Economic Life of Northern India (Gupta Period) – Review
By Dineshchandra Sircar
Summary
Sircar reviews S. K. Maity’s ‘Economic Life of Northern India in the Gupta Period (A.D. 300–550)’. The monograph consists of nine chapters covering topics such as sources, land system, revenue, agriculture, industry, trade, labour, corporate economic life and currencyfile:///home/oai/share/563033-1-398-185-288.pdf#:~:text=There%20are%20altogether%20nine%20chapters,the%20author%20discusses%20the%20information. It includes appendices on Varahamihira’s texts, land sale records and gold content of Gupta coinsfile:///home/oai/share/563033-1-398-185-288.pdf#:~:text=Currency%2C%20Exchange%20and%20Money,13%29%2C%20a%20list%20of. Sircar praises the book’s exhaustive research and recommends it to studentsfile:///home/oai/share/563033-1-398-185-288.pdf#:~:text=Reviews%20255%20This%20lictle%20book,of%20Gupta%20history%2010%20particular, though he notes minor misprints and emphasises that many issues remain controversialfile:///home/oai/share/563033-1-398-185-288.pdf#:~:text=There%20are%20some%20misprints%20here,even%20though%20the%20author%E2%80%99s%20treatment. He illustrates this by discussing Maity’s interpretation of the land measure Pravartavapa as a sub-division of Kulyavapa; evidence from Orissa suggests Pravarta equalled ten Kulyas, raising questions about Maity’s viewfile:///home/oai/share/563033-1-398-185-288.pdf. Sircar also comments on Maity’s discussion of the civic board comprising Nagarasresthin and othersfile:///home/oai/share/563033-1-398-185-288.pdf#:~:text=Certain%20Bengal%20inscriptions%20of%20the,along%20with%20a%20few%20other. He concludes that the monograph is valuable but interpretations should be tested against further evidence.
Conclusion
Sircar commends Maity’s monograph for its comprehensive survey of Gupta economic life but reminds readers that many interpretations remain open to debate. He highlights controversies over land measures and administrative boardsfile:///home/oai/share/563033-1-398-185-288.pdf and encourages scholars to seek further evidence. The review illustrates that economic history is complex and that careful scrutiny of texts and inscriptions is necessary to refine our understanding.