Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 November 2008
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.
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