|
The feudalism brought in important changes in the agrarian relations. Initially, the King was to grant land to the cultivator, but now the cultivator had to be granted land through a intermediary, which is referred in the law books of Gupta and post Gupta period as swamin. The swamin granted the land to cultivator who sometimes granted it to the sub cultivator. These created societies into a number of classes of current affairs increase our Knowledge. Peasants were themselves divided into two groups, richer being known as mahattar while not so rich were known as kutumbin. Thus land added one more dimension to the division of varna and caste. Land rights also underwent a change in the new system. Ancient Indian texts point to the communal ownership of land. According to a later vedic text Aiterya-Brahamana, the Earth protested against the action of Visvakarman Bhauvana, who donated land to the priests as sacrificial fee. This indicates that in those days land could not be given without the consent of the clan. Gautama, another lawgiver of post vedic times lays down that what is considered as livelihood (yoga kshema) cannot be divided. This would obviously include land which according to this could not be divided among family members. However, the situation changed in later periods. The Mitaksara and madanaparijata claimed that the brahamana sons could divide the landed property between them. Still later law givers in the eleventh-thirteenth centuries clearly provided to division of land. Under the King, the peasant had only to pay the tax on his produce to the King, but for other things like pastures, forests and ponds he was to give nothing. He could also increase his cultivation in the barren uncultivated area. This implied a common right of the village community over these things. However, some of the general knowledge grants particularly those by Pratihara Kings granted these rights to the grantee. Further some of these grants included the right to cultivate or get it cultivated. This has been interpreted as right to eviction, though this is not mentioned in the land grants. All these indicate the loss of common rights of the village community and placing the same at the disposal of the intermediary. The medieveal period also saw the appearance of forced labour or visti imposed on the villagers as a whole. However, unlike Europe, the peasants were not generally forced to work on the fields of their masters; forced labour was used instead for the construction of roads, palaces, forts and also to help transport the royal army and officials in the country side. A basic characteristic of the feudal economy is local needs, locally satisfied leaving no scope for market production. Growth of self sufficient village economy should be seen in this context. In earlier periods, there were references of villages of artisans, but in the period of Palas and Pratiharas, village population comprised of brahamans, cultivators, merchants, artisans, chandalas etc. For the upkeep of the self sufficient economy it was necessary that all sections of primary producers should live in the village. Growth of Indian feudalism has a dichotomy with the period. During the period from 750 A.D. to about 1200 A.D., there had been a decline in trade commerce as can be inferred from the diminished use of coins. Decline of trade has also been stated to be one of the reasons for growth of self sufficient village economy as decline in trade forced the artisans to leave the towns and migrate to the villages which could provide livelihood though at subsistence level. This self sufficient economy sustained itself for centuries and was not affected by the Muslim rule of the country, as these rulers though opposed to Brahmans and polytheism, were not inclined to disturb the existing mode of production.
Related Articles -
Current Affairs, General Knowledge,
|
