Question map
Not attempted Correct Incorrect ★ Bookmarked
Loading…
Q55 (IAS/2015) History & Culture › Medieval India › Medieval social structure Official Key

With reference to Indian history, which of the following is/are the essential element/elements of the feudal system? 1. A very strong centralized political authority and a very weak provincial or local political authority 2. Emergence of administrative structure based on control and possession of land 3. Creation of lord-vassal relationship between the feudal lord and his overlord Select the correct answer using the code given below.

Result
Your answer: —  ·  Correct: B
Explanation

Feudalism was characterized by fragmented political units with diffused[1] political authority, where local lords expanded their territorial control in the absence of forceful kings and emperors[1]. This directly contradicts statement 1, which incorrectly describes strong centralization as a feudal characteristic.

In Indian history, land revenue was a major source for rulers, with land divided into jagirs allotted to jagirdars, who further allocated land to zamindars for tax collection from peasants[2]. This confirms statement 2 - that feudalism involved administrative structures based on land control and possession.

Feudalism was marked by agricultural production around manor houses where lords possessed land cultivated by peasants who pledged loyalty, goods and services, while these lords pledged loyalty to greater lords who were vassals of kings[3]. This hierarchical lord-vassal relationship validates statement 3.

Therefore, statements 2 and 3 correctly describe essential elements of feudalism, while statement 1 is fundamentally incorrect as feudalism featured weak central authority, not strong centralization.

Sources
  1. [2] Indian Economy, Nitin Singhania .(ed 2nd 2021-22) > Chapter 10: Land Reforms in India > HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF LAND REFORMS > p. 336
  2. [3] Themes in world history, History Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 3: Nomadic Empires > CHANGING TRADITIONS > p. 79
How others answered
Each bar shows the % of students who chose that option. Green bar = correct answer, blue outline = your choice.
Community Performance
Out of everyone who attempted this question.
50%
got it right
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Full view
Don’t just practise – reverse-engineer the question. This panel shows where this PYQ came from (books / web), how the examiner broke it into hidden statements, and which nearby micro-concepts you were supposed to learn from it. Treat it like an autopsy of the question: what might have triggered it, which exact lines in the book matter, and what linked ideas you should carry forward to future questions.
Q. With reference to Indian history, which of the following is/are the essential element/elements of the feudal system? 1. A very strong cen…
At a glance
Origin: Books + Current Affairs Fairness: Moderate fairness Books / CA: 6.7/10 · 3.3/10

This is a classic 'Definition Trap' question. It tests conceptual clarity on 'Indian Feudalism' (a major debate in Indian historiography) rather than obscure facts. Statement 1 is the key: Feudalism inherently implies the decentralization of power to local lords, making a 'very strong centralized authority' an oxymoron. The source is standard NCERT conceptual understanding of the Post-Gupta period.

How this question is built

This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.

Statement 1
Was a very strong centralized political authority combined with a very weak provincial or local political authority an essential element of the feudal system in Indian history?
Origin: Web / Current Affairs Fairness: CA heavy Web-answerable

Web source
Presence: 5/5
"That is, the tentacles of bureaucracy did not reach as deeply into local communities. ... Here, state control was minimal, amounting to little more than establishing workable relations with chieftains."
Why this source?
  • Describes limited reach of central bureaucracy into local communities, implying weak central control over localities.
  • Notes minimal state control in hinterlands and reliance on relations with chieftains, which contradicts the idea of a very strong central authority.
Web source
Presence: 4/5
"political units were fragmented and political authority diffused. ... In the absence of forceful kings and emperors, local lords expanded the territory subject to them and intensified their control over the people living there."
Why this source?
  • States that political units were fragmented and political authority diffused, a context in which local elites retained power.
  • Explains that in the absence of forceful kings local lords expanded control—supporting a model of weak central and strong local authority rather than the reverse.
Web source
Presence: 3/5
"Administration of justice was mainly based on local customs and practices. Property laws and personal laws were based on the feudal system and caste system."
Why this source?
  • Says administration of justice relied on local customs and practices, indicating significant local authority in legal matters.
  • Links property and personal laws to the feudal system and caste system, implying local/regional structures shaped social-legal order.

Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 4: India on the Eve of British Conquest > Nature and Limitations of Regional States > p. 73
Strength: 5/5
“The independent political systems that emerged in the provinces continued to maintain ties with the Mughal imperial authority and acknowledged the emperor's importance as an umbrella. Even rebel chieftains of the Marathas and Sikhs recognised the Mughal emperor as the supreme authority. The polity that emerged in these states was regional in character, and functional with the collaborative support of the different local groups like the zamindars, merchants, local nobles and chieftains. The provincial rulers had to take care of these various local interests in order to maintain themselves. Of course, there were exceptions; for instance, in Mysore, rulers did not recognise the local chieftains.”
Why relevant

Describes provincial polities that maintained ties to Mughal imperial authority while local groups (zamindars, nobles) retained power, implying layered authority rather than absolute central control.

How to extend

A student could compare the degree of imperial oversight versus local autonomy in specific regions (e.g., Bengal, Deccan) to judge whether central strength coincided with weak local power.

Modern India ,Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.)[Old NCERT] > Chapter 2: Indian States and Society in the 18th Century > Indian States and Society in the 18th Century > p. 17
Strength: 5/5
“\sqrt{N} the debris of the Mughal Empire and its political system arose a large number of independent and semi-independent powers such as Bengal, Avadh, Hyderabad, Mysore and the Maratha Kingdom. It is these powers which challenged the British attempt at supremacy in India in the second half of the 18th century. Some arose as a result of the assertion of autonomy by governors of Mughal provinces, others were the product of rebellion against Mughal authority. The rulers of these states established law and order and viable economic and administrative states. They curbed, with varying degrees of success, the lower local officials and petty chiefs and zamindars who constantly fought with higher authorities for control over the surplus produce of the peasant, and who sometimes succeeded in establishing local centers of power and patronage.”
Why relevant

Notes emergence of independent/semi-independent powers from Mughal debris and that provincial rulers curbed but did not entirely eliminate local chiefs and zamindars, indicating contested authority.

How to extend

One could map which successor states established strong provincial administration and which allowed powerful local elites to persist, testing the necessity of centralized dominance.

Modern India ,Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.)[Old NCERT] > Chapter 2: Indian States and Society in the 18th Century > MODERN INDIA > p. 35
Strength: 4/5
“same decadent social order as the Mughal Empire did and suffered from the same underlying weaknesses. The Maratha chiefs were very similar to the later Mughal nobles, just as the saraniami system was similar to the Mughal system of jagirs. So long as there existed a strong central authority and the need for mutual cooperation against a common enemy, the Mughals they remained united in a loose union. But at the first opportunity they tended to assert their autonomy.”
Why relevant

States Maratha chiefs resembled Mughal nobles and that unity depended on a strong central authority; when it weakened, chiefs asserted autonomy — a pattern relevant to feudal fragmentation.

How to extend

Extend by comparing periods with strong emperors versus interregnums to see if feudal decentralization increased when central power fell.

History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 8: Harsha and Rise of Regional Kingdoms > Administration > p. 106
Strength: 4/5
“According to historian Burton Stein, a centralised administration did not even exist under the powerful Guptas. It was restricted only to the central part of the Gangetic plain between Pataliputra and Mathura. Beyond that zone, there was no centralised authority. The only difference between Guptas and Vardhanas is that the former had formidable enemies like Huns, while the latter had no such opponents. The copper plates of 632 CE record a gift of land to two Brahmans.”
Why relevant

Burton Stein's view that even powerful Gupta rule was centrally limited geographically, suggesting central authority could be strong only in core zones while peripheries remained autonomous.

How to extend

Use geographic knowledge to identify core and peripheral zones under Gupta rule and assess whether 'feudal' relations correspond to peripheral local autonomy.

