NAME:- ATREYA GAN CHAUDHURI

DIVISION:- D ( B.A.LLB)
PRN:- 17010223078
SUBJECT:- HISTORY
TEACHER:- DR. POOJA KAPOOR
TOPIC:- “ ADMINISTRATION IN ANCIENT
INDIA – FEUDAL SYSTEM AND FEUDAL
LORDS”
CERTIFICATE
The project entitled “----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------“ submitted to the Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA for History as part of
Internal assessment is based on my original work carried out under the guidance of
------------------------------- from ------------- to --------- ------. The research work has not been
submitted elsewhere for award of any degree.

The material borrowed from other sources and incorporated in the project has been duly
acknowledged.

I understand that I myself could be held responsible and accountable for plagiarism, if any,
detected later on.

Signature of the candidate

Date:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and assistance from
many people and I am extremely privileged to have got all this along the completion of my
project , all that I have accomplished in this project is due to such supervision and assistance
and I would like to express my gratitude towards them.

I respect and thank Dr. C.J.Rawandale for giving me an opportunity to do the project work
and entailing me with support and guidance which helped me complete my project

I also thank Dr. Pooja Kapur who took keen interest in my project and guided me throughout
till the completion of my project work .

I would also like to express my gratitude towards my fellow colleagues and seniors for being
a constant source of encouragement and support.
INTERIM:-
INTRODUCTION

With the advent of the Marxist point of view there occurred a vast change in the way
Ancient History was viewed. One of the topics which was very closely examined was
Feudalism in Ancient India. Scholars pertaining to Ancient Indian history have repeatedly
highlighted the prevalence of a lord system during that period. Through this project the
topic which is going to be looked upon and magnified is “ Administration in Ancient India-
Feudal System and Feudal Lords”.

AIM:-

The main aim of this project will be to shed light upon how administration worked in
Ancient India and draw an analysis of the metamorphosis of administration from Ancient
India to the present times.

OBJECTIVE:-

Administration in present India is often warranted unworthy of it’s stature and derogatory
comments are passed upon it . One of the objectives through this research paper will be to
shed light upon how nepotism was far more prevalent in the ancient times due to the lack of
a proper administrative system to control the actions of the ruler. The main objective of this
paper will be to elucidate upon the Feudal System in Ancient India and establish a
comprehensive study of the topic encompassing all the facets related to the topic , one of
the main reasons why this topic was chosen is the lack of proper know how regarding the
intricacies of Feudal System that exsisted in the historical times .

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:-

1. Origin and Establishment of Feudalism in Ancient India

 2. How did the advent of Feudalism change the exsisting social structure of the Indian
Society at that point of time.
3. Was nepotism a by product of the Feudalistic Culture followed in India. How various
cultures followed diverse Feudal Systems.
4. How feudalism today is just a common historical word with little relevance.
5. Was casteism an inherent part of Feudalism or are they two diverse topics.

CONCLUSION:-

The main objective that the research paper will try and address is a detailed study into a
niche topic such as feudalism which is often restricted to one paragraph definitions in most
book but this research paper will try and change that perception by establishing a far more
detailed study as to the socio economic implications brought about by the advent of
feudalism.
INTRODUCTION:-
In Europeans sense, feudalism depicts an arrangement of proportional lawful and military
commitments among the warrior respectability, rotating around the three key ideas of
rulers, vassals, and fiefs. In any case, in setting with antiquated India, the framework bit by
bit created from the earliest starting point of the land awards

With the advent of the Marxist point of view there occurred a vast change in the way
Ancient History was viewed. One of the topics which was very closely examined was
Feudalism in Ancient India. Scholars pertaining to Ancient Indian history have repeatedly
highlighted the prevalence of a lord system during that period.

