Back to Projects
JOIN WHATSAPP GROUP
Free PSC MCQ 4 Lakhs+
Please Write a Review
Current Affairs 2018 to 2022
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 1
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 2
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 3
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 4
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 5
Kerala PSC Indian History Book Study Materials Page 779
Book's First PageIndian feudalism, thus, passed through several distinct stages. The age of the Guptas and the following two centuries saw the beginning of land grants to temples and Brahmins, and the number of such grants increased steadily and their nature changed basically in the kingdoms of the Palas, the Pratiharas and the Rashtrakutas. In the earlier period only usufructuary rights were generally given, but from the 8th century onwards proprietory rights were transferred to the donees. The process of grants culminated in the 11th and 12th centuries when northern India was parcelled into numerous political and economic units largely held by secular and religious donees, who enjoyed the gift villages as little better than fiefs. Samanta System Origin and Meaning The institution of the samanta was the main innovation which distinguished the post-Gupta period from the other periods of ancient India. The term samanta originally meant ‘neighbour’ and referred to the independent ruler of an adjacent territory in the Maurya period, as is evident from its use in the Arthasastra of Kautilya and the Asokan edicts. In the pre-Gupta period the term was used by law-givers in the sense of a neighbouring proprietor of land. Even the ‘border kings’ (pratyantanripati) mentioned by Samudragupta in his Allahabad prasasti were such samantas in the original sense of the term. By the end of Gupta rule and definitely by the 6th century AD, a new meaning of the term had gained universal currency. Samanta had come to mean a subjected but reinstated tributary prince of a realm. The rise and growth of the samuntas was a dis-tinctive structural feature of the growth of feudal regimes. Whereas in the earlier periods of ancient India administrators had been imposed from above by imperial appointment, the feudal realms from the post-Gupta period onwards were controlled by princes who had once been subjected but then reinstated and were then obliged to pay a tribute and to serve the king loyally. In the late Gupta period, this type of administrator was occasionally found in the border provinces but in Harsha’s time and later on they became powerful figures even in the core area of the kingdom. They enjoyed a great deal of auton-omy within their territory and soon surpassed the