Themes In Indian History Iii Chapter 10 Colonialism And The Countryside

When zamindars were in crisis in the eighteenth century, a group of rich peasants consolidated its position in the villages of Bengal. This class of rich peasants came to be known as jotedars. They had a control over vast areas of land. Sometimes they had even a control on many thousand acres of land. They even controlled local trade and moneylending. They exercised immense power over the poor cultivators of the region. They had even become more powerful than the zamindars. The following reasons were responsible for their strong position :

(i) They lived in villages. So they had a lot of influence on many villagers.

(ii) They opposed the efforts of the zamindars to increase the jama of the village.

(iii) They mobilised ryots to deliberately delay payments of revenue to the zamindars.

(iv) They controlled the local trade and moneylending.

(v) They had a control over several areas of land. They even purchased land when the estates of the zamindars were being auctioned for failure to make payment of the revenue.

The zamindars adopted various means and measures to establish their control over their zamindaris. These are as under:
(i) They adopted the strategy of fictitious sale of land. When a part of their estate was auctioned, their men bought the property by giving higher bids than others. Later on they refused to pay up the purchase money. So there was again auction. The same process of purchase was repeated. At last the state felt exhausted. It sold the estate at a low price again to the zamindar.

(ii) They created hurdles in the possession of the land if anyone from outside the zamindari bought an estate at an auction.

(iii) They transferred some of the estates in the name of women as the property of women could not be taken over.

(iv) The Lathyals of the former zamindars sometimes attacked the new buyers.

(v) Sometimes the ryots also resisted the entry of purchasers from outside.

The Paharias response:

(a) The settling of the Santhals on the peripheries of the Rajmahal hills were initiatlly resisted by the Paharias.

(b) But ultimately they were forced to withdraw deeper into the hills.

(c) They were now confined to the more barren and rocky upper hills. This severely affected their lives.

(d) Their economy was dependent on shifting cultivation which was no longer feasible leading to their impoverishment.

(e) As forests began to be cleared to facilitate cultivation the Paharia hunters also faced problems.

Thus the lifestyle of the Paharias underwent a great change with the coming of the outsiders.

(a) By 1832, the Santhals had settled in the Damin-i-Koh area. Santhal settlements now expanded rapidly. Forests were rapidly cleared for agriculture. As cultivation expanded the Company got more revenue.

(b) But the Santhals gradually became dissatisfied. They found they were not getting their due and were being exploited. The sate was levying heavy taxes on them.

(c) Moneylenders charged them high rates of interest and took over their land when they were unable to pay.

(d) zamindars also had began to increase their hold over their area. Thus they revolted against the exploitation of the zamindar, moneylenders and the state.

Following were the main reasons of anger of the Deccan ryots against the moneylenders:

(i) Moneylenders refused to extend loans to ryots. Ryots felt that moneylenders were insensitive to their plight and miserable conditions.

(ii) Moneylenders were disobeying the traditional norms of rural areas. For example amount of interest could not exceed the principal amount. But in one of the case moneylender had charged more than Rs. 2,000 as interest on the principal amount of Rs. 100.

(iii) Unpaid amount of interest was also being included in new loan deeds so that moneylender could remain away from the hands of law and his amount remain as it is.

(iv) No receipt was given to peasant in case of repayment of loan.

(v) Ryots also complained of moneylenders manipulating laws and forging accounts.

(a) Many zamindaris were auctioned because the zamindars failed to pay the revenue demand on time. This was because the initial demands were very high.

(b) Moreover this high demand was imposed at a time when prices of agricultural produce were depressed making it difficult for the ryot to pay their duces to the zamindar.

(c) Thirdly revenue had to be paid punctually regardless of the harvest. According to the Sunset law if the zamindar did not pay by sunset of the specified date his estate was likely to be auctioned.

(d) Initially the Permanent Settlement limited the power of the zamindar to exploit the peasantry and also reduced his powers. His troops were disbanded, custom duties were abolished and their power to meet out local justice was curbed.

(e) This made it difficult for him to assert his power over the peasants and jotedars to ensure timely payment. Rent collection remained a perennial problem. Sometimes the ryots and jotedars deliberately delayed payment to get the zamindar into trouble. This delayed the zamindar’s payment to the state and often led to his zamindari being auctioned.

The Paharias lived around the Rajmahal hills. They were hostile and apprehensive towards the government officials. They were not willing to talk to outside travellers.

Livelihood of the Paharias : The Paharias earned their livelihood by adopting the following professions:

(i) They practised shifting cultivation.

(ii) They grew a variety of pulses and millets.

(iii) They collected mahua (a flower) for food.

(iv) They reared silk-worms and collected silk cocoons and resin for sale.

(v) They collected wood for charcoal production.

(vi) They used the patches of grass on the land as pasture for the cattle.

(vii) They hunted wild animals.

(viii) They also raided the plains where the settled agriculturalists lived.

(ix) They resisted the intrusion of outsiders. If ever they allowed them, they negotiated political relations with them. They got a regular tribute from the zamindars.

(x) They accepted toll from the traders. In return, they protected the traders. They also ensured that their goods were not plundered by anyone.

Livelihood of the Santhals : The Santhals had come into Bengal around the 1780s. They earned their livelihood by adopting the following jobs :

(i) They cleared forests and cut down timber.

(ii) They ploughed land and grew rice and cotton.

(iii) They expanded cultivaion and increased the inflow of revenue in the coffers of the East India Company.

