Rural Society Structure in Medieval India
Medieval History › Medieval Society & Social Structure · Topic 7.1
Medieval rural society was hierarchical: rajas above zamindars, and below them khudkasht peasants who owned the land they tilled, muzarian tenants, and landless kamin or untouchable labourers and village artisans. Peasants had hereditary rights as long as they paid revenue that could reach nearly half the produce, zamindars had hereditary claims to a share, and village castes dominated those below them.
6 min read · UPSC Prelims · History · Medieval Society & Social Structure
At a Glance
- Top Rajas and zamindars
- Peasants Khudkasht owners and muzarian tenants
- Lowest Landless kamin, untouchables and village artisans
- Revenue Nearly half of the produce at times
- Rights Hereditary rights for peasant and zamindar
- Exam link UPSC Prelims, Medieval History: Medieval Society & Social Structure
Where Does It Fit?
This is the first topic of the category on medieval society and social structure. The previous category covered the Mughal period and its decline, and this one looks at how people lived, beginning with the village. The next topic covers towns and town life. Previous topic: Sayyid brothers dominate Nadir Shah Sacked…">Decline of the Mughal Empire After Aurangzeb.
What Were the Layers of Village Society?
In short: a village had landowning peasants, tenants and landless labourers, and above them zamindars and rajas, with caste deciding who sat where.
| Group | Position |
|---|---|
| Khudkasht | Resident peasants who owned the land they tilled; paid land revenue at customary rates; claimed to be original settlers and often belonged to a single dominant caste or castes |
| Muzarian | Tenants who generally paid land revenue at higher rates; richer khudkasht let out ploughs, bullocks and lands to them |
| Kamin | Landless peasants and labourers, often called untouchables; hit hardest in famines, which were frequent |
| Village artisans | Paid for services in commodities fixed by custom; also suffered in famines |
| Zamindars | Collected revenue from villages and had hereditary rights; above them rajas |
There was great inequality: a peasant without his own ploughs and bullocks often tilled the land of zamindars or upper castes and barely scraped by. The dominant village castes exploited the weaker sections and were in turn exploited by the zamindars. Money hardly entered village transactions, so it is difficult to compute peasants’ real incomes.
What Rights Did Peasants and Zamindars Hold?
A peasant was not dispossessed as long as he paid the land revenue. He could sell his land if a buyer was found and the community did not object, and his children inherited it as of right. The state demand sometimes reached nearly half of his produce, leaving the ordinary peasant with barely enough and no means to invest in improving land. Resident cultivators and village zamindars with larger holdings could and did invest in extending cultivation. The state dues are discussed under the Mughal revenue systems in Mansabdari System and the Dahsala (Land Revenue) System Under Akbar.
Personal ownership of land was very old, and ownership depended mainly on heredity, though new rights arose all the time: whoever first brought land under cultivation was regarded as its owner. Cultivable wasteland (banjar) was plentiful, so a group of enterprising people could settle a new village. Many zamindars had the hereditary right to collect revenue from a number of villages, called a talluqa or zamindari, and received a share that could go up to 25 per cent in some areas. The zamindar was not the owner of all the land in his zamindari: peasants could not be dispossessed so long as they paid, so both held hereditary rights.
Who Were the Zamindars, Rajas and Gentry?
| Aspect | Detail |
|---|---|
| Hierarchy | Above zamindars were rajas who dominated larger or smaller tracts with varied autonomy, also called zamindars by Persian writers to stress subordination |
| Forts and arms | Zamindars, rajas and chiefs kept armed forces and lived in forts or garhis; the Ain lists their combined forces under Akbar at 3,84,558 sawars, 42,77,057 foot soldiers, 1,863 elephants and 4,260 cannons, though they could never field them together |
| Ties | Close caste, clan and tribal links with their peasants, and local knowledge of productivity |
| Names | Found all over the country as deshmukh, patil, nayak and others, so no central authority could ignore them |
| Living | Smaller zamindars lived like peasants; larger ones like petty rajas or nobles; most lived in the countryside as a loose, dispersed gentry |
| Role | Many set social standards and provided capital and organisation for settling new villages and extending cultivation |
Thus medieval society, including rural society, was highly segmented or hierarchical.
What Did Villagers Grow and How Did They Live?
