123 ■Book Review■ KARASHIMA Noboru, Towards A New Formation: South Indian Society under Vijayanagar Rule Shigematsu Shinji 1. The Debate on State Formation in Medieval South India It is crucial to understand the characteristics of "medieval" in south Indian history for a comparative analysis of North-South differences of the state system and the existence or non-existence of "feudalism" in India. The argument on "feudalism," mainly in north India, has been made, as Karashima pointed out in his book (1992), by Mukhia, Sharma, Nurul Hasan, P. B. Mayer, D. N. Jha and others during these 30 years.1) On the contrary, both the empirical and theoretical analysis of structure of south Indian states has not been yet satisfactorily conducted. However, during these 10 years the nature of state and society in medieval south India has been argued by two prominent historians of south Indian, Dr. Noboru Karashima and Dr. Burton Stein. In their arguments the historical concept of "medieval" is properly understood to be the 300 years between the 13th and 16th centuries, that is, from middle or late Chola to the Vijayanagar period. The central questions regarding the characteristics of the medieval period are summarized as follows: 1) whether the autonomous system of semi-independent local chief- tains or the centralized bureaucratic system such as feudalistic state was the feature of Vijayanagar state. 2) whether continuity or change of the politico-economic system dur- ing these 300 years in south Indian society was the feature of medieval period. 3) whether or not there existed "intermediary" local officials admin- istrating the south Indian regions.
44
Embed
Book Review KARASHIMA Noboru, Towards A New Formation ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
123
■Book Review■
KARASHIMA Noboru, Towards A New Formation: South
Indian Society under Vijayanagar Rule
Shigematsu Shinji
1. The Debate on State Formation in Medieval South India
It is crucial to understand the characteristics of "medieval" in south
Indian history for a comparative analysis of North-South differences of
the state system and the existence or non-existence of "feudalism" in
India. The argument on "feudalism," mainly in north India, has been
made, as Karashima pointed out in his book (1992), by Mukhia, Sharma,
Nurul Hasan, P. B. Mayer, D. N. Jha and others during these 30 years.1)
On the contrary, both the empirical and theoretical analysis of structure
of south Indian states has not been yet satisfactorily conducted. However, during these 10 years the nature of state and society in
medieval south India has been argued by two prominent historians of
south Indian, Dr. Noboru Karashima and Dr. Burton Stein. In their
arguments the historical concept of "medieval" is properly understood to
be the 300 years between the 13th and 16th centuries, that is, from
middle or late Chola to the Vijayanagar period.
The central questions regarding the characteristics of the medieval
period are summarized as follows: 1) whether the autonomous system of semi-independent local chief-
tains or the centralized bureaucratic system such as feudalistic state
was the feature of Vijayanagar state.
2) whether continuity or change of the politico-economic system dur-
ing these 300 years in south Indian society was the feature of
medieval period.
3) whether or not there existed "intermediary" local officials admin-istrating the south Indian regions.
124 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 8, 1996
1-1. "Segmentary State" as Medieval State System
Burton Stein addresses in his works2) on south Indian history the char-
acteristics of medieval south Indian society by the particular notion of "segmentary state"
, denying critically the existence of "feudal" state or "feudalism" in south India .
He explains in detail his notion, focusing basically on three aspects,
that is, firstly on supra-structure of central "Nadu" (macro region in his
terminology), secondly on the role and characteristics of the "Nayaka"
(the warrior class of Vijayanagar state), and the significance of reorgani-zation of local communities (conflict and integration of "Valangai" and "I dangai" intercaste groups) .
He characterizes in his work (chapter 7, 1980) the state formation of
Chola as a complex structure of "segmented" and "pyramidal" organiza-
tion, saying that "the pyramidally segmented type of state, so called
because the smallest unit of political organization ―for example, a sec-
tion of a peasant Village-was―linked to ever more comprehensive units
(macro region, Nadu in his concept) of political organization of an ascending order (e.g., village, locality, supra locality, and kingdom)
for various purposes, but that each unit stood in opposition to other
similar units (e.g., one section of a village as against another) for other
purposes".In terms of the interrelation between king or central government, and
local chieftains or peripheral autonomous rulers, he summarizes as fol-lows:
(1) Territorial sovereignity is recognized but limited and essentially
relative.
