139 JOURNAL OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY OF MUMBAI, ISSN: 0972-0766, Vol. XCVI, No.

16, 2023

INTERLINKAGES BETWEEN PROPERTY AND MATRONAGE IN THE PATRIARCHAL

SOCIETY: A PEEP IN EARLY HISTORIC AND EARLY MEDIEVAL INDIA

Dr. Snigdha Singh, Department of History, Miranda House, University of Delhi, Delhi, India.

Abstract
This paper is an attempt to provide an overview of property relations in the early historic and early
medieval India. The aim of the paper is to highlight that women did have access to property even if it
was in a limited way and maybe for a limited purpose. The idea is also to re-examine the existing
notions and to relook at the sources with different sets of questions to enable us to receive different set
of answers. I have used two archaeological sources, epigraphy and sculpture to highlight that women
did have an economic agency as they made gifts in individual capacity. I have also tried to highlight
evidence of a few queens who made gifts only to point out that one needs to corroborate literary,
epigraphic and sculptural sources to get a wholesome history.

Keywords: inheritance, gender, matronage, property, epigraphy, sculpture, laity, bhikkhuni,

interlinkage, queens, shrines/temples.

Introduction
In this paper I will try to delineate the interlinkages that existed between property and
patronage/matronage. I have used different genres of sources; literary, epigraphic and sculptural to try
and highlight the evidence of this interlinkage. I will also try to scoop out information from epigraphic
and sculptural sources to glean if there is any discrepancy between the literary and epigraphic or
sculptural sources or are they all in tune with each other. As the title suggests I would try to focus on
property owned by women who could have belonged to different households and different regions in
north India.

Strīdhana: I begin this paper by focusing on what can be termed as the property of women, that is,
strīdhana. The normative texts interpret it to mean ‘women’s property’ in its literal sense. It is
important to know what comprises this property. According to the normative texts whatever was
acquired by a woman through gift, purchase, inheritance and partition were supposed to be classified
as strīdhana. Though different law-givers had their own interpretation to the classification of strīdhana.
According to Manu smṛiti, six types of property could be classified as strīdhana. These were gifts
received before the nuptial fire, gifts received during the bridal procession, gifts received from in-laws
and relatives during the marriage ceremony, gifts received from father, mother and brother. Viṣṇu-
smṛiti added another kind of gift in the list of Manu-smṛiti. According to Viṣṇu-smṛiti when a husband
remarried, he gave gifts to his former wife which constituted her strīdhana. The views of Yajñavalkya-
smṛiti were similar to those of Viṣṇu-smṛiti though Kātyāyana-smṛiti included gifts made by strangers
as strīdhana. Another important aspect that was added by Kātyāyana-smṛiti was the concept of
saudāyika. Saudāyika was gift received by the maiden from her parents and brother during the marriage
ceremonies. According to Kātyāyana-smṛiti a woman had absolute power over this gift, thereby
entailing that her husband does not enjoy any right over this property (Singh, 2018, pp. 8571-8580).
If one tries to look into the meaning of the term dampatni used during the Ṛg Veda it literally meant
co-owner. This meant that dampatni was co-owner of the family property but interestingly despite
being owner she could not ask for partition of the property. Thus in reality she could only enjoy the
family property and was never the actual co-owner of the property. This was explained by giving
various reasons by the law-givers, for example, Baudhayana said women lacked ‘certain’ juices
therefore could not inherit property. Manu-smṛiti claimed that because women lacked valour, they
were unable to defend their families’ property from intrusion. Wealth had to be diverted because
women were unable to make sacrifices by themselves, that is, without their spouses.
140 JOURNAL OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY OF MUMBAI, ISSN: 0972-0766, Vol. XCVI, No.16, 2023

