Question 1.Discuss the main features of the agrarian economy of north India during 700-1200 A.D. Can it be called feudal?
Answer 1. Indian economy has always been an agrarian economy.The period between 700-1200 A.D saw several alteration in the working of agriaculture in India.The period between 700-1200 A.D is generally regarded as the Early Medieval period,but different historians have different views .Along with the changes in agricultural methods another prominent feature of this period is the debate on feudalism.This is entirely an European concept which would be discussed in detail a little later.The relation between the changing features of agriculture and feudalism would be explained in my essay as I procced.
Before we go into the detail of growth of feudalism in north India,we must first try to understand the origin and the term in its true sense.The term “feudalism”was first used by the lawyers of Europe.Its a concept which began in Europe and is now also related to India.The term Feudalism in general European term means the organisation of the whole administrative structure on the basis of land;its economic essence lay in the institution of serfdom in which the peasant were attached to the soil held by landed intermediaries placed between the king and the actual tillers,who had to pay rent in kind and labour to them.The system was based on self sufficient economy in which things were mainly produced for the local use of the peasants and their lords and not for the market.Historians like R.S Sharma,D.N Jha,D.D Kosambi and B.D Chattopadhaya were those who held the view of the presence of feudalism in India,wheras B.C Sircar and Harbans Mukhia did not have the same notion.
Royal land grants are the major source of histroy for the early medieval history.The incidence of grants by kings to Brahmans increased significantly during 600-1200 A.D.Brahmadeyas had a political dimension.These settlements were created by royal order,and the rights of the brahamana donees were declared and confirmed by royal decree.The feudalism hypothesis interprets brahmadeyas as a cause as well as a symptom of political fragmentation.Most historians view the early medieval period as one of agrarian expansion.The feudal school argues that the land grants led to increasing subordination and oppression of rural groups by Brahamana donees.In Assam where cultivable land was not in short suppy and where large numbers of non brahmanas also held land,the extent of social and economic stratification was not as rigid as in other areas.
In 1940’s B.N Datta and S.A Dange spoke of the growth of feudalism in India.Many early scholars simply transplanted the European concept of feudalism onto the Indian soil.However the new genre of emperical works emerged in the 1950’s,which is when through reasoned argument,’feudal polity’ was shown to be a new stage which represented a strucural change in the Indian social and economic order,characterised by a hierarchy of intermediaries between the state and the peasant
B.D Chattopadhaya talks about political decentralisation,how the conventional aduality of centrifugalism and centripetalism in Indian polity has been replaced by the image of a structure which provides a counterpoint to the centralised bureaucratic state,the crystallisation of which is located only in the post gupta period.He also mentions about the emergence of landed intermediaries,which he considers the hallmark of the feudal social formation and is seen to be linked both to disintegration and decentralisation of state authority and major changes in the structure of agrarian relations.However in the context of the post gupta period,’fief-holders’ and ‘free-holders’ are terms used in relation to secular recipients of such grants and to autonomous holders of land.A change from money economy to self sufficient village as a unit of production,thus begin an important period in transition process.This change over is seen as deriving from the decline of early historical urban centres and commercial networks,this in turn led to the practice of remuneration in land as a substituie for cash,to the migration of different social groups to rural areas,to an agrarian expansion,and to the crystallization in rural society of jajmani relationships.
R.S Sharma also talks of the closed economy and loss of mobility.There were various charters found,they mostly grant villages with fiscal and administrative immunities,to priests in the initial stage and to the vassals and official in the later.In the 11th and 12th century vassals and officials were granted villages and land revenues,especially in Rajput kingdom of northern India.He also mentions about the paucity of coins,even if they are not gold,silver or bronze but the evidence of currency is very much present.He states that the society is primarily agrarian in nature and the growth of feudal society was due to decline in trade and decline in urbanisation.Initially land grants were religious in nature but slowly over the period of time they also turned into heriditary.
D.D kosambi was the first to give this conceptual definition of feudalism in India.He spoke of it in two different aspects,the first being,’feudalism from above’which was essentially political feudalism.After the conquest and political expansion,kings began to transfer their fiscal and administrative rights over land to subordinate autonomous chief,who recognized the suzerainity of the central authority and paid him tribute.An advanced stage of deveopement in this was seen during the gupta period,and later when a class of landowners developed within the village between the state and tha peasantry,gradually to wield armed power on the local population,i.e ‘feudalism from below’essentially socio-economic in nature.
There was a considerable change in agriculture ,the peasants were subjected to immobility,forced labour and payement of revenue at very high rates.This condition of the peasantry in the early medieval period,in this pattern of rural stratification was in a sharp contrast to the agrarian structure in early historical india.The peasats were treated as serfs,this was due to the high price they had to pay as rents many of them couldn’t afford it and thus had to pay in kind as their services.The presence of serfdom was also seen in the European model of feudalism.R.S Sharma talks of the urban decay as the reason for the change in the agricultural pattern.