(2) There is a central government, yet there are also numerous periph-
eral focuses of administration over which the centre exercises only
a limited control.
(3) There is a specialized administrative staff at the centre, but it is
repeated on a reduced scale at all the peripheral focuses of admin-
istration.
(4) Monopoly of the use of force is successfully claimed to a limited
extent and within a limited range by a central authority . . . .
(6) The more peripheral a subordinate authority is, the more chance it
has to change its allegiance from one power to another.
According to Stein's view, this system did not basically change even
Book Review 125
after Chola period till Vijayanagar kingdom (chapter 8, 1980). Even the
new emergence of the Nayaka warrior class was not virtually new as
saying "warriors who used the title of Nayaka or Amaranayaka, or to
whom that title is affixed cannot be defined easily in terms of particular
office, ethnic identity, privileges, and duties . . . . As locally powerful
personages, these chiefs may not have been different in any particular from supralocal personages of the past . . . " (chapter 8, 1980). He sug-
gests repeatedly (chapter 4, 1989) that the Nayakas and other leading local chieftains were not subordinate officials of the central government
and king.
In accordance with the decline of Chola rule, there occurred a conflict
and reorganization of intercaste factions comprised of artisans, mer-
chants, agricultural labourers and farmers, which are called Valangai
(Right-hand caste groups) and Idangai (Left-hand castes group). Stein also interprets the meaning of such factional organizations and their con-
tinuous conflicts only in the context of segmentary reformation, and sug-
gests that there were no dynamic and structural changes of state system but just "the horizontal linkages of disadvantaged caste groups" (chapter
5, 1989).
According to his theory, the semi-independent local chieftains ruled
predominantly the areas in south India, and they preserved their own territories and clan-based community ties despite the existence of the
central authority of the king in Chola and Vijayanagar states.
His concept of "segment" of state is borrowed from the African politi-
cal system by A. W. Southall (1956). As far as the reviewer understands,
this notion is a sort of "network theory" as an operating theory used in
the politico- sociological analysis of pre-modern state organization.
In terms of his application of this key concept to the south Indian
context, he selected politico-ecological factors which can be found suc-
cessively through changes in history. There are three major regions, the "core" or "macro region" of agricultural production area prevailing along
the Coromandel plains, semi-core regions of deep south upland areas and
the "peripheral region" of nothern forest areas in south India. These
ecological features are strongly related to the system of ruling by central
and local rulers. The king of central authority could maintain continu-
ously only part of a "core region" based on the Coromandel plain areas as
a directly controlled territory. On the other hand, the tribal and commu-
126 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 8, 1996
nal groups ruled autonomously around such macro regions. The groups
of local chieftains enjoyed their autonomous power rather than being
controlled by the king in the macro region.
However, such regionally independent local chieftains were not com-
pletely diverse but "loosely integrated" under the central authority ac-cording to Burton Stein's notion. Then, how and on which legitimate
power were such local states unified in the Chola Kingdom proper for as a long period as three centuries? He explains that "the legitimacy of their
(kings') hegemonic claims―which were ceremonial rather than real in
any case―could be recognized by those far-removed from this core of
real power." And the specific "authority" of south Indian kingship was
based not on the pragmatic and bureaucratic system but on the "Dharmic ," religious character of Siva belief. By such ritual sovereignty, "localized political units were capable of being linked loosely and sym -
bolically to kings whose sovereignty might for a time be recognized by
local chieftains" (pp. 44-45, 1980). This state structure continued basi-
cally not only during the Chola period but till the Vijayanagar dynasty as "Vijayanagar kingship
, like Chola kingship, was ritual in respect to rule over peoples and territories of the macro region beyond the 'home' terri-tories of each kingship." Thus, he claims that there was basically no
change from Chola to Vijayanagar periods in terms of the state structure,
though he later slightly changed his idea of clan-based system in pre-
Vijayanagar to patrimonial ones at the last stage of Vijayanagar3).
