NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF STUDY & RESEARCH

IN LAW, RANCHI.

Research Paper
On

RIGHT TO MAINTENANCE OF A WIDOWED DAUGHTER-IN-LAW

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

MS. SREEMOYEE SARKAR YASH SRIVASTAVA

HISTORY SEMESTER III
ROLL NO. 906
 INTRODUCTION

Prostitution a significant social issue and a crime is legally sanctioned by the western
countries. However in the under-developed and developing countries, women are forced to
take this profession largely due to abject poverty and for their daily bread and therefore
become victims of gambling, exploitation by men, drinking and other allied vices. Ancient
India was not an exception to the institution of prostitution and gave impetus to a
systematically organised institute of harlots. The Mauryan
state under the foster care of Chanakya recognised prostitution
as a part and parcel of the society and not a crime as in the
words of Bernard Shaw "was a necessary evil."A study on the
Arthašāstra, the masterpiece on State craft reveals various
aspects of royal administration in ancient India. It is proved
beyond doubt and widely accepted that its author Kautilya was
a matured social and political thinker who could produce such
a treatise in Sanskrit during the early Mauryan era for providing a complete guide line for the
then rulers with an intention to establish an ideal and welfare State in which all minute details
of State policies on administration are dealt with. Even he never hesitated to deal with an
ignoble social affair called prostitution and laid down administrative provisions in this regard
for yielding maximum benefit to the State and simultaneously keeping his view on the overall
welfare of the practitioners. Intelligently enough he could realize the fact that sex business, an
age old practice, is impossible to be abolished.

CLASSIFICATION

Chanakya who conceived this profession as lucrative, regulated the duties and activities of a
prostitute contained in Arthasastra. He has tried to focus attention on the purpose and benefits
of the office of prostitution. Chanakya1 divided the institute of harlots into three categories as
follows:
a) Royal prostitutes
b) City-level prostitutes

1
Kautilya s Arthasastra. Translated and edited by R. Shamasastry, Bangalore, 1915, Book. Il, Chapter. XXVII,
pp. 153
c) Private prostitute or a group of prostitutes under the control of a private person.

All the three classes of harlots were under the control of the state. The institution as a whole
yielded an enormous amount of income to the state exchequer and it is quite likely that
unemployment on the part of woman would have been solved. The estamped harlots of the
Mauryan empire were connotated as “ganikas” which denotes a prostitute and also
government servant.2 The other terms used by Chanakya are pratiganika , rupajiva , Vesya ,
dasi , devadasi , pwnschali , silpakarika , kausikastri and rupadasi which meant special kinds
of prostitutes The individual prostitute i.e. rupajiva3 according to the politician was not a
government servant and the reason for it is obscure.

The superintendent of the prostitutes was known as Ganikadhyaksa who was appointed by
the King. His main duty was to keep an eye on the prostitutes' conduct, ensure her regular
payment of tax to the state, gifts obtained and the number of paramours entertained by her.4
Further his duty involved a close effort of limiting her earnings, inheritance (aya), daily
expenditure, items of extravagance5 and future earnings (ayati). The King paid the monthly
salary to the ganika but her earnings went to the state6 a feature seems to be justified in
calling the system as a primitive form of communism.

CATEGORIES AND SALARY

The harlots were classified into three categories

based on the rank i.e., the first, middle and
highest. They were paid according to the rank
held by them. The ganika employed for the
royal palace received 1000 panas7, as her yearly
salary and the same amount was paid to a
prostitute of the middle rank. The highest rank i e., Royal prostitute got 3000 panas.8
Chanakya also speaks of a rival prostitute (pratiganika) and private prostitutes on a payment
of 500 panas yearly. It seems that these promiscuous women were at times not loyal to the

2
Sternbach, L , Juridical studies in Ancient Indian Law , pt. I, p. 19
3
Arthasastra , Bk. II, p. 155.
4
Ibid, p 153.
5
Ibid, p. 154.
6
Ibid, p. 153.
7
Ibid.
8
Ibid.
state and hence pratiganika was created to act as a spy among her associates. Without any
fear of contradiction one can say that these pratiganikas were part and parcel of the state
prostitution and investigation bureau.

REGULATION

Arthasastra also gives a gist of the prostitute's bio-data. The state

guaranteed her essential commodities and ensured her safety.9 If the
prostitute emigrated or if she died her duty was taken over by her
sister or daughter (if she attained maturity) who were eligible for the
same pay and property. If none were available the prostitute's mother
had to hire another harlot in the place. Chanakya is stern enough to
forfeit her property to the government in the absence of any.10

Further Chanakya was careful enough to ensure that the prostitutes who were in regular
service and later due to old age proved themselves incompetent to carry out their profession
were not reduced to a disreputable position. In turn he appointed them as nurses (matrikas)11
analogous to the Ganikadhyaksa. It is not clear whether men alone were appointed as
superintendents for the Institute of Harlots. It is quite possible that even women referred to as
matrikas by Chanakya must have held the post of Deputy Superintendent or superintendent.

