Q.Describe two features of early feudal society in France.

Think of a school. Even before anyone says a word, you can sense a kind of invisible ladder. The senior who captains the football team, the quiet topper who teachers trust, the kid whose family everyone knows, and the new transfer student who eats alone — each occupies a different rung. Nobody pinned a label on them, yet everyone feels the difference. That feeling, that quiet ranking of people, is the seed of social stratification.

Now widen the lens. The same ladder exists in society at large, but the rungs are sturdier and the climb is harder. Some people are born near the top, others near the bottom, and the ladder itself is built from things like wealth, education, family name, gender, caste, and even the kind of work you do. Social stratification is the name for this systematic ranking of people into layers (strata), where the layers are not random but patterned, and where the ranking carries real consequences for how your life unfolds.

The word "stratification" comes from geology — think of rock strata, those distinct horizontal layers you see in a cliff face. Each layer is separate, yet they stack to form one whole. Society works the same way. The layers are real, they persist over time, and they are arranged in a hierarchy: some strata have more power, more prestige, and more resources than others. Crucially, this is not about individual talent or luck alone. It is about structure — the arrangement itself shapes who gets what, regardless of how hard any single person tries.

Here is what makes stratification distinct from mere inequality. Inequality says "people have different amounts of things." Stratification says "these differences are patterned, durable, and passed down." A rich person who loses all their money in a bad year is unequal to their neighbours, but they have not been stratified out of their class — their networks, education, and family cushion remain. Stratification is about the system that keeps some groups consistently ahead, generation after generation.

To make this concrete, consider the classic dimensions along which societies stratify:

• Class (economic): Your income, wealth, and occupation. This is the most visible layer in a market economy.
• Status (social prestige): The respect and honour attached to your position. A school teacher may earn less than a stockbroker, but often carries higher social esteem.
• Power (political): The ability to get things done, to influence decisions, even against resistance. A local politician may have modest wealth but enormous power.

These three often overlap but do not always align. A celebrity has high status but may have modest formal power. A bureaucrat has power but may lack the wealth of a businessperson. The combination of these dimensions determines your overall position in the hierarchy.

Now, why does this matter beyond academic curiosity? Because stratification is not a neutral description — it is a force that shapes life chances. Your stratum influences your health, your education, the kind of work you get, who you marry, and even how long you live. It is not that the system is perfectly rigid — individuals do move up and down — but the movement is limited and patterned. The son of a factory worker can become a judge, but the odds are stacked differently than for the daughter of a judge.

Here is the key insight for a first-time learner: stratification is socially constructed, not naturally given. The layers exist because human beings have agreed — often implicitly, sometimes through force and tradition — to value certain traits over others. There is no natural law that says a doctor outranks a plumber, or that a landlord outranks a tenant. These rankings are products of history, culture, and power. That is precisely why they can be studied, questioned, and changed.

So when you hear "social stratification," do not picture a static pyramid. Picture a living system — one that sorts people, allocates rewards, and reproduces itself over time. It is the invisible architecture beneath every headline about inequality, every debate about reservation, every conversation about the "gap" between the rich and the rest. Understanding it is the first step to seeing the ladder — and then asking who built it, and who gets to climb.