P-ISSN: 2790-6795 Annals of Human and Social Sciences April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No.

2
O-ISSN:2790-6809 http://doi.org/10.35484/ahss.2023(4-II)69 [758-766]

Annals of Human and Social Sciences

www.ahss.org.pk
RESEARCH PAPER
Feudalism in British India: Causes and Consequences
1Dr. Salma Naz* and 2 Muhammad Luqman
1. Assistant Professor, Faculty of Social Science & Humanities, Minhaj University, Lahore, Punjab,
Pakistan
2. M. Phil Scholar, School of History &Pakistan Studies, Minhaj University, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan
*Corresponding Author: salmanoorshahid@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
The objective of the current study is to explore the causes and consequences of the
promotion of feudalism in British India. Feudalism was a part of the feudal society where
the peasants displayed loyalty to their Lords and received land from them got confirmation
of the security of their lives and land. When the British established their government in
India, it was very problematic for them to understand the Jagirdari and Zamindari system,
because the nature of European feudalism was different from feudalism in India. The
colonial powers provided the Jagirdars full support to use their power and political authority
in their area. As a consequence, they operated for the British government but also followed
their interests, and when colonial rule was over, they continued this practice. The nature of
the research is qualitative. The historical and analytical approach is applied for the analysis
of data. In the light of analysis, it is concluded that British imperial power promoted
feudalism in British India to save their political interests.

KEYWORDS: Colonial Power, Feudalism, Jagirdari System, Promotion of Feudalism

Introduction

The Feudalism is essentially a form of socio-economic institutional that sites itself

in a farming economy where land is the prime source of agricultural production, as well as
revenue. Feudalism, in this sense, names the distribution of the ownership of land and the
division of labor such delimitation involved in a society, as well as the allocation of the
surplus. . In other words, feudalism was a complex society with a system of hierarchical
relationships, where farmers confirmed loyalty to their Lords and in return received some
land from them, thereby serving their owner, in different means finding assurance from
them for their life and land. In 1647 the ruling King Shah Jahan comprised 8000
Mansabdars who allotted the property called jagirs, this land spread over large areas.

The jagirdars had authority for receiving the revenue from the state. The jagirdars also
called the zamindars werealso had responsibility for the collection of revenue for the
king(Alavi, 1980). During the King, there was not allowed private property. The private
property concept was banned. The holder of the property was responsible for to initiate
policy for promotion of agricultural as well as responsible for the development of farmers.
Unfortunately, His sole purpose was to maximization of his wealth accumulation by the
exploitation of the peasants .When the British came to India and established their rule in
India, it was very difficult for them to understand the Jagirdari and zamindari systems,
because European feudalism was different from Indian feudalism(Timberg, 1982). At the
same time , many main amendments were introduced in industrial law, which also given
the zamindars and jagirdars property ownership and rights of the land, allowing them to the
collection of revenues according to new British rules. The property was safeguarded by the
English primogeniture law, allowing the older son to inherit it.The colonial powers gave the
Jagirdars ample opportunities to assert their power and political influence in the area. As a
result, they not only served the interests of the British government but also protected their
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

interest too even when colonial rule ended, they continued the practice. Historically, the
broad concurrence among scholars is that feudalism was the principal mode of production
in early medieval India, just about between the 5th and the 13th centuries, though it is
declared that the impression of it remains up to this day(Sharma, 1958). Within the
historical context of Medieval Civilizations however, Feudalism materialized as the principal
mode of political organization and remained so up until as late as the Industrial Revolution
(1750–1840).concerning the question of periodization in History( Green, 1992), it observed
that feudalism was a form of decentralization which follows the fall down of an empire.
(Parasher, 1987)
Literature Review

Alavi (1980) analysis of India's history since the start of the British conquest, just
over 200 years ago, raises questions about the precise nature of the structural changes that
were brought about during the colonial transformation as well as, incidentally, the
contribution of British relations with India to the start of the Industrial Revolution in
England, a significant turning point in human history.In this study the reasons behind the
Industrial Revolution in England is not discussed rather, the first set of questions is the main
focus in this essay. However, some concerns do come up in this context as well, and they
seem to be somewhat significant.

