1. Code word: turn – perhaps they are more property than before – or perhaps it is only at the
transaction – contextually based
The cost-benefit analysis of Comaroff (Philips argues strongly against her analysis, saying it
leads to decontextualisation and an absence of gender perspective) certainly seems to
support the idea that a woman can be regarded as a property in some respects, since dowry
is seen as compensation of a bride. Thereby, in her account, she makes an equation between
a person and wealth. However, we could argue against this by following Strathern leads, and
question what we mean by property. It is worth noting that while Sharma apparently is
against Comaroff’s analysis, she states that ‘“women are the vehicles by which it is
transmitted rather than their owners” (70)’. She thinks that women start seeing themselves
as burden and are seen by others as just vehicles for procreation and material wealth.
Material goods then become more important than bride’s ability. Goody sees bridewealth as
inheritance, something which Sharma disagrees with too. Goody also questions if
bridewealth and dowry actually have to be equal – one sibling might be in more need of
money than the other is. He also argues against the editorial pieces in Hirschon’s book,
stating that ‘women with property are the opposite of women as property’. However, he
does not explain much why this is. Goody also think that we have a Romantic idea that
marital bounds cannot have anything to do with the material. Furthermore, he points out
that consideration of this is important for future generation. Feminists are generally for free
choice, he means, and bridewealth than can be seen as an inhibiting contract. Even though
contracts may exist, it also implies male responsibilities – not only obligations for women, he
points out. Admits that dowry often comes into control of husband, not to daughter’s gain,
but says she gets it back when widowed. Dowry is advantageous in the sense that it
distinguishes the property a woman receives from her kin and do not merges it with the
dominant male (doesn’t he claimthough in the beginning, that the dowry can be taken from
her? What about the cases when she doesn’t get it back?). Philips is against the of seeing
bridewealth and dowry as either inheritance or disheritance, since it leads to a generalised
reading and a dichotomy. Philips is interesting in the sense that she has chosen to focus on
resistance and steps away from the homogenisation of women’s experiences which other
accounts have leaned on. Philips brings up a number of interesting ppints. Among them is
that she says men have control over property in a patrilineal society and in return, women
get support and protection. Dowry is then seen as guaranteeing this. Can we talk about
some form of exchange? How does this argument work in relation to the idea of women
being regarded as property? Argues against dowry being seen as compensation for
unproductive woman, when they now often are in employment. Compensation focus on
socially perceived contributions rather than actual ones. There is also an idea that women
should not claim. The quote, ‘women strategise within a set of concrete constraints’ (249), is
also interesting to consider. Married women can continue rely on family’s support – that
does not mean she is not property, since she does not fully belong to husband. Philips
argues against the idea that women are vechicles for property as she believes women
receive property in their own right. However, she also says dowry have become marriage
payment and husband’s are in control of dowry. In Yan’s study in rural North China, bride
has taken over the family as recipients. In her study, the value of bridewealth has decreased

2. despite state’s resistance and the spread of free-choice marriage. Bridewealth there today
focuses on the conjugal unit, rather than affinal family – the parental control have
decreased. Increasing control for bride over bridewealth.
Do affinal families accept women because of the ties and prestige or for what it get in
exchange?
Main thesis: Even though in some cases the property can be seen by the receiving family to
be of the same value as the bride, this does not mean she is equated to property. Event
though property is the main focus, she can is still able to pull out.
Main arguments:
The transferral of a bride to another group gives said group prestige. It is thereby tied up
with social standing. This is supported by Sharma
There is also the question about between whom the transaction of dowry or bridewealth
takes place. In most accounts, such a Sharma, Strathern, Pamporov, and Goody, it seems to
be a matter between households.
There is a clear link between kinship and bridewealth. In Sharma’s text, bridewealth is
respected due to the respect one have for the family unit and kinship ties. Lindgren states,
cited in Strathern’s text, that kinship is an ideology which hides inequalities. Goody also
talks about how wealth, by endogamous marriages, can be kept within kin group and thus
leads to increased stratification in society. Philips talk about how kinship mediates property
and property mediates kinship in turn. She also says that dowries exist to establish socially
desirable connections. Philips also states Greater moral burden of women – sacrifice – p.
254 – women’s role in preserving family unity.Some women feel they are in a moral
dilemma: equal property rights or their obligations and loyalty to their families. One woman
talks about earning respect in her husband’s house in proportion to the dowry – she should
then be granted continued emotional and material support by her affinal family, but these
wishes not always fulfilled. Also visible in Yan’s study how kinship impacts bridewealth and
enanles new type (the traditional idea of parental heart made it easy to transition to a more
conjugality-focused bridewealth). Pamporov sees bride price among Bulgarian Roma as a
type of compensatory payment to bride’s family and its social function is to define the
precise social status of the children born from the union – the goal is to guarantee
patrilinearity (cited Radcliffe-Brown for this analysis). Some determinants for choosing bride,
according to the author: the appearance of bride, her practical skills, the reputation of her
family, the wealth and property status of all involved, level of acquaintance between the two
families, economic state of the country. Like Philips, he also give evidence for multiple
experiences.

