MHI-04: POLITICAL STRUCTURES IN INDIA
SECTION- A
.jpg)
The Sangam literature of ancient Tamil Nadu, which dates back to the 2nd century BCE to the 4th century CE, provides valuable insights into the early Tamil polity. The literature, which consists of a collection of poems and stories, describes a society that was divided into three major social classes: the nobility, the commoners, and the slaves.
The nobility, also known as the "Kshatriyas," were the ruling class and were responsible for administering the state and maintaining law and order. They were also involved in military campaigns and were considered to be the protectors of the people. They were known for their bravery and martial skills and were often depicted in the literature as warriors and kings.
The commoners, known as the "Vaishyas," were the farmers, merchants, and artisans of the society. They were considered to be the backbone of the state and were responsible for the economic prosperity of the kingdom. They were known for their hard work and were respected for their contribution to the society.
The slaves, known as the "Shudras," were the lowest class in the society. They were considered to be the property of the nobles and were often used for manual labor and domestic tasks. They had little or no rights and were treated as inferior to the other classes.
The Sangam literature also describes the political system of the early Tamil polity. The state was divided into several small kingdoms, each ruled by a king or chieftain. These kingdoms were known as "Nadus" and were often in competition with each other for power and control. The kings were responsible for maintaining law and order, collecting taxes, and providing protection to the people. They were also responsible for maintaining good relations with other kingdoms and maintaining peace.
2. Analyse the various approaches to the study of early medieval polity.
The study of early medieval polity in India has been approached from various perspectives, with each approach emphasizing different aspects of the political structure of the period. These approaches can be broadly categorized into three main categories: administrative, economic, and social.
The administrative approach focuses on the organization and functioning of the state and its institutions. This approach emphasizes the role of the central government in the administration of the state, including the formation and functioning of the bureaucracy, the role of the king and his court, and the administration of justice. It also examines the relationship between the central government and the local administration, including the role of the local rulers and their relationship with the central government.
The economic approach focuses on the economic policies and practices of the state, including land revenue systems, trade and commerce, and the role of the state in the economy. This approach examines the economic policies and practices of the state, including the role of the state in the economy, the role of the state in the regulation of trade and commerce, and the role of the state in the collection of taxes and land revenue.
The social approach focuses on the social and cultural aspects of the state, including the social organization of society, the role of religion in the state, and the relationship between the state and society. This approach examines the social and cultural aspects of the state, including the role of the state in shaping social and cultural norms, the role of religion in the state, and the relationship between the state and society.
Overall, each of these approaches provides a unique perspective on the political structure of early medieval India and helps to understand the complex and diverse nature of the period. The administrative approach provides insight into the organization and functioning of the state, the economic approach provides insight into the economic policies and practices of the state, and the social approach provides insight into the social and cultural aspects of the state. Together, these approaches provide a comprehensive understanding of the early medieval polity in India.
3. Discuss various interpretations explaining the nature of the Mughal state.
There are several interpretations of the nature of the Mughal state, which was an empire that ruled over much of India and parts of present-day Pakistan and Bangladesh during the 16th to 18th centuries.
One interpretation is that the Mughal state was a centralized, absolutist monarchy in which the emperor held ultimate power and authority. This interpretation emphasizes the Mughal emperors' military and administrative control over their territories and the institutions they established to govern them.
Another interpretation is that the Mughal state was a "gunpowder empire," in which military power and technology were key to maintaining control over a diverse population. This interpretation emphasizes the Mughals' use of firearms and their recruitment of soldiers from different ethnic and religious groups.
A third interpretation is that the Mughal state was a "patrimonial" or "personal rule" state in which the emperor's personal authority and relationships with his subjects were the foundation of government. This interpretation emphasizes the Mughal emperors' personal relationships with their nobles and officials and the role of the imperial household in governance.
A fourth interpretation argues that the Mughal state was a "pluralistic" or "syncretic" state in which different religious and ethnic groups coexisted and interacted with one another in a relatively tolerant and inclusive manner. This interpretation emphasizes the Mughals' policy of religious tolerance and the role of non-Muslims in the empire's administration.