(iv) They cultivated many commercial crops for the market.

(v) They also dealt with traders and moneylenders.

The American Civil War affected the lives of ryots in following way :

(a) Britain was heavily dependent on America for its supply of raw cotton. To reduce this dependency they were always on the lookout for alternative sources of supply.

(b) For this purpose they established the Cotton Supply Association in 1857 and the Manchester Cotton Company in 1859. The objective of both was to encourage cotton production in all parts of the world especially India.

(c) When the American Civil War broke out, supply of cotton to Britain drastically dropped. Frantic attempts were made to increase cotton exports to Britain. In a bid to do this exports, merchants gave advances to urban sahukars who in turn extended credit to rural moneylenders to acquire more cotton.

(d) These developments had a major impact on the peasants in the Deccan who suddenly had access to limitless credit. Rs. 100 was given as advance for every acre planted with cotton. However while rich peasants benefitted by these developments for the large majority, cotton expansion meant heavier debt.

(e) However when the Civil War ended, exports of Indian cotton declined and cotton prices dropped. The moneylenders began to restrict advances to peasants and demanded repayment of outstanding debts. At the same time the revenue demand increased. When the peasants once again turned to the moneylender, he refused to give them loans. This was because he did not have the confidence in the peasants’ ability to repay. This enraged the impoverished peasants and fuelled the outbreak of the peasant revolts in the Deccan.

These are the problems in using official sources in writing about the history of peasants:

(i) There are official sources that reflect only British official concerns and interpretation of all events from the outlook and angle of the English. For example, the Deccan Riots Commission was specifically asked to judge whether the level of government revenue demand of the cause of the revolt.

(ii) Most of the events, revolts and happenings have been presented in a bias manner. The colonial government and official had their own political, economic, religious, cultural and social interests. They had always tried to present a sub-standard picture of Indian society, people, tradition, culture and even the achievements.

(iii) The sources have been presented and recorded by such clever and naughty people who have intentionally presented things with false evidences also. For example, the Deccan Riot Commission alter presenting all the findings with such evidences which was utilise to give authenticity to the report of the commission. The commission has presented this fabricated fact that the government demand was not the cause of the peasants’ anger. It was the moneylenders (again Indians) who were to blames. Such argument is found very frequently in British colonial records. This shows that there was a persistent on the part of the colonial government to admit that popular discontent was ever on account of government action.

(v) Official reports, thus are invaluable sources for the reconstruction of history. But they have to be always read the case and just opposed with evidence called from newspapers, unofficial accounts, legal records and, where possible, oral sources.

Hints:In the chapter the following areas have been mentioned of the subcontinent. Students marked particularly the followings:

(i) Bengal. It means West Bengal occupied by India, East Bengal, now a days Bangladesh along with certain area of Bihar, Orissa and hilly areas of Assam also.

(ii) Madras Presidency, it means modern Chennai and its adjoining areas.

(iii) Bombay Presidency-Modern Mumbai and adjoining areas including Deccan Maharashtra.

(iv) Surat and some other areas of Gujarat.

(v) Rajmahal hills occupied by Paharias and Santhals.

(vi) The Britishers introduced Mahalwari system in eastern part of Punjab (now it is a part and parcel of India).

(vii) Istamarari Settlement (or the Permanent Settlement) was mainly introduced in entire Bengal. On the other hand Ryotwari System in Bombay and southern India.

The revenue system introduced by the British Government in the Bombay Deccan was called as the Ryotwari Settlement.
It had the following features as under:
(i) It estimated the average income from different types of soil.

(ii) It also assessed the revenue-paying capacity of the ryot.

(iii) It fixed a proportionate amount of the revenue as the share of the state.

When the British Government expanded its rule outside Bengal, it introduced new systems of revenue. It discarded the system of Permanent Settlement and did not introduce it in any area. It was because of the following reasons:

(i) There was an increase in agricultural prices after 1810. It increased the income of the zamindars in Bengal. But the revenue was already fixed under the Permanent Settlement. So the colonial state was unable to claim any share from the enhanced income of the farmers.

(ii) As the government wanted to expand its final resources, it introduced temporary revenue settlement in the newly annexed territories in the 19th century.

Buchanan was an employee of the British East India Company. He marched everywhere with a large army of people-draughtsmen, surveyors, palanquin bearers, coolies etc.
The accounts of Buchanan:
(i) He searched for minerals and stones that were commercially valuable, he recorded all signs of iron ore and mica, granite and saltpetre. He carefully observed local practices of salt-making and iron ore-mining.
(ii) He was inevitably critical of the lifestyle of forest dwellers and felt that forest had to be turned into agricultural lands.

The British efforts to encourage the Santhals to settle in Rajmahal Hills:

(i) The Santhals had began to come into Bengal around the 1780s. zamindars hired them to reclaim land and expand cultivation, and British officials invited them to settle in the Jangal mahals.

(ii) Having failed to subdue the Paharias and transform them into settled agriculturists, the British turned to the Santhals. They were proposed to reach and settle in the Rajmahal hills. The Paharias refused to cut forests, resisted touching the plough, and continued to be turbulent.

(iii) The Santhals, appeared to be ideal settlers, clearing forests and ploughing the land with vigour. The Santhals were given land and persuaded to settle in the foothills of Rajmahal. By 1832, a large area of land was demarcated as Damin-i-Koh. This was declared to be the land of the Santhals. They were to live within it, practice plough agriculture and become settled peasants.