1-2. "Feudalistic" as Medieval State System
Karashima's notion sharply contrasts with Burton Stein's. Here we
shall examine briefly his claims. We shall first present an overview of his
hypotheses, then his analyses and criticism of Stein's notion.
He does not recognize at all the idea of "segmentary" and "loosely
integrated state system" in the Vijayanagar dynasty. He asserts the no-
tion of "feudalistic" state of medieval south Indian society, though he is
rather careful in identifying his notion with the concept of the feudalism4)
of Western Europe. His hypotheses on the medieval period are clearly
demonstrated in his major work (1992).
According to his hypotheses, firstly, the power structure of south
India was drastically changed from the late Chola to Vijayanagar periods.
Such change is regarded as the transition from a state-slavery system to
Book Review 127
a feudalistic system. Second, the key role in the formation of state system
was sustained by the "intermediary" class of the Nayaka feudatory.
Third, the fundamental change in south India was brought about at the
local level by the intercaste conflicts and the evolution of new social
classes of various landowners and merchant groups. To prove these hy-
potheses, Karashima examines comprehensively and systematically the inscriptions of major areas in south India.
He assumes that there were three or four drastic changes in the medi-
eval context from Chola to the middle of Vijayanagar rule. His assump-
tion is that the "Pallava-Pandya period to the Chola period, that is, 7th to 9th century, was the state-slavery stage" and "the middle Chola period
seems to have attained the last stage of state-slavery, in which the kings tried to control the peasants directly by breaking community ties in order
to build a more powerful empire."
As shown before, Burton Stein has almost admitted the transition
from clan-based communal ties to the patrimonial system at the late
Vijayanagar stage. However, according to Karashima's speculation, com-
munal ties were already broken much before the late Vijayanagar period,
and at the late Chola stage some independent leaders or private land-
holding classes emerged from such Vellala community leaders as
Udaiyan, Arayan and Alvan, and also the Brahman community of domi-
nant Brahman groups. From the 13th to 15th century, that is, during the
age of the rivalry of local lords, they began to accumulate power, though "the political situation . . . did not allow feudal elements to emerge prop-
erly" and "the degree to which the state exercised direct control over the
peasants was as serfs." And the Vijayanagar period of the 16th century attained a 'feudalistic' stage, "though state control over the Nayakas seems to have differentiated it to a certain extent from feudalism of the
Western Europe" and it seems rather close to the Tokugawa regime of
Japan's feudal system.In the 14th to 15th century, the Nayakas became the important offi-
cials under the king's sovereignty and were integrated into the hierarchi-
cal administrative system. Towards the end of the 16th century, the Nayakas, strength and independence increased further and some of them
enjoyed rather independent landlord territories.
128 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 8, 1996
2. Examination of the "Feudalistic" State System: Its
Significance
Karashima examines in detail the formation of new political system
and a new social order as a feudalistic system in his four major books
which are regarded as his master works on south Indian history5). We
shall review here mainly the latest book (1992).
In this book, in three parts composed of 12 chapters, he discusses the
problem of feudalistic state of Vijayanagar mainly from three aspects. These are the political system as a state structure (chapters 1, 2, 5), local
management and administration as a socio-economic aspect (chapters 3,
4, 6, 11, 12), and new roles of non-agricultural classes and their dyna-
mism of social change (chapters 7, 8, 9, 10). His main concern is clearly
stated as "the mechanism by which the Nayakas of Vijayanagar times
developed their power, or the logic which allows us to recognize them as
feudal lords . . . . " For this purpose, he chooses the three northern dis-
tricts of Tamilnadu, those of Chingleput, North Arcot and South Arcot
and some middle and southern districts, and examines the inscriptions
quantitatively. By analyzing inscriptions, he finds a close association of the Nayakas with kings on the one hand, and with temples on the other
hand.His findings are that in the 14th to 15th century Nayakas had a close
linkage with kings as officials or agents. Under his sovereignty they
served as governor of a region, generals on a campaign, or revenue offic-
ers and administrators. However, in the 16th century they began to pos-
sess certain territories and appeared to be more clearly feudalistic lords
(chapter 1). Drastic changes appear also in the two newly emerged land-lord classes, that is, Nayaka and Nattavar. In the 15th century, Nayakas
had strong confrontation with the latter of local representatives, while in
the 16th century both of them collaborated with each other and formed influential classes of feudal lords.