It should be noted that the Mughal state was a complex and dynamic entity and different aspects of these interpretations may have been more or less prominent at different times and in different regions of the empire.
4. Discuss the nature of sovereignty and administrative mechanism in the Princely states.
Sovereignty refers to the supreme authority and power of a state to govern itself without external interference. In the context of the Princely states in India, sovereignty was held by the individual rulers of each state, who had the power to make their own laws, collect taxes, and maintain their own military and administrative systems.
The administrative mechanism in the Princely states was typically centralized, with the ruler or Maharaja holding ultimate power and decision-making authority. The ruler was typically assisted by a council of advisors, who helped to implement policies and manage the day-to-day administration of the state.
The political structure of the Princely states was often hierarchical, with the ruler at the top, followed by a small group of nobles or nobles and a larger group of commoners. The ruler had the power to appoint and dismiss officials, and had the final say in all matters of state.
However, the Princely states were also subject to the British government's control and influence, as they were technically part of British India. The British government had the power to intervene in the affairs of the Princely states if they felt that the ruler was not acting in the best interests of the people, or if they felt that the state was becoming a threat to British interests in India.
Overall, the nature of sovereignty and administrative mechanism in the Princely states in India was complex, with a mix of traditional, centralized power held by the rulers, and external control and influence exerted by the British government.
5-Write short notes
The colonial military apparatus in India was an integral part of the political structure established by the British during their rule. The British East India Company, which was the main military and administrative authority in India, had its own army known as the Company Army. The Company Army was made up of Indian soldiers, known as sepoys, who were recruited and trained by the British.
The Company Army was responsible for maintaining law and order, protecting British interests, and enforcing British rule throughout India. It also played a crucial role in expanding the British Empire in India by conquering and annexing new territories.
The British government also maintained its own army in India, known as the British Indian Army, which was separate from the Company Army. The British Indian Army was responsible for defending the British Indian Empire from external threats and was made up of both British and Indian soldiers.
In addition to the military apparatus, the British also established a system of political control through the British Indian Civil Service, which was responsible for administering the Indian territories. The British Indian Civil Service was made up of British officials who were appointed to govern the Indian territories and were responsible for implementing British policies and laws.
Overall, the colonial military apparatus in India was a crucial aspect of the political structure established by the British and played a significant role in maintaining their control over the Indian territories.
b-The bureaucracy under the colonial state
Under the colonial state in India, the bureaucracy was a powerful and centralized system that was responsible for administering and governing the country. The British colonial government established a hierarchical system of administration that was divided into different levels, including the district, province, and central levels.
At the district level, there was a District Collector who was responsible for the overall administration of the district, including law and order, revenue collection, and public welfare. The Collector was assisted by a team of officials, including the Superintendent of Police, the Tehsildar, and the Nayak.
At the province level, there was a Governor who was responsible for the overall administration of the province, including law and order, revenue collection, and public welfare. The Governor was assisted by a team of officials, including the Chief Secretary, the Home Secretary, and the Finance Secretary.
At the central level, there was the Governor-General who was responsible for the overall administration of the country, including law and order, revenue collection, and public welfare. The Governor-General was assisted by a team of officials, including the Viceroy, the Foreign Secretary, and the Finance Secretary.
The bureaucracy under the colonial state was a powerful and centralized system that was responsible for administering and governing the country. It was a hierarchical system of administration that was divided into different levels, including the district, province, and central levels. The bureaucracy was controlled by the British colonial government and was responsible for implementing the policies and regulations of the colonial government.
6-Write a note on the Mauryan administration.
The Mauryan administration was one of the most efficient and centralized systems of governance in ancient India. It was established by the Mauryan emperor Ashoka, who ruled from around 269 BCE to 232 BCE. The administration was divided into several levels, with the emperor at the top, followed by the governors, officials, and officers.
The Mauryan administration had a highly centralized system of governance, with the emperor having complete control over the administration. The empire was divided into provinces, with each province being governed by a governor. The governors were responsible for maintaining law and order, collecting taxes, and ensuring the welfare of the people.