In the study of Mukhia (1981) India, in any case, was as yet a pre-entrepreneur
social development when the English victory came to fruition; the Northern Indian culture
could truth be told be portrayed, fundamentally, as a medieval society. How far the design
of the Northern Indian culture did relate to that of a communist idea a "primitive method of
creation" and how that construction was changed by the provincial effect is what we
propose to look at here. The deconstruction of Indian feudalism's foundation in agriculture
is one of its greatest assets. His "free peasantry" argument is persuasive in that it
distinguishes between economic and non-economic concepts of "free" and is helpful in that
it asserts the importance of productive characteristics in the discussion of feudalism. It is
telling to claim that Marxist writers on Indian and European feudalism frequently downplay
or disregard the fundamental nature of agrarian relations. If political, legal, and other non-
economic aspects of feudal societies have been given explanatory privilege in analyses of
these societies, a fundamental question of Marxist analysis - that of precisely determining
such things as politics, law, and ideology - is begged, and with that, the most perceptive
insight.

According to the Stein, (1985) there were two main groups of villagers: ryotwari
villages and zamindari villages. The zammdar was the local lord and master of zamindari
communities, but he was also obligated to the state to collect and give it land revenue. He
played an important functional role similar to the manorial lord in England, though not the
same, in the structure of Indian feudalism. Due to the descriptive complications of
overlapping rights and roles and semantic plurality, this aspect of his role has not been
highlighted sufficiently in descriptive Indian historiography. It has been noted that the name
"zamindar" has been used to refer to lords of various levels of status and authority, starting
with the little ruler.

Moore, (2002)The agrarian class ties that encircled the majority of the population
had a significant impact on the historical geography of feudalism..The conflict between
landowners and peasants over who would receive a portion of the agricultural surplus
tended to create moderate (but always finite rather than endless) pressures for increasing
productivity and market production. Thus, starting in the 10th or 11th century, the growth
of simple commodity production served as the fundamental foundation for the growth of
medieval market towns and cities. The incredible increase in international trade, the
expansion of major commercial hubs like Venice, and other events are historically
subordinate to the development of the forces of production in agriculture.

759
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

Purohit .V (1980) explain Indian feudalism was substantially comparable to the

Votchina and Pomese-based feudal system in Russia, as well as nearly identical to the
Byzantine version of Pronoia. Private land ownership has been a feature of Indian culture
since the beginning of time, as detailed in Kautilya's Arthashastra. In general, British
bureaucrats assigned multiple and contradictory meanings to terms like Ryot, which was
simultaneously held by Baden-Powell to mean actual cultivators or individual assesses
whether cultivators or not, or final judgement. This was in addition to the fact that at certain
times, British Imperialists were interested in undermining the property rights of Indians in
order to expropriate their lands for railway construction and increase land revenue
demands of the state.

Material and Methods

This study is qualitative in nature and exploratory and historical methods are used
to explore the colonial power contribution in the promotion of feudalism. The nature of
the data is archival. Secondary sources of data that consisted of research journals ,books
and internet sources are used for the present study. Analytical process as described by
Creswell (2012) are used for data analysis.The data for this study is gathered through a
review of previous studies from various databases such as Google Scholar and JSTOR . The
sources were selected depending on their application to the research objectives , and only
peer-reviewed and scholarly sources were consulted.

Feudalism in India

Sub-continent consists of many tribal areas, many religions, many castes, and many
ethnic groups. The area of the subcontinent is 2673861 sqm, also known as a multi-cultural
and multinational area and multi-religion, in which many diverse age groups rule the local
population . The subcontinent detects the seed of feudalism from the rule of Hindu dynasty.
In these areas from the Buddhist era to the 300AD. The Monarch, the preacher, and the
fighters control the state. They depended on the excess income of the peasants and the
craftsmen. Later on, when the political system came into the sub-continent, it was difficult
to collect revenue directly from peasants and craftsmen. They found a new way to collect
revenue from peasants and craftsmen, which gave land possessions as jagir to the fighters
and preachers. It permitted them to accumulate the revenue and also shifted the
responsibility to the landlord to keep peace and maintenance of law and order. The
landlord was fully powerful, all in all, they can do anything, they want. The feudalism system
continued in India in different for the Turkish conquests( Habib,1963).

