Q. Discuss the features of feudalism in India during the post-Mauryan period. How was it different from feudalism in Europe? (250 words)
GS paper 1 #IAS #RAS #UPSC #NDA #CDS #CAPF #UDAIPUR #MEWAR #JINESHIASACADEMY #HISTORY
Approach
- Introduce by defining feudalism.
- Explain the rise origin of feudalism in the post-Mauryan period.
- Discuss the features of feudalism in India during the post-Mauryan period.
- Differentiate between feudalism in India and post Mauryan feudalism.
- Conclude by summarizing your answer.
- Introduction
Feudalism was a dominant social system in the medieval times. In this system the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labour, and a share of the produce, in exchange for military protection.
Indian feudalism refers to the feudal society that made up India's social structure until The Mughal Dynasty in the 1500s. The Guptas and the Kushans played a major role in the introduction and practice of feudalism in India, and are examples of the decline of an empire caused by feudalism.
Structure(History of early feudal system in India)Starting from the Gupta period the term samanta (neighbour) became to be applied to those granted land or to subjugated feudatory rulers. Weak enforcement of power over the conquered regions led to the resumption of independence and some high administrative positions became hereditary. There is debate among historians whether the feudatory system in India qualifies as true feudalism, as apparently there was a lack of an economic contract between king, vassal and serf. Other historians however argue that the similarities are significant enough to describe it as feudalism. The essential characteristic was the decentralization of power. Samantas were officials granted lands instead of a salary and proceeded to seize ownership of the area while continuing to refer to themselves as vassals of their ruler. They were required to pay a small fraction of revenue and provide troops for the overlord. These lords often aped their royal suzerains, for instance, by constructing miniature royal palaces.This encouraged the fragmentation of authority and growing parochialism which has been suggested as a cause for the weak resistance against Muslim conquest. Bihar(Zamindars of Bihar)The Bihar region (now a state) of India was a hotbed for feudalism. Feudalism first started when the Kushans ruled over India and flourished when the Gupta Empire ruled over Northern India. Feudal lords ruled the region for decades; semi-feudal conditions still exist. As a result, child malnourishment is common, in spite of modern Bihar's status as having the fastest growth in gross domestic product in India. TelanganaThe Doraas and Deshmukhs ruled the region until the annexation. They held all the land in their fief and everybody used to give their produce, and they used to be given only food barely sufficient for sustenance. The rebellion against feudal lords, known as Vetti Chakiri Udhyamam, from 1946 to 1951 in Telangana region called as Telangana Rebellio illustrates the feudal society in the region. The feudal lords used to reside in a high fortress called as Gadi, for entering it they leave their footwear at the threshold of the gadi. The madigas and other backward classes were required to carry their footwear in their hands if they were passing in front of the gadi or dora. A famous line which is repeated by the oppressed was “Banchen Dora née Kalmoktha (will touch your feet my lord). A major Telugu film blockbuster,Maa Bhoomi , showed the society under feudal lords. The Srikrishna committee on Telangana says in its findings that there is still gross injustice to the land tillers of the region, the villains, in this case, were landlords of Telangana and not those of other regions. KeralaThere were a number of feudal states in Kerala in the Middle Ages between the end of Chera dynasty and the British rule. In Kerala ,Nairs were prominent during feudalism as they acted as both Feudals as well as warriors . The land was owned by Nair but was tilled by backward classes. Nairs in turn took the role of administration and defence. Madras PresidencySeveral zamindaris were established in the Madras Presidency (present-day Tamil Nadu and adjoining areas) from 1799 onwards. The largest of these were Arni,Ramnad, Ganapur and Sivaganga . The zamindari settlement was based on a similar settlement established in Bengal. The Zamindari settlement of Madras was largely unsuccessful and was wrapped up in 1852. However, a few Zamindaris remained till India's independence in 1947. North ArcotNorth Arcot region was under Jagirdars until the Indian independence. The largest estate was that of Arni, a Deshastha royal family. Arni estate was larger than Sandur princely state. Northern AndhraThe Northern Andhra region was under doras until the Indian Independence. The largest estate was that of Vizianagram under the Poosapati kshatriya family which was liberal and enlightened. RayalaseemaThe Rayalaseema region was under Ayyagaru until the independence. The largest estate was that of Panyam; which was ruled by a Deshastha royal family of Vishvamitra gotra and was liberal and enlightened. VidarbhaThe feudal lords in Vidarbha region are notorious for their oppressive rule. |
Body
- Origin of feudalism in the post-Mauryan period
- From the Post Mauryan period and especially from Gupta times, certain political and administrative developments tended to feudalise the state apparatus.
- The most striking development was the practice of making land grants to Brahmanas and Buddhist monks and later to officials for their military and administrative services.
- These grants meant the transfer of all sources of revenue and surrender of police and administrative functions thus giving rise to feudalism.
- Features of Feudalism in the post-Mauryan period
- Vassalage: Vassalage expressed the relation of personal dependence and loyalty between the lord and his vassals.
- Hierarchy of feudal lords: Different titles signified the position and powers within the rank of feudal lords.
- Hereditary administrative positions: Weak enforcement of power led to the resumption of independence and some high administrative positions became hereditary.
- Decentralisation of Power: Samantas were granted lands instead of salary and proceeded to seize ownership of the area while continuing to refer to themselves as vassals of their rulers.
- Oppressive tax system: Imposition of proper and improper taxes, fixed and unfixed taxes along with rent exploited the labour class.
- Prosperity was not shared equally: It was believed that some people were meant for cultivation of land and some for enjoying the fruits of production and hence, prosperity was not shared equally.
- Fragmentation of social formation: Castes were split up into thousands of other castes and subcastes.
- Manorial system: Under the manorial system, the landlord granted lands to persons who would render different services including labour on the lands of the lords in exchange of land.
- Difference between post-Mauryan feudalism and European feudalism
- The post-Mauryan feudalism was based on a caste system which divided the society into 4 parts- Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras, whereas the European feudalism divided the society into church, nobility and the commoners.
- Unlike the European system, most of the power structures within the state did not have to pay taxes
- Western European Feudal lords granted lands to their serfs in order to get their own land cultivated but Indian Kings made grants to collect taxes and surplus.
- conclusion
- Feudalism in India was characterized by a class of landlords and by a class of subject peasantry, both living in a predominantly agrarian economy marked by a decline in trade and urbanism and by a drastic reduction in metal currency.
- Different ecological factors contributed to the nature of social structure and dynamics and hence the difference in European and post-Mauryan feudalism.