Before we try and see If feudalism adjusts into our Indian subcontinent during the 700-1200 A.D,we must first try and understand the meaning of the term ‘feudalism’ and its origin ’feudalism‘is an European concept,first used in a legal manner by the lawyers of Europe.Its a concept where large land estates are surrounded by small plots of land which are administered by the landlords and the peasants have to work on them and for them too.There are various European historians who’ve given their hypothesis on the existence of feudalism.Many of the Indian historians have based their arguments on the basis of these famous European historians such as Henry Perrain,Mark Blough,Perry Anderson etc.Their views are known worldwide and are taken as great writings.The Marxists also had their views regarding feudalism in Europe,they connected this to the change in mode of production.PerryAnderson and Dobb related feudalsim to serfom.However serfom shoud not be confused with slavery,a slave is given no rights at all but a serf is given limited rights.Therefore to conclude we could now say that a feudal society is a society where low level of techniques are used with simple inexpensive technology,where production is not for market but for the needs of the lord by the workers.
The debate of existence of feudalism in north India during 700-1200 A.D is debatble.The source colud be literature or epigraphic evidence.The earlist of literary source is that of the “Dharmashastra” .They are aslo reffered as the law book,they give us ample amount of information regarding legal rights,taxation etc.Manusmritis are also a good source of information.Yajnavalkya and Nibandhas are as rich as any other source.As far as the epigraphic evidences are concerned a number of charters are found which deals with the land grants,but many of them are faughed also, so one has to be really careful while studying them.For example the Gaya and Balinga charters are faughed.
Its only after B.L Datta that the writings on feudalism gained momentum,only after he wrote on feudalism,others took interest in this debate.B.N.S Yadav also wrote on feudalsim.He focused on the feudal dues and emphasised how the economy was a self sufficient economy.
R.S.Sharma argues that the peasants during this period were being subjected.He emphasized the fact that they were tied to the land,no mobility and serfdom(here serfdom should not be mived with slavery),forced labour.In response to this Harbans Mukhiya says that the peasantary in the medieval and pre medieval stages were free.He states that the land man ratio was very favourale.If the peasants were’nt treated in a proper manner they could simply shift to another piece of land.The peasants could show resentment by delaying production or by simply leaving the land and moving to another land.
R.S Sharma also connects feudalism with ruralization.The main characteristics are the ,emergence of landed intermediaries;the presence of a closed economy,natural economy and the emergence of the village as a self sufficient unit of production and distribution;and agrarian expansion on a substantially large scale.These structural changes in the economy are again traced to the growth of land grants,which granted extensive privileges to the donees.This distributed and finally transformed the existing agrarian order.Ruralization led to rural stratification,a number of intermediaries emerged between the state and the producing class.
D.N Jha and R.S Sharma both have similar views regarding the argument of the connection between feudalism and decline in trade.They say feudalism takes position with the decline in trade,which resulted in the shortage of currency for which land grants were introduced.D.C Sircar criticizes both their views and states thet there was no shortage of currency in this period.Numerous coins were found from this period.Even though the coins werent made out of gold,silver or bronze,but the presence of metal coins also proves that the economy was not on a standstill.Money economy was very much in operation and could not collapse completely.He also questions the interpretation made by R.S Sharma of certain terms used in the inscription.
Kulke states that the purpose of land grants was a ritual legitimization,not reflectinga crisis.He talks on them playing an integrative role and not a fragmentary one.Where B.D Chattopadhya says the role of landgrants as a mean of exploitation is over emphasised.He has raised conceptual and emperical arguments against deurbanisation and decommercialisation.He gives us evidences of foreign trades existence and also continued participation of Indians in the trade.He says that the economic basis of the urban centres was an agricultural surplus generated by expansion and new method of cultivation.So cities could not decline due to trade decline because they were not dependent on it.Thus there was urbanisation in early medieval India.
Harbans Mukhiya also criticizes the fact that many people take feudalism to be an universal phenomenon,which is not the case.He states feudalism unlike capitalism is not a phenomenon which could be picked up and placed into any society.This concept was originated in Europe and simply placed in india.
Thus the agrarian economy did see various alteration in north India between 700-1200 A.D.The emergence of landed intermediaries,subjection of peasantry,political decentralisation,ruralisation,and a self sufficient economy were the changed characteristics of the agrarian scene during the early medieval period.These transformation along with the writtings of great historians have helped us realise that there were some traces of feudalism in north India during 700-1200 A.D.Therfore its not just a model picked up from one nation and placed onto the other.But the question of presence of feudalism in India has always been a matter of great debates.As I have mentioned in my essay the writings of great scholars who talk of the existence of feudalism,it is a picture towards the conclusion about the existence of feudalism in north India.Thus we can call the period from 700-1200 A.D a feudal period.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.R.S Sharma :Early Medieval Indian Society:A Society of Feudalization
2.R.S Sharma :Indian Feudalism,c. A.D. 300-1200
3.Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya :The Making of Early Medieval India
4.D.N Jha :Feudal Social Formations of Early India
5.Harbans Mukhiya :The State In India(article)
6.Harman Kulke :The Sate In India(article)
7.Ms.Tasneem :Class notes
Medieval India Assignment
By Kushagra Parasher
2nd History Hons