Debate On Feudalism

Feudalism
 Feudalism is a kind of social and economic system which is
characterized by relationship of peasants with land.

European Feudalism
 Nation of feudalism has European origins.
 European Feudalism – backward and rigid
 Lord-vassal relationship
 High decentralised power

Marxism Theory on Feudalism

 Relationship between land & labour.
 Studied about technology trade money and economic aspects.
 Feudalism In India
 Decline in foreign trade and self-sufficient economy
 Lands grants were given to Brahmans or regions institutions

Type of Land Grants

Brahmadeya Agrahara (collectivity Devadana (religious

(Brahmans) of Brahmans) institutions)

 Brahmanas played an important role in expanding production in India.

Feudalism Debate
 “James Tod” – in his book “Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan”
described the relationship between lord and vassal.
 Marxism see Indian feudalism as economic point of view

 Karlmarx was of view that Indian history was “ Asiatic Mode of

Production” means no class struggle and no change over time

Indian Historians
 Rejected the notion of Asiatic mode of production
 Damodar Dharmananda Kasambi
 In introduction to study of Indian History in 1956. He tells about Indian
Feudalism.
 Indian Feudalism – “Two way process i.e. from above and from below

D.D Kosambi Feudalism Two way process

From Below From Above

Mean:- Many individuals rols from Means:- Feudal structure was

village level of power to become created by state & granting
land lord & vassal of kings lands to Brahmans
 Indian Feudalism was different from European feudalism

Indian Feudalism European Feudalism

Serfdom Serfdom

Means:- Tenant farmer

Absent in Indian was bound to a
hereditary plot of land
feudalism
and to the will of his
landlord
 R.S Sharma (Ram Sharan Sharma)

Land grants in Class

Feudalism
liev of salary intermediaries

Paucity of
Coins
Decline of trade Agarian Economy

De-urbanisation Social nobility

Ruralisation
 In his thesis ‘Indian feudalism in 1965. He says Indian feudalism rise only
due to state action.

 Trade:- After fall of Gupta Empire long distance trade declined and
deurbanisation started in India.

 Coins:- Coins were not available lands grants given to the Brahmanas and
officials in lieu of salary.

 Class of Intermediaries:- As land were granted to Brahmanas. Indian

feudalism become a class of intermediaries and it rise because of state
action. State Gave judicial & police power to them and they become
powerful.

 Peasant left with no power.

 DNJHA – Dwijendra Narayan Jha

 Criticized the theory of R.S Sharma on trade

 He argued that there was absence of long distance trade in India.

 Harbans Mukhia

 He questioned the theory of Indian feudalism

 Feudalism at all be conceived of as a universal system.
 He compare the western Europe with Indian feudalism.
 In India feudalism is not possible if it possible in Europe it will only be
exist in variation.
 Western Europe

Sunshine was just Demand for labour

about 4 months increasing four months

Technology not Good Tying of labour to land

Control the serss by

Low Yield Crop lord

Struggled b/w Serp

and lords

Improvement in
technology &
productivity
India
Agriculture
 Environment Conditions was conducive to agriculture.

 Productivity of land of India was good.

Economy
 Free Peasant Economy

Begar
 It is associated with non-agricultural works and was seldom part of
process of production here.
 Feudalism Reconsider
R S Sharma
 He refined his thesis of Indian feudalism in a paper. (How feudal was
Indian feudalism)

 He focus on “Economic and Social crisis's in Society.

 People signifies – Economic and Social crisis as Kaliyug.

 Suggested that this notion of Kaliyug had characteristics of a crisis the

context is for he transition of society from one stage to another.
DN Jha

 In his essay in “The feudal order: state, society and ideology.”

 Focus on – Cultural and Ideological dimension of feudal order.

 Bhakti movement – Another kind of Bramincial domination by virtue

of ideology of total surrenders, subjection and loyalty to a deity.

 This surrender and loyality could easily be transferred on to feudal lord

and master.