Q- Explain the state of agrarian economy and production relations during the
period between 600 BCE to 300 CE.
Introduction
The major historical-societal processes or changes that occurred during the
Vedic period of Indian history were in close correspondence with the political,
economic, and ideological processes that had been in run throughout the
major part of Indian history, but gained prominence particularly during the
period between 600 BCE to 300 CE. Thus, every process can be better
understood in association, and interrelationship with, and dependence on,
other processes that were simultaneously taking place as certain fundamental
movements within regional and local levels considering the diversity of the
Indian subcontinent, and not as a homogenous phenomenon occurring at a
pan-Indian level.
Many Historians might be divided on their opinion about the nature of the
changes that were taking place. But there is a general consensus among them
that this phase of Indian subcontinent saw the emergence of agricultural
expansion including in areas which had earlier remained peripheral.
The period from 600 BCE to 200 CE represents the onset and establishment of
the early historic period in India. It saw the fruition of the several processes of
transition that had started in the later Vedic period, resulting in the formation
of states called the Mahajanapadas and emergence of a class and caste society.
It is also the period from which we get our earliest records of writing, in the
form of inscriptions in the Brahmi script from the fourth century BC and after.
Under the Mauryas, the second half of this period even saw the first empire in
Indian history. Accompanying and underlying these developments, there was a
great economic expansion.
In the following paragraphs, we’ll attempt to examine the state of agrarian
economy and production relations during the period 600 BCE to 300 CE.
Literary testimony and evidence from early NBPW sites reflect an expansion in
the number and size of village settlements and a process of population growth
in the Ganga valley during c. 600–300 BCE. Early Buddhist texts mention
different kinds of rural settlements. The word gama could refer to a hamlet,
village, part of a settlement, temporary settlement, or even a caravan of
traders camping in one place. Pali texts refer to gamas of park attendants,
carpenters, reed makers, and salt makers. People following these professions
may have constituted a majority in such villages. Terms such as gama-gamani
and gamika refer to village headmen and overseers.
The basis of the agricultural economy of the various regions had been laid
down in the preceding centuries. The importance of agriculture in the Ganga
valley is reflected in the many agricultural similes used in Buddhist texts.
Several Vinaya rules are described as having been made in response to the
needs of farmers. People practised animal rearing, especially cattle rearing. But
land had clearly emerged as the most important basis and form of wealth. The
emergence of urban centres suggests increasing yields and agricultural surplus
wherein rice cultivation continued to be an important aspect of agriculture in
the Ganga valley.
Agriculture, especially plough-based wet rice agriculture, now firmly became
the pivot of the economy of the Ganga valley. Individual, rather than clan,
holdings of land had definitely appeared; the Aganna Sutta even attributes the
rise of kingship to the need for an arbitrator in disputes over rice fields. Land
could also be bought and sold and donated; we get examples like
Anathapindaka, a great merchant, buying an orchard and donating it to the
Sangha. It is not clear however if this applied to agricultural land as well yet.
Some land like pastures, forests and mines were understood to belong to the
king. Archaeologically, this period coincides with Northern Black Polished Ware
culture and excavations at NBPW sites have confirmed not only an agrarian
economy but a flourishing urban one.
It was earlier believed that the Second Urbanisation was the result of the
application of iron technology to the clearing and cultivation of the entire
Ganga plains with the use of iron axes and ploughshares. The harnessing of this
fertile tract is supposed to have produced a spurt in agricultural production,
creating a surplus which facilitated the rise of urban centres. As other scholars
have pointed out, however, the archaeological evidence on iron agricultural
tools in the NBPW period seems to suggest that the use of iron in agriculture
sustained the process of urbanization but did not pre-date or cause it. It is
further argued that the mere coming into being of the potential for a grain
surplus does not lead to the rise of cities automatically. Socio-political
institutions like the state, especially monarchy, and economic mechanisms like
trade and exchange, play a crucial role in concentrating and channelizing the
surplus into urban form. So economic and demographic growth as well as
political and social developments are together responsible for the fundamental
advances that Second Urbanisation represents.