The Deccan Riots Report:

(i) When the peasants’ revolt spread in the Deccan, the Government of Bombay was initially unwilling to see it as anything serious. But the British Government of India, worried by the memory of 1857, pressurised the Government of Bombay to set up a commission of enquiry to investigated into the causes of the riots.

(ii) The commission produced a report that was presented to the British Parliament in 1878. This report, referred to as the Deccan Riots Report, provides historians with a range of sources for the study of the riot.

The Sunset Law stated that if the zamindar did not pay his dues by sunset of the specified date his zamindari would be auctioned off.

(a) The British disbanded the zamindar’s troops and abolished custom duties.

(b) The zamindar courts were brought under the supervision of a collector appointed by the Company.

Jotedar were a class of rich peasants who were most powerful in North Bengal. They were known in different areas as haoladars, gantidars, bargadars and mandals.

The Fifth Report exaggerated the collapse of traditional zamindari power and the rate at which zamindars were losing their lands. For even when zamindaris were auctioned, zamindars were not always displaced, given the ingenious methods they used to retain their lands. The report was biased because it wanted to highlight the mal-administration of the East India Company in India.

The Paharia chief settled disputes and led their tribes into battle.They also helped to maintain tribal unity.

The raids were necessary for survival. The zamindars in the plains paid them regular tribute and the traders paid a toll tax in order to use the passes controlled by them. Once the toll was paid, the Paharia chiefs protected the traders and ensured that their goods were not plundered by anyone.Thus the raids were a means of negotiating political relations with outsiders.

Revolts produce records that historians can use. State authorities do not simply repress a rebellion.They hold an enquiry as to why it occurred so that remedial measures can be taken and peace restored. These inquiries provide evidence that historians can explore.

On 12 May, 1875 at Supa, a large number of villagers gathered and attacked the shopkeepers, demanding their bahi khatas (accounts books) and debt bonds. They burnt the khatas, looted grain shops and in some cases set fire to the houses of sahukars.

1. Bullocks were used to draw the cotton bales.

2. The boulders used on the road.

3. The huge pile of bales of cotton were taken by the boats before the railway era.

A variety of customary norms regulated the relationship between the moneylenders and the ryots. One general norm was that the interest charged could not be more than the principal. This was meant to limit the moneylender’s exaction and defined what could be counted as “fair interest.”

The experiences of injustice felt by the ryots:

(i) The first revenue settlement in the Bombay Deccan was made in the 1820s. The revenue that was demanded was so high that in many places peasants deserted their villages and migrated to new regions. In areas of poor soil and fluctuating rainfall the problem was particularly acute.

(ii) By the 1830s the problem became more serve. Prices of agricultural products fell sharply after 1832 and did not recover for over a decade and a half.

(iii) How did cultivators live through such years ? Inevitably, they borrowed, revenue could rarely be paid without a loan from a moneylender. But once a loan was taken, the ryot found it difficult to pay it back.

(iv) By the mid-1840s there were signs of an economic recovery of sorts. Many British officials had begun to realise that the settlements of the 1820s had been harsh. The revenue demanded was exorbitant, the system rigid and the peasant economy on the verge of collapse.

(v) To extend cultivation peasants needed more ploughs and cattle. They needed money to buy seeds and land. For all this they had to turn once again to moneylenders for loans.

(i) Francis Buchanan came to India as a physician. He served the people of India in institution named the Bengal Medical Service nearly for 21 years.

(ii) Buchanan also served as a renowned surgeon to the Governor General of India named Lord Wellesley.

(iii) He was great lover of animals and birds. During his stay in Calcutta (present day Kalkota), he organise a joo. Due to his efforts that joo develop and later on became the Calcutta Alipur Joo.

(iv) Francis Buchanan also remained incharge of the Botanical Gardens for a short period. It shows that he had great love for plants and trees. On the request of the Government of Bengal he undertook detailed surveys of areas under the jurisdiction of the British East India Company.

(v) Unfortunately in 1815 Francis Buchanan fell ill and returned to his own country. Upon his mother’s death, he inherited for property and assumed her family name Hamilton. Therefore he generally called Francis Buchanan-Hamilton.

The two reasons for the failure of the Permanent Settlement of the land revenue introduced by the British in Bengal were:

(i) One reason was that after 1810, agricultural prices rose, increasing the value of harvest produce, and enlarging the income of the Bengal zamindars. Since the revenue demand was fixed under the Permanent Settlement, the colonial state could not claim any share of this extra income. Keen on expanding its financial resources, the colonial government had to think of ways to maximise its land revenue. So in territories annexed in the nineteenth century, temporary revenue settlements were made.

(ii) Other reason was when officials devise policies, their thinking is deeply shaped by economic theories they are familiar with. By the 1820s, the economist David Ricardo was a celebrated figure in England. Colonial officials had learnt Ricardian ideas during their college years. In Maharashtra when British officials set about formulating the terms of the early settlement in the 1820s, they operated with some of these ideas.

Following strategies were devised by the zamindars of Bengal to survive the pressures of high revenue demand and auction of their lands:

(i) They first of all transferred some of his zamindaris to his mother, since the Company had decreed that the property of women would not be taken over. When a part of the estate was auctioned, the zamindar’s men bought the property, outbidding other purchasers. Subsequently they refused to pay up purchase money, so that the estate had to be resold of the total sales at the auctions over 15 per cent were fictitious.