In the Sultanate's time, it was a fashion to gift the land instead of salaries, the
landlord was bound to support the ruler in their armed campaign. The scheme allotment of
land was called Iqtaa. This system was used first time by the monarchs of Baghdad and after
that, it was adopted by Muslim countries in central Asia and India. When the Mughals came
into power they introduced a system, which is known as Jagir, and Munsab Jagirs’ words
used first time in the 16th century replaced the Iqtaa. Mughals changed the system of
allotment of land to the landlord. In this system, Mughals pay cash salaries rather than land
allotment. However, the Mughals allot permanent land temporarily, through this system, the
jagirdars were remand unstable because land transfer from one jagirdars to another
jagirdars in this way no owner long time jagirdars.

Mansab

There was no image of their private property, changing the property from one
jagirdar to another. This system made the jagirdar unstable, therefore, a lack of interest in
the production of agriculture. The result is a lack of revenue, during jagirdari the jagirdar
does only their money. Their only wish and interest were to exploit the poor peasants and
the target to collect money as much as they could. They did nothing for the improvement of
760
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

peasants, peasants lacked interest in the production of agriculture. The European travelers
found this system, which has no use of technology and inventions they were dependent only
on agriculture. The European traveler understands the system and thinks about trade with
Indians. At last, when the British came to India and established their rule in these areas, it
was very difficult to comprehend the jagirdari system because it was dissimilar from
feudalism in Europe.industrial law, which was amended by British governmentwas only law
for revenue collection under the British rulers.

The British rulers introduced a new English law, the purpose of this law was to
protect property rights, also protect property. Through this law the elder son was the owner,
additionally, the other sons were also recruited in army to make their property as a reward
for their cooperation to British rulers. The British rulers had a main and big source of income
land revenue, but it was not enough for the British so, the British used many other different
methods to increase their income because the income was very important to the stability of
their economy and government. The British introduced the colonial system to make their
government strong and long-term and introduced new policies that made Indian people
loyal to the British. In the mid of the 19th century (1860 -1899) the British felt the need for
India's landlord, it was necessary to control all over India( Pozzo, 2007). Therefore, the
British allot the land to those jagirdars who supported the British during wars and the
uprising against the British.

The British also gifted the land to those people who promised to be loyal to the
British, because without India's loyalty the British could not rule India. During the colonial
period, the British allotted the land to army officers after their retirement, in this way they
produced a new loyal class for the raj. this class remained loyal to the British till their death.
The result of these plans was in the support of the British power and the feudalism system.
The nobles of India were loyal to the British so, they not only helped The British rulers but
also supported them to create an army. The British wanted to make their colonial system
strong, therefore, through the implementation of different acts and law they defined the
responsibilities of Jagirdars.

The British government passed a new law, called the Alienation Act of 1900, the
main purpose of this act of stop the urban people from purchasing rural land. This law was
introduced to stop the purchasing of urban land because the rich people of the urban
purchasing the land. Therefore, the British government has taken some steps to control this
activity (Swamy, 2011). Through these steps, the government controls the
maladministration of jagirs. The reason of application of above mentioned action was that
the British power want to kept strong hold on India.

British Government Steps

The British power wants to the loyalty of Indian, and in this regard, it has taken many
steps, including allotment of property, allotment of jagir, position in the army, etc. The
British want their government long-term, and it has taken many steps. the government of
British needed the landlord to increase their money to develop their economic
condition(Arnold, 1983). The British wanted to show the India that British government did
work for the Indian people's success. To educate the Jagirdars and make them more modern
and aware of upcoming changes, the government established institutions like Mayo College
in Ajmer, Aitcheson College in Lahore, and Talluqdar College in Oudh as educational
institutions.

