A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS

HISTORY I I YEAR III TRIMESTER 2014

Harshitha Dammu [2056] Date of Submission: April 12, 2014

National Law School of India University, Bengaluru

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 5

CHAPTER I: PRE-FEUDAL KARNATAKA AND THE SATAVAHANAS ...................................... 7

CHAPTER II: EARLY KADAMBAS AND THE AGE OF FEUDALISM .......................................... 8

CHAPTER III: THE KADAMBA POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ITS DETERMINANTS ......... 13

CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 15

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................. 17

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 3

INTRODUCTION
Much of written history has been the history of rulers. For centuries, historians considered only that and not everyday life of the people as worth recording. For many, it was the rulers and their politics that made history. After the Second World War a new school of historical thought Marxist historiography or historical materialism as is commonly known gained prominence in mainstream history. In an unprecedented approach, Marxist historiography centred its study on that of the working class and their social and economic constraints. Marxian historians firmly believe that it is the people through the course of their struggle that make historical events and eventually history. It is with the same view and purpose that the researcher has studied the history of the Kadamba State. The Kadambas were an influential ruling dynasty in Southern India during what many historians term as the ancient Indian period. The contribution of the Kadambas to the history of Karnataka is significant. It was only during their rule that Karnataka emerged as a strong, independent and unified cultural and political entity. In spite of this, for a very long time the Kadambas received very little to no reference in the general history of India. Their history had been sadly reduced to that of questionable origin myths and dry, factual accounts of rulers and their reign. This could have been for two reasons, one that the sphere of Indian historical writing had always been dominated by nationalist historians who used a completely different approach in their study of the past and two, most of these historians were from the northern part of the nation. Hence it is not surprising that they were not very well acquainted with their history. It was only in the late 20th Century that some eminent authors like R.S Sharma, D.D Kosambi and Irfan Habib applied the Marxist methodology to their study of Indias past and made pioneering and refreshing contributions to the interpretation of the same. The History of Karnataka in particular received attention after Saketh Rajan, a revolutionary obsessed with the liberation of people in India penned two brilliant volumes from a historical materialist standpoint. The works of these scholars and academicians have initiated a process of reviving the highly subjugated Marxist historiography and in a small way, the lost true history of the Kadambas.

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 4

This research paper is a highly selective and condensed compilation of the major works of such Marxist historians in India. In analysing the nature of the Kadamba State they have converged their views to come to the conclusion that it was feudalistic in nature. But it is not that feudalism erupted out of nowhere during the Kadamba age. The seeds for its growth must have been sown before at an earlier time and this is the purpose for which the Satavahana State is also briefly analysed. Some of the institutions that developed during their rule must have definitely continued well into the Kadamba rule and influenced the nature of its polity. This paper is thus an attempt to effectively understand the Kadamba State in its entirety by drawing a link between its social and economic structures and its political structure. For having used the Historical Materialism approach most social, economic and political developments mentioned have been explained as antagonisms in an existing society and the resulting transitions into new modes of production.

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 5

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Hypothesis: The Kadamba State was feudalistic in nature as a result of its socio-economic structure. Aims: To analyse the political structure of the Kadamba State by way of studying the society and economy during its rule and its predecessors rule. To understand what determines the larger political superstructure of a State. Objectives: To elaborate on the hypothesis statement and come to a conclusion about its validity. To establish that the Marxist approach to understanding history is the best way to obtain meaningful and accurate history. Research questions: 1. What was the nature of the economy and society of Karnataka before the Kadambas? Did it contribute in anyway whatsoever to the rise of feudalism later in the Kadamba age? 2. Was the introduction of the feudal system purely a politico-legal decision by the rulers or was it influenced by the existing socio-economic structure of the Kadamba people at the time? 3. Considering that the socio-economic structure of a State almost always affect its polity, how did Kadamba polity change with certain dynamic developments in its economy and society? Scope: The scope of the research paper has been expanded to include the Satavahana State as it is believed by the researcher that it helps in having a better understanding of the Kadamba State that emerged after it. Limitations: There were many rulers with the dynastic name Kadambas but this study is limited to the Kadambas of Banavasi otherwise known as the Early Kadambas. Almost everything that is known about the Kadambas of Banavasi is sourced from inscriptions made during their rule. There is absolutely no literary evidence dating back to their time that refers to them.