History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 7: The Guptas > Introduction > p. 89
Strength: 4/5
“After the Mauryan empire, many small kingdoms rose and fell. In the period from c. 300 to 700 CE, a classical pattern of an imperial rule evolved, paving the way for state formation in many regions. During this period, the Gupta kingdom emerged as a great power and achieved the political unification of a large part of the Indian subcontinent. It featured a strong central government, bringing many kingdoms under its hegemony. Feudalism as an institution began to take root during this period. The living standards of upper classes reached a peak. Education, art and study of science progressed, but the feudal system of governance put people in some form of hardship.”
Why relevant

Claims feudalism began taking root in the Gupta period alongside a strong central government, implying that a strong centre and feudal features could coexist.

How to extend

A student could examine specific institutional features (land grants, jagirs) during Gupta rule to evaluate whether strong central institutions accompanied feudal practices.

Statement 2
Was the emergence of an administrative structure based on control and possession of land an essential element of the feudal system in Indian history?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Exploring Society:India and Beyond ,Social Science-Class VII . NCERT(Revised ed 2025) > Chapter 7: The Gupta Era: An Age of Tireless Creativity > LET'S EXPLORE > p. 156
Presence: 5/5
“The Gupta Empire had a well-organised system of administration. Instead of controlling everything from a central authority, they divided the empire into provinces and granted land to local rulers, priests and chieftains. These land grants were carefully inscribed on copper plates to keep accurate records — many of which have been discovered by archaeologists in recent times. This system helped ensure proper tax collection and allowed the Gupta rulers to govern efficiently while still giving local leaders some control over their regions.”
Why this source?
  • Describes Gupta practice of granting land to local rulers, priests and chieftains as an administrative device.
  • Notes use of engraved land grants (copper plates) to record and regulate these grants, linking land control to governance and tax collection.
  • Shows decentralisation of authority via land-holding that resembles a land-based feudal administrative structure.
Indian Economy, Nitin Singhania .(ed 2nd 2021-22) > Chapter 10: Land Reforms in India > HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF LAND REFORMS > p. 336
Presence: 5/5
“In the history of India, there are many instances where collective ownership of land was practiced. Moreover, for the kings and emperors, land revenue was one of the major sources of revenue. Land was divided into jagirs. These jagirs were allotted to jagirdars. And they further used to split the land and allocate them to zamindars. Zamindars used to give that land to peasants for cultivation and in return they used to collect tax/revenue from them. During the colonial era, lands of communities and tribals were seized by zamindars and the British. Subsequently, they introduced different systems of tax collection through land.”
Why this source?
  • Explains division of land into jagirs allotted to jagirdars and further allocation to zamindars, indicating hierarchical land-based administration.
  • Explicitly traces chain from rulers to jagirdars to zamindars to peasants, showing land-possession as basis for administrative and revenue relations.
Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 5: Land Reforms > 5.1 Land Rights before Independence > p. 190
Presence: 4/5
“In India, during the Mughal period (before 1765), zamindars or "revenue collectors" collected revenue on behalf of the Mughal Emperor, whose representatives or Diwan supervised their activities. The zamindar served as an intermediary who procured economic rent from the cultivator and after withholding a percentage for his own expenses, made available the rest, as revenue to the State. Under the Mughal system, the land itself belonged to State (People, Territory, Government and Sovereignty) and not to the zamindar, who could transfer only his right to collect rent. The Nawabs of Bengal ruled the area under the Mughal Empire through their feudal chiefs.”
Why this source?
  • Describes zamindars as revenue-collecting intermediaries under the Mughal state, linking administrative roles to control over land revenue rights.
  • States that land legally belonged to the state while revenue rights were transferred, highlighting administrative structures built around land control.
Statement 3
Was the creation of a lord-vassal relationship between a feudal lord and his overlord an essential element of the feudal system in Indian history?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Themes in world history, History Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 3: Nomadic Empires > CHANGING TRADITIONS > p. 79
Presence: 5/5
