The copious references to the preservation of Varnashrama system by the kings eulogized in inscriptions are mere reflection of the Smriti tradition. Comment.

Answer:

Inscriptions of the early medieval period repeatedly praise kings for upholding varnashrama-dharma. Such formulae certainly echo the Smriti tradition, but they were not empty convention: they reflect a genuine political need to legitimise authority in a period of rapid social change.

The case that these are Smriti formulae

• Varnashrama-dharma is a Dharmashastra ideal, systematised by Manu and later commentators.
• The phrases are stereotyped and recur across widely separated dynasties.
• Prashastis were composed by Brahmana court poets steeped in that tradition.
• Eulogy conventionally magnified royal virtue regardless of actual conduct.

Why they reflect more than convention

• New dynasties of obscure or tribal origin needed Brahmanical legitimation.
• Land grants to Brahmanas were the practical counterpart of these claims.
• The period saw rapid absorption of tribes and new groups into the caste order.
• Assertion of varnashrama was a means of ordering this fluid social situation.
• Kings claimed kshatriya status and fabricated solar or lunar genealogies.

Evidence of actual social practice

• Jati proliferation and untouchability intensified in this very period.
• Land grants created a Brahmana landed elite with real economic power.
• Regional variation was wide, and Smriti prescriptions were unevenly enforced.
• Bhakti and Tantric movements simultaneously challenged the same hierarchy.

Historiographical views

• R.S. Sharma linked social rigidity to the land-grant economy of Indian feudalism.
• B.D. Chattopadhyaya read the formulae as evidence of active state formation.
• Both agree the claims served contemporary purposes, not mere literary habit.

Assessment

• The formulae are conventional in language but purposeful in function.
• They record what rulers wished to be believed, which is itself historical evidence.
• They must be checked against land grants and other material evidence.
• Read critically, they illuminate the process of legitimation rather than social fact.

The statement is therefore only partly true. The language is undoubtedly drawn from the Smriti tradition, but as B.D. Chattopadhyaya has argued, its constant repetition in early medieval inscriptions reflects the real work of legitimising new dynasties and integrating new social groups, so the formulae are historical evidence rather than mere convention.