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 6

Sources: The research has been sourced entirely from secondary sources i.e. books. Articles and book reviews have been studied but not used in the paper as research material. Mode of Citation: A Uniform mode of citation has been followed throughout the paper. The citation is for books is as follows:E.g.: Author, Title of the Book, Sub-Title (if any), Page Number (Edition Number (if any), Place of Publishing: Publisher, Year of Publication). Chapterisation: 1. A Pre Feudal History of Karnataka Keeping in mind the Marxist view that changes in society are a result of internal conflicts over production relations, Karnataka under the Satavahanas and the changes their rule brought to its people and their productive relations has been briefly discussed. It is basically an attempt to trace out the beginnings of feudalism. 2. Kadamba Kingdom during the Age of Feudalism A study of the main features of the feudalistic Kadamba society and economy. 3. Understanding Kadamba State by its society and economy In furtherance of the main objective of proving that the socio-economic structure determines a state, in this case a feudal State and not the other way round as is believed by most historians.

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 7

CHAPTER I: PRE-FEUDAL KARNATAKA AND THE SATAVAHANAS

The transformation and development of society is a steady and often imperceptible process stretching over long periods of time. Almost always, the structure of an existing State has been determined by its preceding State.1 A better understanding of the Kadamba State, thus can only be achieved by studying the Satavahana State before it. The Satavahanas ruled parts of Northern Karnataka after the fall of the great Mauryan Empire.2 The earliest references to the use of an iron plough for agriculture in the Southern part of the Indian subcontinent comes from the Satavahana age around 240 BC.3 This new instrument of production signalled the end of primitive agriculture of tribal societies and established a State founded on class society with caste as its basis of division.4

1 Saketh Rajan, Making History: Karnatakas People and their Past , 98 (Bangalore: Vimukthi Prakashana, 1998). 2 RS Sharma, Sudras in Ancient India, 160 3 DD Kosambi, An Introduction to the study of Indian History, 240 4 RS Sharma, Aspects of Political Ideas and Institutions in Ancient India , 201

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 8

CHAPTER II: EARLY KADAMBAS AND THE AGE OF FEUDALISM

It is at this juncture that we come to discuss about the transformation of the Shudra mode of production into the feudal mode of production. Although several factors forced this restructuring of the State, the main and the most relevant to the purpose of this paper is the rebellion of the labour class roughly corresponding to the third century AD. They either refused to stick to the producing functions assigned to them or declined to pay taxes.5 Either way, in order to maintain the stability of the existing social structure of class division, the State had to be restructured, and this itself was based on the emergence of a new class that was provided land grants by the king.

The new socio-economic structure some main features

Existence of a landed intermediary class Decentralised State As mentioned in the previous chapter, the chief measure undertaken by the State to ensure stability in the social order and otherwise legitimising State rule was issuing of land grants, mostly to individual Brahmins and otherwise Jainas, administrators, rich merchants and military chiefs. Land grants were seen as the most prized manner of payment and so replaced payment in cash.6 Now, the land grants definitely helped create an intermediary landed class, who wielded considerable economic and political power.7 This can be seen from the fact that

5 Supra note 2, at 234. 6 BR Gopal, Corpus of Kadamba Inscriptions, 1, 24 (Sirsi: Kadamba Institute of Cultural Studies, 1985). 7 KV Ramesh, Chalukyas of Vatapi, 6 (New Delhi: Agam Kala Prakashan, 1984).

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 9

functions hitherto performed by State officials such as collection of taxes, levy of forced labour, regulation of mines and agriculture, maintenance of law and order and defence were gradually handed over to firstly the priestly or Brahmin class and then the warrior class.8 What this meant for the Kadamba Kingdom was that now, there existed a new intermediary landed class apart from the ruling and labour class, who neither held power in its direct form nor worked as part of their profession yet extracted surplus from the labour class and enjoyed all economic benefits that earlier accrued to the State when it held the ownership of land.9 The State now depended upon this class of landlords for taxes in kind and for military service thereby creating a hierarchy of feudal interests over the lands. A strong centralised bureaucracy, which was a hallmark of the Mauryan State now gave way to decentralisation and with it the feudalisation of the economy and the society as a whole.10

Absence of an extensive empire The Satavahana Empire was vast sprawling over a major portion of modern-day Andhra, Karnataka and Maharashtra. Their end resulted in the disintegration of the empire into smaller kingdoms with each being taken over by the strongest feudatory of the region.11 Taking advantage of relatively smaller opponent kingdoms, each tried to obtain suzerainty of the other. This political instability continued until the first Kadamba king Mayuravarma rose to power and defeated all these kingdoms. However, even the now new Kadamba kingdom was not large enough or strong enough to retain centralised power. The successors to Mayuravarma contributed to the kingdom by annexing new territories but that again only added to the political instability. The later Kadamba rulers too were often engaged in wars with other contemporary rulers often losing parts of their own territory.12 Another event that was a setback to the large Kadamba kingdom was its division into three smaller kingdoms, each headed by a rival member of the family.