Besides there are certain aspects which seem to govern strīdhana, for example the status of the girl,
whether she is unmarried, married, or widow. Importantly what is the nature of property, moveable
or immoveable. If she was married then which form of marriage did, she follow, anuloma or pratiloma.
Did the husband have absolute control on all her property or only on certain types of property? Property
was also governed by the two school of laws that were prevalent. What seems evident is that according
to most lawgivers strīdhana would devolve on to the daughters except when there were no daughters
but only sons were present in the family. However, certain factors would need to be taken into
consideration. One of the first things to take into cognizance was the form of marriage, anuloma or
pratiloma. When strīdhana is being devolved on daughters then preference would be given to the
unmarried daughter/s and if all were married then preference to the unprovided daughter. The
daughter-in-law does not seem to have any distinctive rights in the property of the family she is married
into. Widows are only caretakers of the property therefore they could use the property of her husband
for maintenance only. She did not have the right to sell or mortgage the property. On the other hand, a
concubine belonging to any of the upper three varṇas were only allowed maintenance whereas a
concubine belonging to a sudra varṇa could inherit property. If a concubine got married then same
method of devolution applies.
The notion of strīdhana varied according to the two schools of law, Mitākṣarā and Dāyabhāga.
Mitākṣarā law did not allow women to inherit but they could only receive maintenance. In reality
women did not have absolute right in any kind of property, not even strīdhana. Dāyabhāga, gave
women absolute control over their strīdhana and they could ask for division of property after their
father’s death. This is the theoretical frame work based on the literary texts.

Re-reading the Text

Sometimes it is also helpful to read the text against the grain and for this I have taken up the theme of
gift-giving in this paper. One knows that gift-making is never a one-way process. It entails
reciprocation. All gifts though in theory is voluntary, disinterested and spontaneous are in fact,
obligatory and interested (Mauss, 1990, p.1). Giving gifts has customarily been seen in light of its
symbolism and generally linked with religious practices. Therefore it is possible to consider gift-giving
as a significant component of the early historic and early medieval period’s social and economic life
because it eventually developed its own laws and standards. The earliest reference of dāna as a distinct
function in society comes from the dāna-stūti hymns of the Ṛg veda (Thapar, 1984, pp.107-110). These
hymns were sung in praise of those who made generous gifts. Here, the gods were invoked and an
appeal was made to them to give aid in the form of victory in tribal wars and cattle raids. After the
war, spoils of war or gifts which were tangible gifts were distributed to the priests and one’s kinsmen.
These gifts consisted of cattle, sheep, goats, horses, weapons, and female slaves. The purpose of the
gifts made here was to ensure success in battle, which gave power and political status to the tribal chief
while for the priests this was a major source of income. Thapar explicitly states that the purpose of
extensively giving gifts in early societies was threefold. It served a magico- religious function where
the gift was symbolic of communion with the supernatural (Thapar, 1984, p.111). Moreover, the donor
and recipient conferred status on each other, and gift giving acted as a means of exchanging and
redistributing economic wealth where women were conspicuous by their absence as they had no role
to play in the political arena but the social arena was different.
According to Findly, the Gṛhya Sūtras prescribed etiquettes for the alms contract of two religious
offices, the brahmācārin and the sanyāsin. The concept of householder as a donor in Vedic religion
was based on hospitable dāna to religious persons that could be done by the householder or by his
wife, who, in the Brahmānic view, acted on behalf of the whole household (Findly, 2003, p.57). This
gives agency to the gahapatnī to decide on gifts to be given therefore a say in economic matters of the
household but not for herself. One needs to keep that distinction in mind.
In contrast to the Vedic paradigm, there was a shift in the Buddhist relationship from household
obligations toward the renunciant to individual matronage/patronage. Majority of donors who helped
141 JOURNAL OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY OF MUMBAI, ISSN: 0972-0766, Vol. XCVI, No.16, 2023

to support the sangha were women—mothers, aunts, wives, sisters, etc. who gave food to their kin
when they approached their doorway begging for food. In this process of social and economic change,
the housemistress had taken centre stage in the religious contract of making dāna, the gahapatnī
emerged as an independent agent. Thus a new autonomy for women in matters of dāna could be
observed (Findly, 2002, pp.13–31). One must remember that the Buddhist encounter was primarily
with the woman of the household, so instead of pure patronage, it is partly a system of pure
‘matronage’.

