Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T19:05:58.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Commercialization of Agriculture in Colonial India: Production, Subsistence and Reproduction in the ‘Dry South’, c. 1870–1930

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

David Washbrook
David Washbrook
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although it would now seem established beyond question that agriculture in most parts of India had been exposed to commercial influences from medieval times, there can be little doubt that a variety of developments from the second half of the nineteenth century greatly strengthened those influences. Railways and road transport made possible a huge expansion in cash cropping, for national and international markets, and production regimes across the subcontinent were placed in a new context of opportunity—and of pressure. While so much would scarcely be disputed among historians, what has become—and remained—more controversial, however, is an understanding of the implications of this extended commercial logic for agrarian economy and society. Since colonial times, opinions would seem to have been divided between ‘optimists’, for whom commercialization marked progress and a growing prosperity for all; ‘pessimists’, for whom it marked regress into deepening class stratification and mass pauperization; and ‘sceptics’ who held that it made very little difference and that its impact was largely absorbed by preexisting structures of wealth accumulation and power on the land.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , February 1994 , pp. 129 - 164
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For the growth of commerce in late medieval South India, see Subrahmanyam, S., The Political Economy of Commerce: Southern India 1500–1650 (Cambridge, 1990);CrossRefGoogle Scholaralso Subrahmanyam, S. (ed.), Merchants, Markets and the State in Early Modern India (Delhi, 1990.)Google Scholar

2 See Hurd, J., ‘Railways and the Expansion of Markets in India, 1861–1921’, Explorations in Economic History 12, 1975;CrossRefGoogle ScholarMcAlpin, M., ‘Railroads, Prices and Peasant Rationality: India 1860–1900’, Journal of Economic History 34, 1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 These three positions can be traced back to debates in the later nineteenth century. For a recent optimistic or ‘meliorist’ account of, particularly, Western India, see McAlpin, M., Subject to Famine: Food Crisis and Economic Change in Western India, 1860–1920 (Princeton, 1983);CrossRefGoogle Scholar for a more pessimistic view, Guha, S., The Agrarian Economy of the Bombay Deccan (Delhi, 1985);Google Scholar for a sceptical view, Charlesworth, N., Peasants and Imperial Rule: Agriculture and Agrarian Society in the Bombay Presidency, 1850–1935 (Cambridge, 1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 See my, The Emergence of Provincial Politics: The Madras Presidency 1870–1920 (Cambridge, 1976);Google Scholar also, ‘Country Politics: Madras 1870–1930’, Modern Asian Studies 7, 1973;Google Scholar also ‘Economic Stratification in Rural Madras’ in Hopkins, A. and Dewey, C. (eds), The Imperial Impact (London, 1978).Google Scholar

5 Robert, B., ‘Economic Change and Agrarian Organization in “Dry” South India 1890–1940: A Re-interpretation’, Modern Asian Studies 17, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Robert calculated this decline at a rate of 0.06 per cent per annum between 1891 and 1931. Robert, ‘Economic Change’, p. 63.Google Scholar

7 Madras District Gazetteer. Francis, W., Bellary District (Madras, 1904), p. 135.Google Scholar

8 For example, the droughts of 1891–92 and 1896–97 reduced cropped area by 25 and 18 per cent, respectively, from that of their previous seasons. Bad seasons between 1917–18 and 1923–24 kept average cropped area 6 per cent lower than in 1916–17.Google ScholarSee Government of India, Agricultural Statistics of British India, Quinquennial Series, ‘Madras: Bellary District’ (Calcutta and Delhi, various).Google Scholar

9 See Government of Madras, Season and Crop Reports (Madras, annual).Google ScholarIn fact, Bellary's crop yield ‘norm’ was briefly reduced for a few years in the 1910s, before being raised back to pre-1900 levels, which the ‘seasonal adjustment’ factor indicates it never reached. Bellary's stagnation is marked against the apparent dynamism of the Southern cotton belt in Coimbatore-Tinnevelly, where, particularly, cotton yields rose noticeably over the period.Google Scholar

10 See below, Section V.

11 The district originally included a number of taluks which, after the Great Famine, were separated off into the separate Anantapur district. Subsequent to that, too, taluk boundaries underwent several changes. At various times between 1890 and 1930, the district varied between 5730 and 5975 square miles.