In terms of the relation of Nayakas with temples, the inscriptions show
mutual close ties through the deed of donation of land by Nayakas, and
the gains of the Nayakas from temples such as administration of temples,
guardianship of temple treasury and so on (chapter 2). Such relations between temple and Nayakas are much closer in the 16th century than
before. Thus, Nayakas could enjoy more rights of grants of land and
Book Review 129
village, and also tax remission than kings did. That means the growth of Nayakas' local influences and accumulations of management power of
local productions (chapters 3, 4). Karashima let the evidence from in-
scriptions tell that the Nayakas, as newly rising local chieftains were the
influential landlords and government officials under the king in the 14th
to 15th century and began to be semi-independent governors in the 16th
century, though they were still under the state's control.
Along with the change of administrative and political change in
Vijayanagar state, reorganization of local communities and the stratifica-
tion movement arouse at the infrastructure level. That was the struggle
between intercaste groups. While Stein regards the movement of
Valangai and Idangai caste conflict as segmentary reform or horizontal
unity movement among the disadvantaged lower castes, Karashima takes
it as the serious class struggle for gaining socio-economic hegemony by
newly grown non-agricultural sectors. Through this process of social and
economic changes, the complex organizations of Nayaka-traders, and
and Nayaka-craft castes began to gain substantial sovereignty over the
local areas through the production of commercial commodities and trade
in the local and inter-regional network (chapters 7, 8, 9, 10).
3. Contribution to Understanding of New Medieval History and Further Issues
The arguments regarding feudalism in south India are not new. We
had had already several notable works since the early 20th century6).
These works suggested implicitly or explicitly the characteristics of feu-
dalism in the medieval south Indian state. However, these works utilized
sporadic and fragmentary sources of inscription or only foreign sources,
such as Portuguese and Jesuit documents, in order to analyze medieval
history. On the contrary, Karashima introduced a comprehensive and
statistical survey of several hundred inscriptions from the 13th to 16th
century in several districts of south India. As he states, "the study
method of inscriptions is always to check first all the extant inscriptions
with the Annual Report on (South) Indian Epigraphy, then to read the
texts of many important inscriptions most relevant to the particular
study for a detailed examination" (p. 9, fn. 8, Introduction). The result
of such painstaking work is the documentary series he published in 1988 and 1989.
130 Journal of the Japanese Association for South Asian Studies, 8, 1996
This detailed analysis of basic documents made his statement much
more persuasive and concrete. Furthermore, to prove the notion of feu-
dalistic state, he examined not only the political and administrative sys-
tem but also the changes of intercaste reorganization in the context of the
formation of feudalistic system. His explanations carefully refrain from
speculation and are very clear-cut in every chapter. The process of ex-
amination is quite logical. Therefore, we can be persuaded to recognize
the existence of feudalistic state or even feudalism in south Indian medi-eval society.
Lastly, the reviewer, though not a specialist of inscription analysis and
Vijayanagar history proper, would like to add some comments.
We still have a question on Nayakas, whether they were generally the
warrior class or whether it was an overall title which was acquired by
indigenous farmers (e.g., various land-holding classes emerged from the
pre-Vijayanagar era) through the political instability after the decline of the Chola.
According to the indigenous materials collected in the Mackenzie Records, there were various categories of local leaders or land-holding
groups with different lineages, socio-economic backgrounds and differ-ent motives, among which some were petty cultivators and others were
local chieftains. Then, how the differentiation occured among the
Nayaka, Nattavar and Palaiyakkaran and other "cultivator" classes in the
Vijayanagar period? Were they originally from particular caste groups, or from obviously different social groups? In terms of the classes of small
landholders and influential landlords, what are the criteria of these cat-
egories? Are these dependent on the size and scale of land or the caste
status or some title deeds given by the upper authorities or king? Though Karashima carefully says that "as for the state of petty landholders and
cultivators, we do not have enough information at present . . . " the
analyses are needed to understand the process of the emergence of inter-mediary classes.