Epigraphical and Sculptural Evidence

Epigraphical Evidence from Bharhut, Sanchi and Mathura
The question arises if the epigraphical and sculptural source give us the same evidence or is there a
different story that can be delineated from these sources. The data from the epigraphical records and
sculptural evidence give us indication of women alienating property. One of the first aspects that need
to be pointed out is that alienation of property can only happen if women own economic resources.
From the votive inscriptions found at Bharhut, Sanchi and Mathura one finds that women (laywomen
and bhikkhunīs) made donations at these pilgrimage centres in their own name. The gifts bestowed by
women could be small like pavement slabs, coping stones etc. as found at Bharhut and Sanchi. Sanchi
has 3 stūpas and it is interesting to note that at stupa3 most of the donations were gifted by women. At
the other two stūpas also women did not lag behind men in making gifts. They even travelled from
some distance to make their gifts and get it recorded. It is interesting to note that at all the three stūpas
at Sanchi and at Bharhut women were prominent in making donations and getting it recorded. At
Mathura there are a great variety of gifts given by lay women like statues of the Buddha, Boddhisattva,
Tirthankaras, homage tablets etc. The picture that emerges very clearly from these votive inscriptions
is that women did have property to make grants in their individual capacity and in their own name for
their own spiritual benefit. On all the gifts gifted by women or men their names have been inscribed
thereby attesting that women had the agency to make gifts.

Sculptural Evidence from Bharhut

Some of the sculptures gifted at Bharhut give us a similar kind of evidence. I will take into
considerations only two examples from this site to endorse my point of view. From the sculptures
found at Bharhut one can say that these sculptures left an imprint permanently on the minds of people
as the appeal of these representations is immediate and indelible (Mitra, 1980, p.94) and it is with the
help of these sculptures along with the inscriptions written below it that help in the construction of
history of gender. One of the heaviest amongst the pillars was gifted by Chāpa Devāyā. It was richly
carved with three elephants at the base of the pillar wherein the elephant at the centre was the largest
while the two elephants on the two sides were a little smaller than the centre piece. It had the relic
casket and a garudadhvaja. Another example is a statue of a yakhinī gifted by a bhikkhunī. This
sculpture was of Sirimā devatā, an aesthetically carved statue. It has been sculpted with great detailing
like the layered necklace around her neck, tattoo on her forehead, or her folded drapery. The evidence
of donation made by these two women (one lay and the other ecclesiastical) tells us a different story.
Even if one wants to argue that it was done for spiritual merit or that it was not the norm one cannot
deny that exceptions were present to the norm laid down by the Dharmaśāstra. It primarily draws
attention to the fact that women did possess certain property that they were solely responsible for. The
question that always arises, was it their strīdhana over which they had absolute right. Moreover women
may have had their own earnings as women were employed in different kinds of work like basket
making, weaving, body guards, soldier (evidence from a sculpture from Bharhut) etc. (Singh, 2018,
pp.21–62).
142 JOURNAL OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY OF MUMBAI, ISSN: 0972-0766, Vol. XCVI, No.16, 2023

Evidence of Donations made by Regent-Queens and Queens

When one moves ahead in time and comes to the time of the Gupta empire one finds that Prabhāvatī
Guptā, daughter of Chandragupta II was married in the Vakāṭakā family and when her husband died
she became the regent queen (basically a caretaker of the throne for her son). During her reign she
gifted villages to āchāryā, brahmans which has been preserved for posterity in the Poona plate
inscription along with Miregaon plate inscription. Importantly there was no real difference in the
recording of the gifts given by Prabhāvatī or by other male members from the family. Prabhāvatī’s
daughter, Atibhavati, constructed a temple of Nṛsimba which was named Prabhāvatīsvāmin (deity
named after mother). This is a rare evidence of deity or places named after queens/women unlike
kings/men (Bhattacharya, 2014, pp.19-24).
There have been evidence also from Kashmir where there has been a string of ruling queens either as
regents or in their own capacity. Rangachari’s work emphasises on the agency of women in social and
political processes without which history of early medieval north India would be distorted. According
to Rangachari, Diddā was a prolific builder. In fact the Diddāsvāmin temple was built by her as the
name of the temple itself suggests. The Diddāpura town and maṭhas were also constructed under her
matronage. Another known shrine was the Siṁhasvāmin shrine & her vihāra. Kalyanadevi, built the
town of Kalyanpūra while Ratnādevī, built maṭha, gokula, towns etc which bespoke of splendour
(Rangachari, 2012). Thus linkage between power & buildings is similar for queens and kings even
though the number of buildings built by queens is much less than the kings but one cannot ignore the
matronage of the queens wherever there is evidence for it.

