ANALYSING B.D.

CHATTOPADHYAY
Name: Eukti Ujjainkar,
Roll no.: 2023/389
Paper: History of Medieval India
Course: B.A. history hons.

This introduction represents an attempt to understand the concept

which the term ‘early medieval’ may represent, both as a
chronological phase and as a signifier of processes of change which
correspond to the phase. Early historiographical trends broadly
categorised the phases ignoring the variability, this has been
criticised by N.R.Ray , he argued that periodization must be
proportional to the special attributes of the theme. This notion in
Indian history writing challenged the oriental tone and underscores
the change and continuity of Indian history.
Taking discussion further he explains that the term ‘ancient’ is no
longer so simple. Multitude of archaeological excavations and
explorations has added significant dimensions to how we view the
ancient period of our history Instead of continuing to use the blanket
term ‘ancient’ for all occasions, it has therefore become imperative
to disentangle the various components of ‘ancient’ from each other;
in other words, to redefine ‘ancient’. One way of doing this is to
identify the core cultural traits which constitute the required
chronological construct.
It is no longer necessary to label the entire pre-medieval or pre-
early-medieval Indian society ‘ancient’. There is arbitrariness in the
use of labels as it ignores variability of construct as early medieval
and medieval are used in relation to the Sultanate period of north
Indian history, as well as in relation to the Cola period in south India.
Chattopadhyay highlights the need for re-evaluation of usage of
terms.
According to Chhatopadhyay in the dominant school of ancient
Indian historiography ‘Indian feudalism’ was the reference point for
the transition to medievalism. A multi-dimensional characterization
of medievalism was proposed by Ray, He located the beginning of
the process in the seventh century and says it became more
pronounced from the eighth century, however, Ray does not specify
the major attributes of these subperiods. Instead, he offers a broad
package of characteristics which, for him, define Indian medievalism.
Attributes of this phase of history is polar opposite of preceding
period, this phase is marked by a new state structure is characterized
by decentralization and hierarchy, features suggested by the
presence of a wide range of semi-autonomous rulers. Another aspect
is the emergence of landed intermediaries which is linked to land
grants. The core of the ideology of the period is seen to be
characterized by bhakti since it accentuated the relationship of
loyalty and devotion, which are believed to be hallmarks of feudal
ties. Moreover, there was rise intensity of proliferation of castes and
change in the nature of stratification of peasants.
The transition seems the crystallization of an opposition: early
medieval is seen as a breakdown of the civilizational matrix of early
historical India. Breakdown implies social crisis, historical events
which signify crisis are identified differently by different historians .
Recent writings attempt to show that the crisis can be analysed, in
concrete historical terms, from the way the epics, the Puranas and
other brahmanical texts delineate Kaliyuga, namely as marking the
fall from a normative social order. This is because the brahmanical
texts use concrete social categories such as the state, human
settlements, rums, and so on, to highlight an upheaval which
heralded a rupture with the past. The transition to the early
medieval period is located in this social upheaval.
The question of variability between the eighth and ninth centuries
the second and third centuries will emerge from methodological
emphasis on societal processes. The fact that historical-cultural
stages have always been uneven over the subcontinent this
perspective brings us to major processes which were operative
through all the phases of Indian history, i.e., expansion of state
through localization, peasantization of tribes and process of
integration. The chapter further put light on the argument that the
making of early medieval India, if we adopt this perspective, may
thus have to be seen in terms of the scale of certain fundamental
movements within the regional and local levels, and not in terms of
the crisis of a pre-existent, pan-Indian social order.

Chattopadhyay delves into characteristics of the period between the

third and sixth centuries. It was marked an increasing scale of local
state formation. This process is suggested by the emergence of
different categories of ruling lineages distributed over regions. To
illustrate this process, he analyses Vidarbha region. The scale of the
formation of local states and the transformation of some of them
into major, regional state structures became much more historically
significant, when examined closely, they all display trends which
worked towards the formation of the regional political, economic
and socio-religious order.

In this period monarchy became the norm of polity. This vindicated

Brahmanical monarchical ideology, the view that anarchy pervaded
the vacuums which signified an absence of monarchy. In this period
sharp fissions developed within communities and regions and the
emergence of a complex of relations of domination and
subordination which characterize a regional state society; this is
irrespective of whether the polities representing such societies
remained autonomous or semi-autonomous. He supplements this
argument by analysing the social category called Rajputs from
Rajasthan, the formation of this social category drew in non-
indigenous communities
Analysing the social construct the chapter brings on the position of
the Vaisya varna, traditionally associated with cattle keeping,
agriculture and commerce, declined gradually as a result of the
decline of long-distance commerce, and that the position of the
Śudras, whose ranks swelled through the assimilation of ‘numerous
aboriginal tribes and foreign elements’ improved. The new Śudras do
not seem to have been recruited as slaves and hired labourers like
their older counterparts. They pursued their old occupations and
were possibly taught new methods of agriculture, which gradually
turned them into tax-paying peasants. There occasional mention of
groups of like vardhakis (carpenters)" or carmakaras (leather
workers) either owning plots of land or having received land from
the king to provide services toa newly established temple. Text
further dives to explore the peasantry in the post Gupta period
which special emphasis on Assam,Tamilnadu and others.

The ideological and religious dimensions of the society was going

through process of transition. It is difficult to envisage a
homogeneous strand in the ideological evolution of the period. Yet
meaningful attempts to understand the making of the early medieval
phase of Indian history must relate to all these dimensions. It is
generally believed that Bhakti and the worship through Bhakti of God
as a Lord located in a temple, was the key ideological strand of the
period. Cult assimilation led to the formation of a structure which
combines heterogeneous beliefs and rituals into a whole even while
making specific elements dominant. This period also saw changing
perception of royal and divinity which is explained through example
of Jagganath of Orrisa. Additionally, Shaktism in some region became
prevalent that symbolised the function towards the integration of
other local cults and becoming one of the recognizable symbols of
the region. The religious and ideological expressions of a region in
their varied forms thus become enmeshed in the web of its polity,
economy and society.

Concluding the arguments presented above, period between the

sixth-seventh and the twelfth thirteenth centuries reflect vastly
different Indian society from the early historical period, the change
does not necessarily have to be envisaged in terms of a collapse of
the early historical social order. It needs to be reiterated that the
process of state formation was not a unique characteristic only of
the time span discussed. However, the relationship between the
process and region formation, considered from a pan-Indian
perspective, was perhaps the closest in this period. This chapter
concludes on the note that the assimilation of ideas, symbols and
rituals which had far much wider territorial spread and acceptability.
Additionally, Common modes of royal legitimation and interrelated
phenomena such as the practice of land grants, the creation of
agrahâras, the emergence of major cult centres and temple
complexes as well as social stratification subscribing to the varna
order were some highlights of the discussions of this time phase