1920’s till her arrest in 1927. She is the most respected person amongst the Rongmei, Zemi and liangmei communities spread over in three states viz., Manipur, Nagaland and Assam. These communities (both Christian and non-Christians) consider her their spiritual leader and many even worship her.

Highly respectable place accorded to a maternal under amongst the Semas fits very well with the matriarchal societies like the ones this writer comes from where the maternal uncle has greater claims over the ego than his own father. And in case of a conflict of opinion between a maternal uncle and the ego’s father, the ego is expected to carry out the wishes of the former. As opposed to this type of extreme respect enjoyed by amaternal uncle ina matriarchal society, there is a `joking relationship’ in a patriarchal society. And as far as the Semas are concerned, the special duties and the responsibilities of a maternal uncle begins with the birth ceremony of a nephew/niece and continues throughout his/her life. The maternal uncle in a Sema society has certain special functions even in the death ceremony of his nephew/niece. The inability of the Sema women owning any immovable property has its parallels in other matriarchal societies too. For instance, in Kerala both the Muslims and the Hindus have the matriarchal family system. The property, however, is managed by the eldest male member of the family and none can even question his wisdom in the management or mismanagement of the property right is vested amongst the Semas with the husband/father while in Kerala with the maternal uncle. Khasis in Meghalaya also belong to matriarchal matrilineal social system, but Khasi and Jayantia women have control over the strings of purse.

Only in a matriarchal society, women get a high place. And with the Semas, she has a very dignified position both as a daughter and as a wife which is diametrically opposed to the position of a woman in patriarchal societies including the other Naga communities where a woman takes a secondary position always in obedience, as a daughter to her father, as a wife to her husband and as a widow to her sons. A Sema woman has a dignified position even in her death, in that it is considered a matter of strict etiquette that as many people as had accompanied her on her wedding day from her father’s house to her husband’s house must attend her funeral.

The only point that comes in the way of confirming the hypothesis of Hutton is the prevalence amongst the Semas of paying huge bride price by the groom or his parents to the bride’s parents, the consequently treating the wives as movable properties to be divided and shared amongst the sons after the demise of the father. This writer himself has come across instances of Semas who on the death of the father divided amongst themselves and married in such a remarriage is that none marries his own mother. In such a division, the eldest son gets the largest share. These remarriages with the step mothers are in addition to the wives each son already has.