8 VK Thakur, Urbanisation in Ancient India, 314 (New Delhi: Abhinan Publications, 1981). 9 B. Sheik Ali, History: Its Theory and Method, 213 (1 edn, New Delhi: Macmillan India, 1981). 10 RS Sharma, Indian Feudalism, 4 (2 edn, New Delhi: Macmillan India, 1980).

11 G.M Moraes, The Kadamba Kula, 354 (1 edn, Bombay: Asian Educational Services, 1931). 12 Y Gopala Reddy, The Feudal Element in Western Chalukya Polity, 114 (Hyderabad: Victory Publishers, 1990). NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 10

All in all, the Kadamba State, with its decentralised power and political instability did not qualify as an extensive empire. This is a characteristic feature of early feudalism.13

Self-Sufficient Rural Economy One major impact of land grants was the creation of villages as the new centres of power and as self-sufficient units of the economy affecting the existence of towns and cities and thereby causing their decline. The urban economy that flourished under the Satavahana State enabled the ruling class to extract surplus from the rural areas using the strong State machinery from the cities themselves. Now, quite on the reverse, the new decentralised Kadamba State dispersed State machinery and apparatus to rural areas in order to have better control of the now feudal lands. Hence there was a change of locale of ruling class to villages with them migrating from towns to villages.14 Even the army sometimes was portioned off to the country as peasants. This entire process of urban collapse is again seen by Marxist historians as a universal characteristic of feudalism.15 The depopulation of urban centres only meant the populating of villages. This should not be seen as a retreat but as an advancement in the mode of production to feudalism as the political class however continued to reside in the political capitals of their respective kingdoms in this case, the city of Banavasi.16 This only speaks of the Kadamba States continuity with that of the Shudra holding system.

Decline in Trade and Commercial Activity Following the urban collapse was the shrinkage of trade and commerce. The merchant class that predominantly dwelled in towns and cities suffered a setback as a result. Commerce suffered inevitably. Another reason for this decline could have been the influence of the

13 Supra note 6, at 279. 14 Supra note 8. 15 Frederick Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, 162 (Abercrombie: Resistance Books, 2004). 16 Supra note 1, at 154. NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 11

rising social values iterated by the Brahmin class that might have tried to curb the growing status of the wealthy merchant class in relation to their own. Sea-faring throughout the period of early feudalism was seen by Brahmins as unholy.17 Another indicator of poor trade was the paucity of coins for at least eight centuries since the inception of feudalism.18 This again could have been as a result of the self-sufficiency of rural economic units and their practice of local production and local consumption that had little or no use for coined money.19 The last indicator of poor trade is the decline of Buddhism in this era. As seen before in the first chapter, Buddhist clergymen were the beneficiaries of land grants from the Satavahana rulers. This was because Buddhism was seen as the most developed of religious institutions that could channelize communication between the State and the labour class.20 The religion was tied to mercantile activity as they received generous donations from merchants and traders. So logically a fall in trade placed Buddhism in the backburner. It would however be fallacious to assume that trade had no place in the age of feudalism. Trade and commercial activity did take place but it was always low-key and did not contradict the existing feudal order. Trade in the feudal era came to be feudalised.21

Economic relations under the religious superstructure Early feudalism was a period when caste as an institution gained immense economic relevance. Caste is an integral part of the production relations as it fixes ones relation to property and these relations cannot be altered.22 Under feudalism the feudal class derived its position from the land grants made to it by the king. Land was the principal realm of production at the time and all other activities generally corresponded to it. In the Kadamba State Brahmanism, Buddhism and Jainism were

17 O.P Prasad, Decay and Revival of Urban Centres in Medieval South India, 46 (New Delhi: Commonwealth Publishers, 1989). 18 Supra note 18, at 54. 19 Supra note 16, at 178. 20 Supra note 5, at 101. 21 Supra note 1, at 156. 22 Supra note 1, at 206. NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 12

patronised religions. Large pieces of land were given to these clergymen on a completely rent free basis.23 Sometimes the sustenance of these grants required entire villages of labour. The labour class was thus made servile to this new religio-political superstructure. Throughout the feudal Kadamba period, the Brahmin Priests concerned themselves with less and less religious and more secular and stately functions and subsequently went on to become a part of the political structure as well. Hence, of all types of feudalism, it was Brahmin feudalism that dominated all. Thus the religious and non-religious ideas and policies that were generated during the Kadamba period not only served but flowed from a landed feudal class.24 This class and caste hierarchy was reflective of the religious superstructure.

