2. Mahajanapadas
• Buddhist and Jaina texts mention 16
powerful states (mahajanapadas)
during 6th century BCE
• The common thread connecting this
period archaeologically is the ceramic
type ‘Northern Black Polished Ware’
and Punch Marked Coins
• Two kinds of states:
• Rajyas (monarchies)
• Ganas and Sanghas (non-
monarchy)
• Ganas and Sanghas were
oligarchies, a council of group of
people
• Most powerful states: Magadha,
Kosala, Vatsa, Avanti
3. Mahajanapadas
• Buddhist and Jaina texts mention 16
powerful states (mahajanapadas)
during 6th century BCE
• The common thread connecting this
period archaeologically is the ceramic
type ‘Northern Black Polished Ware’
and Punch Marked Coins
• Two kinds of states:
• Rajyas (monarchies)
• Ganas and Sanghas (non-
monarchy)
• Ganas and Sanghas were
oligarchies, a council of group of
people
• Most powerful states: Magadha,
Kosala, Vatsa, Avanti
9. Nature of feudalism in ancient India
• Diverse views against R.S. Sharma:
• Questions the closed economy, decline or absence of
coinage proposed by R.S. Sharma
• Scholars like D.C. Sircar, B.D. Chattopadhyaya, B.N.
Mukherjee, raised objections as they emphasized on the
continuing monetary economy
• Cites examples of circulation of debased coins to meet the
trade activities, due to dwindling silver resources
• Thriving conditions of foreign and inter-regional trade
during the early medieval India
10. Nature of feudalism in ancient India
• Champakalakshmi (1987):
• Examined feudalism in connection with formation of the
state and role of kingship in peninsular India
• Generally, emergence of feudalism is attributed due to
declining economic conditions, paucity in coinage and
decline in disruption / decline in international trade
• In case of south India, contrasting situations as the
maritime trade continued and hence economy was different
• Emergence of trade guilds in south India cited as an
evidence, long distance trade with south east Asia, in
particular, with Kambujas, Shailendras and Thai region
• The monumental architecture during the Pallavas and
Cholas is also indicated as a negative evidence for the
emergence of feudalism
• The feudal system in south India is unnoticed until the rise
of the Vijayanagara dynasty
11. Nature of feudalism in ancient India
• As per B. Chattopadhyay (2012), feudal polity:
• ‘…emerged from the gradual breakdown of a centralized
bureaucratic state system, empirically represented by the
Mauryan state…’
• The diverse nature of regional powers of later periods
corresponds to the disintegration of bureaucratic units
• Feudal polity, characterised by a three-tier or two-tier
administrative system can be traced as early as the
Kushana and Satavahana periods in India
• However, it consolidated around 5th century CE during the
post-Gupta period
• The evidence of monetary system during the Mauryan
period and from Arthasastra may indicate the
remunerations paid in cash and not land grants
• The shift towards introducing the land grants along with
rights of administration, corroded the authority of the state
and the emerging situation is described as ‘parcellation’ of
the sovereignty
12. Nature of feudalism in ancient India
• Harbans Mukhia (1979):
• Questions the application of European models on the
Indian scenario
• Denied the subjugation of peasants in early medieval India
and cites examples of production based on economically
free peasants
• Criticised the attribution of feudalism due to state action
• High quantity of surplus existed in the form of land revenue
and cesses to the State; which formed the main instrument
of exploitation-due to high fertility of land and low
subsistence level of the peasants
• Equilibrium existed so that the state appropriated the
peasant’s surplus compensated by relative stability
• The redistribution networks enabled the resolving of social
conflicts
• Proposes a separate Asian model based on the available
evidences and against the imposition of European models
13. Further Readings
1. Champakalakshmi, R. 1987. Urbanisation in South India: The Role of Ideology and Polity. Social Scientist, Aug.
- Sep., 1987, Vol. 15, No. 8/9 (Aug. - Sep., 1987), pp. 67-117. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3520287
2. Chattopadhyaya, B.D. Introduction: The Making of Early Medieval India. In The Making of Early Medieval India,
Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994, pp. 1–37.
3. Harbans Mukhia. 1979. Was there Feudalism in Indian History? Proceedings of the Indian History Congress ,
1979, Vol. 40 (1979), pp. 229-280. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44141966
4. Kosambi, D.D. 1955. On the Development of Feudalism in India. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research
Institute, July - October 1955, Vol. 36, No. 3/4 (July - October 1955), pp. 258-269.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/44082960
5. Sharma, R.S. 1958. The Origins of Feudalism in India (c. A.D. 400-650). Journal of the Economic and Social
History of the Orient , Oct., 1958, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Oct., 1958), pp. 297-328. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3596372