Freedom to the prostitutes was granted on a payment of 24,000 panas as ransom to the
state.12 It is clear-cut that as she was a government servant, the state lost its income due to her
withdrawal from the profession of a harlot.

INSTITUTE OR SCHOOL OF PROSTITUTES

Besides her regular duty she had to do the work of bathrooms as shampooers, bedding-room
attendants, washerwoman, flower-garland makers and provided to procure scents, scented
water, fragrant powder and costumes for the place. Above all the female slaves or prostitutes
were present for handing over these articles to the King, which was considered as a sign of
respect. The Mauryan government also appointed several teachers to teach different kinds of

9
Arthasastra , Bk. II, p.153
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
arts to the prostitutes. Chanakya also speaks of a prostitute eight years old giving a musical
concert before the ruler,13 probably an early training to attain all the characteristics of a well
accomplished prostitute for becoming an expert in her youthful stage. They were also well-
trained who knew several languages for performing the task of detecting the wicked criminals
and the foreign spies.

PUNISHMENTS AND FINES

A ganika was expected to follow the strict stipulations laid down by the emperor and
violation meant heavy punishment. For example a prostitute mortgaging her property
(Svapateyam) was fined 50 panas and 24 to 48 panas for speaking ill of others or hurting. At
the same time Chanakya warns the citizens not to spoil the institute of harlots.14 The
strumpets were cautioned not to carry on this profession at a minor age and a person
assaulting her was liable for the maximum amercement.15

From a proper study of the institution of prostitution as mentioned in Arthasastra, it is clear

that during the Mauryan age the prostitute was a highly respected government servant. The
amount of punishment was fixed according to the rate of crime committed.

Cheating was not allowed and the harlot was fined based on the paramour's decision. But in
cases if the paramour happens to be unassociable due to internal disease or personal defects,
the prostitute had all authority to check him out. From this it is evident that both prostitutes
and the paramour had to undergo periodical medical check up in the Mauryan state.

The usual tax paid by the prostitutes monthly to the government was double the amount of
their daily earnings (bhogadvigunam) and the rupajiva who were not the government servants
had to pay 1 /15th (6.6%) of their income as tax to the state.

Thus it can be conjectured that the idea of creating such institution must have been politically
motivated to collect details about the hostile neighbours, their plans etc. and secondly the
state received 30% of income through the institution of harlots. Chanakya did not think of the
rehabilitation of women, the reason for it is that this vice (prostitution) had its origin initially

13
Ibid, P. 153-156.
14
Ibid, p. 154.
15
Ibid.
among the Royal officials which later spread to the town level. Chanakya was helpless in
banning this institute as it was forced on him to create.

CONCLUSION

Prostitution always remains a debatable issue. Whether its validity or social ambiguous
attitude towards it which remain unchanged from ancient to modern period. But the
most important question remain in isolation
is that how it has been survived so many
years irrespective society’s rival attitude
towards it? From the ancient perspective the
answer of this question is - prostitution not
only remained a medium of survival for a
section of women, it also played a great role in building state’s economy as well as
the society for its own needs wanted this institution to survive in ancient India as we
can see through the study of Mauryan empire. The main question of my project is –
What was the nature of prostitution in Mauryan era? Was it a matter of shame or respect
in ancient time? These questions have ambiguous answer as the term “ RESPECT” is quite
ambiguous as in one hand ganikas got high respect but also paid a price for it and
most of ordinary prostitutes didn’t even have that luck. In other hand the term
“SHAME” is also very ambiguous as society alienated itself from them & looked
upon them as something shameful but at the same time didn’t shame to use their
charity or most importantly didn’t shame to take their service at all. So both the
words-SHAME & RESPECT have ambiguous meaning in ancient time in respect of
prostitution.
 REFERENCES

 Sternbach Ludwick, 1951, “Legal position of prostitutes according to Kautilya’s

Arthasastra”, Journal of American Oriental Society, 11.
 Kangle R.P., (Ed. and Tr.) 1960, The Kautiliya Arthašāstra, part I and II, University of
Bombay.
 Thakur Vijaykumar, 1973 “Some facets of prostitutes in India,” Journal of Bihar
Research Society, Patna.
 Sahoo P.C., 2010, “The Arthasastra On Prostitution”, Deccan College Post-Graduate and
Research Institute (Deemed University), Pune.
 Kuppuram G., 1979, “Chanakya On Prostitution (Based on Arthasastra)”, Proceedings of
the Indian History Congress, 40.