“rules of tribes. The finest example was the empire of Charlemagne in western and central Europe at the beginning of the ninth century. Even after its rapid collapse, urban centres and trading networks persisted, albeit under heavy attack from Hungarians, Vikings and others. What happened was called 'feudalism'. Feudalism was marked by agricultural production around castles and 'manor houses', where lords of the manor possessed land that was cultivated by peasants (serfs) who pledged them loyalty, goods and services. These lords in turn pledged their loyalty to greater lords who were 'vassals' of kings. The Catholic Church (centred on the papacy) supported this state of affairs and itself possessed land.”
Why this source?
  • Defines feudalism as a system where lords pledged loyalty to greater lords who were vassals of kings, directly describing the lord–vassal hierarchical bond.
  • Specifically links agricultural manors, serf obligations and layered vassalage, showing lord-vassal ties as core institutional feature.
Themes in world history, History Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 4: The Three Orders > The Second Order: The Nobility > p. 89
Presence: 5/5
“This relationship involved elaborate rituals and exchange of vows taken on the Bible in a church. At this ceremony, the vassal received a written charter or a staff or even a clod of earth as a symbol of the land that was being given to him by his master. The noble enjoyed a privileged status. He had absolute control over his property, in perpetuity. He could raise troops called 'feudal levies'. The lord held his own courts of justice and could even coin his own money. He was the lord of all the people settled on his land. He owned vast tracts of land which contained his own dwellings, his private fields and pastures and the homes and fields of his tenant-peasants.”
Why this source?
  • Describes formal ceremonies, oaths and symbolic transfer of land from lord to vassal (charter, staff, clod of earth), illustrating the institutional mechanics of lord–vassal relations.
  • Highlights rights and powers granted to vassals (control over property, military levy, judicial authority), indicating the centrality of the relationship to feudal power structure.
Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 5: Land Reforms > 5.1 Land Rights before Independence > p. 190
Presence: 4/5
“In India, during the Mughal period (before 1765), zamindars or "revenue collectors" collected revenue on behalf of the Mughal Emperor, whose representatives or Diwan supervised their activities. The zamindar served as an intermediary who procured economic rent from the cultivator and after withholding a percentage for his own expenses, made available the rest, as revenue to the State. Under the Mughal system, the land itself belonged to State (People, Territory, Government and Sovereignty) and not to the zamindar, who could transfer only his right to collect rent. The Nawabs of Bengal ruled the area under the Mughal Empire through their feudal chiefs.”
Why this source?
  • Provides an Indian example: zamindars acted as intermediaries collecting revenue for the Mughal ruler and operated under supervision, indicating a hierarchical, dependent relationship akin to feudal lord–vassal ties.
  • Mentions Nawabs ruling through 'feudal chiefs', suggesting that layered authority and intermediaries were present in Indian contexts.
Pattern takeaway: UPSC frequently tests 'Structural Features' of historical periods. The pattern is to insert an 'Extreme Opposite' statement (e.g., claiming Centralization in a Decentralized system) to test if you understand the core logic of the system, not just the dates.
How you should have studied
  1. [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Found in every standard Ancient/Medieval history textbook (RS Sharma, Old NCERT Class XI/XII). Statement 1 is a direct contradiction of the basic definition of Feudalism.
  2. [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: The transition from the Gupta Empire to the Post-Gupta period (c. 600–1000 CE), characterized by the rise of the 'Samanta' system and land grants.
  3. [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the specific terms of Indian Feudalism: 'Vishti' (forced labor), 'Agrahara/Brahmadeya' (tax-free land grants), 'Samanta/Mahasamanta' (feudatories), and the decline of trade/urban centres (urban decay theory). Contrast with European Feudalism (Manorial system vs. Indian village autonomy).
  4. [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: When studying 'Isms' (Feudalism, Colonialism, Mercantilism), do not just read the narrative. Explicitly list their 3-4 structural pillars (e.g., Economy = Land, Polity = Decentralized, Society = Hierarchy). UPSC swaps these pillars to create trap statements.
Concept hooks from this question
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Centralisation vs Regional Autonomy in Indian Polities
💡 The insight

References show debates over the extent of central control (e.g., Mughal/imperial umbrella vs regional states, and claims that Gupta centralisation was limited). This concept is directly tied to evaluating whether feudalism required a very strong centre.

