The Indian conception of 'Medieval Era'

 

Introduction: -
As we all know that history is about interpretation of events, texts, dynasty and empires in context of their rulers, policies, and cultures etc. thus, the division and categories under which history is kept is also contentious where historians have conceptualized this category i.e., of ‘ancient, medieval and modern’ in their ways through varied perspectives. When it comes to South Asian history and Indian history in particular the division of Indian history was first done by British colonizers on sectorial basis relating Ancient to Hinduism, Medieval to Islamic rule and Modern to British Era. Although this division has its own flaws but it impacted Indian history for a long time and even today. However, many contrary conceptualizations also developed with time like socio-economic, political perspectives and so on. Here in this essay, we will look at some of these interpretations done by historians for the medieval history.

Definition and re-definitions of the ‘medieval’: -

Indian history for the first time was categorized by British historians and scholars on religious lines paving way for communal historiography in India. James Mill was the first scholar who demarcated ancient India as Hindu era, medieval India as Mohammetean or Muslim era and modern India as British Era. Following his path Monstuart Elphinstone in his book ‘History of India’ (1841) divided India neatly into Hindu and Mohammetean periods. The Islamic rule is marked with decline and stability in the Indian history where its culture, art and tradition etc. got defiled and peace disturbed. Then Indian Scholars also professed and promulgated this view proposed by the European and British Scholars, K.M. Munshi accepted 1000 A.D. as the date for the commencement of Medieval Era when Mahmud of Ghazni invaded the north-western India and harmed the ‘Somnath Temple’ as assumed and in continuation Nationalist historians marked Turkish conquest between 12th and 13th centuries for establishment of Delhi Sultanate as the commencement of Islamic or medieval era. Some historians also find the invasion by Umayyad General Muhammad bin Qasim in 8^th century in the north-western Indian region as the initiation of Islamic rule in India and medieval as well 

        On the other hand, Indian historians have also tried to define the idea of medieval in the context of European history as well, like the idea of ‘Indian feudalism’ by historians like R.S. Sharma and D.D. Kosambi where the context of ‘Dark Ages’ have been paralleled with India proposing the rise of regional polities caused due decline and disintegration of Mauryan and then Gupta state. The theory of ‘urban decay’ also comes with it, where the decline in urban economy, trade and commerce, numismatics and ruralisation of towns is marked as a ‘negative development’. These theories are also criticized by historians like B.D. Chattopadhyay who argued that this transition to ‘early medieval’ India as it is marked should be viewed as a ‘positive phenomena’; he argues that “early medieval society from Gupta times saw several important socio-economic political changes- including the increased clearing and settlement of uncultivated lands, the growth of networks of nucleated rural settlements, the growth of new political lineages and the transformation of non-state societies to ‘state-society’, the peasantization of cultivators and hunters-gatherers as a part of this process, and the concomitant incorporation of non-caste people into the varna hierarchy.” (Daud Ali; the idea of medieval in the writing of South Asian history: contexts, methods and politics; 2014).
          It was after Christopher Cillarius, towards the end of 17th century with the expansion of European polities that the convention of ‘ancient, medieval and modern’ came up. His works gave a notions different time periods as “Historia antiqua up to Constantine the Great; historia mediiaevi to the fall of Constantinople in 1453; and historia nora from 1453 onwards.” (Harbans Mukhia; Medieval India: An alien conceptual hegemony; New Delhi, 1998). Historians have tried to redefine the idea of medieval in economic context also using the examples of Delhi Sultanate and Mughal Empire majorly their economic policies and systems, common economic factors leading to their decline etc. Irfan Habib a popular historian of Aligarh School believes that due to increasing land revenue demands to fund their wars, which led to agrarian crisis and exploitation of peasantry, administrative weaknesses etc. He also opposes the ‘Indian feudalism’ theory by stating that Mughal state attain its powers through various factors like rationalized system of military states and revenue collecting system sustained by military power and so. He termed it as a unique ‘Medieval Indian system’, where unlike the feudal system, the Mughal polity controlled it’s subordinate through the ‘mansabdari’ system introduced by the Emperor Akbar. The British colonial historians have conceptualized Indian past on communal boundaries with a partial approach by looking only at Persian and specified sources of both sides like H.M. Elliott and J Dowson in their work ‘The history of India as told by its own historians’ have distorted, decontextualized and mistranslated passages from Persian chronicles although they had their own political contemporaneous motives. Another instance of historians using a particular category of source and interpreting it with a linear viewpoint, comes from the theory of Mughal polity where historians have described the Mughals as a centralized physical structure in the context of power and economy on the basis of Persian Chronicles and other sources.
        Historians have also looked for regional polities in the larger picture of ‘vast Empires’ who contributed to the making of these dynasties, for example historians like Sunil Kumar, Dirk Kloff and Nobert Peabody have analyzed and highlighted rules of various factors in formation of large polities; like encouraging local polity formation through regional warlords and farmers soldiering under the shade of ‘Rajput’ affiliation. The necessity of royal rituals, local deities for example the Jagannath cult where lord Jagannath was a tribal deity first and later became a popular of Odisha, tradition and culture in the formation of large polities and dynasties have helped us in understanding the nature of politics during the medieval and redefining the political context where the regional polity had a greater role to play in deriving legitimation for dynasties. Another significant example of noting regional history comes from the historian Cynthia Talbot where she has focused on a regional kingdom namely the Kakatiya kingdom and also the Burton Stein’s ’Segmentary state model’ where he had explained the distribution of power at various levels instead it being vested at a central authority i.e., the king through Chola kingdom of Southern India. 
Conclusion
Historians have tried to redefine the idea of medieval at first through different perspectives formed by British colonizers and have also compared the European context of medieval with the Indian like the ‘Indian feudalism’ theory and the ‘Dark ages’ notion. At first, these definitions of our past were formed on communal lines, then after a few decades perhaps through late 1950's there was a shift from religious connotations to finding more legit sources to the redefine the idea of ‘medieval’ through like legal documents and material evidences etc. then we find interpretations in economic and political context by different schools of historians namely Marxist, Revisionist and so on focusing on regionalism and economic spheres much through examples of great empires of like Mughals.    

References: - 1.Daud Ali, “The idea of medieval in the writing of South Asian history: contexts, methods and politics”,  Routledge Taylor and Francis group, 2014. 2. Harbans Mukhia, “Medieval India: an alien conceptual hegemony”, Sage journals, 1998