This class stayed steadfast to the British power and worked with its administrators
to uphold law and order in their respective regions.In addition, landlords were seen as
essential collaborators by the British power during the period of 1860-1899 to maintain
mass control. As a result, they also favored the Jagirdars who provided them with support
throughout the unrest and produced new members who pledged to be faithful to them(
761
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

Duly,1965). After army officers retired, it was the custom during colonial period to give
them a piece of land. This created a class of people who were loyal to the Raj. These policies
helped colonial government , and the feudal lords not only supported the British power by
recruiting fighters for its military but also supported it ( Kosambi,1955). The Jagirdars were
granted full possibilities by the colonial empires to establish their political influence in the
area. Consequently, they helped the British government while also succeeding their own
objectives, and at the end of Colonial reign, they made the same type of power rights.

Colonization and Peripheralization

Industrial Revolution in united Kingdom was a big landmark in human history. The
British rule in India was a new relationship with the people of India. What role did British
colonial rule in India play in the development of the Industrial Revolution in England, as well
as the new relationships that developed as a result of that rule? Studies of the Industrial
Revolution, the transition from feudalism to capitalism in England, and the colonial
transformation do not typically ask such a question. Together with other "world economies"
and "mini-systems" of isolated and involuntary simple agricultural hunting or gathering
societies, the "Indian Ocean area," which was previously a "proto-world-economy," is
dissolved. as well as being incorporated as new peripheries into the expanding modern
world system that is centered on Europe.

The term "agreement" and colonization were both used in the 19th century. The idea
of agreement. gave the right to Europeans to control the land of Indians, land in their name.
Think about the settlers they were a man of capital, who brought their money and resources
to India. Their number was expected to remain in a small figure. As the India Commission
observed in 1930, the Europeans in India were“a foreigner, who, after passing his working
years in India, looks forward to freeing from his job to that other country which is his real
home( Omvedt, 1980). Only a small portion of those who go out for the motive of business
settle down in India permanently, and the domiciled European community does not grow”.

During Colonization immigration from the British to India came, The British
government allotted the land to the immigration person and the army man(Gough, 1974)
.After the allotment of land to the British people, they were the permanent members of India.
Without capital, they needed the basic skills of forming and handcrafts and they were to live
by their labor on the land. when India for as long as Europeans limited commercial and
political engagement with India confined them, to some shore factories the issue of
colonization and labor did not seriously arise (Rudra,1981).. But the British were a success
in settling in India, during the second half of the 18th and starting years of the 19th century,
British settlement and then colonization came to the fore. The attitude of East India
Company was negative. The British wanted to access Europe in India without barriers, In
1830 it was in a position that changed its attitude into an effective policy(Chutia,2020).

English landowners or pioneers would be both 'hazardous' and 'crooked'. Working

up resistance to the British would be the logical rule, separate the laid out arrangement of
farming and tax assessment, and substitute for cultivators experienced in the harvests, soil,
and environment of India Europeans who were aliens to these.“We cannot understand the
arts of cultivation in this soil and climate so well as the natives. The landholder will consider
us with jealousy and hatred, as the invaders of his rights and property. The ryots, attached
by custom, religion, and prejudice, to the authority of their ancient masters, will not readily
submit to labor for new ones, to whom they are not bound by any natural relation of
manners or religion, or by reciprocal obligations of protection and dependence. A few
Europeans will be thinly scattered over the face of the country; the native inhabitants will
desert it”.

762
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

Feudalism Development in India during British Rule

The British came into power in India and started working for revenue because the
British wanted their economy stronger than the other countries (Sharma, 1985)., they used
many methods to increase the revenue and introduced many systems to India like the
Zamindar, Ryotwari System, Mahalwari System, which revenue collector for British( Husain,
& Sarwar,2012).

Zamindar

The zamindar system was introduced by Cornwallis in 1793 through Permanent

settlement, Under this act, the British government allotted the land to the zamindar
permanently. lifetime Zamindar agreements were made in Bengal, Orissa, and Bihar
divisions of U.P. This agreement was extended in 1800 to Northern Carnatic and North-
Western Provinces. Zamindars were the owners of the lands( Murdoch, 1984). Zamindars
were permitted to collect revenue from the peasants. the Central Provinces, Punjab, and the
central providences while Oudh villages are placed under middlemen with whom the
government deals directly( Perveen, & Dasti2014) The Zamindari system covered mostly
30 % of the British controlling area. The always pad tex even the production was zero. tax
The paid tax in cash tax The realized amount would be divided into 11 parts. 10/11 of the
portion belongs to East India Company. 1/11 of the portion belongs to Zamindars.