3. You can also question what is meant by wealth itself and the apparent subject/object,
thing/person, dichotomies so apparent in the Western world and weather these are
applicable in other cases. She argues in her article that women may be equated with
wealth in this society but that we have to look differently at wealth. She claims there is an
idea in this Guinean society that wealth symbolises aspects of personhood.
Many of the examples also bring up how cash economy has changed the practice.
Sharma:
Powerpoint:
It is not women’s wealth, it only goes with them.
Brides are objects that can give prestige to social group
The issue divide women among themselves
Text:
Household over individual
Divide law and practice
Later in life, women get more control over dowry as mother-in-laws and mothers
Expectations of groom’s family – ability of bride’s family to give
Have little to say over dowry once it leaves her house
Children seen as property of parents
When it comes to goods, senior women oversee and keep track of correct relations of
reciprocity and they control gift exchange. Not when it comes to cash though
More group emphasis – less individual emphasis
Cost-benefit analysis (Comaroff) – Bridewealth as compensation for loss pf productive bride
– dowry as compensation for addition of unproductive bride.
Even though women earn a lot in high-caste families today, dowry has not been abolish since
they earn comparatively less than their husbands and are thus still dependent.
Failure to marry is a greater disgrace to women than men. Shortage of women, one reason is
dowry (69)
Women as important instruments in search for prestige.
Sharma disagrees with Goody’s equation between dowry and inheritance due to: in this
case, not a fixes share, it is not paid to bride but husband’s family, transfers between
households and finish with the quote:
“women are the vehicles by which it is transmitted rather than their owners” (70)

4. Claims that material goods become more important than bride’s abilities – lead to women
seeing themselves as burdens (but what are her proofs?)
The promise of dowry when son marries uphold the system
Women as objects, as vehicles for procreation and prestige for social groups.
Property divides woman among themselves
Strathern:
Powerpoint:
Questions subject/object dichotomy
Women as inalienable gifts – not disposable but detachable
Women stand for for ‘clan person’: from the viewpoint of women, aspects of themselves are
bound to their identification with their clan brothers
Text:
Men monopolise earnings
Sexual division of labour: women and horticulture, men and the public sphere.
Patrinlineal groups¨
Daulo region, East Highlands – wok meri – funds for women – invest also in men’s business
Hagen, West – women cannot deal with money, seen as spendthrifts.
Lindgren: existing property relations reproduces agnatic structure, women’s right to
property not similarly recognised.
Lindgren also: kinship as an idelology which hides inequalities
Different take on person in PNG: not subject-object dichotomy
Women equated with wealth, according to Strauss and therefore are like objects, but this is
based on our own assumtions about wealth and it being an object. That men are transactors
do not comprises women’s personhood
She also emphasises compensation (165)
Because we a distinction between person and things, we think women are thought of as
objects
Claimwomen do not object to it
Wealth stands for aspects of persons – or aspects of clan.
Detachibility and women and metonyms.