There are references to Brahmana gamas in Magadha and Kosala, where
Brahmanas were the dominant landowners. Some of these villages may have
originally been brahmadeyas which was the land gifted by kings to Brahmanas.
The size of landholdings varied. Small farmers must have used household
labour to till their modest plots of land. On the other hand, there were owners
of large landed estates.
The emergence of the idea of private property in land is evident from
references to the gift and sale of land. For example, Anathapindika, a wealthy
gahapati of Shravasti, bought Jetavana from prince Jeta Kumara in order to gift
it to the sangha. Land gifted to the sangha was generally orchard land or
wooded land. The Vinaya Pitaka defines an arama which was land gifted to the
sangha as a flower garden or orchard. The Anguttara Nikaya in fact explicitly
prohibits the sangha from possessing agricultural land. It is interesting to note
that the Agganna Sutta in the Digha Nikaya connects the origin of kingship to
disputes arising over rice fields.
References in the Digha and Majjhima Nikayas to Bimbisara and Pasenadi giving
land to Brahmanas and the sangha indicate that kings had control over some
tracts of land. Wastelands, forests, and mines probably also fell within their
purview. From the point of view of the state, land was the most important
source of revenue. Taxes on land must have varied a great deal. The
Dharmashastra texts generally stipulate 1/6th of the subjects’ produce as the
king’s share. However, the Gautama Dharmasutra states that cultivators must
pay the king a tax amounting to 1/10th, 1/8th, or 1/6th of their produce.
Buddhist texts refer to dasas, dasis, kammakaras, and porisas working in
households and on land. The words dasa and dasi for male and female slaves
are known in earlier sources. But kammakara is new and refers to someone
who hired out his labour in return for wages. Household labour was no doubt
inadequate for owners of large landholdings, and herein lies the origin of the
practice of employing wage labour. The compound word dasa-kammakara is
also sometimes used for labourers. The Ashtadhyayi refers to vetan i.e., wage
and vaitanika i.e., wage earner.
All these growth-related trends in
agriculture, crafts, trade and
urbanism continued
unabated in the second half of the
period under study, namely end-
All these growth-related trends in agriculture, crafts, trade and urbanism
continued unabated in the second half of the period under study, namely end-
4th to end 3rd century CE. This was the Mauryan century which saw some
additional developments in the economic field largely as a consequence of the
rise of a strong state-empire. We learn of these on the basis of the evidence of
Kautilya’s Arthashastra and Megasthenes’ Indica. Thus, for example, while
private ownership of land must certainly have continued, it is possible that
large farms run by the state were brought into being. This is suggested by the
Arthashastra referring to sita land or crown land and to an officer called the
sitadhyaksha in charge of it, and to the cultivators of this land by what appear
to be sharecroppers, ardhasitakas. If these farms indeed existed in parts of the
Mauryan realm, they are likely to have been responsible for Megasthenes’
erroneous impression that all land belonged to the king. The Arthashastra does
suggest however that the state settled new lands and employed forced labour
to work on it.
A variety of taxes were levied on land, chief among which was Bhaga,
equivalent to one-sixth of the produce. Other tithes we hear of are bhoga, bali,
kara, ubalika, and hiranya. Kautilya classifies land into different kinds on the
basis of the systematic assessment carried out by the state, and also provides
for increasing the tax to one-fourth or one-third in times of emergency. There
was a chief collector of revenues and a treasurer and a host of local officials like
sthanikas and gopas who carried out the assessment and collection.
Conclusion
To conclude, we must observe that majority of population worked in
agriculture which is evident from the overall importance paid to agriculture
during the period. Several factors including socio, economic, political,
geographical, and climatic factors worked together to bring this phenomenon.
The agrarian expansion from the period of our study was sought by expanding
agriculture to new locations with new technologies. The producers produce
various agricultural crops with advanced methods as that of sharecropping.
Land revenue provided the state with majority of its revenues which helped
the state to function properly and in the flourishing of economy.