Ryotwari system

The Ryotwari system was also a revenue collector system to increase the income of
the British government. This system was implemented by Sir Thomas Munro in 1882,who
was appointed as Governor of Madras in 1820. This system was extended to the Mumbai
area under the supervision of Thomas Reid( Roy, 2011). The taxation was based on the
condition of land not the income of land. But in some conditions, they demand 50 % of the
gross revenue. Under the Ryotwari System, the farmers had ownership rights but tax rate
was very high 50% tax on barren and 60% on irrigated land was imposed. British
administration directly gathered taxes from the farmers.

Mahalwari System

Mahalwari system was also a revenue gatherer system.Holt Mackenzie introduced

it in1822 and it was amended in 1833. This was the preliminary land taxation system
introduced in North-West India. Later It was introduced in North-West Frontier ,Central
Province, , Agra, Gangetic Valley, Punjab , etc of British India. According to this system, the
land was distributed into Mahals. Each Mahal contains one or more villages. The whole
village or Mahal was counted a single unit for tax collection. The village committee was
assigned the responsibility of tax collection. Possession rights were bestowed the peasants.
The tax rate was very high. The Mahalwari system consisted on many provisions of
Ryotwari and the Zamindari System.

The property or mahals restrictive bodies where terrains have a place together with
the town's local area called the group of co-shares. The assortment of co-shares is
answerable for the installment of land income however individual obligation was not
forgotten about the singular obligation stays working totally. The subject of presenting a
settlement of land income close by finished and rout regions came to be the front of the
approaching of nineteenth 100 years. Nonetheless, this framework was begun exclusively
by passing the Regulation VII of 1822 which was the down-to-earth ramifications of
Mackenzie’s moment of 1819. The framework had been poor down in light of the extreme
state interest and unbending nature in its working and assortment of land income. In an
ordinarily Mahalwari town, the co-sharers are the cultivators. The owners didn't draw in
themselves exclusively with the public authority, yet by villages.
763
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

The pioneer Madras Presidency

Contained an area of 148,796 square miles (385,380 km2), of which 141,705 square
miles (367,010 km2) were under direct British rule, while the rest was disseminated
amongst the regal states. In the areas managed by the British, three frameworks of land
ownership existed zamindaris, and ryotwari. In 1911, zamindari homes covered 26 million
sections of land (110,000 km2)and involved more than one-fourth of the total region of the
presidency. In 1945-46, there were 20,945,456 sections of land (84,763.25 km2) of
Zamindari estates which yielded an income of 97,83,167 Rupees and 58,904,798 sections of
land (238,379.26 km2) lands which yielded an income of Rs. 7,26,65,330.

Constitutional Steps

The British government passed many laws in India to maintain its occupation. The year
1919 was a great year when the First World War ended. During this period the British
government in India adopted aggressive policy to destroy the Indian militants and nationalists
those challenged British colonial rule ( Halifax, 1935). The purpose of the Government of India
Act of 1919 was to benefit the Indian elite class which was politically average by creating a road
map to allow Indians the ability to finally govern themselves but under British rule( Rizwan, &
Hassan, 2020).The British wanted to change India's political system and develop an as liberal
and international vision for all nations( Haridas,2020). The internationalist talk put pressure on
nations of colonies. International laws are necessary for the relationship with European nations.
As the British government confronted anti colonial challenges, it oddly extended its impact
under an internationalist system in different spots, maybe most strikingly, the Middle East,
where it held order over enormous pieces of the previous Ottoman Empire. The Most important
reform after the World War British India was the pathway of the Indian Government Act 1919,
it is also known as the Montagu Chelmsford reforms. This act is well known as the great change
in India's history in the 20th century.

Conclusion

In the end, it can be summarized that feudalism has passed through different ages
and stages of its evolution and is used in various viewpoints. The real concept of feudalism
is almost the same as taking hold and affecting the peasants and society. Feudalism was, a
European idea but it also moved into underdeveloped countries. Europe may not exist in
this time, after and return to capitalism. The British changed many methods to stabilize their
feudalism in India, and to collect revenue. British used this step in India for stability to their
feudalism. British Government ’s main purpose was to make money from India. The purpose
of the British was to make the people loyal to the British government.