High-yield for UPSC because many questions ask about nature of state formation and centre–periphery relations in Indian history. It links to topics like administrative structures, causes of regionalism, and decline of empires. Master by comparing textbook positions and key historians (e.g., on Gupta and Mughal centre–province relations) and practising answer structures that weigh evidence for/against strong centralisation.

📚 Reading List :
  • Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 4: India on the Eve of British Conquest > Nature and Limitations of Regional States > p. 73
  • Modern India ,Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.)[Old NCERT] > Chapter 2: Indian States and Society in the 18th Century > MODERN INDIA > p. 35
  • History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 8: Harsha and Rise of Regional Kingdoms > Administration > p. 106
🔗 Anchor: "Was a very strong centralized political authority combined with a very weak prov..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Role of Provincial and Local Elites (zamindars, chiefs, nobles)
💡 The insight

Several references emphasise provincial rulers' dependence on or conflict with local groups (zamindars, merchants, chiefs), which matters for judging whether local authority was weak or strong under feudal arrangements.

Important because UPSC questions probe social and political bases of power (how local elites mediated state authority). It connects to land revenue systems, jagirs/jagirdari, and rise of regional powers. Prepare by tabulating roles/interests of zamindars, chieftains and provincial rulers and using source excerpts to show continuity/variation.

📚 Reading List :
  • Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 4: India on the Eve of British Conquest > Nature and Limitations of Regional States > p. 73
  • Modern India ,Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.)[Old NCERT] > Chapter 2: Indian States and Society in the 18th Century > Indian States and Society in the 18th Century > p. 17
🔗 Anchor: "Was a very strong centralized political authority combined with a very weak prov..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Origins and Nature of 'Feudal' Structures in India (Gupta period and later)
💡 The insight

Evidence references the Gupta period as when feudal elements 'began to take root' while also noting limited central authority—this concept helps parse what 'feudal' meant in Indian context.

Useful for essay and mains answers that require nuance about 'Indian feudalism' vs European feudalism. It helps candidates avoid over-generalisation by mapping institutional features (land grants, local power) across periods. Study by comparing textbook claims (e.g., Gupta origins) with counter-evidence on administrative reach and local autonomy.

📚 Reading List :
  • History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 7: The Guptas > Introduction > p. 89
  • History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 8: Harsha and Rise of Regional Kingdoms > Administration > p. 106
🔗 Anchor: "Was a very strong centralized political authority combined with a very weak prov..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Land grants as administrative instruments (copper-plate grants)
💡 The insight

Gupta-era land grants to local elites are cited as a mechanism that devolved authority and tied administration to land-holding.

High-yield for UPSC: questions often probe methods of decentralisation and revenue administration in early medieval India. Connects to topics on state formation, epigraphy (copper-plate evidence), and local power structures. Prepare by studying examples of land grants, their administrative functions, and their inscriptions.

📚 Reading List :
  • Exploring Society:India and Beyond ,Social Science-Class VII . NCERT(Revised ed 2025) > Chapter 7: The Gupta Era: An Age of Tireless Creativity > LET'S EXPLORE > p. 156
  • History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.) > Chapter 7: The Guptas > Introduction > p. 89
🔗 Anchor: "Was the emergence of an administrative structure based on control and possession..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Jagir–Jagirdar–Zamindar hierarchy
💡 The insight

References show jagirs allotted to jagirdars and downstream allocation to zamindars, illustrating a land-based administrative chain central to feudal arrangements.

Frequently tested in questions on medieval agrarian relations and revenue systems; links political decentralisation with economic control. Master the hierarchy, functions and differences between jagirdars and zamindars, and map them to question prompts about intermediaries and revenue collection.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Economy, Nitin Singhania .(ed 2nd 2021-22) > Chapter 10: Land Reforms in India > HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF LAND REFORMS > p. 336
  • Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 5: Land Reforms > 5.1 Land Rights before Independence > p. 190
🔗 Anchor: "Was the emergence of an administrative structure based on control and possession..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 State revenue apparatus and land control (Diwan, revenue officials)
💡 The insight

Mughal diwan and revenue record-keeping show institutional penetration into agriculture, tying administration to land revenue control.

