Introduction to Pre-Modern Indian Polity
Pre-modern Indian polity has been examined through various lenses. Scholars often describe it as ‘traditional’ or ‘Oriental Despotic’. The former interprets political structures as pre-state polities. The latter suggests a stagnant political system. Both perspectives highlight the perceived continuity in Indian political history.
Segmentary State Model
A. Southall developed the segmentary state model based on studies in East Africa. This model is applicable to Indian contexts, particularly in relation to the mandala theory. J.C. Heesterman and others have linked it to the political structures of various Indian dynasties. The model emphasizes limited territorial sovereignty and ritual hegemony rather than political dominance.
Oriental Despotism
K.A. Wittfogel’s concept of Oriental Despotism suggests an unchanging political landscape in India. This view posits that hydraulic societies dominated Indian polity from ancient times until the 19th century. It implies a lack of political dynamism and marks the central role of the ruler.
Change in Indian Polity
While many scholars acknowledge changes in Indian polity, they disagree on the mechanisms. A.S. Altekar pointed to feudal tendencies as a source of political malaise. T.V. Mahalingam identified checks on royal power through local chieftains. K.A. Nilakanta Sastri traced a shift in Chola polity from tribal to more complex structures.
Religious Identity of Rulers
The religious identity of rulers also influenced political changes. R.C. Majumdar noted that the end of ‘Hindu rule’ marked transition. This period, characterised by the reign of Harshavardhana, symbolised the decline of a unified political order. The shift from Hindu to other forms of governance was seen as a destabilising factor.
Feudal Polity
The theory of Indian Feudalism, as proposed by D.D. Kosambi and R.S. Sharma, describes a fragmented political landscape during the Early Medieval period. This fragmentation marked a departure from the centralized empires of the Early Historic period. Feudal polity introduced hierarchical social structures, replacing the binary state-peasantry divide.
Emergence of Feudal Structures
Feudal polity emerged from the decline of a centralised bureaucratic system. New centres of power replaced traditional bureaucratic units. Land assignment systems became prevalent, leading to the ‘percellization’ of sovereignty. This process was evident in the Kushana and Satavahana polities.
Agrarian Relations and Land Grants
Land grants, such as agraharas and brahmadeyas, played important role in shaping feudal polity. B.N. S. Yadava brought into light the significance of the samanta system in early medieval governance. However, B.D. Chattopadhyaya argued that secular land assignments also contributed to political dynamics.
Integrative Polity
B.D. Chattopadhyaya introduced the concept of ‘legitimation process’. This refers to the relationship between the king’s temporal power and the priestly class’s spiritual authority. The king’s role was to maintain social order through a balance of power and dharma. This dynamic was critical for sustaining the state’s legitimacy.
Role of Temples and Bhakti
Temples served as focal points for integrating diverse social norms. The ideology of bhakti emerged as a powerful unifying force. Kings often identified themselves with temple deities, reinforcing their authority. The Pallavas and Cholas exemplified this integration through temple patronage.
Lineage and Political Power
Political power in early medieval India was often linked to lineage. The proliferation of ruling lineages created a complex network of authority. This network did not always correspond to static territorial boundaries. For instance, the Kadambas and Kalachuris expanded their influence beyond their original regions.
Genealogy and Ruling Lineages
Inscriptions from the 7th century reveal elaborate genealogies of ruling families. These genealogies often traced origins to mythical heroes. The emergence of local roots for ruling lineages was in defining political power.
Territorial Dynamics of Power
Territorial changes were common as new dynasties emerged. The shift from one ruling lineage to another often redefined political landscapes. This process indicates that state formation is not always a linear progression.
Segmentary State Characteristics
The segmentary state model outlines specific characteristics of early medieval polity. These include limited sovereignty, a centralised core, and quasi-autonomous administrative foci. The model critiques the absence of absolute political control at the centre.
Critique of the Segmentary Model
Critics argue that the segmentary state model overlooks the political and economic dimensions of state structure. B.D. Chattopadhyaya asserts that a state requires stability and resource mobilisation. The model fails to account for the dynamic nature of power across different regions.
Samanta System and Political Integration
The samanta system was central to early medieval polity. It represented a shift from feudal decentralisation to political integration. The overlord-subordinate relationship became dominant, connecting various local power bases.
Ranking and Political Structure
Ranking within the samanta hierarchy was crucial for political organisation. The roles of various ranks, such as dandanayaka and mandalika, defined the structure. This ranking system facilitated military cooperation and resource distribution among lineages.
Evolution of Early Medieval Polity
The early medieval polity marked a transition from limited state societies to more expansive structures. This period acted as a prelude to greater control by medieval states. The emergence of nobility and structured service assignments characterised this evolution.
Conclusion – About Early Medieval Polity
The study of early medieval Indian polity reveals a complex interplay of power, lineage, and socio-religious dynamics. About these elements provides insight into the broader historical context of India’s political evolution. The integration of various political structures laid the groundwork for future developments in Indian governance.