764
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

References

Alavi, H. (1980). India: transition from feudalism to colonial capitalism. Journal of

Contemporary Asia, 10(4), 359-399.

Arnold, D. (1983). White colonization and labour in Nineteenth‐century India. The Journal
of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 11(2), 133-158.

Chutia, M. (2020). Growth and development of education in India during British period in a
historical perspective. International Journal of Management (IJM), 11(9), 1464-1470.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Duly, L. C. (1965). The failure of British land policy at the Cape, 1812–281. The Journal of
African History, 6(3), 357-371.

Green, W. A. (1992). Periodization in European and world history. Journal of World History,
34(2),13-53.

Gough, K. (1974). Indian peasant uprisings. Economic and Political Weekly, 9(32), 1391-
1412.

Habib, M. (1963). The agrarian system of Mughal India (1556-1707). The agrarian system of
Mughal India (1556-1707). Bombay: Asia Pubi. House

Halifax, V. (1935). Indian Constitutional Reform. International Affairs (Royal Institute of

International Affairs 1931-1939), 14(2), 198-216.

Haridas, V. (2020). Indian Feudalism Debate and Other Models of Polity. International
Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 9(10),1384-1387.

Husain, M. H., & Sarwar, F. H. (2012). A comparative study of Zamindari, Raiyatwari and
Mahalwari land revenue settlements: the colonial mechanisms of surplus extraction in
19th century British India. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(4), 16-26.

Kosambi, D. D. (1955). On the development of feudalism in India. Annals of the Bhandarkar

Oriental Research Institute, 36(3/4), 258-269.

Moore, J. W. (2002). The crisis of feudalism: An environmental history. Organization &

Environment, 15(3), 301-322.

Mukhia, H. (1981). Was there feudalism in Indian history?. The Journal of Peasant
Studies, 8(3), 273-310.

Murdoch, D. H. (1984). Land policy in the eighteenth-century British Empire: The sale of
Crown Lands in the Ceded Islands, 1763–1783. The Historical Journal, 27(3), 549-574.

Omvedt, G. (1980). Migration in colonial India: the articulation of feudalism and capitalism
by the colonial state. The journal of peasant studies, 7(2), 185-212.

Parasher, A(1987). Feudal Formations.Social Scientist, 15(8), 118–25.

Perveen, S., & Dasti, H. A. (2014). Feudalism: A pastime of power, economic and political
influence in Pakistan. Pakistan Vision, 15(1), 59.

765
 Annals of Human and Social Sciences (AHSS) April-June 2023, Vol. 4, No. 2

Pozzo, B. (2007). A suitable boy: the abolition of Feudalism in India. Erasmus Law
Review, 1(3) 41-58

Purohit, V. (1979 ). The Asiatic Mode of Production and Feudalism in Indian History and
Historiography. In Proceedings of the Indian HistoryCongress,40(1),741-750

Sharma, R. S. (1985). How feudal was Indian feudalism?. The Journal of Peasant
Studies, 12(2-3), 19-43.

Rizwan, M., & Hassan, M.(2020). Constitutional Development in British India. Journal of
Historical Studies, VI(I), 23-35

Rudra, A. (1981). Against feudalism. Economic and Political Weekly,16(52), 2133-2146.

Roy, T. (2011). The Economic History of India, 1857-1947, Delhi: Oxford University Press

Sharma, R. S. (1958). The Origins of Feudalism in India (c. AD 400-650). Journal of the
Economic and Social History of the Orient, 1(3), 297-328.

Stein, B. (1985). Politics, Peasants and the deconstruction of feudalism in medieval

India. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 12(2-3), 54-86.

Swamy, A. V. (2011). 'Land and Law in Colonial India', in Debin. M, & Jan L.V. Z (eds), Law
and Long-Term Economic Change: A Eurasian Perspective CA: Stanford University Press

Timberg, T. A. (1982). Bihari backwardness: Does feudalism frustrate? Asian Survey, 22(5),
470-480.

766