Q5
Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the different stages of Indian feudalism and analyze its impact on Indian political system. (b) Do you consider Sultan Iltutmish to be the real founder of the Delhi Sultanate? Discuss. (c) Identify the different categories of Persian literature which emerged during the Delhi Sultanate. (d) Examine the causes of Babur's success against Ibrahim Lodi in the First Battle of Panipat. (e) Discuss the attitude of Chishti saints towards the state. How were the Suhrawardi saints different in their attitude towards the government? (10×5=50 marks)
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में दीजिए: (a) भारतीय सामंतवाद के विविध चरणों की विवेचना करते हुए भारतीय राजनीतिक व्यवस्था पर इसके प्रभाव का विश्लेषण कीजिए। (b) क्या आप सुल्तान इल्तुतमिश को दिल्ली सल्तनत का वास्तविक संस्थापक मानते हैं? विवेचना कीजिए। (c) दिल्ली सल्तनत काल में उभरकर आए विविध प्रकार के पारसी साहित्य की पहचान कीजिए। (d) पानीपत के प्रथम युद्ध में इब्राहीम लोदी के विरुद्ध बाबर की सफलता के कारणों का परीक्षण कीजिए। (e) राज्य के प्रति चिश्ती संतों के रुख (एटिट्यूड) की विवेचना कीजिए। सरकार के प्रति अपने रवैये में सुहरावर्दी संत कैसे भिन्न थे? (10×5=50 अंक)
Directive word: Discuss
This question asks you to discuss. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.
See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.
How this answer will be evaluated
Approach
The directive 'discuss' demands a balanced, analytical treatment across all five sub-parts with evidence-based arguments. Allocate approximately 30 words each (~20% time) to parts (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e), ensuring each sub-part has a mini-introduction, analytical body with specific examples, and brief conclusion. Prioritize analytical depth over descriptive coverage, using the limited word budget to showcase historiographic awareness and comparative frameworks where asked.
Key points expected
- (a) Stages of Indian feudalism: pre-feudal (Gupta-early medieval), feudal (c. 600-1200), and post-feudal/colonial transition; impact on political decentralization, emergence of samantas, and regional kingdoms per R.S. Sharma's thesis
- (b) Iltutmish as real founder: consolidation of iqta system, creation of Turkan-i-Chahalgani (Corps of Forty), establishment of Delhi as capital, and resistance to Mongol pressure; counter-argument acknowledging Qutb-ud-din Aibak's role
- (c) Persian literature categories: historical (tarikh), biographical (tazkira), poetry (ghazal, qasida, masnavi), and administrative/insha literature; specific examples like Minhaj-us-Siraj's Tabaqat-i-Nasiri
- (d) Babur's success at Panipat 1526: military innovations (tulughma, cart-wagon defense), Ibrahim Lodi's strategic errors, Afghan nobility's disaffection, and effective use of artillery
- (e) Chishti attitude: aloofness from state, emphasis on poverty and service to poor, rejection of royal patronage; Suhrawardi contrast: active engagement with political authority, acceptance of land grants, diplomatic role in statecraft
Evaluation rubric
| Dimension | Weight | Max marks | Excellent | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chronology accuracy | 20% | 10 | Precise dating across all sub-parts: for (a) correctly sequences feudal stages (Gupta-600-1200); for (b) cites Iltutmish's reign (1210-1236) and key events like 1221 Mongol threat; for (d) dates Panipat to April 1526; for (e) correctly places Chishti establishment in India (c. 1192 onwards) and Suhrawardi arrival under Iltutmish | Broadly correct periodization with minor errors (e.g., vague 'medieval' for specific centuries, conflating early and late Delhi Sultanate phases, imprecise battle dating) | Significant chronological confusion (e.g., placing Iltutmish before Aibak, misdating Panipat, anachronistic treatment of Sufi orders, or complete absence of temporal markers) |
| Source & evidence | 20% | 10 | Deploys specific textual evidence: for (a) references R.S. Sharma's Indian Feudalism or D.D. Kosambi's work; for (b) cites Minhaj-us-Siraj or Fakhr-i-Mudabbir; for (c) names specific works (Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, Taj-ul-Masir, Khazain-ul-Futuh); for (d) uses Baburnama directly; for (e) references malfuzat literature (Fawa'id-ul-Fu'ad) | General awareness of source types without specific titles (e.g., 'Persian chronicles' without naming, 'Sufi literature' without specificity, broad reference to 'modern historians') | No source citation, reliance on textbook generalizations, or invented/fabricated source references; failure to distinguish between primary and secondary sources |
| Multi-perspective analysis | 20% | 10 | Demonstrates balanced argumentation: for (a) considers both Marxist and non-Marxist interpretations of feudalism; for (b) presents case for Aibak as founder then refutes with Iltutmish's consolidation; for (e) explicitly contrasts Chishti and Suhrawardi positions with named exemplars (Nizamuddin Auliya vs. Bahauddin Zakariya) | One-sided treatment or superficial acknowledgment of alternative views without substantive engagement; descriptive listing rather than analytical comparison | Completely partisan stance without counter-argument (e.g., asserting Iltutmish as founder without addressing Aibak's role), or failure to address the comparative dimension in (e) |
| Historiographic framing | 20% | 10 | Explicit historiographic awareness: for (a) engages with Sharma-Kosambi debate on Indian feudalism; for (b) references Mohammad Habib's assessment of Iltutmish; for (c) acknowledges Persian literary influence on Indian historiography; for (e) cites K.A. Nizami or S.A.A. Rizvi on Sufi-state relations | Implicit historiographic positioning without explicit naming of scholars or schools; standard narrative presentation without critical engagement with interpretive frameworks | Wholly uncritical, textbook-derived narrative with no awareness that historians debate these issues; anachronistic value judgments or presentist framing |
| Conclusion & synthesis | 20% | 10 | Each sub-part achieves concise closure: for (a) synthesizes feudalism's legacy for Mughal administrative structures; for (b) offers nuanced verdict on 'founder' debate; for (e) draws broader inference about Sufism's political adaptability; maintains thematic coherence across the five responses despite discrete format | Abrupt or repetitive endings without analytical summation; conclusions merely restate points made; no cross-referencing or thematic integration between sub-parts | Missing conclusions for multiple sub-parts, or conclusions that contradict the body; failure to address the specific directive (e.g., 'discuss') in closing statements |
Practice this exact question
Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.
Evaluate my answer →More from History 2021 Paper I
- Q1 Identify the following places marked on the map supplied to you and write a short note of about 30 words on each of them in your Question-c…
- Q2 (a) Do you agree that ecological factors influenced the flow and ebb of the Harappan Civilization? Comment. (20 marks) (b) Do you consider…
- Q3 (a) Will it be proper to consider the megaliths to represent a single, homogeneous or contemporaneous culture? What kind of material life a…
- Q4 (a) "The political and economic needs of rulers, combined with economic and status needs of the merchant class, together provided the recep…
- Q5 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Discuss the different stages of Indian feudalism and analyze its impact on Indi…
- Q6 (a) Discuss the transformation of Sikh community from a Nirguna Bhakti sect into a politico-military organization. (15 marks) (b) Give your…
- Q7 (a) Discuss the importance of Iqta system. How did it help in centralization of administration of the Delhi Sultanate? (15 marks) (b) Why i…
- Q8 (a) "The Chola rulers were not only mighty conquerors, efficient administrators but also builders of fine temples." Comment. (15 marks) (b)…