Transaction of Ancient Period into Medieval

As we know about separation of history into three segments - Mediaeval period is one of the most important segment, which can be considered as the bridge between ancient and modern period. Like Western countries mediaeval age in India is associated with the rise of feudalism. To make understanding about medieval period it’s essential to know about the ‘classical’ segment of ancient period. B. D Chattopadhyay is of the opinion that the period between 2nd 3rd Century CE to 6th century known as classical formation period[1]. It means during this time segment (Gupta age) we can see standardization in several field like literature, polity, social, economic, and cultural field. During post Gupta period several Changes occurred in practices of ancient customs, culture and tradition. Especially in the field of polity, economic, social and culture. By analyzing these changes during classical and post classical period we can draw the socio-economic figure of mediaeval India.

In Political field

Post classical period is known for Political degeneration. To know about political changes occurred during this period lets discuss a little bit about some features of ancient or classical age monarchial system. In ancient period the state was centralized in nature and ruled by highly bureaucratic Rajanya or Kshatriya. He was the supreme authority of the state in which the hierarchy of power based on land holding was absent. Its officials were paid mainly in cash.

During Post Gupta Period this centralized state system collapsed due to Decline recorded in trade system. It causes significant change in the mode of payment to government officials. Due to lack of currency the state introduced ‘land grant system’ in lieu of cash salary. Due to Increase in numbers of ‘land grant’ (Agrahara) to the Brahmins and political subordinates, the centralized state system rapidly converted into decentralized or feudal state system. That caused emergence of feudalism. These feudal rulers were very soon converted into semi-autonomous ruler generally known as Samant or Maha-Samant.[2]

In Social Field

During this period the old Brahmanical order modified. Due to Agrahara (revenue free land) to Brahmins a new class that is called middle class emerged. The result is the Brahmin and political subordinates converted into landholders. It caused the emergence of Jajmani system. In this system landholders community regarded as patrons and the serving community as clients. Beside it during this period the warrior class ‘Rajput’ community adopted the profession of the Kshatriya.[3] To legitimize their position among people they also claimed descent from the solar and lunar dynasties. The Vaishya were the ancient agricultural community, they remained unchanged. While Shudras who were the landless laborers in the beginning, during this period they emerged as a rich peasants called Mahattars or Mahto.  

Beside it in ancient period Hindu society segmented into four social groups – Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra. In the beginning there were no chances to intermixing of these Varnas. Because prevention of Varna-Shankar (mixing up of Varna) was one of the main objective of a king. But during classical period intermixing of these Varna’s can be seen. According to the brahmanical explanation this illegitimate mixture of Varnas caused the formation of the ‘Jati’[4]. In the beginning Jati was beyond of the four Varnas. Which can be seen in Sanskrit texts. One of the important Sanskrit text ‘Manusmriti’ mentions only the four Varnas and a few 61 mix caste. While the another Sanskrit text Vishnu dharmottar purana references thousands of mix caste as well as hierarchized composition of the Shudra Varna by putting different groups in categories of uttam (good), madhyam (middle) and Adham (inferior).[5]

In Economic field

Indian long distanced foreign trade flourished since the Kushan period. But it declined during Gupta (with Roman Empire) and post Gupta period (with Iran).[6] That's why the early historical urban centers and commercial cities of northern India declined. After the decline of urban centers the village converted into units of production. Because the soldiers, artisans merchants, migrated from town to rural areas.

In religious field

During this period the existing religion divided into several sects or subsects. By replacing brahma, Indra like Vedic period God Vishnu, Shiv, Durga etc. emerged as supreme deities. Domestic workshop overshadowed the cult of sacrifices. Dana, Prasad, Pooja, Bhakti, teerth system emerged and promoted. Due to continuous grants, land grants temple became the significant center of social economic and cultural activities, especially in South India.

Beside these changes others changes took place during this period like the peasantization of the tribes, emergence of several local languages etc.

Thus we can see that the period between post Gupta period and the establishment of the Delhi sultanate, witnessed several significant structural changes in polity, society, economy field. These changes switched the ancient period into medieval.

---

[1] Chattopadhyaay, Brajdulal (2012) The Making of Early Medieval India’ Oxford University Press, Page No XXIII

[2] Chattopadhyaay, Brajdulal (2012) The Making of Early Medieval India’ Oxford University Press, Page No 11

[3] Sharma R S (2015) Early Medieval Indian Society, Orient BlackSwan Publication, Page no. 24

[4] Chattopadhyaay, Brajdulal (2012) The Making of Early Medieval India’ Oxford University Press, Page No. XXV

[5] Chattopadhyaay, Brajdulal (2012) The Making of Early Medieval India’ Oxford University Press, Page No. XXVI

[6] Sharma R S (2015) Early Medieval Indian Society, Orient BlackSwan Publication, Page no. 27

Periodization of Indian History

Likewise world history Indian history has been divided by the Indian historians into three periods. These periods are ancient, mediaeval and modern. However beside these we also know about its segmented periods like Paleolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, early historic, classic, early mediaeval, Sultanate, Mughal, late mediaeval period, colonial period etc. We can see this periodization in history part of Social science subject of upper primary school level. Where class six history syllabus deals with ancient period, class seven with mediaeval and class eight with modern period. Here a question rises that why historians separated history in different? What is the base of this periodization? In a simple way we can say that periodization of history is essential to understand a time segment better. It may be a right but we can’t say it a perfect answer. Then what would be the perfect answer? To know about it let’s have a pip into Indian history writing.