Intent for making Dāna

There is definitely an intention for making dāna of architectural parts of the stūpa, sculptures/temples
etc which are tangible objects and which would remain for posterity. The evidence of temples, shrines,
vihāras being built in their names speak of a power structure in the physical landscape as these
buildings bore their names. Through these buildings/shrines their names were perpetuated for
posterity. Additionally, it serves as a reminder for those who visit these locations centuries after they
were built, letting them know that these shrines serve as a testament to their significance in history and
their ability to affect change. It is also a reminder of their social status and their socially sanctioned
public activity.
It is sort of a self-proclamation to avoid being forgotten like other monarchs have been. If not for these
enormous buildings and the epigraphic remnants, one would not be familiar with the names of the
majority of the queens or of lay women or bhikkhunīs and one would not have any memory of them.
One should also acknowledge that these are public statements and it enhanced their prestige along with
their social standing.

Agency of Women
Another point that should be accentuated is that matronage provides evidence of women’s agency
because they were active participants in religious practises and not excluded from this sphere of public
life. It becomes clear that women were capable of obtaining, holding, and alienating property since
they appeared to be visible, even in the public sphere. It is clear from the epigraphic evidence that
women were autonomous agents who were not dependant on male power.
It is evident that over time, private home rituals took the shape of gift-giving in the form of architectural
parts of the stūpa, sculptures, homage tablets, construction of temples, shrines, etc. By erecting stūpas,
statues, shrines, and other structures they gave others an opportunity to enjoy the rewards from
worship. Women thus participated in gift-giving in both the private and public spheres. Although it
appears that women are equally prominent as men in giving gifts, the normative texts maintain a
complete silence about this say.
Thus patronage and matronage expresses core religious values. Furthermore, one can assert that
women played a significant role and were not marginalised in the area of religious matronage from
143 JOURNAL OF THE ASIATIC SOCIETY OF MUMBAI, ISSN: 0972-0766, Vol. XCVI, No.16, 2023

various sites and time frames as they actually contributed to the survival of Buddhism and Jainism.
The validation of matronage and devotion suggests that women’s religious activity was not restricted
by the standards set forth in the Dharmaśāstra scriptures.
Therefore, when evaluating gender roles one should read the sources counterintuitively instead of
focusing on exclusion. With this shift in emphasis, women would no longer be seen as peripheral to
the main territory, therefore territory also requires a new definition. Moreover, the situation would be
radically different if the focus was shifted from ‘what women were not performing’ to ‘what women
were accomplishing’.
One can conclude that women could be seen as active participants in religious practices and not as
passive bystanders who were dependent on their male relatives or male religious authorities (especially
in the grants made at the stūpas). They emerge as individual entities, capable of making gifts without
the need for approval or intervention from their male relatives. Dāna made by women demonstrate
their readiness to engage in social, economic, and religious endeavours. Additionally, one saw that
dāna was made in accordance with each person’s financial situation, as evidenced by the variety of
gifts that were given. Giving gifts in their respective capacities was one way that women displayed
their public assertiveness. Therefore, women can be credited with having mental agency, motivation,
and intellectual autonomy.

Reference:
• Bhattacharya, Shatarupa, ‘Issues of Power and Identity: Probing the Absence of ‘Mahārājñi’—A Survey of
the Vākātaka Inscription’, Indian Historical Review, New Delhi: ICHR SAGE Publications, 2014, vol.
41(1), pp. 19–34.
• Findly, E.B., ‘The Housemistress at the Door: Vedic and Buddhist Perspectives on the Mendicant
Encounter’, in Jewels of Authority: Women and Textual Tradition in Hindu India, ed. laurie l. Patton, New
Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2002, pp.13–31.
• Findly, Dana: Giving and Getting in Pali Buddhism, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, 2003.
• Mauss, M., The Gift, repr., London: Routledge, 1990.
• Mitra, Debala, Buddhist Monuments, repr., Calcutta: Sahitya Samsad, 1980.
• Rangachari, Devika, ‘Exploring Spaces for Women in Early Medieval Kashmir’, New Delhi:
Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, Occasional Paper History and Society, New Series 6, 2012,
pp.3-29.
• Roy, The Power of Gender and the Gender of Power: Explorations in Early Indian History, New
Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2010.
• Singh, S., ‘Exploring the Question of Gender at an early Stūpa: Inscriptions and Images’, ed.
Snigdha Singh et al., Beyond the Woman Question: Reconstructing Gendered Identities in Early
India, Delhi: Primus books, 2018, pp. 21–62.
• Singh, Snigdha, ‘Strīdhana: Is It Her Dhana?, SRJIS 2018 pp, 8571-8580.