05 Slavery

Context

Slavery has existed as a constant element in the social and economic life of all nations of antiquity such as Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome and also of many nations of Europe.¹ It was however left to such Christian nations of the West as England and the United States of America to carry on the institution of slavery in the most horrible manner possible never dreamt of by any nation of antiquity, viz. by sending out kidnapping expeditions to Africa to collect slaves, to huddle them in ships in such unspeakably filthy conditions that half of them died on the voyage, to sell them to plantation owners and others like chattel.

Westermarck in his ‘Origin and Development of the Moral Ideas’ vol. I (1912) p. 711 was constrained to observe ‘This system of slavery, which at least in the British colonies and slave states surpassed in cruelty the slavery of any pagan country ancient and modern, was not only recognised by Christian Governments but was supported by the large bulk of the clergy, Catholic and Protestant alike.’ Slavery was abolished in the British Dominions only in 1833 and in British India by Act V of 1843.

dAsa records

It has been seen above (pp. 26-27) that the word ‘dāsa’ in the Ṛg. generally stands for the opponents of the Āryas. It is possible that when the dāsas were vanquished in battle and taken prisoners they were treated as slaves. In the Ṛgveda, however, there are not many passages where the word ‘dāsa’ can be said to have been used in the sense of slave. In Ṛg VIII. 56. 3² we read ’thou madest a gift to me of one hundred donkeys, of one hundred fleece-bearing ewes and one hundred dāsas’. It appears that here dāsa means slaves or serfs. In Ṛg VIII. 5. 38 the sage praises his patron Caidya Kaśu ’the common people sit down at the feet of Caidya Kaśu like men crowding round tanners of hides, (Caidya) who honoured me by giving me ten noblemen that were like gold in appearance’. Here probably there is an allusion to the gift of ten captured nobles made to the sage by Caidya Kaśu, the victor.

A sage declares in Ṛg. VIII. 19. 36 ‘Trasadasyu, son of Purukutsa, gave me fifty young women’. This probably refers to the gift of female slaves (dāsīs). The Tai. S. VII. 5. 10. 1 says “dāsīs (girl slaves) place on their heads jars full of water and singing this madhu and beating their feet against the ground dance round the mārjālīya’ &c.”³

The Tai. S. II. 2. 6. 3 refers to the gift of a horse or a male (slave). ‘He obtains a portion of himself who accepts (in gift) a being with two rows of teeth, (such as) a horse or a human male; on accepting an animal with two rows of teeth one should offer to Vaiśvānara a mess cooked on twelve potsherds’.⁴

The Ait. Br. 39. 8 mentions large gifts such as 10,000 girls (dāsī) and 10,000 elephants made by a king to his purohita performing coronation. When the angel of Death tries to dissuade Naciketas from his curiosity to know the destiny of a person after death, he tempts the inquirer (Kaṭha Up. I. 1. 25).

‘Here are such handsome women with chariots and musical instruments as cannot be secured (ordinarily) by men; make them, when gifted by me, serve you; do not ask me what happens after death’.

The women referred to were probably meant to be serving (or slave) girls who attended on a man as maids and who could dance and sing.

In the Bṛ. Up. IV. 4. 23 Janaka after receiving instruction in Brahmavidyā from Yājñavalkya exclaims

‘I make a gift to your honour of the Videhas together with myself for being your slave’.

We read in the Chān. Up.

‘In this world they speak of cows and horses, elephants and gold, wives and slaves, fields and houses as mahimā (greatness)’. [[181]]

Vide also Chān. Up. V. 13. 2 and Bṛ. Up. VI. 2. 7 for references to dāsīs. These passages show that in the Vedic period men and women had become the subjects of gifts and so were in the condition of slaves. [[182]]

śūdra not slave

Though Manu ordained (I. 91, VIII. 413, 414) that the principal duty of the śūdra was to wait upon the three higher castes or that the śūdra was created by the Creator for the service of brāhmaṇas, the śūdra who thus served a dvijāti as a duty was not his slave.+++(4)+++

Jaimini (VI. 7. 6)⁵ makes this perfectly clear by saying that when a man makes a gift in the Viśvajit sacrifice of everything belonging to himself he cannot make a gift of the śūdra who waits upon him as his duty. Śabara in his bhāṣya adds

’the śūdra may not desire to serve the man to whom the sacrificer gives his all and the latter has no power over him if he is unwilling.’

We have seen how the Gṛhya Sūtras speak of dāsas being employed to wash the feet of honoured guests.

Humane treatment

It appears that the ideal placed before the masters was to treat the slave humanely. Āp. Dh. S. II. 4. 9. 11⁶ says that one may indeed stint oneself, one’s wife or son (as to food) if guests come, but never a dāsa who does one’s menial work (or a dāsa and hired servants).

Gift, not Sale

In the Anuśāsana parva⁷ it is stated ‘one should not sell a human being who is a stranger; how much more one’s own children’. In the Mahābhārata gifts of dāsas and dāsīs are very frequently mentioned. In Sabhāparva 52. 45, Vanaparva 233. 43 and Virāṭa 18. 21 gifts of 30 dāsīs to each of 88000 snātaka brāhmaṇas are spoken of. In Vanaparva 185.