Important for synthesising administrative history with economic history: helps answer questions on how states sustained themselves and structured agrarian relations. Study the role of revenue offices, record-keeping, and their impact on local intermediaries.

📚 Reading List :
  • THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART II, History CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 8: Peasants, Zamindars and the State > 6. Land Revenue System > p. 213
  • Indian Economy, Vivek Singh (7th ed. 2023-24) > Chapter 5: Land Reforms > 5.1 Land Rights before Independence > p. 190
🔗 Anchor: "Was the emergence of an administrative structure based on control and possession..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S3
👉 Lord–vassal relationship (fief, oaths, rituals)
💡 The insight

Core descriptions (ceremonies, oaths, transfer of land/rights) in the references explain how lords granted land and status to vassals, forming the institutional basis of feudalism.

High-yield for questions on feudal institutions: explains how military, judicial and economic authority was delegated. Links to topics on medieval political structure and land tenure; helps answer comparative questions (European vs Indian feudal forms). Prepare by memorising key features (oath, fief, ceremonies) and examples.

📚 Reading List :
  • Themes in world history, History Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 4: The Three Orders > The Second Order: The Nobility > p. 89
  • Themes in world history, History Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 3: Nomadic Empires > CHANGING TRADITIONS > p. 79
🔗 Anchor: "Was the creation of a lord-vassal relationship between a feudal lord and his ove..."
🌑 The Hidden Trap

The 'Vishti' (Forced Labor) connection. Since Feudalism is confirmed as a topic, the next logical question often targets the economic burden on the peasantry. Look for terms like 'Vishti' (Gupta period) or 'Vetti' (Chola period) in your NCERTs.

⚡ Elimination Cheat Code

Apply the 'Oxymoron Test'. The word 'Feudal' comes from 'Feud' (Fief/Land) held by a Lord. If the Local Lord holds the land and power, the Central King *must* be relatively weak or dependent. Statement 1 claims 'Very strong centralized authority'—this contradicts the very existence of powerful local feudal lords. If the Centre is absolute, it's a Bureaucracy, not Feudalism. Thus, 1 is false. Eliminate A and D.

🔗 Mains Connection

Link this to GS-1 Society and GS-2 Polity: The 'Feudal Mindset' often cited in Indian sociology (hierarchy, patronage) traces back to this period. Also, compare the 'Samanta' system with modern 'Federalism'—Feudalism is decentralization based on personal loyalty/military service, whereas Federalism is based on Constitutional law.

✓ Thank you! We'll review this.

SIMILAR QUESTIONS

IAS · 2021 · Q8 Relevance score: 0.65

With reference to Indian history, which of the following statements is/are correct? 1. The Nizamat of Arcot emerged out of Hyderabad State. 2. The Mysore Kingdom emerged out of Vijayanagara Empire. 3. Rohilkhand Kingdom was formed out of the territories occupied by Ahmad Shah Durrani. Select the correct answer using the code given below.

IAS · 2012 · Q7 Relevance score: -0.45

With reference to the guilds (Shreni) of ancient India that played a very important role in the country’s economy, which of the following statements is/ are correct? 1. Every guild was registered with the central authority of the State and the king was the chief administrative authority on them. 2. The wages, rules of work, standards and prices were fixed by the guild. 3. The guild had judicial powers over its own members. Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

CDS-I · 2014 · Q9 Relevance score: -1.01

Consider the following statements regarding Indian Feudalism in the early medieval period : 1. The revenue assignments were called Bhoga. 2. The hereditary chiefs neither collected revenues nor assumed administrative powers. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

IAS · 2000 · Q91 Relevance score: -1.65

Assertion (A) : The origin of feudal system in ancient India can be traced to military campaigns. Reason (R) : There was considerable expansion of the feudal system during the Gupta period.

IAS · 2012 · Q47 Relevance score: -1.72

With reference to the history of ancient India, which of the following was/were common to both Buddhism and Jainism ? 1. Avoidance of extremities of penance and enjoyment 2. Indifference to the authority of the Vedas 3. Denial of efficacy of rituals Select the correct answer using the codes given below :