The Mauryan administration also had a strong system of bureaucracy, with officials and officers at different levels. These officials and officers were responsible for maintaining records, collecting taxes, and enforcing the laws of the empire. They were appointed by the emperor and were answerable to him.
The Mauryan administration also had a strong army, which was used to maintain law and order, protect the empire from invaders, and expand the empire. The army was divided into several divisions, with each division being commanded by a general.
In conclusion, the Mauryan administration was a highly centralized and efficient system of governance, which was instrumental in maintaining stability and prosperity in the empire. It laid the foundation for the development of a strong and centralized administration in ancient India.
7-Analyse the judicial system prevailing in Ancient India.
The judicial system in ancient India was a complex and hierarchical system that evolved over time. It was based on the principles of dharma, or moral and ethical laws, and was primarily focused on maintaining social order and justice.
At the highest level of the judicial system was the king or ruler, who was responsible for dispensing justice in his kingdom. He had the power to hear appeals and make final decisions in cases of great importance. The king was assisted by a council of ministers and advisors, known as the sabha and the samiti, who helped him in making decisions.
Below the king were the local courts, which were headed by officials known as rajans or judges. These officials were appointed by the king and were responsible for hearing and deciding cases within their jurisdiction. They were assisted by a group of assessors, known as the sabha, who helped them in making decisions.
There were also specialized courts for specific types of cases, such as criminal cases, civil disputes, and disputes related to trade and commerce. These courts were headed by officials known as prakritis or prakritis, who were experts in the relevant areas of law.
The judicial system also had an appeals process, where individuals could appeal a decision made by a lower court to a higher court. The final court of appeal was the king or ruler.
In addition to the formal judicial system, there were also informal systems of justice, such as the use of arbitrators and mediators, who were chosen by the parties involved in a dispute to help them reach a resolution.
Overall, the judicial system in ancient India was focused on maintaining social order and justice, with a strong emphasis on the principles of dharma. It was a complex and hierarchical system that evolved over time and had a mix of formal and informal systems of justice.
8-Discuss the provincial and local administration under the Delhi Sultanate.
Under the Delhi Sultanate, the administration of the provinces and local areas was divided into two main systems: the iqta system and the sarkar system.
The iqta system was a system of land grants given to military officers and officials in return for their service to the Sultan. These officers, known as iqtadars, were given the right to collect taxes and administer justice in their designated areas, but they were also responsible for maintaining order and providing military support to the Sultan. The iqta system was a way for the Sultan to control the provinces through a network of loyal officials, but it also led to the emergence of powerful local dynasties that could challenge the central authority.
The sarkar system was a system of provinces, or sarkars, that were directly administered by the Sultan's officials. Each sarkar was divided into smaller units called parganas, which were overseen by a pargana officer. The pargana officers were responsible for collecting taxes, maintaining order, and providing military support to the Sultan. The sarkar system was a way for the Sultan to exert direct control over the provinces, but it also led to the centralization of power and the weakening of local autonomy.
Both the iqta and sarkar systems were used by the Delhi Sultanate to control the provinces and local areas, but they had their own strengths and weaknesses. The iqta system was more effective in maintaining order and collecting taxes in remote and difficult-to-govern areas, but it also led to the emergence of powerful local dynasties that could challenge the central authority. The sarkar system was more effective in exerting direct control over the provinces and centralizing power, but it also led to the weakening of local autonomy and the suppression of local customs and traditions.
Overall, the provincial and local administration under the Delhi Sultanate was a complex and constantly evolving system that was shaped by the political, economic, and military realities of the time. It was a mix of different systems and strategies that were used to control the provinces and local areas and maintain the stability and power of the Sultanate.
9-How did the colonial and nationalist legacy shape the post -colonial Indian polity?
The colonial and nationalist legacy has had a significant impact on shaping the post-colonial Indian polity.
Firstly, the colonial experience has deeply influenced India's political institutions and administrative structure. The British had imposed a centralized, bureaucratic system of governance in India, which has been inherited and continued by the Indian government even after independence. This centralization of power has led to the concentration of power in the hands of a few, leading to a lack of representation and accountability at the local level.
Secondly, the colonial experience has also had a significant impact on the Indian economy. The British had implemented policies that were aimed at extracting resources from India and promoting the interests of British industry. This legacy has continued to shape the Indian economy even after independence, with the country remaining primarily agrarian and dependent on exports of raw materials.
Thirdly, the colonial legacy has also had an impact on the Indian society. The British had implemented policies that aimed to divide and rule, which led to the creation of religious, ethnic, and linguistic divisions in Indian society. These divisions have continued to shape the Indian polity even after independence, leading to the emergence of various regional, linguistic, and religious movements in the country.
Finally, the nationalist movement that led to India's independence also played a significant role in shaping the post-colonial Indian polity. The movement had emphasized the idea of a united and secular India, which has been reflected in the Indian Constitution and the government's policies. However, this ideal has been challenged by various regional, linguistic, and religious movements in the country, leading to a constant struggle between the idea of a united and secular India and the demands of various groups for greater autonomy and representation.
Overall, the colonial and nationalist legacy has had a significant impact on shaping the post-colonial Indian polity, influencing the country's political institutions, economy, society, and the idea of a united and secular India.
10-Land revenue settlements under the British rule.
During the British rule in India, land revenue settlements were implemented as a means of taxation and revenue collection. The British government aimed to create a stable and predictable system of land revenue collection, as it was an important source of income for the colonial government.
The British implemented several types of land revenue settlements, including the Permanent Settlement, the Ryotwari Settlement, and the Mahalwari Settlement.
The Permanent Settlement was implemented in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa in 1793. Under this system, the British government granted land rights to the zamindars, who were local landowners, in return for a fixed annual revenue payment. The zamindars had the right to collect rent from the tenants and could also transfer the land to others.
The Ryotwari Settlement was implemented in areas where the British government directly controlled the land, such as in the Madras Presidency. Under this system, the government directly assessed and collected revenue from the cultivators, who were known as ryots.
The Mahalwari Settlement was implemented in the North-Western Provinces and the Punjab. Under this system, the revenue was assessed and collected from the village community as a whole, rather than from individual cultivators.
Overall, the British land revenue settlements aimed to create a stable and predictable system of revenue collection, but they also had significant impacts on the local population, including the displacement of tenants and cultivators, and the consolidation of land ownership in the hands of a few powerful landowners.
11-Anglo-Oriental controversy and Educational Despatch of 1854.
The Anglo-Oriental controversy refers to the debate and discussions that took place in the mid-19th century in British India regarding the education and cultural development of the Indian population. The controversy centered around the question of whether Western or Eastern education and culture should be promoted in India.
On one side of the debate were the Orientalists, who argued that Indian culture and education should be preserved and promoted. They believed that Western education and culture were inferior and would lead to the loss of traditional Indian values and culture.
On the other side were the Anglicists, who believed that Western education and culture were superior and should be introduced to India as a means of modernization and progress. They argued that Indian culture and education were backward and needed to be replaced with Western education and culture.
The Educational Despatch of 1854 was a document issued by the British government in India that outlined a new policy for education in India. The despatch stated that Western education should be promoted in India and that the government would provide funding and resources for the establishment of schools and colleges. It also stated that English should be the language of instruction in schools and colleges.
The Educational Despatch of 1854 was seen as a victory for the Anglicists and a setback for the Orientalists. It marked the beginning of a new era of education in India and the promotion of Western education and culture. However, it also led to the suppression of traditional Indian culture and education, which many saw as a negative aspect of British rule in India.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please reads the answers carefully if any error please show in the comment. This answers are not responsible for any objection . All the answers of Assignment are above of the paragraph. If you like the answer please comment and follow for more also If any suggestion please comment or E-mail me.
Thank You!
.jpg&description=Ignou MHI-04 - POLITICAL STRUCTURES IN INDIA){kind=link}
0 Comments