34 Vainya is said to have given a thousand handsome dāsīs with ornaments on to Atri. Vide Droṇaparva 57. 5-9.

Punishment

Manu (VIII. 299-300) places a slave on the same level as one’s son in the matter of corporal punishment

’the wife, the son, the slave, a menial servant, one’s full brother—these when guilty of wrong may be beaten with a rope [[183]] or a thin piece of split bamboo, but only on the back and never on the head and if a person beat them otherwise he would be punished as a thief.’

Provenance over time

Slavery was probably not much⁸ in evidence in India in the 4th century B.C. or the treatment of slaves in India was so good that a foreign observer like Megasthenes accustomed to the treatment of slaves in Greece thought that there was no slavery. Megasthenes (MacCrindle, p. 71) states that none of the Indians employs slaves (vide Strabo XV. 1. 54).

That slavery existed then admits of no doubt. The Emperor Aśoka when proclaiming his Law of Piety enjoins in his 9th Rock Edict that the Law of Piety consists (among other things) in the kind (or proper) treatment of slaves (dāsas) and hired servants.

Arthaśāstra

Slave eligibility

In the Arthaśāstra (III. 13) Kauṭilya⁹ gives very important provisions about slaves. He says that the mlecchas are not punishable if they sell or pledge their children, but an Ārya cannot be reduced to slavery. He then prescribes that if a relative sells or pledges a śūdra (who is not born as a slave) or a vaiśya or kṣatriya or a brāhmaṇa (all being minors), he should be respectively fined 12, 24, 36 and 48 paṇas and that if a stranger sells or pledges the above then the vendor, the vendee and the abettors will be liable to the first, middle and highest amercements and whipping respectively (i. e. first amercement for sale of a śūdra by a stranger and whipping for the sale of a brāhmaṇa). But he allows the pledge of even an ārya in family distress.

He refers to several kinds of slaves viz. dhvajāhṛta (captured in battle), ātmavikrayin (who sells himself), udaradāsa (or garbhadāsa, one who is born to a dāsī from a slave) or those so made for a debt (āhitika), or for a fine or court’s decree (daṇḍapraṇīta). He then prescribes how they are set free from slavery.

One who sells himself or is pledged or is born a slave becomes a free man by paying off respectively the amount for which he was purchased or pledged or what would be a proper price.

One who is made a slave for a fine may pay off the fine by doing work.

One captured in war may become free by paying according to the time he has been in bondage and the work he did or by paying half of it.

The child of one who sells himself [[184]] remains an ārya (free man).

Abuse punishment

He prescribes that if a master makes a pledged slave carry a corpse or sweep ordure, urine or leavings of food, or keeps him naked, beats him or abuses him or violates the chastity of a female slave, he forfeits the price paid by him.

He prescribes the first amercement for a master having intercourse with a pledged slave girl against her will and middle amercement for a stranger doing so.

Manu categories

Manu (VIII. 415) speaks of seven kinds of dāsas, viz. one captured in battle, one who becomes so for food (i. e. in scarcity or in a famine), one born in the house (i. e. of a female slave), one bought, one given (by his parents or relatives), one inherited (as part of the patrimony), one who becomes so for paying off a fine or judicial decree.

He states the general rule¹⁰ that the wife, the son and the slave have no wealth and whatever they earn belongs to him whose wife, son or slave they are.

Manu prescribes a fine of 600 paṇas for a brāhmaṇa making a member of the dvijāti castes after his upanayana a slave against his will.

Other categorization

Nārada (abhyupetyāśuśrūṣā) and Kātyāyana among the smṛtikāras contain the most elaborate treatment on slavery. Nārada first says that a śuśrūṣaka (one who serves another) is of five kinds viz. a Vedic student, an antevāsin (an apprentice who is learning a craft), adhikarmakṛt (a supervisor over workmen), bhṛtaka (hired servant) and dāsa. The first four are called karmakara.

They can be called upon to do only work that is pure, while a dāsa may have to do impure work¹¹ such as cleaning the entrances to the house, filthy pits (for leavings of food), the road, dunghill heaps, touching (or scratching) private parts, taking up and throwing away ordure and urine (verses 6-7), doing bodily service to the master if he so desires.

Nārada mentions 15 kinds of slaves viz. one born in the house, one bought, one acquired (by gift or other means), [[185]] one inherited, one saved in a time of famine, one pledged by the master, one discharged from a large debt, one captured in a battle, one vanquished in a bet, one who accepts slavery by saying ‘I am yours’, an apostate from the order of asceticism, one who stipulates to be a slave (for a certain time), one who is a slave for food (as long as food is given to him), one who is tempted to become a slave out of love for a female slave, and one who sells himself.

Winning Freedom

Nārada says that the first four of these are not freed from slavery except by the favour of the master (v. 29), while one who sells himself is the worst kind of slave and he also does not become free from slavery (v. 37). Nārada (v. 30) and Yāj. (II. 182) state a rule applicable to all slaves, viz. that when a slave saves a master from imminent danger to the latter’s life the slave becomes a free man and (Nārada adds) that he gets a share in the inheritance as a son.

