AGRARIAN AND
POLITICAL STRUCTURES
From about the beginning of the eighth
century, there emerged a political set up in
western India and central India in which new
social groups acquired political power by various
means such as settlement of new areas. The
pattern of the emergence of the Rajputs, which
was partly a clan-based organisation of political
authority, shows some deviations form
developments outside western India. However,
the mobility of new powers towards kshatriya
status for legitimation was not specific to western
India as a similar process was in operation
elsewhere in early medieval India. After seeking
legitimacy for their new Kshatriya role, the ruling
clans of western and central India formulated
detailed geneologies in the period of their
transition form feudatory to independent status.
They consolidated their political position by
means of specific patterns of land distribution
and territorial system. Some other prominent
features of the polity and the agrarian
struchtures in the region are:
• organisation of bureaucracy which could
connect different modes in their political
structures marked by different foci or
levels of power.
• Dominance of landlord-subordinate
relations.
• Landholding as an important component
of the samanta status.
• Integration of local polities into larger
status polities.
• Certain amount of land-based ranking
associated with politico-administrative
roles and services.
• Wielding of vast-administrative and
financial powers by vassals and officers
to the extent of sub-infeudation.
INDIAN FEUDALISM
This period (from 750 to 1200) in Indian
history has been termed as a period of ‘Indian
Fedualism’ by a few historians. They believed
that a number of changes took place in Indian
society. One significant change was the growing
power of a class of people who are variously
called Samantas, Ranaks, Rauttas etc. Their
origins were very different. Some were
government officers who were defeated rajas
who continued to enjoy the revenue of limited
areas. Still others were local hereditary chiefs or
tribal leaders who had carved out a sphere of
authority with the help of armed supporters. In
course of time these revenue-bearing lands began
to be considered hereditary and monopoly of a
few families. The hereditary chiefs began to
assume many of the functions of the government.
They not only assessed and collected land
revenue but also assumed more and more
administrative power such as the right lands to
their followers without the prior permission of
the rulers. This led to an increase in the number
of people who drew sustenace form the land
without working on it.
The salient features of Indian feudalism were
as follows.
1. Emergence of hierarchical landed
intermediaries. Vassal and officers of
state and other secular assignes had
military obligations and were called
Samonta. Subinfeudation (varying in
different regions) by these donees to get
their land cultivalted led to the growth
of different strata of intermediaries. It
was a hierarchy of landed aristocarats,
tenants, share croppers and cultivators.
This hierarchy was also reflected in the
powers, administrative structure, where
a sort of lord vassal relationship
emerged. In other words, Indian
feudalism consisted of the unequal
distribution of land and its produce.
2. Prevalence of forced labour. The right
of extracting forced labour (Vishti) is
believed to have been exercised by the
Brahmanas and other grantees of land.
Forced labour was originally a
prerogrative of the king or the state. It
was transferred to the grantees, petty
officials, village authorities and other.
As a result, a kind of serfdom emerged,
in which agricultural labourers were
reduced to the position of semi-serfs.
3. Due to the growing claims of greater
over them by rulers and intermediares,
peasants also suffered an curtailmat of
their land rights. Many were reduced
to the positon of tenants facing evergrowing
threat of eviction. A number
of peasants were only share- croppers
(ardhikas). The strain on the peasantry
was also caused by the burden of
taxation, coercion and increase in their
indebtness.
4. Surplus was extracted through various
methods. Extra economic coercion was
a conspicuous method, new mechanisms
of economic subordination also evolved.
5. It was relatively a closed village
economy. The transfer of human
resources along with land to the
beneficiaries shows that in such villages
the peasants, craftsmen and artisans
were attached to the village and, hence,
were mutually dependent. Their
attachment to land and to service grants
ensured control over them by the
beneficeries.