5. Cash economy has been absorbed into gift economy responses
We must understand the way wealth symbolises aspects of personhood and how this shape
Reproduction of society through reproduction of money
Property, relations, Jack Goody:
Defines property as an object but also to the rights, the latter entails relationships
Wants to puncture the myth that individuality is individualised in West and never of
collective nature
Have studied how kinship have been affected by kinship
Importance of land – to keep land and thus hierarchal structure, inheritance has to work,
Had to be kept within a close kin group (203). Endogamous marriage to keep property within
group, thus strengthening stratification. Says that it could be relatively equal between men
and women.
Due to lack of land in Africa – inheritance was gendered – women gave to women, men to
men. Therefore exogamy was more important, since more could be gained. POW: Jack
Goody seem to operate from the principal that people always look for maximal gain.
In Europe, dowry generally has a negative reputation, claimed to lead to determining
marriage for women and men and disinheriting daughters
Questions why it needs to be equal – brother might be in need of more money
Argues against Hirschon’s ‘women as property’ (205) He says ‘women with property are the
opposite of women as property’. Property right are needed as future generations and kin
groups need to be considered. A romantic idea to think that marital bounds should not imply
anything material.
He claims feminist favour free choice and therefore rejects property relations as it is seen as
a binding contract, thus inhibiting a woman. He counters though that these contracts also
means male responsibility, not only female.
Admits that dowry often comes into control of husband, not to daughter’s gain, but says she
gets it back when widowed. Dowry is advantageous in the sense that it distinguishes the
property a woman receives from her kin and do not merges it with the dominant male
(doesn’t he claim though in the beginning, that the dowry can be taken from her? What
about the cases when she doesn’t get it back?)
Dowry disappeared – no functional necessity – instead given after death, as help with
education etc.
Focus on divorce – where property relations in modern societies are emphasised

6. Points to how splitting up in modern age, where love spurs people to have a communal fund,
can cause terrible arguments. Both negative emotional and practical impact.
Verifying what is the women’s and husband’s property would makes matter easier to settle.
POW: Have quite a cynic view on Western family, divorce, single mother. Very black-and-
white view.. His arguments seems biased and have many flaws.
Goody, Bridewealth and dowry in Africa and Eurasia
Says dowry is pre-mortem inheritance
Claims bride gets lots from bridewealth
He seems to say that cash economy has led to greater class and gender inequalities
One function of bridewealth is to tie bride to father’s kin group, which is tied with
inheritance, consanguinal control rather than conjugal over bride.
POW: Where are these examples located? Can be used for some ethnographic examples –
go back for more.
Stridhanam: rethinking dowry – Philips
Focus on women’s responses
Kerala, southern India, Syrian Christians
The law promotes gender equality – Indian succession act of 1925 – but do not have great
social legitimacy – inherent gender bias against women in the judicial system
Accuse Comaroff’s cost-benefit analysis of decontextualized generalisation and absence of
gender perspective. Earlier analysis has focused on its importance to alliance, affinity, status,
mediator
Says Goody and Tambiah sees dowry as inheritance and Sharma sees it as disinheritance –
multiple experiences makes this a generalised reading and a dichotomy
She reanalyses previous arguments on four levels: property devolution, kinship systems
women’s property experiences and the legal domain.
Citicieses homogenisaton of women’s experiences
Responses to gender inequality depending on caste and kinship positioning.
Women’s responses to property situations include strategies such as: accommodation,
acquiescence, compromise, bargaining with kin, everyday forms of resistance, occasional
resistance, outright litigation

