Name - krishna tyagi (5056)

Assignment of HOI
Q- Critically analyse the significance of the 'Early medieval' period in context of the
periodisation of Indian History. Describe its varied characteristics in the light of recent
research.
Answer - The early medieval period in India has become the subject of intense debate over
the last couple of decades 1. One of the main features of this debate has been the issue of
periodization. The tripartite division of India's past into the Hindu, Muslim, and British
periods was first introduced by the European scholar James Mill 2. However, Indian
historians, such as R.C. Majumdar, criticised this periodization as absurd and inconsistent,
replacing these terms with Ancient, Medieval, and Modern 3. Historian N.R. Ray argued for
analytical attempts to determine whether chronological labels could be understood in terms of
specific attributes associated with them . As historians accepted the idea of the medieval
period and its subdivision, the early medieval period, it came to be seen as a transitional
phase between the ancient and medieval periods 4. When historians began to consider early
medieval times as an important phase, several elements became central to the discussion:-
(a)The nature of the change from ancient to early medieval(B)The construction of the early
medieval period(C) The methodological causes for defining the earlymedieval period 5.The
use of labels like "early medieval" and "medieval" seems inconsistent because they are
applied to different periods in various parts of Indian history, such as the Sultanate period in
North India, the Chola period in South India, and the Chalukya period in the Deccan. This
suggests that we need to rethink how we categorize historical periods 6.To understand the
beginnings and characteristics of early medieval India, historians have proposed three
different models to explain the transition to early medieval India in various regions7
.However the most prominent one from them is the model of 'Indian Feudalism'. Historian
N.R ray envisages three sub periods within the medieval : (i)seventh to twelfth
century,(ii)twelfth to the first quarter of the sixteenth century,and (iii) first quarter of the
sixteenth to close to eighteenth century. He does not specify the major attributes of this period
instead he offered a broad package of characteristics which define indian medievalism
1
UPINDER SINGH : RETHINKING OF EARLY MEDIEVAL INDIA . ( n.p.) 1
2
Ibid.
3
Ibid.3
4
BRAJADULAL CHATTOPADHYAYA : THE MAKING OF EARLY MEDIEVAL INDIA ( NEW DELHI :
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS - 2012 ) 1-2
5
Ibid.3-4
6
Ibid.7
7
UPINDER SINGH.5
through feudalism . He listed these major traits for defining this : 1) All ruling dynasties
became regional, and in this sense their genesis is considered comparable to the emergence of
European nation-states. 2)The character of the economy changed from a money economy to a
natural economy.3) In various media of social communication (such as script, language and
literature) there was the crystallisation of a regional character-a process which offers, again, a
'striking parallel' with European developments.4)The dominant feature characterising religion
was a proliferation of sects and sub-sects. 5) Art activities too came to be recognizable only
in terms of 'regional' schools, such as Eastern, Orissan, Central Indian, West Indian and
Central Deccan; or in terms of such labels as Pallava and Chola, in which again the regional
context is implicit 8.To understand Indian feudalism, it is helpful to first grasp the concept of
European feudalism. In Europe, the political essence of feudalism was rooted in organising
the entire administrative structure based on land. Its economic foundation lay in the
institution of serfdom, where peasants were bound to the land, which was held by
intermediaries placed between the king and the actual tillers. These peasants were required to
pay rent, either in kind or labour, to the intermediaries. This system operated on a
self-sufficient economy, where goods were produced primarily for personal use and not for
the market 9.
R.S. Sharma saw Indian feudalism as a system of distributing the means of production and
taking surplus from it. He believed that feudalism developed in an agrarian economy, where
there was a class of landlords and a class of dependent peasants. In this system, landlords
took surplus from the peasants using social, religious, or political methods, which are called
"extra-economic" means. At its core, Indian feudalism was based on the relationship between
the lord and the peasants, with the estate being exploited by its owner, manager, or
beneficiary 10. According to him , feudalism in india ,unlike in europe ,began with the land
grants made to Brahmans, temples, and monasteries.evidences of land grants came from 1st
century bce 11.But they became more prominent after the fifth century onwards when
“pravarasena 2” a vakataka ruler gave up his control over almost all sources of revenue,
including pasturage,hides and charcoal mines for the production of salt ,forced labour and all
hidden treasures12 .D.d kosambi ,another prominent historian ,gave two stage theory to define

