THE Marxist view of history is based on successive stages corresponding to the mode of production. For European history, it delineated five stages – that of primitive communism, slave society, feudalism, capitalism and finally socialism. The order can carry a different terminology in Asiatic societies; in the writings of Marx and Engels themselves it is indicated that the basis of ancient societies of Asia was different from that of Europe. It was not the slave mode of production but self sufficient, autonomous village production (combining features of many successive stages into one), which provided for the stability and prosperity of ancient Asiatic empires.

In Europe, feudalism was more developed than the slave society in terms of advanced production relations. But it marked a regression not only in art and culture but technology as well compared to the Greek and Roman civilisations. Yet, it was in the latter half of feudalism that leaps in technology were made which laid the basis of capitalism. The process of history from a Marxist standpoint is thus full of unevenness in a single context. It is more so when it comes to comparing different contexts say Asia, Africa and Europe where the period of development of one region may turn out to be the dark age of another, and vice-versa.