Colonialism and the Countryside — Exploring Official Archives

Colonial rule was first established in Bengal, and it was in the Bengal countryside that the East India Company first tried to reorder rural society to secure its revenue. This chapter follows three cases: the Permanent Settlement and its effect on the zamindars and the rich peasants called jotedars; the Rajmahal hills, where the Paharias and the Santhals lived very different lives and met the Company in very different ways; and the Bombay Deccan, where a cotton boom and its collapse ended in riots against moneylenders. Running through it is a question about sources: most of what is known comes from official records — revenue reports, surveys, commission inquiries — written by those who governed, for their own purposes.

Bengal and the Permanent Settlement

The Permanent Settlement came into operation in 1793, under Lord Cornwallis, then Governor-General. The Company fixed the revenue that each zamindar had to pay, and fixed it permanently — it was not to be increased in future. The Company hoped that this would ensure a regular flow of revenue and encourage zamindars to invest in improving their land, since they would keep any increase in output. It made the rajas and taluqdars of Bengal into zamindars; a zamindar had several — sometimes as many as 400 — villages under him, collected rent from the villages, paid the revenue to the Company and kept the difference as his income. If he failed to pay, his estate could be auctioned.

  • Why zamindars defaulted: the initial demands were very high, because the state feared that with the demand fixed forever it would lose its future share of rising income; the demand was imposed in the 1790s, a time when agricultural prices were depressed; the revenue was invariable regardless of the harvest; and the "sunset law" meant that if payment did not come in by sunset of the specified date, the zamindari was liable to be auctioned.
  • Curbing the zamindar's power: zamindars' troops were disbanded, customs duties abolished, and their cutcheries (courts) brought under the supervision of a Company-appointed Collector; zamindars lost the power to organise local justice and the local police.
  • Ryots defaulted too: in bad years ryots could not pay their rents, and when the harvest was good they deliberately delayed; rich ryots and village headmen were pleased to see the zamindar in trouble.

In 1797 an auction was held in Burdwan (present-day Bardhaman) of a number of mahals held by the Raja of Burdwan. Numerous purchasers came forward and the estates were sold to the highest bidders — but many of the purchasers turned out to be the raja's own servants or agents, acting on his behalf. Over 95 per cent of the sales at the auction were fictitious: the raja's estates had been publicly sold, but he remained in control of his zamindari. When a purchaser defaulted, the estate was put up for resale, and the same thing happened again — a tactic zamindars used to avoid losing their land.

ℹ️ The rise of the jotedars
While many zamindars were in crisis, a group of rich peasants consolidated their position in the villages. These jotedars acquired vast areas of land — sometimes thousands of acres — controlled local trade and moneylending, and exercised immense power over the poorer cultivators. Much of their land was cultivated by sharecroppers (adhiyars or bargadars), who brought their own ploughs, laboured in the field and handed over half the produce. Within the villages the jotedar's power was more effective than the zamindar's, who often lived in urban areas; jotedars resisted efforts by zamindars to increase the jama of the village, prevented zamindari officials from executing their duties, and deliberately delayed payment of revenue. They were particularly powerful in north Bengal, and in some places were called haoladars, gantidars or mandals.

Much of the evidence comes from the Fifth Report, 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, and ran to 1,002 pages, over 800 of them appendices reproducing petitions of zamindars and ryots, reports of collectors and other documents. It reflects the debates in Britain over the Company's misrule, and historians read it as an argument as well as a record.

The Hoe and the Plough — the Paharias and the Santhals

In the early nineteenth century Francis Buchanan, a physician in the service of the Bengal Medical Service, travelled through the Rajmahal hills as part of a survey of the areas under the Company's jurisdiction; his journals are an invaluable source, though written from the point of view of the Company, interested in resources that could be developed. The hills were home to the Paharias, who practised shifting cultivation with the hoe, clearing patches of forest by cutting and burning, and lived on forest produce — collecting mahua flowers for food, silk cocoons and resin for sale. Their life was intimately connected with the forest, and they regularly raided the plains, sometimes to survive in years of scarcity and sometimes to assert power over settled communities, who paid them tribute for safe passage.