ORIGIN AND ESTABLISHMENT OF FEUDALISM IN ANCIENT INDIA:-

The causes of Indian feudalism is situated in arrive gifts to brahmanas and sanctuaries from
the Gupta period onwards, and later to state authorities, including the estrangement of
financial, managerial and legal rights. The rise of different focuses of energy and a lot of
decentralization, ensuing to persistent, methodical parcellization of sway or state control
which progressively lapsed on to the donees, making them autonomous masters, has been
related to feudalism. The numerous, hierarchised focuses of energy, diverse evaluations
ofsamantas, (for example, mahamandalesvara, mandalika, mahasamanta, samanta,
laghusamanta, and so forth.), and reviewed arrive rights are seen to be the consequence of
state movement, i.e., arrive stipends. Decrease of long-separate and sea exchange, lack of
cash, and urban shrinkage evidently pleasantly adjusted off the contention. However the
decay of exchange towns-cash theory prompting the rise of Indian feudalism had its offer of
ideological issues from the earliest starting point, seeing that an outer factor, for example,
exchange was seen to represent earth shattering inner advancements summoning the
progress to another social arrangement. As anyone might expect in this way in the late
1970s and mid 1980s the possibility of the Kaliyuga emergency was set as an option or
supplementary causative factor disclosing the entry to feudalism. For this situation arrive
stipends were purportedly made to kill the unavoidable social emergency, however it is
another issue that they went ahead to introduce huge socio-political changes, including
moderately shut, independent towns. The development of localism, regionalism and shut
attitudes are attributed to these advancements. Despite the multiplication of ranks and the
rise of new social classifications, for example, the Rajputs and Kayasthas, society is generally
seen in bipolar terms, the masters and the laborers. The workers we are advised were
subjected to a few exactions, including constrained work, loss of group rights to backwoods,
field, lakes and nibbling grounds, and even removal. Sharp social divisions, we are told,
prompted laborer turmoil. Plus, there is likewise an inferred suspicion that the land
concedes crosswise over areas were produced using an epicenter with uniform results.
While the possibility of Kali Age emergency was recovering Indian Feudalism, at the same
time Harbans Mukhia brought up critical issues identifying with the nonappearance of
organized reliance of the early medieval Indian working class and their next to no
subsistence necessities contrasted with those in primitive Europe and queered the pitch.
This was soon trailed by crafted by Burton Stein, Hermann Kulke, and B. D. Chattopadhyaya.
The possibility of Indian feudalism by and large, with bearing on its changed measurements,
has been powerfully contended for and guarded by R. S. Sharma, B. N. S, Yadava, M. G. S.
Narayanan, D. N. Jha, R. N. Nandi, and Suvira Jaiswal, among others. In any case, the
financial and social measurements appear to have to a great extent subsumed the political.

HOW DID THE ADVENT OF FEUDALISM CHANGE THE EXSISTING SOCIAL

STRUCTURE OF THE INDIAN SOCIETY AT THAT POINT OF TIME?
The roots of Indian feudalism still stay to be tastefully clarified. The issues concerning the
possibility of the decrease and rot of towns, exchange and cash, among different issues,
have been talked about before by D. C. Sircar, B. N. Mukherjee, John Deyell, and K. M.
Shrimali and an evaluation of the circumstance is accessible in the works of Chattopadhyaya
in the mid 1990s. While the examples and followers of Indian feudalism contend for
shrinkage in the non farming division of the economy amid the seventh-tenth hundreds of
years, others have attempted to see the structures in which exchange and urbanism made
due in the early medieval circumstances. Additionally, by moving the concentration from
coin typology and dynastic issues to volumes it has been called attention to that metallic
coins were almost as abundant as in the early noteworthy period. The predominant
comprehension of country settlements and rustic culture as shut and independent has been
addressed in progress of N. Karashima, Jan Breeman, and Chattopadhyaya. They point to the
majority of provincial settlements and the variety in their spatial and social sythesis. All
settlements did not have a tank and sanctuary for instance, and a similar social gatherings
did not live in each settlement. The colossal between town participation and country
cooperations and additionally the complexities of rustic life have been featured. That
conveys us to the hypothesis of Kaliyuga emergency. It has been unmistakably shown that
the affirmed emergency was not a chronicled emergency. It was at most an emergency of
certainty with respect to the brahmanas, identified with the issue of support in a
circumstance of rivalry from the "unorthodox" groups or potentially a quick innovation of
the brahmanas to influence individuals to affirm to Brahmanical ideological standards during
a time portrayed by financial development, social change and the spread of state social
orders inside the Brahmanical structure outside Gangetic north India. The proposition of
decentralized, divided primitive nation lays on the presupposition of an equitably spread
Mauryan realm of uniform authoritative profundity the nation over, which did not change
substantially under the Kushanas and Satavahanas paving the way to proto medieval Gupta
times. Notwithstanding, late compositions on the idea of the Mauryan state scrutinizing the
expected level of centralization and institutionalization or homogenization of the realm, and
an alternate point of view of post Mauryan states concentrating on uneven advancements
and majority of societies irritate this comprehension. The persistent moving of the worker
boondocks and gigantic socio-social changes are reflected in the systematization of the
possibility of varnasamkara and the innovation of new ones, for example, apaddharma, Kali
yuga, and additionally the accentuation on obligation or dharma. Essentially, the brahmanas
and religious establishments, who were beneficiaries of imperial land gifts from the Gupta
period onwards, rather than being seen as operators of decentralization have been returned
to and seen as pace creators of regal expert. The related issues are the protest of gift, which
were generally a grama (town), palli (village), pataka (some portion of a town), measures of
land, and so forth, the quantum of such gifts and their relationship versus the land under
development crosswise over districts. For instance, one doesn't know how genuinely a
brahmana donee with some land or a piece of the town would impact agrarian relations in
the settlement. The rich laborers in the settlement could have had comparable amounts or
more land. Additionally, one needs to reevaluate the outcomes of a couple of brahmanic
settlements in a bigger agrarian territory. These are critical for the portrayal of the donees
and the rising social development