(ii) There were other ways in which zamindars circumvented displacement. When people from outside the zamindari bought an estate at an auction, they could not always take possession. At time their agents would be attacked by lathyals of the former zamindar. Sometimes even the ryots resisted the entry of outsiders.

When in India the British officials derived land revenue policies, their thinking was deeply shaped by renowed economist named David Recardo. By the 1820s the economist David Recardo was a figure in England.Colonial officials had learnt Ricardian ideas during their college years. According to Ricardian ideas, a landowner should have a claim only to the average rent that prevailed at a given time. When the land yielded more than this ‘average rent’ the landowner had a surplus that the state needed to tax. If tax was not levied, cultivators were likely to turn into rentiers, and their surplus income was unlikely to be productively invested in the improvement of the land.

In Maharashtra when British officials set about formulating the terms of the early settlement in the 1820s, they operated with some ideas of Recardo.

Several British officials working in India thought that the history of Bengal confirmed Ricardo’s theory. There are zamindars seemed to have turned into rentiers, leasing out land and living on the rental incomes. It was therefore necessary, the British officials now felt, to have a different system.

Opposition of the monopoly of the East India Company over the trade with India and China:

(i) Many of the changes we are discussing were documented in detail in a report that was submitted to the British Parliament in 1813. It was the fifth of a series of reports on the administration and activities of the East India Company in India. It is often referred to as the Fifth Report.

(ii) From the time the Company established its rule in Bengal in the mid-1760s, its activities were closely watched and debated in England. There were many groups in Britain who were opposed to the monopoly that the East India Company had over trade with India and China. These groups wanted a revocation of the Royal Charter that gave the Company this monopoly. The evidence contained in the Fifth Report is invaluable. But official report like this have to be read carefully. In fact, recent researches show that the arguments and evidence offered by the Fifth Report cannot be accepted uncritically.

Deeds and bonds appeared as symbols of the new oppressive system. In the past such deeds had been rare. The British however, were suspicious of transactions based on informal understanding, as was common in past. The terms of transactions, they believed, had to be clearly, unambiguously and categorically stated in contracts, deeds and bonds, and regulated by law. Unless the deed or contract was legally enforceable, it had no value.

Overtime, peasants came to associate the misery of their lives with the new regime of bonds and deeds. They were made to sign and put thumb impression on documents, but they did not know what they were actually signing. They had no idea of the clauses that moneylenders inserted in the bonds. They feared the written word. But they had no choice because to survive they needed loans and moneylenders were unwilling to give loans without legal bonds.

Paharias lived around the hills of Rajmahal. Following were the main features of their life: 

(i) They lived in huts under the tamarind groves and they rested under the shadow of mango trees.

(ii) They considered whole of the region as their personal land.

(iii) They hunted in the forests and practised shifting cultivation.

Paharias’ huts

(iv) They often resisted the entry of outsiders into their region.

(v) Their chiefs used to maintain unity in their respective groups and used to settle their mutual disputes.

The British introduced a new system of revenue collection in Bengal. It was called the Permanent Settlement.
It was introduced by Lord Charles Cornwallis in 1793. Under this system, the East India Company had fixed the revenue that each zamindar had to pay. If any zamindar failed to make the payment of the revenue in time, his estates were auctioned to recover the due revenue.

The ideas behind the system. By introducing the Permanent Settlement, the British officials wanted to resolve the problems that they faced. They were aware that the rural economy of Bengal was in crisis because of the following factors:

(i) There was the recurrence of many famines.

(ii) There was a considerable decline in the agricultural production.

Regular flow of revenue : The need of hour. The British officials realized the need to enhance revenue resources. This could be done by encouraging investment in agriculture and trade. So they permanently fixed the rates revenue to ensure a regular flow of revenue.

In the decade of 1770, British adopted the brutal policy of extermination towards Paharias and egain hunting them down and killing them.

Change in the Policy : In the decade of 1780, Collector of Bhagalpur, Augustus Cleveland, adopted the policy of pacification. This policy proposed to give annual allowance to Paharia Chiefs and they were made responsible for controlling their men. They were also expected to maintain order in their localities and to keep disciplin among their own people.

Result : A number of Paharia chiefs recused to take the annual allowance. Those who accepted the allowance, lost the authority within their community. They came to be seen as stripendiary chiefs being in the pay of colonial government.

Damin-i-Koh was the land of Santhals situated in the Rajmahal hills. British persuaded the Santhals to live in the foothils of Rajmahal by giving land to them. By 1832, a large part of land was demarcated as Damin-i-Koh and was declared as land of Santhals. They had to live in this region, practise plough agriculture and had to become settled agriculturalists. There was a stipulation in the certificate of land grants that the minimum of 1/10 of the total area had to be cleared and had to be cultivated within the first 10 years. Whole of this region was surveyed and mapped. This region was enclosed first 10 years. Whole of this region was surveyed and mapped. This region was enclosed y boundary pillars. In this way this region was separated from the world of settled agriculturists of plains and Paharias of the hills.

When the British Government expanded its rule outside Bengal, it introduced new systems of revenue. It discarded the system of Permanent Settlement and did not introduce it in any area. It was because of the following reasons:
No Share in Enhanced Income:There was an increase in agricultural price after 1810. It increased the income of the Zamindars in Bengal. But the revenue was already fixed under the Permanent Settlements. So the colonial state was unable to claim any share form the enhanced income of the farmers. As the government wanted to expand its financial resources, it introduced temporary revenue settlements in the newly annexed territories in the ninteenth century.