8
BRAJADULAL CHATTOPADHYAYA.8-9
9
RAM SHARAN SHARMA : INDIAN FEUDALISM ( DARYAGANJ,NEW DELHI : LAXMI
PUBLICATIONS - 2024 ) 1
10
RAM SHARAN SHARMA : HOW FEUDAL WAS INDIAN FEUDALISM ( n.p) ,1985 .17
11
D N JHA : EARLY MEDIEVAL PERSPECTIVE ; AN INTRODUCTION ( n.p,n.d ) .3
12
R S SHARMA ( INDIAN FEUDALISM) .2
indian Feudalism 13.He believed that the simple structure of closed economy,was disturbed
during the early centuries if Christian era ,when the kings began to transfer their fiscal and
administrative rights over land to their subordinate chiefs ,who then came into direct relation
with peasantry ,this process was termed as ' feudalism from above ' . In another aspect he said
that a class of landowners developed within the village between the state and the peasantry,
gradually wielding with armed power on the local population ,this process was termed as
'feudalism from below ' 14.
In the context of south india ,the problem of periodisation is highly complex and even
difficult to define the periods of history ,because unlike northern parts of india ,southern india
, didn't even see a change in religion of the rulers , there were no spectacular conquests ,nor
dynastic changes dramatic and noisy enough to proclaim the exit of one period and the entry
of another. Therefore,in order to understand the change of period , historians found different
models which are not only based on political structure but also on the economy, society and
culture15 . And it was Burton Stein who shook things up in southern india , by putting forward
a searing critique of traditional historiography. He suggested that the "segmentary state
model" , designed by anthropologist 'Aidan Southall 'in the context of his work on the
African Alur tribe, could be applied to South India16 .He took hundreds of local societies
called - Nadus,from the inscriptions and literature of Chola times as the fundamental
components or pyramidically organized segments of the society.He said that the segmentary
state refers to a political order which is distinguished from others . He saw it as a unitary state
with its fixed territory,its centralised administration and coercive power . According to him
,the segmentary state has the following political order : 1) there are numerous centres or
political domains ,2) political power and sovereignty are differentiated in such a way as to
permit appropriate power to be wielded by many , but full and royal sovereignty by an
anointed king ,3) all of the numerous centres have autonomous administrative capabilities
and coercive means,4) there is a state in the recognition,by lesser political centres ,often
through ritual forms ,of a single ritual centre ,an anointed king .
These Nadus ( numerous political domains)were the stratified and ranked , occupationally
diverse,and culturally varied .The structuring of localised, hierarchically organised segments
was influenced by various social, political, and cultural factors, as well as ecological
conditions. This led to the formation of three distinct types of localities, which I have