With a population estimated at about 125 million, there was plenty of cultivable land. India had a diversified economy with wheat, rice, gram, barley, pulses, bajra and also cotton, indigo, chay (red dye), sugarcane and oilseeds, which paid revenue at higher rates in cash and were called cash crops. Peasants shifted crops with prices and adopted new ones: tobacco and maize in the seventeenth century, and potato and red chillies in the eighteenth. Silk and tusser were so widely grown in Bengal that silk need not be imported from China. The state gave taccavi loans, but local effort was crucial. Agriculture used no new techniques but was efficient and fed growing cities, exported rice and sugar, and supplied raw material for textiles. The peasant’s life followed the seasons and custom, with fairs, pilgrimages and ceremonies. Houses were of mud with cots, bamboo mats and earthen utensils; the staple diet was rice, millet, pulses and chapatis, with ghee and oil cheap. For more on living standards, see Standard of Living in Medieval India.
As an analytical point, the village was hierarchical and unequal, yet peasants were not helpless: because land was plentiful, migration was a real check on exploitation, as peasants could leave oppressive zamindars.
Why Is This Topic Important?
- Standard term set Khudkasht, muzarian, kamin and talluqa
- Land relations Hereditary rights on both sides
- Link Background to revenue and the jagirdari crisis
What Came Next?
The next topic describes towns and town life in medieval India. Next topic: Towns and Town Life in Medieval India.
Key People and Terms
- Khudkasht Resident peasant owner
- Muzarian Tenant cultivator
- Kamin Landless labourer
- Talluqa Zamindar’s revenue-collection area
- Banjar Cultivable wasteland
- Garhi Fortified residence of a chief
Exam Corner
Points to Remember
- Khudkasht owned; muzarian rented.
- Kamin were landless, often untouchables.
- Zamindar share up to 25 per cent.
- State demand sometimes nearly half.
- Population about 125 million.
Do Not Confuse With
- Khudkasht and muzarian Resident owners versus tenants paying higher rates
- Zamindar and raja Revenue collector with hereditary rights versus superior chief
- Banjar and polaj Long fallow wasteland versus land cultivated almost every year
Memory Hook
Owner, tenant, labourer; zamindar above, raja higher; rights on both sides.
Mains Angle
Questions on rural society ask for structure and relations. These points add depth.
- Hierarchy Castes and classes in the village
- Rights Hereditary claims of peasants and zamindars
- Economy Cash crops and new crops
A Question You May Face
An original practice question, not a past paper question.
“Describe the structure of rural society in medieval India.”
How to Answer
- Classes Khudkasht, muzarian, kamin.
- Gentry Zamindars and rajas.
- Rights Hereditary claims.
- Economy Crops and burden of revenue.
GS Relevance
Frequently Asked Questions
Who were the khudkasht and muzarian?
Khudkasht were resident peasants who owned the land they tilled and paid revenue at customary rates. Muzarian were tenants who generally paid at higher rates and often hired ploughs, bullocks and land from richer khudkasht.
Who were the kamin?
Kamin were landless peasants and labourers, often belonging to the groups called untouchables. They and the village artisans suffered the most in the frequent famines and had the hardest lives in the whole village community.
What was a talluqa or zamindari?
A talluqa or zamindari was an area from which a zamindar had the hereditary right to collect land revenue. He received a share, up to 25 per cent in some areas, but did not own all the land.
Could a medieval peasant be removed from his land?
No. A peasant was not dispossessed so long as he paid the land revenue, could sell the land if a buyer was found and the community agreed, and his children inherited it as a matter of right.
What crops were grown in medieval India?
Farmers grew wheat, rice, gram, barley, pulses and bajra, along with cash crops such as cotton, indigo, sugarcane and oilseeds. Tobacco and maize were added in the seventeenth century, and potato and red chillies in the eighteenth.
PYQ Practice — Statement Analysis
1 Muzarian were resident peasants who owned the land they tilled.
Those were khudkasht; muzarian were tenants.
2 Zamindars had a hereditary right to collect revenue from a talluqa.
Their share could be up to 25 per cent.
3 Tobacco and maize were new crops of the seventeenth century.
Potato and chillies came in the eighteenth.
4 Peasants could be evicted at will by the state.
They stayed as long as they paid revenue.
Related Topics
Browse the full Medieval History index