Impact of the Ideas of David Ricardo:
The British Government introduced some of the idea sof David Ricardo, famous economist, in the state of Maharashtra. Ricardo believed that a land-owner should claim only the average rent that prevailed at a given time. Many peasants in Bengal had leased out their land. So they lived on the rental income. Such income must be taxed. Thus the British introduced the Ryotwari System of revenue settlement in the Bombay Deccan. Herein the revenue was settled directly with the ryot. The revenue paying capacity of the ryot was assessed. The ryot paid his fixed share.
New Systems:

Thus we see that the British Government introduced many new revenue policies such as:

(i) Temporary Revenues settlements

(ii) Ryotwari Settlement.

In the Permanent Settlement, the taluqdars were the owners of the land. They paid a fixed rent to the Company. They distributed their land among the peasants. They earned the desired interest from them. In other words, the Permanent Settlement benefitted most the rich Zamindars. They had to pay the revenue that was fixed in perpetuity. The state was unable to claim its share in the enhanced income of the farmers. On the contary, under the Ryotwari system, the government got tax from those who cultivated lands with their own hands.

Under the Ryotwari system, all the middlement were removed. This system was better than the Permanent Settlement of revenue. It increased the rights of the farmers. It also increased the income of the state. Infact the Ryotwari Settlement was introduced to alleviate the drawbacks of the Permanet Settlement.

There wre special signs of an economic recovery of sorts during the decade of 1840. A number of British officials realised that the land settlements of the 1820’s were quite harsh. Demanded revenue was too much or exorbitant. System was so rigid that it led to collapse of peasant economy. So revenue demand was moderated to encourage peasant to exmapnd cultivation. Prices of agricultural products showed some recovery after 1845. Peasants began to expad their areas. they were migrating to new areas and were changing the pastureland into agricultural fields. But peasants required more ploughs and cattles to expand cultivation. They required money to buy new lands and seeds to sow on that land. For all this, they once again had to turn to money-lenders for loans.

Because of the followint reasons, the British wanted to clear the forests and expand the settled cultivation of land:

(i) By adopting the settled cultivation of land, the colonial government wanted to enahance its revenue.

(ii) It could grow cash crops for export.

(iii) The British could establish an ordered and civilised society.

(iv) They associated forests with wildness. They considered the forest people as savage, unruly and primitive. They found these people difficult to govern. So they exhorted the Santhals to clear the forests. they encouraged settled agriculture.

(v) They wanted to tame, civilise and persuade the forests people to give up hunting and take up plough to cultivated the land.

The Fifth Report was submitted to the British Parliament in 1813. It was called the Fifth Report as it was the fifth in a series of reports about the working of East India Company. The core issue of the Fifth Report was the administration and activities of the East India Company. This report had 1002 pages. About 800 pages were in the form of appendices which included petitions of zamindars and ryots, reports of Collectors, statistical tables on revenue returns and the official notes on the revenue and judicial administration of Bengal and Madras.

Objectives of the Report : Many groups of people in Britain were not happy with the working of East India Company in India. They opposed the monopoly enjoyed by East India Company over trade with India and China. Many British traders wanted a share in Company’s trade in India. They emphasised that the Indian market should be opened for British manufactures. Many political groups even argued that the conquest of Bengal benefitted only the East India Company and not the British nation as a whole. They highlighted the misrule and maladministration by East India Company. As a result, the British Parliament passed several acts in the late 18th century to regulate and control the rule of East India Company in India.

It even asked the Company to submit regular reports on its administrative activities in India. The Fifth Report was such a report. It was produced by select committee. It was concerned with the nature of Company’s rule in India. It contained an invaluable evidence against the rule of East India Company in India. It brings out the pitiable condition in rural Bengal in the late 18th century.

Basis of Criticism : The Fifth Report has been carefully examined by the critics. They find the following lacunas in it:

(i) It has many unconvincing arguments and evidences.

(ii) Its purpose was only to criticise the maladministration of the East India Company.

(iii) It exaggerated the collapse of traditional zamindari power.

(iv) It stated in hyperbolic words that the zamindars were losing their land. The land of the most of the farmers was auctioned.

(v) The Company did not collect revenue with punctuality.

The Santhals settled in the Rajmahal hills around 1800. They displaced the hill-folk who lived in this region. They cleared many forests. They cultivated the land. Earlier the Santhals had come into Bengal around the 1780s.

Then they settled in the Jangal mahals. In fact, they were ideal settlers. So their settlements expanded rapidly. They had forty villages in 1838. But about 1473 Santhal villages had come up by 1851. In other words, the Santhals were merely 3000 in 1838. But they grew upto 82,000 by 1851.

The Role of the British : The British wanted to establish an orderly, refined and settled society. They did not like the Paharias as they were savage, primitive and unruly. They associated forests with wildness as found the hill-folk difficult to govern. By 1770, they adopted a brutal policy of extermination towards the Paharias. They hunted them down and killed them. As the British had failed to tame the Paharias and transform them into settled agriculturists, they turned to the Santhals.

With the decline of cotton export, moneylenders and export merchants of Maharashtra were no longer keen on providing long term loans. Ryot community became very angry as they were denied of loans by moneylenders. They were not infuriated that they came under great debt, but they were infuriated because moneylenders were insensitive to their miserable condition. Moneylenders were also disobeying the traditional customs and rules of rural areas.

