In 1969, when I was visiting India, I examined the thesis of a young lecturer of Gorakhpur University, Mr. Jaimal Rai, and visited his university in order to conduct the oral examination, which was lengthy and searching, and at which he gave an excellent showing. Now Dr. Rai asks me to write a preface to the published version of the thesis. To introduce it I can do no better than quote the last sentence of my written report: "I can sincerely say not only that it is worthy of publication, but also that the candidate has the positive duty to publish it, after necessary revision, so that the world of learning may have the benefit of his very original interpretation of Ancient Indian Social History."
Much has been written on the evolution of the Indian social system already, especially in recent years, when a sociological approach to history has become popular in many learned circles. But Dr. Rai has given much original thought to the subject, and has produced a very impressive interpretation of the often rather tenuous data. His picture differs considerably from any other which I have hitherto seen (c. g. A. N. Bosc, D. D. Kosambi, Max Weber, Charles Drekmeier), and seems to me more convincing than any.
He interprets his date as reflecting the break up of tribalism, following the inception of private ownership in land. The growth of kingdoms and cities, with the introduction of iron, coinage and writing, produced a class of absentee landlords reflected in the Pali texts. This class was largely destroyed by the authoritarian Mauryan regime The later period saw a further growth of industry and commerce, stimulated by foreign invasion and trade with the West, and this led to the increased development of city life, culminating in the sophisticated 'classical age' of the Gupta Empire. The author shows that, throughout the period he covers, the rigid system of Varya and caste adumbrated in orthodox brahmanical literature does not represent the real situation. In fact high position and prestige were always largely dependent on talent and wealth.
Thus Dr. Rai's study forms a really valuable addition to the already considerable literature on early Indian social history. I heartily commend the book not only to the specialist in the subject and to students, but also to the educated Indian public who are seeking for a balanced and scholarly analysis of their own social history, written in an objective and understanding spirit.
"It is impossible" announced Baudhayana, the representative of the rural world of the Dharmalastras, "that a town-man will ever attain salvation," Sneering, and with a banter, retorted Isvaradatta, the sybarite of the kama tradition, "Even a short stay in a village will, of certainty, damage the senses and smother the aesthetic susceptibilities." Without entering into this ancient controversy the author will merely submit that urban and rural worlds of ancient India had two different attitudes, aspirations and ways of living. The rural world with communal, corporate life, joint family system comprising various members as coparceners, and agrarian economy was characterised by a comparatively rigid social stratification. Cities with a wide net-work of luxury industries, interlinking the regional economy into the national, and far-flung mercantile activities tended to create a world-view which was more liberal, tolerant and accommodating. The epicurean attitude born of luxury and splendour gave an edge to the criticism of rigid social stratification envisaged in the rural world.
The story, of course, starts with the disintegration of tribal structure into the vani fas and kulas, which with the new concept of family proprietary rights threw up a variety of political structures of svarajya, vairajya, samrajya etc. orchestrated by a variety of political, economic and cultural forms in the rural world. At this juncture, the introduction of iron and consequent surplus in food, the rise of monetised economy and the presence of the trained artisan class coming down from the Harappan civilization brought about the second urban Revolution in India. In the following pages, the story of the actions and interactions of these two traditions has been folded in the context of social stratification.
The nobility landlordism of the Vedic society and the 'tribal-oligarchical landlordism' of the pre-Mauryan period were destroyed by the Mauryans. In the Sunga period, however, they rose again only to be finally annihilated by the Guptas, when the feudo-federal form of Government gave to the landlordism the shape of feudalism. Against this background, the position of the Kshatriyas-their rise in the pre-Mauryan period, disappearance under the Mauryas, emergence in a new form during the Sunga period, and lastly, replacement by the Brahmaņa feudatories-has been drawn. Thus, in the post-Mauryan period, the nobility landlordism got a fresh lease of life, and under the feudo-federal structure of the Gupta administration, the land-lordism assumed the feudal complexion. But while in the pre-Mauryan period the Kshatriya nobles were the land-lords, in the later Gupta period, the Brahmana-nobles.
Hindu (935)
Agriculture (118)
Ancient (1085)
Archaeology (754)
Architecture (563)
Art & Culture (910)
Biography (702)
Buddhist (544)
Cookery (167)
Emperor & Queen (565)
Islam (242)
Jainism (307)
Literary (896)
Mahatma Gandhi (372)
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist