What is segmentary state India?

Southall describes the segmentary state as a state where the sphers of ritual suzerainty and political sovereignty do not coincide. The ritual suzerainty extends widely towards a flexible changing periphery while the political sovereignty is confined to the central core domain.

What is feudalism in medieval India?

Use of the term feudalism to describe India applies a concept of medieval European origin, according to which the landed nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord’s land …

What is segmentary state?

Segmentary state was the concept coined to fit Alur society into the theory of political anthropology of the 1940s. It would be simpler and better to define the segmentary state as one in which the spheres of ritual suzerainty and political sovereignty do not coincide.

Who used the segmentary model instead of feudal theory for the study of medieval India?

While Burton Stein argued for a peasant state and society, leading to a segmentary state, Hermann Kulke and B. D. Chattopadhyaya put forward their integrative model. At this juncture two brief but obvious clarifications may be necessary.

What is the meaning of segmentary?

noun. 1. One of the parts into which something is divided: division, member, part, piece, portion, section, subdivision.

What is the difference between Indian feudalism and European feudalism?

The post-Mauryan feudalism was based on a caste system which divided the society into 4 parts- Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras, whereas the European feudalism divided the society into church, nobility and the commoners.

What is segmentary system of government?

A segmentary lineage society is a type of tribal society. A close family is usually the smallest and closest segment and will generally stand together. For example, by Aidan Southall in “Illusion of Tribe” and by Burton Stein He has used the term to explain the polity of a number of empires.

How is European feudalism different from Indian?

Indian feudalism was divided on a caste-basis such as Brahmanas, Kshatriya, Vaishaya and Shudras, while European feudalism was divided on the basis of class as in nobility, clergy and commoners.

Do you agree with the view that Vijayanagara state was segmentary?

Archives. Burton Stein regards the Vijayanagara state as a segmentary state and suggests that absolute political sovereignty rested with the center and symbolic or ritual sovereignty rested with the Nayakas and the Brahmin commanders in the periphery.

What the meaning of Acephalous?

Definition of acephalous 1 : lacking a head or having the head reduced. 2 : lacking a governing head or chief.

Does Chattopadhyaya negate the Indian feudalism model?

B. D. Chattopadhyaya negates the most important argument of the Indian feudalism model, i.e., the argument of land grants. Thus, according to B. D. Chattopadhyaya, it can be said that the early medieval period was a period of state formation and not of fragmentation and disintegration.

What are the different models of early medieval India?

Other important contributing models are that of the Marxist’s Indian Feudalism Model of R. S. Sharma and the Segmentary State Model of Burton Stein. The Integrative State Model of B. D. Chattopadhyaya is also one of the dominant models that has tried to determine the nature of the state in the early medieval India.

What is the segmentary state model?

The Segmentary State Model was given by Burton Stein where he tried to determine the nature of the state in the early medieval India. Burton Stein propounded his theory in the criticism of Nilkanta Sastri’s theory of Centralized State Model of the Chola Empire.

What is the segmentary state according to Southall?

The Segmentary State is an anthropological model developed by Southall. Burton Stein utilized this model to describe the state formation under the Cholas and the Pallavas. Southall describes the Segmentary State as a state where the spheres of ritual suzerainty and political sovereignty do not coincide.