Deviousness of Moneylenders : The process of moneylending was definitely widespread even before the colonial rule. Moneyleanders were generally very powerful individuals. A number of customary norms were there between the relations of moneylenders and ryots and these norms even regulated their relations. One of the general norm was that the interest charged must not be more then the principal amount. This norm was made to limit the exactions of moneylenders and to define the term ‘fair interest’. But this norm was generally violated by the moneylenders during colonial rule. In one of the case investigated by Deccan Riots Commission, money-lender charged more than Rs. 2000 of interest on the principal of Rs. 100. Ryots gave a number of petitions or complaints about injustice of such exactions and the violation of this traditional custom.

Peasants came to see the moneylenders as deceitful as devious. They complained that moneylenders were manipulating the laws and were forging the accounts. The British passed a Limitation Law in 1859 which states that the bond of loan signed between moneylender and ryots would be valid only for three years. The main objective of this law was to stop the accumulation of loan for a long time. But moneylenders turned the law around in their own favour. They forced the ryots to sign a new bond after every three years. The new bond included the original loan and accumulated interest and new set of interest was charged on sum of the both. In the petitions submitted by ryots to Deccan Riots Commission described that law of this process worked and how different methods were used by moneylenders and these were:

(i) Ryots were not given any receipt in case of payment of loans.

(ii) Moneylenders entered fictitious figures in the bonds.

(iii) Moneylenders used to buy peasant harvest at low prices and finally took over the property of peasants.

While so many zamindars were facing a crisis in end of the 18th century (during the British East India Company), the group of rich peasants were consolidating their position in villages known as jotedars. In the report of survey conducted by Francis Buchanan we come to know about the Dinazpur District of North Bengal. In this report we get a detailed description of jotedars.

Position as a landholder : By the early 19th century the rich class peasants or jotedars had acquired vastarea of land sometimes as much as several thousand acres.

As a trader and moneylender : The position of the jotedars should not big estimated only by huge areas of the land. They had establish their control on local trade as well as money lending business. They use to exercise immense power over the poorer cultivators of the region.

A large part of land of the jotedars was cultivated through share-croppers (they were called adhiars or bargadars) who brought their own plough, laboured in the field and handed over half the produce to jotedars after harvest.

Comparison between Jotedars and zamindars:

(i) Within the villages, the power of new class of rich peasants or jotedars was more effective than that of traditional zamindars. Unlike zamindar who generally live to reside in city, jotedars were located in the small villages but they exercise direct control over a considerable section of poor villagers.

(ii) The jotedars seriously resisted efforts by zamindars to increase the jama of the village, prevented to zamindar’s official from executing their duty.

(iii) The jotedar mobilized ryots (of the villages) who were dependent on them. They (jotedars) deliberately delay payment of revenue to the zamindar.

(iv) Whenever the land estates of the zamindars were auctioned by the British East India Company for failure to make revenue payment, jotedars came generally among the purchasers.

Powers of the Jotedars : (i) The jotedars were very powerful particular in north Bengal. Although rich peasants and village headmen were emerging on commanding figure in the countryside in other parts of Bengal as well. In some places they were called haoladars, elsewhere they were known as gantidars or mandals. Their rise certainly weekened the authority of zamindars.

(ii) Landlords do not like the rich peasant class or jotedars, but it is evident from the description given by Francis Buchanan that they were absolutely necessary, unless the landlords themselves would advance money to their tenantry.

(iii) The jotedars who cultivate large portions of land are very refractory, and know that zamindars have no power over them. They pay only a few rupees on account of their revenue and then full in balance almost every kist (instalment), they hold more land than they are entitled to by their kottahs (deeds of contract).

The colonial rule is known for dissatisfaction miseries, poverty, debt, bad days of the people (particularly of the common people) throughout within its periods. The lives of peasants of colonial Bengal and the Rajmahal hill areas, Paharias and Santhals expressed their grievences against the colonial rule. Revolts were experienced and seen in the countryside in the Bombay Deccan, also from time to time rebels expressed their anger and fury against the foreign exploiters.

The main participants among the rebels were debtors. They burnt the account books and debt bonds, khatas, looted grain shops in several places such as in Supa (Poona). They attract the houses of sahukars and moneylenders. Their revolt also spread to Ahmednagar. At many places the British officials and their policemen were also attacked. At some places ryots also joined them because they could not pay the amount of revenue in time and they opposed harsh method adpoted by the Company’s officials.

Causes:

(i) The peasants rose against what they perceived to be injustice and the cause of their suffering. If we try to understand the premises of their resentment and peel the layers of their anger, we get a glimpse of their life and experience that is otherwise hidden from us.

(ii) The traders or gaindealers are also considered responsible for the revolts. They did not believe in fair dealing. They use to exploit the adverse economic situation of the ryots and debtors. Shopkeepers use to change the records of account books dishonestly in their own favour.

(iii) The British officials took seriously the rebels activities and their efforts to take law in their own hands. Police posts were established in villages to frighten rebellion peasants into submission.