HOW VARIOUS CULTURES FOLLOWED DIVERSE FEUDAL SYSTEMS?

One may include that the early assignments were to the brahmanas and religious
foundations, while the administration assignments took after and did not go before the
beginnings of "primitive" nation. The inquiry at that point is can the religious donees with a
grama, a piece of it or more be seen as feudatories? On the off chance that awards to them
symbolized the financial and political fixing of the state it is not understandable in the
matter of why a great many kings and a great many dynasties proceeded with the wonder.
That separated, the provincial appropriation of early land allows plainly proposes their
neighborhood birthplaces, for the most part being made by some nearby administration in a
general setting of neighborhood state arrangement. The instance of the Matharas of
Kalinga, Vakatakas of Vidarbha, Kadambas of Kuntala, and the early Pallavas, for instance,
effectively makes the point. The spatial and fleeting correspondence between arrive
stipends and the spread of state social orders focuses to their commonly valuable, and not
opposing, relationship.Questions identified with the chain of command of feudatories and
the making of the pyramidal political structure, asset exchange from the subordinate to the
superordinate and the beginning of medieval nation have not been attractively replied on
account of north India or south India. In like manner, the general population have been
 underestimated and the need to open scaffolds or set up a harmony with them has not
been thought to be adequately vital inside this historiography. There has been some
engagement with Bhakti as philosophy of the medieval request. In any case it needs
acknowledgment that legitimation of energy or the constitution of specialist includes
persistent arrangements with well known yearnings and engagement with the social area.
People groups and societies are dynamic, not static. The varieties in time and space
crosswise over societies should be perceived and acknowledged. The issue to a great extent
is by all accounts, as has been brought up, the outcome of first making the structure and
after that searching for procedures to clarify it instead of the other path round, and this it
shows up is by and large step by step perceived in any event on account of south India.
Quickly expressed, "if there is have to take a gander at change in early Indian history, it is
important that students of history too every so often present some adjustment in the way
they see the past”1

WAS CASTEISM A PART OF FEUDALISM OR ARE THE TWO DIVERSE?

Feudatories regularly had their own particular sub-feudatories consequently developing a
chain of importance. At times the lord took away the give made to the feudatory yet it
happened once in a while. A different gathering of certifications were the Brahmans who for
religious reasons were frequently given the land and in addition the privilege to gather
income. In this framework the general population who endured the most were laborers who
for the most part were of the Shudra position. They paid the income to the master as well as
they needed to do a wide range of free work for him and additionally to pay extra
assessments. As the weight on the working class expanded they slipped advance into the
impoverishment. Exchange additionally declined the surplus abundance of the feudatories
and the ruler was utilized for obvious utilization.

HOW FEUDALISM TODAY IS JUST A COMMON HISTORICAL WORD WITH

LITTLE RELEVANCE?
Feudalism in India today is just a common historical term that ceases to hold much
relevance. Feudalism in ancient times used to be a demarcation of power but in today’s

1
Early Medieval India, Indian Feudalism and Alternative Histories
world it is nothing but a slew of titles which were awarded as a demarcation of favouritism
in ancient times. Casteism can be considered a by product of feudalism since caste
demarcation became even more prevalent with power distribution with Feudalism.

CONCLUSION
Feudalism in ancient India was an important element of administration which played a vital
part in the proliferation of the zamindari system and caste system. But in the 21 st century
Feudalism no longer holds any substantial ground.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. studymoose.com/comparing-feudal-system-to-caste-system-essay

2. http://theproproom.blogspot.in/2014/06/feudalism-versus-caste-system.html

3. Early Medieval India, Indian Feudalism and Alternative Histories).