Question What is polyandry, why does it occur and what is its impact on gender relations? Response Polyandry can be defined as "a marriage between a woman and two or more men simultaneously" (Berreman, 1962, Tiwari, 2008). Polyandrous marriages can be split into two distinct forms: fraternal and non-fraternal. Fraternal polyandry is by far the most common of the two, and involves a group of brothers who become the collective husbands of a woman, or women (polygynandry) (Berreman, 1962). Conversely, non- fraternal polyandry involves husbands who are unrelated. This essay will focus on cases of fraternal polyandry unless otherwise stated. Scholars posit a variety of factors commonly associated with polyandry, a combination of which are thought to predetermine its practice. These indicators can be broadly categorised as economic, ecological and socio-cultural constraints, causing many scholars to conclude that the practice of polyandry is culturally adaptive rather than biologically motivated (Goldstein, 1971, Chattopadhyay, 1994, Levine & Silk, 1997). Further, when analysed through a biological evolutionary framework – whereby human behaviours can be seen as having the unconscious goal of increasing reproductive success (Stephens, 1998) – polyandrous unions present an anomaly, reducing rather than increasing the potential for male reproductive success. Just as polyandry presents a intriguing contradistinction to the more prevalent paradigm of monogamy with its de- emphasis on female sexual exclusivity, so too can we expect that gender relations might deviate from dominant Western ideologies. While it is tempting to ethnocentrically presume that women are entirely subjugated in polyandrous unions, these marriage types present both benefits and difficulties for husbands and wives. Individual societies in which polyandry occurs create and adopt culturally sanctioned axioms such as de-stigmatized divorce, remarriage and reformulation of existing marriages, to help regulate some of these issues, allowing a degree of autonomy for both genders. This essay will analyse in further detail some of the theories that attempt to explain the practice of polyandry, and discuss the gender relations that this practice implies. The practice of polyandry has long been of interest to anthropologists, particularly in light of the fact that it seemingly denies biological evolutionary theory by delimiting the reproductive capabilities of males. No single reason has been found to account for this rare phenomenon, however theorists have compiled a list of common conditions under which this practice may occur. Westermarck identified a quadriad of predictors for polyandry that included a disparity of gender ratios, limited resources, harsh ecological conditions, and the prolonged absences of husbands from the household (Westermarck quoted in Levine & Silk, 1997). Across the Indian Himalayas, Tibet and parts of Sri Lanka, Goldstein (1971) Parmar (1975), Tiwari (2008), Levine and Silk (1997) have identified that polyandry is adopted largely to ensure against the fragmentation of land that is generally inherited equally amongst brothers. Each brother marrying individually would present a significantly higher financial outlay in terms of bride-price, partitioning land and economic interests, and erecting separate dwellings. Often, due to tough environmental conditions limiting the amount of workable land, family estates would prove insufficient to sustain multiple, monogamous families on partitioning (Parmar, 1975). Further, conflicts over inheritance may arise between sisters-in-law, each prioritising the future financial interests of their children (Parmar, 1975, Chattopadhyay, 1994). The practice of polyandry also has significant financial benefits as it increases adult labour allowing for the diversification of economic pursuits resulting in increased wealth and resources for the family corporation (Chattopadhyay, 1994, Haddix, 2001, Tiwari, 2008). Other advantages of polyandry include population control; higher ratios of adults to children, and providing a constant male guardian for wife and children; essentially affecting the homeostatic regulation of consumers to resources (Levine & Silk, 1997, Haddix, 2001, Tiwari, 2008). These advantages afford polyandrous families an innovative avenue to counter problems arising from ecological and economic circumscription, while ensuring both their personal survival and the success and wealth of the family corporation. While this group of predicating factors fits in neatly with polyandrous communities across the Himalayan region, it fails to provide a complete justification for the practice of polyandry, nor can it reliably predict its occurrence. There are many regions throughout the world, and indeed, regions of the Himalayas, in which all of the above determinants for polyandry exist, and yet polyandry does not (Berreman, 1962, Chattopadhyay, 1994). There are also instances of polyandry