  • Pacification: in the 1780s, Augustus Cleveland, a Company collector, proposed a policy of pacification: Paharia chiefs were given an annual allowance and made responsible for the proper conduct of their men. Many chiefs refused, and those who accepted lost authority within their community. The British also launched brutal campaigns of extermination.
  • The Santhals began arriving in the area around the 1780s. They were settled cultivators who used the plough, and the British, seeing them as ideal settlers who would clear forests and cultivate the land, invited them to settle in the foothills. In 1832 a large area was demarcated as Damin-i-Koh and declared to be the land of the Santhals; they were to live within it, practise plough agriculture and become settled peasants. The Paharias, unable to stop the Santhals' advance, retreated deeper into the hills.
  • The Santhal hul (1855–56): the land the Santhals had brought under cultivation was taxed heavily, moneylenders (dikus) charged high rates of interest and took over land when debts were unpaid, and zamindars asserted control over the area. By the 1850s the Santhals felt that the time had come to rebel; led by Sidhu and Kanhu, they rose in 1855–56. After the revolt was suppressed, the Santhal Pargana was created, carved out of districts of the region, and special laws were enacted within it to conciliate the Santhals.
⚠️ Hoe = Paharias; plough = Santhals
The paper pairs the two groups with their implements and their relationship to the forest. The Paharias were shifting cultivators and forest gatherers who used the hoe; the Santhals were settled plough cultivators whom the British invited in. The Damin-i-Koh was demarcated for the Santhals, not the Paharias.

The Bombay Deccan — Cotton, Debt and the Riots of 1875

Unlike the Permanent Settlement, the revenue system introduced in the Bombay Deccan in the 1820s was the ryotwari settlement: the revenue was settled directly with the ryot, the average income from different types of soil was estimated, and the revenue-paying capacity of the ryot assessed. The demand was not fixed permanently but was to be revised periodically. The first revenue demand was so high that in many places peasants deserted their villages; when prices fell after 1832 and famine struck in 1832–34, many ryots could not pay and had to borrow from moneylenders.

From boom to riot in the Deccan
  1. 1857
    Cotton Supply Association founded in Britain to seek cotton supplies from around the world
  2. 1859
    Manchester Cotton Company formed; the Limitation Law limits the validity of loan bonds to three years
  3. 1861
    The American Civil War cuts cotton supplies to Britain; demand for Indian cotton soars and Deccan ryots expand cotton cultivation on credit
  4. 1865
    The Civil War ends, American cotton returns, and the boom collapses
  5. 1875
    Riots begin at Supa in Poona district; ryots attack sahukars and burn their account books
  6. 1878
    Report of the Deccan Riots Commission presented to the British Parliament

On 12 May 1875, ryots from surrounding rural areas gathered at Supa, a large village in Poona district, and attacked the shopkeepers and moneylenders, demanding their bahi khatas (account books) and debt bonds, which they burnt; the revolt spread through Poona and Ahmednagar. The ryots' sense of injustice had deepened as the boom ended: moneylenders refused further loans, and the Limitation Law of 1859, meant to stop interest accumulating over long periods by making loan bonds valid for only three years, was circumvented — moneylenders made ryots sign a new bond every three years, carrying over the unpaid balance and interest as a new principal. The Government of India, worried by the memory of 1857, pressed the Government of Bombay to set up a commission of enquiry, the Deccan Riots Commission, whose report was presented to the British Parliament in 1878. Historians note that the Commission was asked specifically whether revenue demand was the cause of the revolt — and it concluded that the moneylenders, not the government's revenue demand, were to blame, a conclusion that suited the government that had appointed it.

Key takeaways

  • The Permanent Settlement of 1793, under Cornwallis, fixed each zamindar's revenue forever; the sunset law allowed defaulting estates to be auctioned.
  • At the Burdwan auction of 1797 most sales were fictitious — the purchasers were the raja's own agents.
  • Jotedars — rich peasants with sharecroppers called adhiyars or bargadars — were more powerful in the villages than zamindars, especially in north Bengal.
  • The Fifth Report, submitted to Parliament in 1813, is a key source; Francis Buchanan surveyed the Rajmahal hills.
  • The Paharias used the hoe; the Santhals used the plough and were given the Damin-i-Koh in 1832; the Santhal hul of 1855–56 was led by Sidhu and Kanhu.
  • The ryotwari settlement in the Bombay Deccan was made directly with the ryot and revised periodically.
  • The American Civil War (1861–65) created a cotton boom and bust; the Deccan riots began at Supa in 1875; the Commission reported in 1878.

Practice questions (8)

Attempt each one before opening the answer. Every explanation names the tempting wrong option as well as the right one, because that is where marks are lost.

  1. Under the "sunset law" associated with the Permanent Settlement:

    1. Ryots could not be made to work in the fields after sunset
    2. Revenue courts could hold hearings only until sunset
    3. If payment did not come in by sunset of the specified date, the zamindari was liable to be auctioned
    4. Zamindars had to dismiss their troops by sunset on the day of settlement
    Show answer

    Answer: C — If payment did not come in by sunset of the specified date, the zamindari was liable to be auctioned

    The sunset law made a zamindari liable to auction if the revenue had not been paid by sunset on the due date — one of the reasons so many estates changed hands after 1793. Zamindars' troops were indeed disbanded under the Settlement, which is why the option about dismissing troops sounds plausible, but that was not what the sunset law said.