7. The prohibition of dowry has not helped women when gender equality in property
inheritance have not been fixed in other way, women must rely then on dowry- it also makes
them more vulnerable – since they cannot get it back when divorcing or widowed
Women responsible for preserving the moral of the family
‘Women strategise within a set of concrete constraints’, citing another author, o. 249
How kinship mediates property and how property mediates kinship
Men control property, patrilineal society – in return women get support and protection –
dowry guarantees these rights – POW: so it’s an exchange?
Women should not claim
Married women can continue rely on family’s support – that does not mean she is not
property, since she does not fully belong to husband
Argues against dowry being seen as compensation for unproductive woman, when they now
often are in employment. Compensation focus on socially perceived contributions rather y
than actual ones
Dowries to establish socially desirable connections
Have become a marriage payment (152)
Greater moral burden of women – sacrifice – p. 254 – women’s role in preserving family
unity
Some women feel they are in a moral dilemma: equal property rights or their obligations and
loyalty to their families
Is against the idea that women are just vehicles for transfer or property – women receive
property in their own right, p. 257
Husband usually in control of dowry, women rarely complain, conjugal interests comes
before interest in domestic property control
One woman talks about earning respect in her husband’s house in proportion to the dowry –
she should then be granted continued emotional and material support by her affinal family,
but these wishes not always fulfilled
The Discussion part summaries arguments.
Dowry and inheritance practices on a continuum.
The individual and transformation of bridewealth in ruralNorth China/Yan
Bride has replaced family as recipient of bridewealth, due to a misunderstanding of Western
individualism. Have had an effect on mate choice, family division and support for the elderly.
Claims individualismhas not been taken into account in previous studies

8. Marriages exchanges will fade away, as the family change, free choice increase, parental
power decrease – citing Goody
Free choice increase in mate choice – but bridewealth intact and increasing in value
Village youth transforming the practice into a new kind of property division
Chinese state have tried to make it disappear – but individualism and bridewealth has
increased
Used to be farming community, lots of labour migration today, more women in work
Bridewealth is money and goods – buy new stuff – do not pass old goods within family
Bethrothal gifts increasingly given directly for bride’s use – ganzhe – given directly to bride
1990s – bride requested all material gifts be converted into cash and then given to her. Then
house was included and maybe means of production.
New bridewealth centres on conjugality, parental power decreases. Also reduced
importance of the affinal relationship between in-laws and the senour generation.
‘Furthermore, the innovation of ganzhe enables the bride to have direct contrl over the
marriage finances provided by the groom’s family, which practically transformed
bridewealth into the wealth of the bride in a literal sense’ (642)
Ultimate intention: conjugal fund – why brides are hard negoatiators
Because young people earn to marriage, they are merely taking out their deposis
Individuality admired (644) – more common among educated and urban – connections to
family modernisation in their minds
Why has bridewealth not been eliminated although other social changes have occurred?
One individual can change a lot, urbanity and media’s influence. Their social standing and
reputation was not destroyed either by their demand. Parents have an idea of parental heart
and want to meet son’s demands. It is a moral idea that defines the parents as persons in
Chinese society. Both parental heart and individuality legitimises current practices of
bridewealth.
Individuality seen as necessary for survival, especially in a market economy.
Changes: shift to free-choice marriage, different division of property within family –
demands for larger bridewealth came out of the fact that earlier family division gave little to
conjugal pair.
Giving large bridewealth might ensure security in old age for parents, as that can prove their
parental support.
State wanted to destroy kinship and old traditions and shift loyalty to state.
Sold like a donkey/Pamporov

9. Wants to discuss bride-price among Roma in Bulgaria.
Money to bride’s father from groom’s family
Bride-price used to be strong tradition in Europe
Kanaba – a type of this – ‘a payment about the honour of the bride’ – which alludes to
virginity¨
Bride price is a kind of compensatory payment given to the girl’s family when she leaves her
parental home due t the marriage. One of the main social functions of such a payment before
or during the marriage is to define precisely the social status of the children born from the
union. He goal of the bride-price is to guarantee the patrilinearity regardeless f the fate of
the marriage (citing Radcliffe-Brown, 1952, at page 472)
Also functions to secure woman against mistreatment – she will get whole or part of bride-
price back at divorce
Also helps to keep wealth within kin due to endogamy – therefore also has a stratifying
purpose
Determinants of bride-price: the appearance of bride, her practical skills, the reputation of
her family, the wealth and property status of all involved, level of acquaintance between the
two families, economic state of the country.
Bride-price may even be claimed at elopement.
Increasing poverty and liberalisation of social values have led to changes and gradual
disappearance. Urban Roma.
But some communities still importatnt – semi-nomadic – pazari – translated as markets –
reunions as site for premarital meetings and bride-price negotiation – cites
misunderstandings that have arisen from this word – likens it to a picnic
Multiple attitudes to this among women – as like with Sharma – some said they were sold
like a donkey, others equates high bride-price with love and care.