12 Because of the changes in boundaries, it is easiest to express population changes in these terms. See Census of India, 1871, Report on the Census of the Madras Presidency, vol. 1 (Madras, 1874), p. 68; 1931, vol. 14, pt 2, p. 2.Google Scholar

13 See Appendix to Bellary District Gazetteer, 1930, p. 16.Google Scholar

14 Food crops occupied between 1.4 and 1.6 million acres of Bellary's cultivation, outside drought years, fairly continuously between 1890 and 1930. Season and Crop Reports.Google Scholar

15 On the groundnut ‘revolution’, see Government of India, Report on the Marketing of Groundnuts in India and Burma (Delhi, 1941).Google Scholar

16 In 1890–91, total cropped area was 2.10 million acres, of which 346,000 were under cotton. In 1928–29, 2.46 million acres were cropped, of which 593,000 were under cotton. Agricultural Statistics of British India, Madras 1890/91–95/96, p. 98; Season and Crop Report 1928/29. For purposes of comparison, there should be a downward adjustment of 108,000 acres in the first estimate of cropped area to allow for boundary changes. But the cotton figures require little alteration as the changes did not affect the principal cotton-producing taluks.Google Scholar

17 Calculated from ‘Statement of the Rent-roll’ in Government of Madras, Report on the Settlement of the Land Revenue in the Madras Presidency (Madras, annual series).Google Scholar

18 Land Revenue Reports.Google Scholar

19 ‘The higher prices for farm commodities induced cultivation of new lands’. Robert, ‘Economic Change’, p. 63.Google Scholar

20 Government of India, Indian Central Cotton Committee. General Report on Eight Investigations into the Finance and Marketing of Cultivators' Cotton (Bombay, 1929). ‘Madras’, p. 51. The Madras investigation, which centred on Bellary district, was conducted in 1926–27.Google Scholar

21 Cultivated acreage both opened and closed the decade of the 1890s at about 2.1 million acres but plummeted twice between in response to severe droughts. Bellary cotton prices rose only from Rs 15.5 to Rs 17 per imperial maund. See Agricultural Statistics, ‘Madras: Bellary district’.Google Scholar

22 Cropped area rose from 2.2 million acres in 1901–02 to 2.4 million in 1914–15. Cotton acreage rose over the same period from 287,000 to 411,000 acres. Cotton prices rose from Rs 17.5 to Rs 24.Google ScholarSeason and Crop Reports, and Government of India, Prices and Wages in India 1861 to 1921 (Calcutta, 1923).Google Scholar

23 Cropped area fell from 2.4 million acres in 1914–15 to 2.2 million in 1918–19. Cotton prices peaked in 1918 at Rs 76 per maund and then halved again over the next two years. Cholum/jowar prices rose from Rs 2.25 per maund in 1915–16 to Rs 7.25 in 1918–19 and Rs 6.5 in 1919–20. Season and Crop Reports a n d Prices and Wages.Google Scholar

24 Cropped area remained static at around 2.2 million acres from 1920–24 and then rose to 2.45 million acres by the end of the decade. Groundnut acreage increased from 20,000 to 315,000 acres and cotton from 446,000 to 593,000 acres. Cotton prices were extremely unstable (as was acreage): dropping sharply in the immediate aftermath of the War; recovering between 1923 and 1925; and then declining slowly until 1929 when they halved, from Rs 24 to Rs 12 per maund, at the onset of the Great Depression. Season and Crop Reports and Prices and Wages.Google Scholar

25 Calculated from ‘Statement of the Rent-roll’, in Land Revenue Reports.Google Scholar

26 From 141,928 to 138,070. Census of India, 1891, vol. XIV, p. 6; 1931, Madras, vol. 2, p. 8.Google Scholar

27 Calculated from ‘Statement of the Rent-roll’, Land Revenue Reports.Google Scholar

28 ‘… the bigger ryots—those who own wide acres, employ many hands and are as often as not traders in produce and moneylenders as well as landholders’. Francis, , Bellary District, p. 99;Google Scholar also see Kelsall, J., A Manual of the Bellary District (Madras, 1872), pp. 260–70; and my ‘Economic Stratification’.Google Scholar

29 Stein, B., ‘Does Culture Make Practice Perfect?’ in Stein, B., All the Kings' Manna (Madras, 1984).Google Scholar

30 See Mukherjee, N., The Ryotwari System in Madras (Calcutta, 1962).Google Scholar

31 Stein, , ‘Does Culture’.Google Scholar

32 By the late 1860s, patels and kurnams held 386,918 of Bellary's 635,251 acres of inam land. Kelsall, Manual, p. 191.Google Scholar

