Minimalist IAS
Prelims 2022 paper

UPSC CSE Prelims 2022 · Question 60 · The Mauryan empire

According to Kautilya's Arthashastra, which of the following are correct?

Prelims 2022 · Q60

The Mauryan empire Hard

According to Kautilya's Arthashastra, which of the following are correct?

  1. 1.A person could be a slave as a result of a judicial punishment.
  2. 2.If a female slave bore her master a son, she was legally free.
  3. 3.If a son born to a female slave was fathered by her master, the son was entitled to the legal status of the master's son.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

Answer & explanation

Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only

UPSC's official answer: (b) · the answer UPSC accepted, and the one that counts in the exam

Also defensible: (d)

  • Statements 2 and 3 are undisputed: 'if a female slave bore her master a son, not only was she legally free but the child was entitled to the legal status of the master's son' (NIOS, following Romila Thapar).
  • Statement 1 has textual support. Shamasastry's translation of Book III, chapter 13 reads 'any person who has been enslaved for fines or court decrees (dandapranitah) shall earn the amount by work', and the NIOS textbook says a man could become a slave 'as a result of a judicial punishment'. On that reading all three are correct, option (d).
  • UPSC's key leaves 1 out, and the text supports that too: Kautilya lays down that 'never shall an Arya be subjected to slavery', lists slaves as born, inherited, bought, pledged, self-sold or captured in war, and Kangle's critical edition reads 3.13.18 as a man sentenced to a fine working it off, not as enslavement.
  • So the answer turns on whether working off a court fine counts as slavery: the historians' summary says yes (d); the text's own categories say no (b).

UPSC's key counts only statements 2 and 3; historians' accounts and Shamasastry's translation support statement 1 too, giving (d). In the exam, go with (b), and treat 'slavery by judicial punishment' as a historian's gloss rather than Kautilya's own rule.

This box is Minimalist IAS's analysis, with its sources; it does not change UPSC's answer.

Statements 2 and 3 are correct: a female slave who bore her master a son was legally free, and the child took the legal status of the master's son. UPSC's key does not count statement 1: Kautilya lays down that an Arya cannot be reduced to slavery, lists slaves as those born in the house, inherited, bought, pledged, self-sold or captured in war, and treats a man sentenced to a fine as one who works the fine off, not as a slave.

  • ✗ 1. The Arthashastra (Book III, ch. 13) says 'never shall an Arya be subjected to slavery'; a man pledged to raise money for a fine or decree must be redeemed, and one sentenced to a fine works it off (3.13.18). Judicial punishment is not among the text's own categories of slaves: born in the house, inherited, bought, pledged, self-sold, captured in war.
  • ✓ 2. If a female slave bore her master a son, she was legally free.
  • ✓ 3. Such a child was entitled to the legal status of the master's son.

Remember · Arthashastra on slaves (dasa): no slavery for an Arya; a slave-mother who bore her master a son became free, and her son took the legal status of the master's son.

Sources

Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2022, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 1 Oct 2026 (how we verify). ·

More on The Mauryan empire

All The Mauryan empire questions →

Same topic in the Mains syllabus