  2. At the auction of the Raja of Burdwan's estates in 1797, historians find that:

    1. Most of the sales were fictitious, the purchasers being the raja's own agents
    2. The estates were bought by British officials of the Company
    3. The jotedars of the area bought every estate
    4. No buyers came forward and the estates were returned to the raja
    Show answer

    Answer: A — Most of the sales were fictitious, the purchasers being the raja's own agents

    Numerous purchasers came forward, but most turned out to be the raja's servants or agents acting for him — over 95 per cent of the sales were fictitious, and he stayed in control. The jotedars were rising rivals of the zamindars, which makes them a tempting answer, but at Burdwan the estates were "bought" by the raja's own people.

  3. Which of the following correctly describes the jotedars of late eighteenth-century Bengal?

    1. Company officials who supervised the zamindars' courts
    2. Landless labourers who worked on zamindari estates
    3. Rich peasants who controlled large areas of land, local trade and moneylending
    4. Hill people who practised shifting cultivation
    Show answer

    Answer: C — Rich peasants who controlled large areas of land, local trade and moneylending

    Jotedars were rich peasants with large holdings, often worked by sharecroppers called adhiyars or bargadars, and they controlled local trade and moneylending — within the village their power exceeded the zamindar's. The Company official supervising the zamindars' cutcheries was the Collector, and shifting cultivators of the hills were the Paharias.

  4. Match the item with its description. A. Fifth Report B. Damin-i-Koh C. Limitation Law D. Supa — 1. Area demarcated in 1832 as the land of the Santhals 2. Village in Poona district where the 1875 riots began 3. Report on the Company's administration submitted to Parliament in 1813 4. Made loan bonds valid for only three years

    1. A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2
    2. A-3, B-4, C-1, D-2
    3. A-1, B-3, C-4, D-2
    4. A-3, B-1, C-2, D-4
    Show answer

    Answer: A — A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2

    The Fifth Report went to Parliament in 1813; the Damin-i-Koh was demarcated for the Santhals in 1832; the Limitation Law of 1859 limited loan bonds to three years; and the Deccan riots began at Supa in 1875. Each distractor swaps one pair, so the item rewards fixing each name to its date as well as its meaning.

  5. Assertion (A): The British encouraged the Santhals to settle in the foothills of the Rajmahal hills. Reason (R): The Santhals were plough cultivators whom the British saw as ideal settlers to clear forests and expand cultivation.

    1. Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A
    2. Both A and R are true, but R is not the correct explanation of A
    3. A is true, but R is false
    4. A is false, but R is true
    Show answer

    Answer: A — Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A

    The British had failed to turn the Paharias into settled cultivators, and saw in the plough-using Santhals the settlers they wanted — people who would clear forest and pay revenue on cultivated land. That is why they were invited in and given the Damin-i-Koh in 1832, so R explains A. "R is not the correct explanation" misses that the invitation followed directly from their way of farming.

  6. Arrange in chronological order: (A) The Permanent Settlement comes into operation (B) The Damin-i-Koh is demarcated (C) The Deccan riots break out (D) The Santhal hul

    1. A, D, B, C
    2. B, A, D, C
    3. A, B, C, D
    4. A, B, D, C
    Show answer

    Answer: D — A, B, D, C

    The Permanent Settlement dates from 1793, the Damin-i-Koh from 1832, the Santhal hul from 1855–56 and the Deccan riots from 1875. The hul is easy to misplace after 1857 because of its proximity to the great revolt, but it came a year before it, and two decades before the riots at Supa.

  7. How did moneylenders in the Bombay Deccan get around the Limitation Law of 1859?

    1. By making ryots sign a new bond every three years, carrying unpaid sums forward as fresh principal
    2. By moving their business to Bengal, where the law did not apply
    3. By persuading the Deccan Riots Commission to repeal it
    4. By lending only in grain and seed rather than cash, claiming that loans in kind fell outside the law
    Show answer

    Answer: A — By making ryots sign a new bond every three years, carrying unpaid sums forward as fresh principal

    The law made loan bonds valid for only three years to stop interest piling up over long periods, so moneylenders had ryots sign a fresh bond every three years, rolling the unpaid balance and interest into a new principal. The ryots' resentment of this practice fed into the riots of 1875, and the Commission reported on the riots rather than repealing anything.

  8. The ryotwari settlement introduced in the Bombay Deccan differed from the Permanent Settlement in Bengal because:

    1. It was made with zamindars rather than with peasants
    2. Revenue was settled directly with the ryot and revised periodically rather than fixed forever
    3. It abolished land revenue altogether
    4. It applied only to cotton-growing land
    Show answer

    Answer: B — Revenue was settled directly with the ryot and revised periodically rather than fixed forever

    In the ryotwari settlement the revenue was fixed directly with the ryot, on an estimate of the soil's average income, and was to be revised periodically rather than fixed for ever. Settlement with zamindars was the Bengal model, so a settlement "made with zamindars" describes exactly what ryotwari was designed to avoid.