1) Handling the syllabus wording (“Paramours”)
The syllabus line reads “Paramours, Polity and Administration.”
- I will keep the term Paramours exactly as written.
- In many standard academic contexts, a similar list often refers to the Paramaras (a well-known early medieval dynasty), but since you asked to follow the syllabus wording exactly, this module treats “Paramours” as the titled unit and focuses on:
- early medieval polity and administration patterns typical of regional dynasties
- how such dynasties organized power, revenue, and legitimacy
If you later confirm that “Paramours” should be corrected to “Paramaras,” I can update future batches accordingly—without changing today’s output.
2) What CUET PG expects from a “Polity and Administration” module (early medieval context)
Questions usually focus on:
- features of early medieval governance:
- land grants
- intermediaries
- local elites and village institutions
- military and forts
- taxation and revenue rights
- how these differ from:
- Mauryan centralized models (ideal type)
- Gupta-era patterns (continuities)
- conceptual debates: “feudalism” and decentralization (handled carefully)
3) Early medieval polity: core concepts
Regional kingship and legitimacy
Regional dynasties generally build legitimacy through:
- genealogy and lineage narratives in inscriptions
- dharma rhetoric (protector of social order)
- patronage of temples/Brahmanas (and sometimes other traditions)
- visible public works (temples, tanks, forts)
Key idea: Legitimacy is a political technology: it stabilizes taxation and obedience.
Territorial control: core vs periphery
Early medieval polities often show:
- strong control in the core area
- negotiated control in frontier/peripheral zones:
- through alliances
- tributary arrangements
- granting rights to local chiefs in exchange for loyalty