(iv) According to some historians a new revenue system was also responsible for revolts in Bombay Deccan. As British rule expanded from Bengal to other parts of India, new systems of revenue were imposed. The Permanent Settlement was rarely extended to any region beyond Bengal. In short we can say the Ryotwari System was introduce in Bombay Deccan. The place of zamindars or exploiters was taken directly by the Company itself. Keen on expanding its financial resources, the colonial government had to think of ways to maximise its land revenue. So in territories annexed in the nineteenth century, temporary revenue settlements were made. The farmers had to pay nearly more than 50 percent of their total agricultural produce. In fact the burden of revenue amount was maximum.

(i) Revenue settlement of Bombay Deccan and its effects on peasants debt in 1820s : The first new revenue settlement after the Permanent Settlement of Bengal was made in Bombay Deccan in the 1820s. The revenue that was demanding by the English was very high. Due to pressure of high demand of revenue at many places poor peasants deserted their native villages. They migrated to new area in these regions of poor soil and fluctuating rainfall the problem was particularly accute. When rains failed and harvest were poor they found it not to possible to pay the revenue to the Company. They were forced to take loan from local moneylenders, traders or sahukars.

The Company use to send its own representative for the collection of revenue dues. These collectors incharge of revenue collection were keen on demonstrating and pleasing their superiors. So they went about extracting payment with utmost severity. When someone failed to pay, his crops were seized and a fine was imposed on the whole village.

(ii) Impact of sharp decline in price of agricultural products in 1830s and peasants debt : By the 1830s the problem become more severe. Prices of agricultural products fell sharply after 1832 and did not recover for over a decade and a half. This meant a further decline in peasants income.

(iii) Role of natural calamities in increasing the debt amount of the farmers: The countryside of Bombay Deccan and other areas of Maharashtra were devastated by a famine that struck in the years 1832-34. One-third of the cattle of the Deccan were killed, and half the human population died. Those who survived had no agricultural stocks to see them through the crisis. Unpaid balances of revenue mounted. How did cultivators live through such year ? How did they pay the revenue, who pay their consumption needs, purchase their ploughs and cattle, or get their children married ? Inevitably, they borrowed. Revenue could rarely be paid without a loan from a moneylender.

(iv) Improvement in attitude of Government but new areas emerged for debt (for seeds and lands):

(a) By the mid 1840s there were signs of an economic recovery of sorts. Many British officials had began to realise that the settlements of the 1820s had been harsh. The revenue demanded was exorbitant, the system rigid, and the peasant economy on the verge of collapse. So the revenue demand was moderated to ecourage peasants to expand cultivation.

(b) After 1845 agricultural prices recovered steadily Cultivators were now extending their areas, moving into new areas, and transforming pasture land into cultivated fields.

(c) But to expand cultivation peasants needed more plough and cattle. They needed money to buy seeds and land. For all this they had to taken once again to moneylenders for loans.

(i) The ryots were not given loans by sowkars because the sowkars (moneylenders and merchants) were very selfish, heartless, greedy and dishonest. They did not had faith in re-payment capacity of the ryots due to their very low income.

(ii) The ryots had to face the following difficulties during getting loan from the sowkars :

(a) Due to low income and poverty the ryots were forced to take loans from sowkars to meet their basic needs such as to purchase grain and clothes etc.

(b) They had to pay more price than the market or cash prices for their grains, clothes etc. The prices asked from them were generally twenty five or fifty per cent more than demanded from customers making ready money payments.

(c) The agricultural produce of the ryots fields was also taken by sowkars who at the time of removing it assured them that it would be credited to their account but they (dishonest sowkars) did not actually made any mention of it in the accounts.

(iii) The ryots were unable to pay the inflated demand due to their low income, low agricultural production, extra social-cultural expenses, dishonesty of the sowkars.

(i) (a) The peasants when cannot earn enough to defray he forced to beg moneylenders again and again.

(b) Moneylenders provide them the necessary of cloth and grain but with signing a bond of hard conditions.

(c) The produce of peasants’ fields also taken by sowkars i.e., moneylenders by assuring that it will be credited to their account but will not.

(d) The sowkars when taken the produce, he refused to pass any receipt, etc.

(ii) The norm was that moneylender gives the money, clothes and grain to ryot by signing with a bond of hard conditions.

(iii) In 1859, the British passed a Limitation Law that stated the loan bonds signed between moneylenders and ryots would have validity for only three years. This law was meant to check the accumulation of interest over time. The moneylenders, however, turned the law around, forcing the ryot to sign a new bond every three years.

(i) The peasant is making the following commitment in this deed:

(a) If he would unable to pay back the loan to the moneylender, he would give over all his possessions-land, carts, and animals to the moneylender.

(b) He also commits to pay for the animals which had originally belonged to him. He had to sign a deed of hire stating very clearly that these animals and carts did not belong to him.

(c) In cases of conflict, deeds of hire could be enforced through the court.

(ii) A deed of hire tells us that the relationship between the peasant and the moneylender was not of equal status of two parties. The peasant was helpless borrowers and the moneylender was the only sources to provide loan. He was in a higher and better position to impose all terms and conditions on the helpless peasant. When debts mounted the peasant was unable to pay back the loan to the moneylender. He had no option but to give over all his possessions to the moneylender. Without animals he (the peasant) could not continue to cultivate. Therefore, he took land on rent and animals or hire.

(iii) He had to take animals on hire. He now had to pay for the animals which had originally belonged to him. He had to sign a deed of hire stating very clearly that these animals did not belong to him. He would have to pay every month the hire thereof at rupees four a month, and obtain a receipt in moneylender’s own handwriting. In the absence of a receipt he would not contend that the hire had been paid.