Multiplication of Castes under Feudalism Caste as a social institution must have originated from the period of the breakdown of a classless society belonging to primitive communism to its transition to the Shudra holding mode of production.25 This is almost simultaneous with the development of a class society in India. The long process over which tribes merged in with a generalised society must have been the beginnings of caste. This transition was largely the result of the introduction of plough agriculture in various regions which changed the system of production, broke the structure of tribes and clans and made caste the alternative form of social organisation.26 The inference that can be drawn from this is that the spread of caste is related to the spread of plough based agriculture. So, if plough agriculture was the chief instrument of production that broke up the pre-class, pre-caste tribal social order and if plough agriculture spread to certain regions during the Shudra mode of production under the Mauryans and Satavahanas resulting in the rise of caste in these regions, then the multiplication and consolidation of the caste system can be dated to the early feudal period of the Kadambas in the south.27

23 B. Sheik Ali, Comprehensive History of Karnataka, History of the Western Gangas, 181 (Mysore: University of Mysore, 1972). 24 Supra note 1, at 172. 25 Irfan Habib, Essays in Indian History: Towards a Marxist Perception, Caste in Indian History, 164 (London: Wimbledon Publishing Company, 2002). 26 Romila Thapar, Interpreting Early India, 97 (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1993). 27 Supra note 1, at 183. NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 13

With this, the study of some of the main Kadamba socio-economic features comes to an end. The task that remains now is to establish that these have determined the larger Kadamba political superstructure of Feudalism.

CHAPTER III: THE KADAMBA POLITICAL STRUCTURE AND ITS DETERMINANTS

The most important determinants of the structure of a state are the nature of its economy, the composition of the classes in power and the manner in which it organises its politics.28 The State of the Shudra holding system was centralised, its armed forces were based in major towns and cities if they were not deployed for suppression or war. The feudal state on the other hand, was decentralised and it was structured on the basis of the natural economy that prevailed with its main body existing in the country. The restructuring of the State was affected as a result of the effect of the land grants and the interests of the landed intermediary class which it now had to protect and serve.29 In the Kadamba State, the king was at the apex with his consisting of princes and the circle of ministers around him. Below this, the territory of the kingdom was divided into provinces portioned off to either the princes or kinsmen who came to possess them on a hereditary basis with the passage of time. Each province was then sub-divided into districts headed by subfeudatories who formed the third tier of administration. Each district had control over at least a dozen villages under it. Finally each village was governed by a village assembly of elders. Each strata of the administration possessed its own body of men who were answerable to those above it. Thus the Political hierarchy of the Kadamba State was 5 layered.30 Each of these officials starting from the court downwards, and at times even including the king, were paid by the ownership of villages and land. Thus the main task that they concerned

28 Supra note 1, at 164. 29 Supra note 15, at 1. 30 Supra note 1, at 165. NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 14

themselves with was the collection of revenue from these lands and not as one would assume with administration or war.31 The Kadamba State has been described to be tributary from the tribute that the feudal lords pay, segmentary from the numerous independent individual segments that make up the State, decentralised from the devolving of powers of management and administration to the feudal class and finally a peasant state as it is a characteristic of early peasant societies. All these attempts at characterising the Kadamba State are only partially correct. They do not characterise the State in its entirety but merely look at one material aspect of it. This is where the Marxist theory of State comes in handy. The Marxist theory of the State perceives the State as an instrument or agency of class rule. It is the instrument of suppression of one class over the other and comes into existence along with its special apparatus in order to facilitate this.32 Using this, if the Kadamba State were to be characterised, it would be by the class that it serves, the feudal class. This feudal class was directly related to the mode of production the feudal mode and the specific society and economy that this class had created in its own exclusive interest. Hence, the Kadamba State is a feudal State and that has been determined by its feudal economy, its landed intermediary class and decentralised administration.33

31 Supra note 19, at 118. 32 VIadimir Lenin, The State, 1 (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1977). 33 Supra note 1, at 169. NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 15

CONCLUSION
A careful study of the Satavahana State has been proved to be fruitful for the purpose of having a better understanding of the Kadamba State. From Chapter 1, it is now known that the Satavahana period saw the end of primitive communism in Karnataka and a transition into the Shudra holding mode of production. This was the period when institutions such as caste and class came to be firmly established among the people and when productive relations became exploitative. It is this exploitation by the Satavahana State that prompted the Shudra people to revolt and thus forced to State to restructure itself. This is the link between the Satavahana State and the Kadamba State. As the historian Vico might have analysed, if these instances hadnt occurred, then probably a Kadamba State might have never emerged. It did, however and modified its political structure in such a way that it would continue to hold the class system in place since it was integral to its existence. As an answer to the second research question, the collective self-consciousness of the highly exploited Satavahana people forced the State to feudalise itself. Hence, feudalism although a politicolegal decision, was highly influenced by the socio-economic conditions of the people of that time. The Kadamba State decentralised its bureaucracy that resulted in a highly stratified polity. Religion and its institutions such as caste were used tactically to maintain a certain social and economic order as studied in chapter 2. These actions was undertaken by the State in order to gain legitimacy for it rule and subsequent political stability. This is the researchers answer to the third research question. The hypothesis statement thus stands correct. The only thing that now remains to be done is to establish that Marxist historiography is the best methodology that can be employed in the study of the past. As mentioned in the introduction to this paper, the history of the Kadambas had been much neglected and incorrectly represented by mainstream historians until a few Marxist historians reinterpreted their history using the historical materialism approach. Nationalist historians emphasise on the rulers and their actions when on the contrary throughout the course of this paper it has been shown that it is the people that make history. Nationalist historians factual history merely provides one with awareness of the past not understanding of it as it doesnt analyse causes behind historical events.

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 16

From primitive communism to the Shudra holding mode of production during the Satavahanas to feudalism under the Kadambas, every event has been determined by the people alone, people who desperately struggled to break away from the clutches of the establishment and to free themselves from the exploitative relations of production. The rulers never made history, but only saw it being made by the people. Marxist historians have this incredible insight and their work always reflects this. Nationalist historians on the other hand would have led one to the conclusion that it is the rulers who determine the nature of their society and economy, when it is so blatantly incorrect. This is why Marxist historiography stands correct. Inferring from all this, Marxist approach to understanding history is the right approach to understanding the past.

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 17

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1) B. Sheik Ali, History: Its Theory and Method (1 edn, New Delhi: Macmillan India, 1981). 2) B. Sheik Ali, Comprehensive History of Karnataka, History of the Western Gangas (1 edn, Mysore: Prasaranga, University of Mysore, 1976). 3) BR Gopal, Corpus of Kadamba Inscriptions (Sirsi: Kadamba Institute of Cultural Studies, 1985). 4) DD Kosambi, An Introduction to the Study of Indian History (2 edn, Mumbai: Popular Prakashan, 2008). 5) Frederick Engels, The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State (Abercrombie: Resistance Books, 2004). 6) G.M Moraes, The Kadamba Kula (1 edn, New Delhi: Asian Educational Services, 1931). 7) Himanshu Prabha Ray, Monastery and Guild (1 edn, London: Oxford University Press, 1986). 8) Irfan Habib, Essays in Indian History: Towards a Marxist Perception, Caste in Indian History (London: Wimbledon Publishing Company, 2002). 9) KV Ramesh, Chalukyas of Vatapi (New Delhi: Agam Kala Prakashan, 1984). 10) O.P Prasad, Decay and Revival of Urban Centres in Medieval South India (New Delhi: Commonwealth Publishers, 1989). 11) RN Nandi, Social Roots of Religion in Ancient India (Calcutta: KP Bagchi, 1986). 12) Romila Thapar, Interpreting Early India (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1993). 13) RS Sharma, Aspects of Political Ideas and Institutions in Ancient India (4 edn, New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1991). 14) RS Sharma, Indian Feudalism (cAD 300-1200) (New Delhi: The Macmillan Company of India, 1980). 15) RS Sharma, Sudras in Ancient India (2 edn, New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2002). 16) Saketh Rajan, Making History: Karnatakas People and their Past (Bangalore: Vimukthi Prakashana, 1998). 17) Vladimir Lenin, The State (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1977).
NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY

A MARXIST HISTORY OF THE KADAMBAS 18

18) Y Gopala Reddy, The Feudal Element in Western Chalukya Polity (Hyderabad: Victory
Publishers, 1990).

NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL OF INDIA UNIVERSITY