The systematic history writing begins in India by the officials of the British East India Company. Systematic history writing means the writings based on authentic evidence (Primary source), critical thinking and chronology, which is the soul of historiography. Most of the historians of this period who wrote Indian history belonged to European countries and followed the history writing theories of the enlightenment (A revolt against religion) period historians, philosophers like Niebuhr (Critical examination of the sources), Ranke (Application of primary sources in inquiry), August Comte (Application of scientific method of inquiry) of Europe. After the battle of Plassey the East India Company officials not only came into the contact of Indian languages like Sanskrit, Farsi etc. but also in Sanskrit and Farsi texts. They studied, researched and translated it in English. After the establishment of East India Company rule in Bengal the Governor of Bengal Henry Vansittart (1760-64 AD) commissioned Salimullah to write a history of Bengal.[1] This text has been translated into English by Francis Gladwin under the title ‘A Narrative of transactions in Bengal’. After it by the inspiration of Warren Hastings Ghulam Hussain Khan Tabatabai wrote a history of India from 1707 to 1780 under the title ‘Siyar U’l Muntakharin (View of Modern Times)[2]. It is the history of the British Government policy in the Bengal Presidency. ‘Robert Orme’ the historiographer of the east India Company from 1769 to 1801 deeply studied the Indo-Muslim chronicles of the medieval period and wrote one the famous text ‘Historical fragments of the Mughal Empire, of the Marathas, and off the English concerns in Indostan in from M.Dc. LIX'. On the basis of Muslim historian writings Robert Orme easily wrote a brief outline of the Muslim ruling dynasties in India from the invasion of Muhammad bin Qasim in 712 AD. But their headache was the ancient Indian History Exploration especially before the Turk invasion.  

For it Orientalist and Indologist approach historians came forward. In this addition Mrityunjay Sharma One of the teacher of Ford William College of Calcutta wrote a historical text in Bengali which was published in 1808 AD. In this text he separated Indian history into four periods – Satya Yug, Treta Yug, Dwapar Yug, and Kali Yug.[3] the imperialist approached historian also contributed in it. Imperialist historian James mill wrote a textbook which published in 1817. In his text he divided Indian history into three segment – the Hindu, the Muslim and the British period.[4] This periodization was based on the religion of the ruling king of that period. So James Mill is off the opinion that the mediaeval period in Indian history begins with the establishment of Muslim rule or Delhi Sultanate in 1206 AD and it continued till the arrival of the British in power. Several Nationalist Historians like K P Jaiswal, R.C Majumdar, and R. K Mukharjee etc. accepts the mills theory of periodization in their Writings. In this addition historian V. Smith divided India's past into 5 phases - the ancient period, Hindu period, the period of the mediaeval Hindu kingdoms, the Muslim period, and the British period[5]. There were several problems to accept this religion based periodization. Because neither all rulers of Ancient India followed Hinduism nor all rulers of mediaeval period were followers of Islam.  However Up to the decade of 1960 these two periodization were used by Indian historians as well as Indian History Congress also.[6] But the Marxist Approached Historians called it communal classification of Indian history. Because the purpose of James mill's periodization was to establish the fact that the British rule is better than the Hindu and Muslim Rule.

After Indian Independence the Marxist historians like DD Kosambi, R S Sharma challenged Mills theory of Periodization of Indian History. According to Marxist historian the periodization of Indian history can’t be done on the basis of religion of the ruling ruler or dynasty. But on the base of societal change came in different period. By analyzing a series of inscriptions, land grants by the kings to the Brahmans, temples and the political subordinate etc. Marxist historians identified important change in state, society and in economy especially after the Gupta period. These changed system also can be seen in practice during Sultanate and Mughal period before the advent of the British in power. So they called this period Early Medieval Period as a period between ancient and medieval.

Thus on the basis of Marxist approached historians opinion after indian independence the period from Palaeolithic age to Gupta period kept under Ancient Period, Post Gupta Period to the establishment of the british rule under Medieval period and after it regarded as Modern Period in Indian History.

---

[1] Shreedharan E (2003) A Textbook of Historiography, Page No. 380

[2] Ibid. Page No. 380

[3] Ibid. Page No. 387

[4] Singh Upinder (2011) Rethinking Early Medieval India: A Reader, Oxford University press. Page No. 1

[5] Ibid. Page No. 2

[6] Sharma R S (2015) Early Medieval Indian Society, Orient BlackSwan Publication, Page no. 17