One who is an apostate from the order of ascetics is a slave of the king till the former’s death (Yāj. II. 183).

One saved in a famine becomes free by giving a pair of cows, one pledged¹² if the master who pledged him repays the debt, the slave in lieu of discharge of debt by paying off the debt with interest, one who accepted slavery or who was captured in battle or became so under a bet is freed by giving a substitute who is equal to him in work, one for a stipulated period by the lapse of the period, one who is a bhakta-dāsa becomes free by the master ceasing to give food, one who is ‘vaḍavāhṛta’ (tempted by a female slave) by abandoning his intercourse with her (Nārada vv. 31-34, 36). Yāj. (II. 182) and Nārada (V. 38) say that one who was made a slave by force or was carried away by raiders and sold should be set free by the king.

varNa

Yāj. (II. 183) and Nārada (v. 39) prescribe that a man can be a slave to a master only in the proper order of varṇas¹³ i. e. the three varṇas next to a brāhmaṇa may be slaves to a brāhmaṇa, a vaiśya or a śūdra may be a slave to a kṣatriya but a kṣatriya cannot be the slave of a vaiśya or a śūdra, nor a vaiśya of a śūdra. There is one exception viz. an apostate from asceticism may be the slave of a vaiśya or a śūdra [[186]] king.

Kātyāyana emphasizes that a brāhmaṇa¹⁴ cannot be made a slave even to a brāhmaṇa, but if he himself chooses, he may do pure work for a brāhmaṇa endowed with character and Vedic learning, but no impure work.

Kātyāyana (v. 721) says that when a brāhmaṇa becomes an apostate from the order of asceticism he should be banished from the kingdom and the kṣatriya or vaiśya apostate may become a slave to the king.

Dakṣa (VII. 33) quoted by Aparārka (p. 787) adds that the apostate’s head should be branded with the mark of a dog’s foot.

Slave mother freed

Kauṭilya¹⁵ and Kātyāyana (v. 723) both declare that if a master has sexual intercourse with a female slave and she is delivered of a child, both the slave and the child should be given freedom by the master.

Inheritence

Kauṭilya declared that the heirs to the wealth of a slave are his relatives and if none of them exist then the master, while Kātyāyana¹⁶ says that the only wealth that the slave can call his own is the price he received for selling himself or what the master gave as a gift through favour.

Manumission

Nārada (vv. 42-43) describes the ceremony of the manumission of a slave

“when a master being pleased with a slave desires to make him a free man, he should take, from the slave’s shoulder, a jar full of water and break it, he should sprinkle water mixed with whole grains of rice and flowers on the slave’s head and thrice uttering the words ‘you are no longer a slave’ he should dismiss him with the (slave’s) face to the east.”

Adoption

The Vyavahāramayūkha¹⁷ quotes a verse from the Kalikāpurāṇa about an adopted son, which is very interesting ‘persons adopted and the like on whom the saṃskāras of cūḍā (tonsure) and Upanayana are performed by the gotra of the adopter, become sons of (the adopter), otherwise the person on whom such ceremonies are not performed is held to be a slave [[187]] (of the adopter).’

The Vyavahāramayūkha remarks that this passage is not reliable as it is not found in several mss. of the Kalikāpurāṇa.

Nārada mentions 15 kinds of slaves, but this is not one of them. All that the Kalikāpurāṇa probably means is that when a boy is adopted into another family after his cūḍā and upanayana are performed in the family of birth, he is not fully affiliated in the family of adoption, he does not become a son and so does not take the inheritance but is only entitled to maintenance in the family of adoption, just as a slave is to be fed. No digests have recognised such a person as a slave proper.

Debt

Nārada¹⁸ (ṛṇādāna 12) and Kātyāyana declare that a debt contracted by a Vedic pupil, an apprentice, a slave, the wife, a menial servant and a workman for the benefit of the family even though it was incurred in his absence, was binding on the owner of the house.

Witness

Ordinarily a slave was not a competent witness, but Manu VIII. 70 and Uśanas (quoted in Vyavahāramayūkha p. 37) say that when no other witness is available, a minor, an old man, a woman, a pupil, a relative, a slave or a hired servant may be a witness.

Works on slavery

There are numerous works dealing with slavery in its various aspects. The latest book on the subject is ‘Slavery through the Ages’ by Sir George Mac Munn (1939). Mr. D. R. Banaji has published a very painstaking and interesting study on ‘Slavery in British India’ from 1772 to 1843 (2nd ed. 1937). The Carnegie Institution of Washington has published studies on several aspects such as ‘Judicial Cases’ (by Mrs. Catterall in 1926) and ‘Documents of the history of the Slave Trade to America, 1930’ by Prof. Elizabeth Donnan. Dr. H. J. Nieboer’s ‘Slavery as an Industrial System’ (1910) is a well documented study of slavery in various countries and at various times.