33 For a discussion of the ‘share’ economy, See Stein, B., ‘Politics, Peasants and the Deconstruction of Feudalism in Medieval India’, Journal of Peasant Studies 12, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34 See Kelsall, , Manual, pp. 262–7.Google Scholar

35 Ibid., p. 262.

36 Robert, (p. 75) implied that Bellary farming could be drawn under a general ‘inverse farm size: productivity’ rubric derived from the Farm Management Surveys. But, as Bharadwaj has shown, the rubric principally operated in conditions of irrigated agriculture. The surveyed districts with ‘dry’ production conditions most similar to Bellary's were Amraoti and Akola districts, further North across the Deccan. They possessed no significant inverse ratio.Google ScholarSee Bharadwaj, K., Production Conditions in Indian Agriculture (Cambridge, 1972).Google Scholar

37 The sample sizes in both surveys were too small, and too biased towards larger producers, to make this evidence conclusive. But it can be said that, in both cases, the farms with the highest per acre productivities were large. Madras Provincial Banking Enquiry Committee, vol. V (Madras, 1930), pp. 272–350;Google ScholarImperial Council of Agricultural Research, Report on the Cost of Production of Crops in the Principal Sugarcane and Cotton Tracts of India, vol. IV (Delhi, 1938–1939), pp. 11–200.Google Scholar

38 The Committee noted output of 108 lbs per acre on cotton areas over 50 acres but just 90 lbs on those under 5 acres and 85 on those between 5 and 25 acres. Cotton Committee, p. 51.Google Scholar

39 MPBCE, II, p. 297; V, pp. 310–12; ICAR, IV, p. 14.Google Scholar

40 MPBCE, V, p. 272, 298;Google ScholarFrancis, , Bellary District, p. 85.Google Scholar

41 The ICAR imputed a rental charge of c. Rs. 3·5 per acre to production costs. If this is removed, as irrelevant to the circumstances of most groundnut farmers, charges imputed to bullocks and fertiliser come to about 55 per cent of costs of production. ICAR, IV, pp. 192–8.Google ScholarOn the importance of cattle to groundnut, also See Baker, C., An Indian Rural Economy 1880–1955 (Oxford, 1984), pp. 145–53.Google Scholar

42 Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, p. 63;Google ScholarAgricultural Statistics, ‘Madras: Bellary district’ and Season and Crop Reports.Google Scholar

43 Madras District Gazetteer, Bellary District (Supplement) (Madras, 1930), p. 68.Google Scholar

44 Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, p. 74.Google Scholar

45 Cotton Committee, pp. 11–33.Google Scholar

46 Kelsall, , Manual, pp. 318–19.Google Scholar

47 McAlpin, M., ‘Railroads, Cultivation Patterns and Foodgrain Availability’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 12, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48 See Parliamentary Papers, 1881, vol. LXXI, pt 2Google Scholar: Report of the Indian Famine Commission, 1881, Appendix 3. Also my ‘Economic Stratification’ and ‘Country Polities’Google Scholar; Arnold, D., ‘Famine in Peasant Consciousness and Peasant Action: Madras 1876–78’ in Guha, R. (ed.), Subaltern Studies III (Delhi, 1984).Google Scholar

49 Francis, Bellary District, p. 135.Google Scholar

50 See Parliamentary Papers, 1898, vol. XXXII:Google ScholarReport of the Indian Famine Commission, 1898, Appendix, ‘Madras’. Also my ‘Economic Stratification’ and ‘Country Polities’Google Scholar; Arnold, D., ‘Famine’.Google Scholar

51 See Kolliner, A., ‘The Structure of Rural Credit in the Ceded Districts of the Madras Presidency’, paper presented at Conference of Rural Agrarian History,University of Pennsylvania,1975, pp. 39–49.Google Scholar

52 The employment of permanent farm servants seemed closely related to the number of cattle and ploughs kept and amount of wet cultivation undertaken. MPBCE, V, pp. 301, 330, 332.Google Scholar

53 This was rated across all Bellary farming at 5 days of family labour for every 21 days hired. But in purely ‘dry‘ farming it was considerably lower—5.2 days of family labour for 8.1 hired. ICAR, IV, pp. 17, 66–7.Google Scholar