13
UPINDER SINGH .3
14
D N JHA .3
15
KESAVAN VELUTHAT : THE EARLY MEDIEVAL IN SOUTH INDIA ( n.p ) - 2011.20-21
16
UPINDER SINGH .8
categorised as "central," "intermediate," and "peripheral" zones within the Chola segmentary
political system.17B D Chattopadhyay and Herman Kulke argued from the political and
cultural points of view,that the early medieval period was marked by integration and the
process of intensive state formation in areas that were peripheral to the heartlands of the
earlier large kingdoms and empires 18 Evidence of such agrarian expansion and political
integration can be traced down at the time of king harsa during the seventh century after the
decline of the Gupta Empire19 . Chattopadhyaya identified certain important processes that
were at work in all phases of Indian history, including the early medieval: the expansion of
state society through local state formation; the transformation of tribes into peasants and the
expansion of caste; and cult appropriation and integration. Kulke on the other hand offers a
further refinement and elaboration of the integrative model, which he describes as a
processual model of integrative state formation.He highlighted the transformation of tribal
chieftains into Hindu rajas and the interactions between stares and tribal communities, which
were reflected in the patronage of autochthonous cults by upwardly mobile rulers.He
acknowledges chat integration also involved war, conquest, and violence, and that, in spite of
the systematic expansion and centralising tendencies of certain states, the writ of the emperor
did not run unimpeded20 .This process started from the local nuclei of early socio-economic
and political development and increasingly came to include their hinterlands. This process of
integrative state formation in early medieval India refered to three concentrically connected
geographical areas and accordingly went through three chronologically distinct stages of state
development. These geographical zones were (i) the local nuclear area from which the
political development issued, (ii) its surroundings peripheral zones, and (iii) beyond these
peripheral zones the nuclear areas of (originally) independent 'neighbour' (samanta). These
three spatial zones found their chronological dimension in three successive stages of state
formation, which may be termed as chiefdom, early kingdom, and imperial kingdom.'
There are four main factors behind this integrated process which are : 1) the foundation and
extension of chiefly power within a nuclear area ,2)the emergence of the early kingdom
through a stepwise penetration 3) the emergence of the imperial kingdom with a considerably
enlarged core region, consisting of the original dynastic nuclear area and its conquered and
integrated hinterland, and (iv) processes of integration during these three stages of state
formation with particular references to aspects of 'ritual policy'

17
BURTON STEIN : THE SEGMENTARY STATE ; INTERIM REFLECTIONS ( n.p ,n.d ) .72-74
18
UPINDER SINGH.11
19
HERMAN KULKE : THE EARLY AND THE IMPERIAL KINGDOM ( n.p,n.d) .91
20
UPINDER SINGH .11
Another important factor in this processual integration was the incorporation of mighty local
cults and the integration of their non- brahmana priests into the courtly circle .The major aim
of this integration of local cults into the courtly cult was to create a ' Vertical legitimization '
in order to rule within the nuclear region and its people .21
The time period Between sixth - seventh to twelfth -thirteenth centuries can be understood as
early medieval22 .This term 'early medieval period' can be understood as the bridge term , and
as a response to an older , flawed division of India's past in The Hindu, Muslim and British
period 23.This term goes beyond the narrowly political and cultural dimensions of history,and
further ,it clearly projects continuities in the operation of major societal processes in the later
phases of indian history 24.The flexibility about its chronological limits at both ends does not
reflect a unity in terms of historical process but allows disjunctures and regional variations 25.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
I have used below mentioned sources to compiling and creating this project :-
● Singh Upinder : Rethinking Early Medieval India - 2012 ( n.p ) 1,3,5,8,11,34,35.
● Chattopadhyaya Brajadulal: The Making Of Early Medieval India ( New Delhi :
Oxford University Press - 2012 ) 1-2 ,8-9,35 ,37.
● Sharma R S : Indian Feudalism ( Daryaganj,New Delhi : Laxmi Publications -2024 )
1-2.
● Sharma R S : How Feudal Was Indian Feudalism ( n.p ) ,1985 . 17
● JHA D N : Early Medieval Perspective;An Introduction ( n.p,n.d ) .3 .
● Veluthat Kesavan : The Early Medieval In South India ( n.p ) - 2011 . 20-21
● Stein Burton : the Segmentary State : Imperial Reflections ( n.p,n.d ) .72-74
● Kulke Herman :The Early And The Imperial Kingdom ( n.p,n.d) .91

21
HERMAN KULKE . 91-92 , 96
22
BRAJADULAL CHATTOPADHYAYA.35
23
UPINDER SINGH .34
24
BRAJADULAL CHATTOPADHYAYA.37
25
UPINDER SINGH .35