The policies adopted by the British towards the Paharias were:

(i)In the 1770s the British embarked on the brutal policy of extermination , hunting the Paharias down and killing them.

(ii)By the 1780s , Augustus Cleveland, the Collector of Bhagalpur, proposed a policy of pacification.

(iii)Paharia chiefs were given an annual allowance and made responsible for the proper conduct of their men. Many Paharia chiefs refused the allowances , those who accepted lost authority within the community.

(iv)The Paharias withrew deep in the mountains insulating themselves from hostile forces and carrying on a war with the outsiders.The brutal repression shaped their perception of British infiltration into the area. 

The policies adopted by the British towards the Paharias were:

 (i) In the 1770s the British embarked on the brutal policy of extermination, hunting the Paharias down and killing them.

 (ii) By the 1780s, Augustus Cleveland, the Collector of Bhagalpur, proposed a policy of pacification.

 (iii) Paharia chiefs were given an annual allowance and made responsible for the proper conduct of their men.

 (iv) They were expected to maintain order in their localities and discipline their own people. Many Paharia chiefs refused the allowances, those who accepted lost authority within the community.

 (v) The Paharias withdrew deep in the mountains insulating themselves from hostile forces and carrying on a war with the outsiders. The brutal repression shaped their perception of British infiltration into the area.

The Fifth Report was submitted to the British Parliament in 1813.

(i) It was the fifth of a series of reports on the administration and activities of the East India Company in India.

(ii) Often referred to as the Fifth Report, it ran into 1002 pages, of which over 800 pages were appendices that reproduced petitions of zamindars and ryots, reports of collectors from different districts, statistical tables on revenue returns, and notes on the revenue and judicial administration of Bengal and Madras (present-day Tamil Nadu) written by officials.

(iii) It contained information about Company’s misrule and maladministration, Incidents of greed and corruption of Company officials were discussed.

(iv) It exaggerated the collapse of traditional zamindari power in Bengal.

(v) It overestimated the scale on which zamindars were losing their lands.

Two points of difference:
(i)In country side, people subsisted by cultivating the land while in towns by contrast people who lived were artisans traders , administrators, rulers etc. Towns dominated over the rural areas.
(ii) Towns & cities were often fortified by walls but not the villages of the countryside.

The Zamindars failed to pay the revenue-demand in the early decades after the permanent settlement:

(i) The initial demands were very high. This was because it was felt that if the demand was fixed for all time to come, the Company would never be able to claim a share of increased income from land when prices rose and cultivation expanded. To minimise this anticipated loss, the Company pegged the revenue demand high, arguing that the burden on zamindars would gradually decline as agricultural production expanded and prices rose.

(ii) This high demand was imposed in the 1790s, a time when the prices of agricultural produce were depressed, making it difficult for the ryots to pay their dues to the zamindar.

Towns were often defined in opposition to rural areas.

(i) They came to represent specific forms of economic activities and cultures. In the countryside people subsisted by cultivating land, foraging in the forest, or rearing animals.

(ii) Towns by contrast were peopled with artisans, traders, administrators and rulers. Towns dominated over the rural population, thriving on the surplus and taxes derived from agriculture.

(iii) Towns and cities were often fortified by walls which symbolised their separation from the countryside. However, the separation between town and country was fluid.

(iv) Peasants travelled long distances on pilgrimage, passing through towns; they also flocked to towns during times of famine. Besides, there was a reverse flow of humans and goods from towns to villages.

(v) When towns were attacked, people often sought shelter in the countryside. Traders and pedlars took goods from the towns to sell in the villages, extending markets and creating new patterns of consumption.

The battle between the hoe and the plough was a long one:

i. The British wanted to bring more land under cultivation for increasing agricultural produce and revenue.They failed to convince the Paharias to practice settled
agriculture.

ii. Hill folk in the Rajmahal hills were known as Paharias. They depended on forest produce and shifting cultivation or their living and grew a variety of pulses and millets for consumption.

iii. The British gave land to Santhals (Damin-i-koh) to settle in cultivate. The Santhals cleared land and converted it into cultivable land.

iv. Santhals displaced the Paharias. They practiced plough agriculture and ploughed land to grow rice and cotton.

Santhals revolted against zamindars, moneylenders and the colonial state during 18th century because:

(i) Santhals were restricted from moving down to the lower hills and valleys, they were confined to the dry interior and to the more barren and rockey upper hills. This severely affected their lives, impoverishing them in the long term.

(ii) The santhals, however, soon found that the land they had brought under cultivation was slipping away from their hands.

(iii) The states wss levying heavy taxes on the land that the Santhals had cleared.

(iv) Money lenders were charging them high rates of interest and taking over the land when debts remained unpaid and zamindars were asserting control over the Damin area.

(i) In 1859 the British passed a Limitation Law that stated that the loan bonds signed between moneylenders and ryots would have validity for only three years. 
(ii) This law was meant to check the accumulation of interest over time.
(iii) Cotton boom and the American civil war.
(iv)The ryots were dependant on money lenders for survival.
(v) The money lenders refused to extend loans to the ryots.
(vi) Money lenders violated the customary norms.
(vii) Rural indebtedness.
(viii) Ryots saw money lenders as devious and deceitful.
(ix) Manipulation and forging of Peasant accounts by money lenders.
(x) They complained of money lenders for manipulating laws and in 1859 this law was passed to check the accumulation of interest over time.