54 G.O. 3628 (Revenue) dated 30 November 1909, Tamilnadu Archives.Google Scholar

55 The three villages examined by the Banking Enquiry were on excellent cotton soil and very close to Bellary town. Nonetheless only between 20 and 30 per cent of their acreages were under cotton. MPBCE, V, pp. 273, 296, 323.Google Scholar

56 Cotton Committee, p. 51.Google Scholar

57 Calculated after ‘disallowing’ for rent. ICAR, IV, p. 21.Google Scholar

58 Ibid., pp. 66–7.

59 MPBCE, V, pp. 324, 332.Google Scholar

60 Of course, local wage rates varied greatly. This figure is based on the ‘commonest’ rate found for male labour in the late 1920s. Quinquennial Wage Censuses (1926).Google Scholar

61 The rains came in June or July and the last harvests in the black-soil areas took place in March.

62 Arnold, , ‘Famine’; also, my Emergence of Provincial Politics, ch. 2.Google Scholar

63 My Emergence of Provincial Politics, chs 2, 3;Google ScholarBaker, , A Rural Economy, ch. 5;Google ScholarArnold, D., Police Power and Colonial Rule, Madras 1859–1947 (Delhi, 1987).Google Scholar

64 See McAlpin, , Subject to Famine.Google Scholar

65 McAlpin, , for example, estimated basic grain needs at 460 lbs per person per year, but this does not include allowances for other ‘necessities’. McAlpin, ‘Railroads’.Google Scholar

66 Francis, , Bellary District, II, p. 139.Google Scholar

67 Kolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, p. 15.Google Scholar

68 See my ‘Economic Stratification’; also MPBEC, V, p. 350.Google Scholar

69 Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, pp. 60–1.Google Scholar

70 Kolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, p. 15.Google ScholarThe ICAR put the costs of cotton cultivation in the early 1930s at Rs 12–13 per acre. ICAR, IV, p. 37.Google Scholar

71 Robert claimed that Kolliner and the Banking Enquiry indicated net profits per acre of Rs 30 for cotton, Rs 18 for groundnut and Rs 10 for cholum. But it is hard to see how these figures are derived. The highest gross return to cotton acreage in the Banking Enquiry's survey was just Rs 34, which, allowing even for low cultivation costs, could not have yielded a net return of more than Rs 22 per acre. Kolliner's actual conclusion was that net profits per farm averaged between Rs 10 and Rs 25 per acre, depending on what was grown. Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, pp. 63, 74–5;Google ScholarKolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, p. 15.Google Scholar

72 Gross returns to groundnut acreage varied between Rs 37 and Rs 45 against costs of production, recalculated by Kolliner, at about Rs 15–18. MPBCE, V, pp. 275–333;Google ScholarKolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, p. 15.Google Scholar Robert's attempt, by manipulation of price and acreage statistics, to demonstrate ‘small farm’ cropping choice as including groundnut is extremely curious. Besides the problem of production conditions, there is also one of location. Before the mid-1920s, 80 per cent of the cotton and the groundnut crops were produced in different (black-soil and red-soil) taluks: if farmers did make price-rational decisions about choosing between them, their farms must have been spread over dozens of miles! Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, pp. 74–5.Google Scholar

73 The ICAR found a ‘business’ income of Rs 7 per acre on cotton against production costs of Rs 13. Although cotton prices were lower in the mid-1930s than in the late 1920s. ICAR, IV, pp. 106–7.Google ScholarCholum returned Rs 11–14 per acre against costs of Rs 5–8 per acre. MPBCE, V, pp. 275–333;Google ScholarKolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, p. 15.Google Scholar

74 Between 1926 and 1930, black-soil land averaged about Rs 53 per acre, which was down by about 35 per cent on values during the boom years of the First World War. Government of Madras. Statistical Atlas of the Madras Presidency (Madras, 1936), p. 337.Google Scholar

75 E.g., MPBCE, V, p. 300.Google Scholar

76 Due to variations in land fertility, it seems preferable to quote revenue asset values (which were, albeit loosely, related to fertility) than simple acreages.

