Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:49, 12 August 2007

The history of slavery in India (or the Indian subcontinent) is complicated by the presence of factors which relate to the definition, ideological and religious perceptions, difficulties in obtaining and interpreting written sources, and perceptions of political impact of interpretations of written sources (See introductory discussion in Levi, (9)). If current scholarly interpretations of various literary sources are accepted, then slavery as forced appropriation of labour, skill or sexual gratification appears to have existed in various forms from the pre-500 BCE period. Some scholars however refer to interpretations that associates escalation or intensification or extension of slavery with rulers, elite, military commanders, political regimes professing Islam (beginning 7th century CE), as ideologically motivated (Cf. C. Levi’s comments in the footnote of (9)). Similar charges of ideological motivations on the part of historians who find associations of slavery with non-Islamic regimes, are absent, and hence there is a greater convergence of opinions in favour of the existence and extent of various forms of slavery in the Indian subcontinent prior to the advent of Islam(4,6,7,8,10).

Prior to 500 BCE

The Vedic association of "Dasas" with "slaves" has been challenged by some scholars, and is currently held to be debatable (4,9).

Early period - 500 BCE to 500 CE

In the early period (500BCE-500 CE), where we first have significant amount of written records mainly in the form of literature and legal or policy texts, we find features of slavery as practised to have significant differences from contemporary slave-economies such as that of Greece and Rome - such as the absence of records of regular slave markets, or presence of legal strictures restricting abuse and exploitation of slaves.(1,3)

The primary relevant textual source attributed to this period is “Arthasastra” (3) whose author is given to be “Kautilya” (once in the text as VishnuGupta), and usually referred to by later authors as “Chanakya” (patronymic). If the main body of the text was indeed finalized within the early period of the Mauryan era (in the 4th century BCE), Arthasastra, provides some important clues on the extent and nature of slavery during this period. Apart from scattered references, the main relevant portion is chapter 13, book III, which discusses slavery under the significant title “rules regarding slaves and labourers”. The sale or mortgage of the life of an “Arya” is only conditionally permitted under legal court orders or to recover legal costs or combat financial hardships of the family or clan, by kinsmen only of the sold. The definition of “Arya” in this context is clearly stated to include all castes, (and even a “Sudra” if he is born a “Arya”). However such sale by kinsmen are still to be penalized by fines (3). If the sellers are not kinsmen, then such sellers are liable to face not only fines but also capital punishment. Arthasastra categorically states that the “Arya” cannot be enslaved, although it allows enslavement of offspring by the “mlechchas” (at this period probably includes anyone from the western hinterland of the Indian subcontinent) as a customary practice of the latter (pp 230-234,(3)).
The slave appears to have retained degrees of control over money, property, right to compensation or wage for labour, and had the right of redeem (nishkraya), and deceiving or depriving a slave of these rights is also a punishable offence. Slavery also appears to have been of limited duration or of temporary status, as only two specific conditions are given for slavery for life(3). Employing a slave to carry the dead, or to sweep ordure, urine, remnant of meal, stripping or keeping in nudity, hurting or abusing, violating the chastity (of a female slave), causes the forfeiture of the value paid for the slave (although it is not clear whether this earns the slave his or her freedom). In the same paragraph, however, it is stated that the violation of the chastity of nurses, female cooks, or female servants of the class of joint cultivators or of any other category shall at once earn them their liberty. A master’s connections with a nurse or pledged female slave “against her will” is a punishable offence, (for a stranger the degree of offence is higher), and “rape” is specifically mentioned as particularly offensive with high penalties as well as forfeiture of sale price (3). In fact if a child is born to the female slave as a result of sexual union with the master, then the mother and child have to be freed immediately.
For an “Arya”, slavery appears to have been limited to the person who has sold himself, and not automatically to his family or offspring, as the status of the offspring as “Arya” is categorically emphasized. A slave is also guaranteed to not only whatever he has earned without prejudice to his master’s work, but also any inheritance he has received from his father.
As for prisoners of war, enslavement does not appear to have been automatic, as it is stated that an Arya who is captured in war can only be ransomed for an amount proportionate to the damage or dangerous work done by the captive at the time of his capture (or half the amount)(3).

Early medieval period - 500 CE to 1200 CE

Medhatithi(1) observes that 'the captive of war' mentioned by Manu (VIII. 415) does not refer to the ksatriya made captive in war but to the slave who after the defeat of his owner is brought over and enslaved by the captor. Sometimes feudal invasions resulted in the abduction or enslavement of the people in the invaded territories.
Lekhapaddhati(2) mentions girls to have been brought from raids on other countries and sold into slavery. The fact that out of the four documents on slavery the Lekhapaddhati assigns two to this type indicates the frequency of such a practice. In one document a certain Rana sri Pratapasimha is said to have brought the girl in question from an attack made on a foreign state(2).
In the second document a certain rajaputra is said to have captured the girl when fighting in the service of mahamandalesvara ranaka sri Viradhavaladeva in his attack on Maharastra(2), when many people were sold into slavery. The document does not record proper names of the buyers and sellers but uses the expression 'so and so' implying that several general drafts were made so that the names of the buyers and sellers could be entered when the sale was finalised.
General economic condition of the people deteriorated and was one of the factors contributing towards slavery. Medhatithi, comments on the practice of the debtor being made to repay the debt by selling himself, and observes that it is an instance of local and king-made laws which are contrary to the Smrtis and therefore are not to be obeyed(1). During famines, which are frequent during this period, offering oneself up for slavery was an acceptable means of survival. Natural calamities, feudal plundering and frequent Turko-Afghan and Arab raids also impoverished the people. Lekhapaddhati recognised these factors in a document which describes how as a result of a Muslim invasion and plunder, a famine visited a village leading to its abandonment. A village girl unable to support herself from begging had to request people to accept her as a slave(2). Here, personal names of the slave and the purchaser are omitted indicating that such transactions were quite common.

Late Medieval period : 1200 CE to 1800 CE

Modern period: 1800 CE to 2000 CE

References
Manusmrti with the Manubhasya of Medhatithi. Ed. G. Jha. Calcutta, 1932-39. Tr. G. Jha. Calcutta, 1922-29. Ed. with the commentary of Kulluka (Manvarthamuktavati). Ed. N. R. Acharya. Bombay, 1946.
Lekhapaddhati. Ed. C. D. Dalal and G. K. Shrigondekar. Baroda, 1925.
Arthasastra, Ed. and tr., R.D. Shyamasastry, Government Press, Bangalore, 1915.
Uma Chakravarti, `Of Dasas and Karmakaras: Servile Labour in Ancient India', in Patnaik and Dingwaney, Chains of Servitude, p. 37.
K. S. Lal, Muslim Slave System in Medieval India (New Delhi, 1994)
Salim Kidwai, `Sultans, Eunuchs and Domestics: New Forms of Bondage in Medieval India', in Utsa Patnaik and Manjari Dingwaney (eds), Chains of Servitude: bondage and slavery in India (Madras, 1985).
Anal Kumar Chattopadhyay, Slavery in India (Calcutta, 1959), p. iv;
Indrani Chatterjee, Gender, Slavery and Law in Colonial India (New Delhi, 1999).
C. Scott Levi, Hindus Beyond the Hindu Kush: Indians in the Central Asian Slave Trade, JRAS, Series 3, 12, 3 (2002), pp. 277-288
Utsa Patnaik and Manjari Dingwaney (eds), Chains of Servitude: bondage and slavery in India (Madras, 1985).

• History of India
• Slavery by location