As for direct rule by the Nayaka, we do not see how directly they could
manage a local area, whether at the village level or district level. And
also, we still do not have much information about what change occurred
in the village during the transition of the Nayakas' role in the
Vijayanagar period.
Karashima's achievement is a valuable contribution to recent Indian
Book Review 131
history, but there are further issues to be clarified by historians of south
India.
(1996. 6. 3.)
Notes1) Mukhia, Harbans. 1981 "Was there Feudalism in Indian History?" Journal of Peas-
ant Studies, vol. 8, no. 3; Sharma, R.S. 1984 "How Feudal was Indian Feudal-ism?" Social Scientist, no. 129; Nurul Hasan. 1964 'The Position of the Zamindars in the Mughal Empire," Indian Economic and Social History Review, vol. 1, no. 1; Mayer, P. B. 1982 "South India, North India: the Capitalist Transformation of Two Provincial Districts," Capitalism and Colonial Production, H. Alavi et. al.
(eds.), London; Jha, D. N. (ed.) 1987 Feudal Social Formation in Early India, Delhi.
2) Burton Stein. 1980 Peasant State and Society in Medieval South India, Delhi: OUP; 1989 The New Cambridge History of India, 1.2, Vijayanagara., Delhi: CUP; 1984 All the Kings' Mana: Papers on Medieval South Indian History, Madras: New Era Pub.
3) Burton Stein. 1989, Chapter 5; 1985 "Vijayanagar and the Transition to Patrimo-nial System" in A. L. Dallapiccola and S.L. Lallemant (eds.) Vzjayanagar, City and Empire: New Currents of Research.
4) In his work Karashima introduces the basic features of feudalism as follows:
(1) the basic direct producers are not slaves but peasants who own the means of production themselves; (2) local magnates, who possess superior rights to the land that the peasants cultivate, subdue the peasants under their control and extract surplus produce by means of extra-economic coercion; (3) political power as-sumes a hierarchical structure which is sustained by land grants among the ruling class and also by a certain ideology; (4) commodity production is not generalized but limited only to the surplus portion which is appropriated by the exploiting class.
He is reluctant to recognize the feudalism in south India as similar to that of western Europe and finds, rather, similarity with the Tokugawa regime (p. 5-8, fn. 15, 1992).
5) Karashima, Noboru. 1984 South Indian History and Society : Studies from Inscrip-tions A.D. 850-1800, Delhi: OUP; 1988 Vzjayanagar Rule in Tamil Country as Revealed through a Statistical Study of Revenue Terms in Inscriptions, part 1, Tokyo: ILCAA; 1989 Vzjayanagar Rule in Tamil Country as Revealed through a Statistical Study of Revenue Terms in Inscriptions, part 2, Tokyo: ILCAA; 1992 Towards a New Formation, South Indian Society under Vzjayanagar Rule, Delhi: OUP.
6) For example, the following are listed as far as the reviewer knew and read: Heras, H. 1927 The Aravidu Dynasty of Vijayanagara, Madras: B. G. Paul. Saletore, B. A. 1934 Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346-1646), 2 vols., Mdras: B. G. Paul. Mahalingam, T. V. 1940 Administration and Social Life under Vzjayanagar., Madras: Univewrsity of Madras. Krishnaswami Pillai, 1964 The Tamil Country under Vijayanagara. Annamalainagar: Annamalai
132 南 アジア研 究 第8号 (1996年)
University.
(Delhi; Oxford University Press, 1992, vi + 294 p. )
(Shinji Shigematsu, University of Nagoya)
(重松伸 司, 名古屋大学)
■書 評 ■
Nakazato, Nariaki, Agrarian System in Eastern Bengal
ed., Sahajanand on agricultural labour and the rural poor (New Delhi: Manohar, 1994)., idem, Swami Sahajanand and the peasants of Jharkhand (New Delhi: Manohar, 1995).