77 MPBCE, I, p. 76.Google Scholar

78 Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, p. 68.Google Scholar

79 MPBCE, I, p. 82.Google Scholar

80 Kolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, pp. 53–5.Google Scholar

81 Ibid., p. 53.

82 Ibid., pp. 54–6; my ‘Economic Stratification’.

83 MPBCE, II, p. 297; IV, p. 74.Google ScholarSee also, Sayana, V. V., The Agrarian Problems Madras Province (Madras, 1949), espec. pp. 151–7.Google Scholar

84 Census of India, 1881, Madras, vol. I (Madras, 1883), p. 227; 1891, vol. XIII (Madras, 1893), p. 2.Google Scholar

85 Whitcombe, E., ‘Disease and Mortality in Indian Famines’, presentation at workshop on Famine in India, SO AS, October 1989.Google Scholar

86 Groundnut was harvested in November and December, which previously had been a lull in the agricultural season.

87 Kolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, pp. 24–41.Google Scholar

88 Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, p. 68.Google Scholar

89 Cotton Committee, pp. 24, 29.Google Scholar

90 Census of India, 1921, vol. XIV, pt 2, p. 120.Google Scholar

91 Robert, , ‘Economic Change’, pp. 69–70.Google Scholar

92 Kolliner, , ‘Structure of Credit’, pp. 25–6.Google Scholar

93 Ibid., p. 55.

94 Baker, , Rural Exonomy, pp. 227–8, 509–13.Google Scholar

95 Kelsall, , Manual, p. 262.Google Scholar

96 Madras District Gazetteer, Bellary District (Supplement), p. 68.Google Scholar

97 Season and Crop Reports, annual.Google Scholar

98 Cotton Committee, p. 51.Google Scholar

99 Season and Crop Reports, 1926/1927.Google Scholar

100 The yields are given in Bellary ‘country’ maunds of c. 26 lbs. MPBCE, V, pp. 272–335.Google Scholar

101 ICAR, IV, pp. 164–73.Google Scholar

102 Season and Crop Reports, 1933/1934–1935/1936. Guha has noted similar problems in the Western Deccan. Guha, Agrarian Economy, pp. 110–12.Google Scholar

103 Benson, C., An Account of the Kumool District (Madras, 1889), p. 25.Google Scholar

104 Season and Crop Reports, annual.Google Scholar

105 The yields are given in Bellary ‘kadavas’ of c. 63 lbs. MPBEC, V, pp. 272–335.Google Scholar

106 ICAR, IV, p. 111.Google Scholar

107 Season and Crop Reports, annual.Google Scholar

108 MPBEC, V, p. 278.Google Scholar

109 The smallest farm (13.98 acres) in the ICAR survey grew no groundnut. The two others below 25 acres grew it only once in the three years of the survey. ICAR, IV, pp. 88–121.Google Scholar

110 Season and Crop Reports, 1902/1903 and 1933/34.Google Scholar

111 In 1890/91, 85,000 ploughs and 209,000 bulls and bullocks were held to be working 2.1 million acres of cultivation; in 1925/26, 80,000 ploughs and 208,000 bulls and bullocks were held to be working 2.4 million acres. Agricultural Statistics 1890/91 and Season and Crop Reports 1925/1926.Google Scholar

112 ICAR, IV, p. 14.Google Scholar

113 Madras District Gazetteer, Bellary District (Supplement), pp. 68–9; Cotton Committee, P. 51.Google Scholar

114 Kelsall, , Manual, pp. 262–7.Google Scholar

115 ICAR, IV, pp. 164–73.Google Scholar

116 Calculated from ‘Statement of the Rent-roll’ in Land Revenue Report 1925/1926.Google Scholar

117 Francis, , Bellary District, p. 85.Google Scholar

118 Ibid., p. 86; MPBEC, V, p. 272.Google Scholar

119 Madras District Gazetteer, Bellary District (Supplement), pp. 68–9.Google Scholar

120 See my ‘Economic Stratification’.

121 MPBEC, III, p. 807.Google Scholar

122 Baker, , Rural Economy, ch. 5.Google Scholar

123 Krishnaswami, S., who was concerned with food-deficit problems during World War II, took the entire millet crop to be rurally, and locally, consumed.Google ScholarKrishnaswami, S., Rural Problems in Madras (Madras, 1947).Google Scholar

124 McAlpin, M., ‘Price Movements and Economic Fluctuations’ in Kumar, D. (ed.), Cambridge Economic History of India, II (Cambridge, 1983).Google Scholar

125 McAlpin, , ‘Railraods’.Google Scholar

126 Baker, , Rural Economy, pp. 227–8, 509–13.Google ScholarSee also, Blyn, G., Agricultural Trends in India 1891–1947 (Philadelphia, 1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar