Rural Industry and Commercial Agriculture in Late Seventeenth-Century South-Eastern India

8/13/2019 Rural Industry and Commercial Agriculture in Late Seventeenth-Century South-Eastern India

1/40

The Past and Present Society

Rural Industry and Commercial Agriculture in Late Seventeenth-Century South-Eastern IndiaAuthor(s): Sanjay SubrahmanyamSource: Past & Present, No. 126 (Feb., 1990), pp. 76-114Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/650810Accessed: 20/05/2010 02:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Oxford University Pressand The Past and Present Societyare collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to Past & Present.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/650810?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ouphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ouphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/650810?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/40

RURALINDUSTRYAND COMMERCIAL GRICULTUREIN LATE SEVENTEENTH-CENTURYSOUTH-EASTERNNDIAThe expansionof rural ndustry n manypartsof the Old World nthe early modernperiod, with a view to supplyingdistantmarkets,is one of the striking eatures f thatepoch. Over he pasttwo decadesand moretherehas been a livelycontroversy verwhetherany set ofbroadgeneralizationsan be arrived t fromthe varietyof individualexperiences; concomitantly,this particularphenomenon thegrowthof rural ndustryand with it commercial griculture-hasbeen used as a springboardor an examination f the historical ootsof capitalism.However, the discussionpredates he whole "proto-industrialization"ebate parked ff by FranklinMendels n his 1972article,and the readerwill discovermanyof the issues n this debatealreadyunder scrutiny n a symposium n the 3rournalf EconomicHistory n 1969on "Capitalismnd the Extentof its EarlyDevelop-ment outside Europe''.1In the South Asian case, despitea braveattempt ome yearsagoby FrankPerlin, the debatenevertook off.2This was partlybecausePerlin'sown essaywas, even by his own admission,"uncomfortablyschematic" nd cast in far too abstract mouldto elicit constructiveresponse. But it was also due to the fact that there has been littlechangesince 1983, when Perlinwroteof a "remarkableack [in theSouth Asian case] of any seriousregional monographson textileindustries, n the seventeenthand eighteenthcenturies,of a kindlong legion n the European istoriography"3 What s trueof textilesis true in greater degree of other pre-colonial ndustries ironmanufacture, nd the extractivendustriesmoregenerally includingsaltpetre roduction) eingglaring xamples.So longas these acunae

1 See F. F. Mendels,"Proto-Industrialization:he FirstPhaseof the Industrializa-tion Process",.Tl.Econ. Hist., xxxii (1972); Zl. Econ. Hist., xxix (1969), specialnumber ditedby FredericC. Lane,withpapersby IrfanHabib,HalilInalcik,SubhiLabiband YasukazuTakenaka.2 FrankPerlin, "Proto-Industrializationnd Pre-Colonial outhAsia", Past andPresent,no. 98 (Feb. 1983), pp. 30-95.3 Ibid., pp. 39-40, 53.


3/40

77URAL INDUSTRYAND AGRICULTUREN INDIAremain,exercises uchas thatof Perlinmustbe treated,regrettably,asalluring astlesntheair ofnecessityullofgeneralizationsasedon whatthe authornicelyterms"circumstantialndimpressionisticevidence".My primarypurpose n the presentstudyis not to quarrelwithPerlin,whoseessayhas, in theultimateanalysis, ervednotonebuttwousefulpurposes: irst,helpingto castseriousdoubton the ideaof pre-colonialSouthAsianhistoryas somesortof hothouse lower,proceedingon a logic of its own andinsulated romthe restof theworld;andsecondly,alertinghistorians f colonialandpost-colonialSouthAsia to the possibilities nherent n the "long

view", whilewarning hemof thepriceto be paidfortheirneglectof pre-colonialdevelopments.Unlike Perlin'scontribution,however,the presentessaywill returnto a focus on a limitedregionaleconomyover arelatively horttimeperiod; t will derive n largemeasure, urther-more,fromarchival vidence,whileat thesametimepresentinghefindings n a more generalspatial,temporaland historiographicalcontext.

The region chosen for study here comprisespartof the modernIndianstateof AndhraPradesh,andwasin theearlymodernperiodknownto Europeanobserversas northernCoromandel.Two majorriversplayeda significant olein theeconomy.To thesouthwastheKrishna,which enteredthe Bay of Bengaljust south of the portof Masulipatnam which, in the late sixteenthand seventeenthcenturies,dominated xternal radefromthe region.

Furthernorthlay the Godavari,whichat the townof Rajahmundryifurcatedoform wochannels:heVasisthaGodavarindtheGautamiGodavari.Textileproductionn this regionhas been the objectof severalstudiessincethe 1960s,mostof whichhavetreated he areaas partof a moregeneralgeographical nit, the Coromandel lain,whichextendsasfarsouthastheKaveridelta nsouthernTamilnadu.Thesestudies,amongwhichonemaymention hoseofTapanRaychaudhuriandS. Arasaratnam,avebeenprincipallyoncernedoestablishhegeneral hronology f theexpansion f textileproductionn thearea,andto advance omearguments n thegrowingcontrolbymerchantcapitalovertheproduction rocess.4Sincethesourcesonwhichthey

4 Tapan Raychaudhuri, 3ranCompanyin Coromandel,1605-1690: A Study in theInterrelations f EuropeanCommerce nd TraditionalEconomies The Hague, 1962); S.(conl. onp. 78)


4/40

78 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126are based are the records of the English ar.d Dutch East IndiaCompanies,which began o export extiles romCoromandel nly inthe early seventeenth entury,these studieshave tendedto presup-posethat he expansionn bothproduction ndexportwasprincipallya seventeenth-centuryhenomenon. n the contextof northernCoro-mandel, J. F. Richardssums up the essence of these studies in arecentessay: "Dutchand English nitiative . . createdan exportofcottoncloth produced n rural ndustrial illageswhich soon reacheda totalestimatedat nine millionyardsa year. Prior o this, southernCoromandel, ather han the northerndistricts,had been the mainzone of textile production or maritime xport".5Arasaratnam asrecentlyargued, besides, that whereas he Coromandelextile pro-ducer had "traditionally" een a part-time griculturalworker,therelatively teadydemandpatternsgeneratedby EuropeanCompanytrademovedhim first nto becominga full-time extileproducer ndthen, over time, to a gradualdependenceon cash advances.6Thusin the courseof the seventeenth ndeighteenth enturies he merchantcapitalist it is argued)acquireda stranglehold ver the productionprocess, eading o the impoverishment f the weaverand his house-hold. The beneficiaries f the processof production or exportwerenot the producersbut the merchants,both Asian and European.Withthe passageof time, the balance f economicpower hifted romthe formerset of merchants o the latter, and with it the principalpart of the surplusfrom production.Raychaudhuri'studyoffersan interesting ontrastn explanation.Based on a sort of early Physiocratic onceptionof the economy, tportraysmanufacture s eventually terile,andthe agrarian conomyin which it is embeddedas in stasis.7The principalvillains of thepiece in this view are the classes associatedwith the state, whichcontrolthe surpluses.Their extortionate rocedures heck agricul-turalexpansionand thus ensure hatthe expansion n ruralmanufac-ture can only prove ephemeral.(n. 4 cont.)Arasaratnam, Weavers,Merchants nd the Company:The Handloom ndustry nSoutheasternndia, 1750-1790", ndianEcon.andSocialHist. Rev., xvii (1980),pp.257-81;S. Arasaratnam, erchants, ompaniesndCommercentheCoromandeloast,1650-1740 Delhi, 1986).5 J. F. Richards,"MughalStateFinanceand the Pre-ModernWorldEconomy",Comp.Studies n Soc. andHist., xxiii (1981), pp. 285-308,esp. p. 305.

6 Arasaratnam, Weavers,Merchants nd the Company", p. 262-3.7 Raychaudhuri,fan Company, p. 6-14, 214-16; or a still more explicit ormu-lation, ee TapanRaychaudhuri,TheAsiaticModeof Production ndIndia'sForeignTrade n the SeventeenthCentury", n Essays n Honour f S. C. Sarkar New Delhi,1976), pp. 839-46.


5/40

WEAVINGENTRO< O 10

\ 9\o |

* Nuzvid

,Guntur

8lo


6/40

80 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126The state in Raychaudhuri's tudy is the Deccani sultanateofGolconda, ounded n the earlysixteenth enturyby Quli QutbShah,

which survived nto the late 1680s, when the Mughalarmiesof theemperorAurangzeb onquered he region.The sultanate f Golcondawas dominated romthe late sixteenth enturyby a Persianized liteat the court n Hyderabad,but powerat the level of the localitywasa somewhatmore complexaffair.The frequent ecourse o revenue-farmingas a fiscal echniqueby this statehas meant hat t is usuallyportrayedn the literature s an extraordinarilyarshand extractiveone, even by the standards f India n the period n question.Recentwork, however, has begun to cast doubt on this characterization.First, it has been shown that at the level of the locality pargana)warrior/cultivatorlites continued o hold sway in many areas; hedelicate equilibriumbetween these elements and the centralstateserved to insulatethe economysomewhat rom agenciesof surplusextraction.Secondly, t has been arguedon the basis of a detailedexamination f the careers f several evenue-farmersmanyof whomwere recent migrants rom Iran) that this form of fiscal mediationmayactuallyhavehelped o fuel agrarian xpansion, ather han imitthe potential f the agrarian conomy. t wouldappear, herefore, hatthe views of Raychaudhuri re n need of considerablemodification.8We maynote, in addition, hat he studiesof bothArasaratnamndRaychaudhuri, s well as a moregeneral ssayby K. N. Chaudhuri nIndian extileproductionn the seventeenth ndeighteenth enturies(which draws rom time to time on "examples" rom Coromandel),are characterized y what Perlin has recently termed a narrowly"evolutionist" erspective.9Nor do they appear o haveexplored herich range of documentationwhich the archivesof the Dutch EastIndia Company the V.O.C.) offer, both on textile production ndon commercial griculture.The present tudywill offera description,as well as an explanation,of developments n the late seventeenth-centurynorth Coromandel conomy, which is based on some newevidence, as well as on recent revisionsprovidedby the AmericanhistorianJoseph J. Brennig. It is useful, however, to begin with

8 J F. Richards,MughalAdministrationn GolcondaOxford, 1975), chs. 1, 2;also SanjaySubrahmanyam, Persians,Pilgrimsand Portuguese:The TravailsofMasulipatnam hipping in the Western Indian Ocean, 1590-1665",Mod. AsianStudies,xxii (1988).9 Cf. K. N. Chaudhuri,"The Structure f the Indian Textile Industry n theSeventeenth ndEighteenthCenturies",ndianEcon. ndSocialHist.Rev., xi (1974),pp. 127-82; ubstantiallyeproducedn K. N. Chaudhuri,TheTradingWorld f AsiaandtheEnglishEast IndiaCompany, 660-1760 Cambridge, 978),ch. 11.


7/40

RURAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTUREN INDIA 81offeringsome alterations o the chronologyof expansionof textileproduction ummarized bove.

The inscriptionsof the medievalperiodrevealthe existenceofseveralweaving entresn the owerKrishna ndGodavarialleysanddeltas,suchas Bhimavaram, chanta,NagulapadundAmritaluru.0By itsverynature,however, hisevidences difficultocomparewiththe documentationf the periodafter1500. It maybe notedfortherecord,nevertheless,hat hetradition ftextileproductionorexportfrom the north Coromandel egion can be tracedat least to thethirteenthcentury,when the portof Motupallidominated xternaltrade. 1By the earlysixteenthcentury hough,whenthe firstPortu-guese recordscome to be available,the dominantrole in textileexportsfrom Coromandels played by the centraland southernregionsof the coastalplain.Evenas lateas 1550 northCoromandeltextilesaretreatedas less importanthanthosefromthe hinterlandsof such portsas PulicatandNagapattinam,t leastwhereseabornetrade s concerned.12It can, however,be demonstratedhat this situationwasreversedin the last three decadesof the sixteenthcentury.The growingimportancen thatperiodof thenorthCoromandelortofMasulipat-namwas predicated n the exportof textiles,producedprincipallyin the lower valleys and deltas of the Krishnaand Godavari, owesternIndonesia, he Malaypeninsulaand Burma.13n the earlyyearsof the seventeenth entury,seaborne xportsof cottontextilesfromthe regionalso beganto flowin increasingquantities o westAsia.Thistrade,controlled s it wasbyAsianmerchants, asconsistentlybeen underestimatedby historianswho have tended, like J. F.Richards,to stressinsteadthe exportsfromnorthCoromandel ytheCompanies.t is true hat he exportof textilesbyAsianmerchantsis not susceptibleof such precise quantification s that of theirEuropean ivals,butavailableiguresdo serveas a correctiveo the

10Vi ayaRamaswamy, extiles ndWeaversnMedieval outh ndia Delhi, 1985),pp. 7-12;K. Sundaram,tudies nEconomicndSocialC'onditionsfMedieval ndhra,4 1).1000to 1600(Machilipatnam,968).11Sundaram, tudies n EconomicndSocialConditions,p. 49-50;see also theevidenceof MarcoPolo, in TheBookof SerMarco volo, heVenetian,ConcerningheKingdomsndMarvels f theEast,3rdedn., ed. H. YuleandH. Cordier, vols.(NewYork,1903), i, p. 359.12 SeeSanjay ubrahmanyam,ThePortugueseResponseothe RiseofMasulipat-nam, 1570-1600",TheGreatCircle,viii (1986).13 Ibid.; fora moredetaileddiscussion, ee SanjaySubrahmanyam,heIvolitic(llEconomyf Commerce:outhernndia, 1500-1650 Cambridge, 989),pp. 213-18.


8/40

82 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126prevalentorthodoxy.Trade from Masulipatnamo Burmaon thepartof Asianmerchantswas consistently stimated n the late 1620sby Dutch observersat between900,000 and 1,350,000florins,andthe bulk of the exportswere of textiles. In contrast, t was only inthe 1640s that Dutch exports from all of Coromandel xceeded1,000,000 lorinsannually,while Englishexports or the coast n theperiod up to 1650 rarely f ever exceededa quarterof that value.14(See Graphs 1-2.) It would thus be no exaggeration o see theexpansion n exportsof cotton textiles from the north Coromandelregion until 1650 as fundamentallydependent on Asian tradingnetworks,rather han on the EuropeanCompanies.In the secondhalf of the seventeenth entury,however, herewasa perceptible lackeningn the expansion f textileexports o the restof Asia. Signs of glut in the Indonesianmarketappearedby about1680, but by this time a new source of demandhad been found.15This was the Europeanmarket,which consumednot only the chintzand paintedcloth of the Krishnaand Godavari eltas(which n anycase accounted or only a small raction f totalproduction), ut alsoplain cloth in particular he varietiesknown under the tradenamesof salampurt,ercalla,murt,bethille nd guinea-clothor long-cloth). The Europeanmarket or Coromandelextileswas one whichthe Dutch had assiduouslydeveloped rom the 1620s on, for theirshipping nvoicesof that period show north Coromandelextilestohave accounted or between a half and two-thirdsof total exportsfromCoromandelo Holland.By 1652 he Dutch Company's nnualordersfor the Europeanmarket ncludedS00,000 florins'worth ofnorthCoromandelextiles romthe five categoriesmentioned bove:bethillesfl. 114,000),murzsfl. 88,000),percallasfl. 40,000), salam-purzs fl. 80,000), and guinea-cloth fl. 75,000).16In the phaseup to about1660 he English aggedbehind he Dutchin their ability to exploit Europeandemand or north Coromandeltextiles.By the last two decadesof the seventeenth entury, hey hadcomecloseto outstrippingheirrivals.The structure f demand rom

14 Algemeen Rijksarchief, The Hague (hereafter A.R.A.), Overgekomen Brievenen Papieren (hereafter O.B.), VOC. 1090, fo. 247; VOC. 1095, fo. 64.15 Raychaudhuri, an Company, assim;Arasaratnam,Merchants, ompaniesndC'ommerce,p. 96-105. On the rise of the textile trade to Europe, see also HoldenFurber, Rival Empires f Trade n the Onent Minneapolis, 1976), pp. 239-44.

16 A.R.A., O.B., VOC. 1084, fos. 176, 190; VOC. 1090, fos. 222-35; finally, forthe order list of 1652, see VOC. 1188, fos. 256-60, "Calculatiewat de jaarlyckseeyssenvan de Kust Cormandel ende der onderhorende comptoiren uiit t'vaderlandt endeIndia omtrent komen te kosten".


9/40

GRAPH 1DUTCH EXPORTS FROM COROMANDEL

'000 florins3,000

1,000- \ I

400- X

1620 1630 1640 16X50 1*Source: Sanjay Subrahmanyam, TheIvolitical conomy f Commerce:outhernn


10/40

84 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126GRAPH 2

ENGLISHEXPORTSFROM COROMANDEL 618-1650*of eight90,000

70,000-

50,000-

40,000-

1618 1625 1635 1645 1648* Source:Subrahmanyam,florins. PoliticalEconomy f C'ommerce,. 181. One rial= 2.5

TABLE 1ENGLISHAND DUTCH TEXTILEEXPORTSFROMNORTHCOROMANDEL 682*

Dutch (in yards)

Draksharama 1 895 ,000Total 4,844,500

English in yards)MasulipatnamPeddapalliMadapollamTotal

1 778,000628,0002,173,0004,579,000

* Source: Joseph J. Brennig, "1 he Textile Trade of Seventeenth-CenturyNorthernCoromandel: A Study of a Pre-Modern Asian Export Industry" (Univ. of WisconsinPh.D. thesis, 1975), pp. 44-5.

the two Companies n 1682 is shown in Table 1. It seems more orless apparent hat textile exports from the northernCoromandel


11/40

85URAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIAregion peaked in about 1700. Thereafter here are visible signs ofstagnation nd then decline n the textile ndustry,and a consequentloss of interest in the region on the part of the European radingCompanies.The Englishandthe Dutch, who hadby now beenjoinedby the Frenchas major raders, oncentratedheir extileprocurementmore and more in centraland southernCoromandel.Besides, sincethe total export by these Companies rom Coromandel s a wholewasnot growingveryrapidly n thefirsthalfof the eighteenth entury,a decline in the relativeshare of northernCoromandels likely tohave been reflected n absolute erms as well.17

It is not perfectly clear whether or not there was a revival inquantities raded n the second half of the eighteenth entury.Thedisastrous amineof the early 1770s,which ravaged he KrishnaandGodavarideltas, had a severe impact on the textile industry, andfragmentary utch reports rom he late eighteenth entury oncern-ing the areasaroundPalakollu a majorweavingcentre n the westGodavari elta) suggestcontinuedsluggishness.18 inally, as G. N.Rao has shown, the second quarterof the nineteenth enturysaw afurthermarked ontractionn the textile ndustryof coastalAndhra,in the face of imports rom England,both into the region tself andinto othermarketswhich had been consumers f northCoromandeltextiles.19The purposeof this rapid tourd'horzzonas been to indicate hephasesof growth,stagnation nd decline n the textile ndustryof theregionunder consideration. t shouldbe underlined hat the periodwithwhichI am principally oncerned namely he lateseventeenthcentury was something of a high-watermark, as well as thebeginningof the periodof stagnation.

IIThe growthof rural extile production n Andhrabetween he mid-sixteenth nd ateseventeenth enturyaccompanied complementarygrowth in certain forms of commercialagriculture.The principal

17 Calculated from Chaudhuri, TradingWorld f Asia, pp. 542-3;S. Arasaratnam,"The Dutch East India Company and its Coromandel Trade, 1700-1740", Biddragentot de Taal-, Land-en Volkenkunde,xxiii (1966), pp. 325-46.18 Arsip Nasional R; I., Jakarta, Buitenland no. 150, Section L, "Register van desuccessive ingekomen Palicolsche klaght schriften".19 G. N. Rao, "Stagnation and Decay of the Agricultural Economy of CoastalAndhra",ArthaViinana, x (1978); G. N. Rao, "AgrarianRelations in CoastalAndhraunder Early British Rule", SocialScientist, xi (1978).


12/40

86 NUMBER 126AST AND PRESENTfood crop of the two rivervalleysand deltasof the regionwas rice,and this becamean extensively radedcrop very early n the period.There s not only evidenceof localized, hort-distancemovements frice, but also a clear suggestionof a more complex and extendednetwork f coastal rade.Rice was brought veryyear n lateJanuaryor early February o Masulipatnam nd neighbouringports fromOrissa and Bengal, which lay furthernorth along the Indian eastcoast. 0This supplywas certainly f some importancen feeding heurban populationof Masulipatnamtself, which clearlynumberedover 100,000 n the mid-seventeenthentury;partof it was probablyalso distributedn the textile-producingillagesof the Krishnadelta.The commercial roduction f two othercropswas facilitated y,and at the same time underpinned, he expansion n the textileindustry.The firstof thesewas cotton,whichwas obviouslya crucialinput into the manufacturing rocess. In the pre-1500periodfairlywidespread ultivation f cottonmay be observed n the PalnadandVinukonda alukas f the Guntur egion,justsouthof the areaunderconsideration.21 portionof this cotton, togetherwith that grownin the Godavari elta itself, would appear o have supplied he bulkof the textile ndustry'sneedseven as late as 1600.If necessary, hesesourceswere supplementedby cotton from the interiorbrought nboatson the Godavari iver.It was not untilthe 1630s,however, hatthis importedcotton assumedmajor mportance.In a recentarticleJosephJ. Brennighas suggested hatafter 1630both the extentof trade n cotton n the regionand ts formchanged.Whereas arlier he cottonhad been broughtpartof the wayoverlandand then down the Krishnaand Godavari iversby boat, the 1630sapparently aw the beginningsof a large-scale radeusing caravansof pack bullocks, organizedby the nomadicBanjara ommunity.22Havingbrought he cottonto the martsof the Krishnaand Godavarideltas or sale, thesecaravans et-urned ith saltproduced n the salt-pans of the coast. Unfortunately,Brennig s somewhatunclearonwherethe cottonoriginated, uggestingmerely hat t was from"theblacksoil districtsof the centralDeccan".Therewere no morethanthreeor four areas,however,which were in the seventeenth entury

20 V. M. Godinho,Os Descobrimentosa EconomiaMundial,2nd edn., 4 vols.(Lisbon,1981-4), v, p. 64; alsoA.R.A., O.B., VOC. 1378, os. 2083V-9; OC. 1624,fos. 185-96;VOC. 1664, fos. 647-59;VOC. 1855, fos. 53-7.21 Sundaram, tudies n Economic ndSocialConditions, p. 23-4.22 Joseph J. Brennig, "Textile Producersand Production n Late Seventeenth-CenturyCoromandel",ndianEcon.andSocialHist. Rev., xxiii (1986), pp. 333-56,esp. pp. 335-8.


13/40

RURAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIA 87notedfor theirextensiveproduction f cotton,andwhich couldhaveservedas sourcesof supply.One sucharea ayduewestof Hyderabad,but it is probable hat much of the cotton producedhere was usedby producers f muslin and chintz n the vicinity tself. Still anotherpossibility s the areaaroundGulbargawhich, moreover, ay astridethe main tradingroute which connectedHyderabad o Bijapurandthe ports of the west coast. The most likely candidate,however, sneitherof these: t is instead he regionextendingwest fromNandedalmost o Aurangabad.Not only was this areaan extensiveproducerof cotton(as testifiedby the seventeenth-centuryravellersThevenotand Fryer)but it lay in the vicinity of the Godavari alley. And, asBrennig has pointed out, all evidence points to the fact that theprincipalmigratoryroute of the Banjaracaravanswas along theGodavarivalley.23Once on the coastalplain, the cotton was distributed hroughanetwork f market ownsand smaller entres.Oneof the majornodesin the distribution attice was Rajahmundry, t the head of theGodavari elta; still anothermajorcentre,which probably uppliedspinnerson both the westernand easternbanksof the Godavari,wasTeeparu.24The other significantcommercialcrop of the region,whichhasbeensomewhat eglectedby historians f thisarea particu-larly in comparison o their northernand westernIndian counter-parts),was indigo.25Onceagain, his cropwas closely dentifiedwiththe textile ndustry,as a sourceof dyestuff,and its productionn thebroadregionseemsto have sufficednot only to meetthe area'sneedsbut to provide a modest surplus for export. The major area ofproduction,referred o by Dutch merchants n the period as "hetland van den indigo", stretchednorth-east romthe town of Nagul-vancha o the majorcentreof Palvancha, lmost n a band betweenthe Krishna and Godavari ivers. Most of the towns and villagesmentioned n connectionwith indigo production n the seventeenthcentury ie in what is the modern-dayKhammam istrictof AndhraPradesh; hey includeNagulvancha ndPalvancha ndGollapudi all

23 For a surveyof regionsproducing otton n the period, ee IrfanHabib,An Atlasof the Mughal Empire, 2nd edn. (Delhi, 1986), Maps 14-B, 15-B, pp. 58-9, 61-3.24 Brennig,"TextileProducers nd Production", p. 337-8.

25 For the most recentdetailed tudy of indigo n northern ndia, see H. W. vanSanten, "De VerenigdeOost-IndischeCompagnie n Guiarat n Hindustan,1620-1660" (Univ. of Leiden Ph.D. thesis, 1982), pp. 133-69;see also H. Nagashima,"IndigoProduction nd Circulationn North Indiaduring he SeventeenthCentury:A Studyof thatof the BayanaTract" in Japanesewith an English ummary], hirin,lxiii (1980), pp. 527-60.


14/40

88 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126threeofwhichwerealsomarket entres orthecrop)andalsosmallerruralcentresof production uchas Suraram,Pentlam,Gunnepalle,Gurramgudem,Akinepalle,Settipalle,Garla,Pulluru,Kondavan-amela,Kachavaram,Araygudem ndGosavidu.6Thoughthesevillagesstretchedacrossa distanceof someeightykilometres,andweresomeeightdays'travel romMasulipatnam,ytheearlyseventeenth entury here s already learevidenceof theirintegration nto wider commercialnetworks.Since the areawasprincipallywateredby the south-westmonsoon,andreceivedmostof its rainfallbetweenJuneand September, he indigo-productioncycletendedto last fromJuneto December.In JuneandJulythesowing ookplace n sandysoil(which s to saysomewhat way romtherivervalleys),andtherewerethreecuttings.27The firstof thesetookplacein late Augustor earlySeptember,when the plantwasone and a half feet high. BetweenNovemberand Decembertheplantswerecutonceagain,andafteragapof thirty-fiveofortydays,athirdtime. The firstcroptendedto be of poorerquality hanthelaterones, and hence the most active seasonfor marketingwasbetweenOctober ndFebruary.Dutchrecords uggest hat hereafterthendigowhichwasavailableended o be eithergreenandhardoradulterated.As has been noted, the principalmartswhereindigo could bepurchasedor cash were Nagulvancha,Palvanchaand Gollapudi.Thesewerefrequented romNovemberto Februaryby merchantsfrom ezwada ndothercentres, ncluding omesituatedasfarwestasBijapur.The indigoof theregion hustravelled, n theonehand,to he weavingvillagesof Warangal,Khammamand the Andhracoastnd,on theother,to DabholandGoa,whence t wasexportedinpart to Persia.While earlyin the seventeenth entury400-500khandieachweighing240 kilos) could comfortably e purchasedagainstashin the indigomartsof the Khammam egion,prudentmerchantsreferred o advancecash to the producers or greatersecurity.his systemwasnot one thatwhollyboundthe producertohe merchant hough,foras H. W. vanSantenhasshown n thecasef theBayana egion(andas independent vidence orourarea26 Foradetaileddescriptionf the ndigo-producingract, eeA.R.A., O.B., VOC.1062,os.45'-6',passim; lsoW. H. Morelanded.),RelationsfGolcondantheEarlySeventeenthenturyLondon,1931).27 Morelanded.), Relations f Golconda;ee alsoA.R.A., O.B., VOC.1472,fos.1111-14;OC. 1712, fos. 513-22;and Pietervan Dam, Beschnivingeande Oost-Indischeompagnie,d. F. W. Stapel,7 vols. (The Hague,1927-54), i, pt. 2, pp.192-201


15/40

RURAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTUREN INDIA 89demonstrates), he producercould returnthe advanceand sell toanotherparty afterthe harvest, f the loan-giverwas not willing tobuy at the currentmarketprice.28In about 1615 indigo production n the Nagulvancha-Palvancharegion was certainly n excess of 120,000 kilos this being theamount hat could be purchased gainstcash.This outputcomparesquitefavourablywith whatwe knowof theBayana egion,where hemost generousestimatessuggest that around1620 the best harvestwould yield 400,000 kilos, and where in factharvests n the periodfrom 1620 o 1660areneverknown o haveexceeded350,000kilos.29We may nferfromour evidence hatthe Khammamegioncertainlyproducedmorethana thirdof this quantity,and perhaps ven up toa half. However, afterthe 1620s, a decline set in and this wasparticularlymarked n the 1630s. A seriesof unseasonal tormsandpoor harvests from roughly 1630 to 1636 is known considerablyto have disrupted he commercial conomy of the Andhraregion,including the locus of indigo production.Repeatedefforts by theDutch to procure ndigo n the years1634-7yieldedpoorresults,andin late 1636 a mere 100 littel (or 14,000 kilos) were available,andthese at the exorbitant riceof 55 to 58 pagodas littel.30 The reasonfor this sharprise in prices (froma normal evel of between30 and34 pagodas)was notmerely he shortfall n production ue to lackofrain, but the increasedcompetition rom Bijapurand other centresfurtherwest, whoseregularsuppliesof Gujarat nd Bayana ndigowere also shrinking n the period. Thus, despite the poor harvestconditions, t is not immediatelyobvious thatall indigo producerswere harshly affected:those who did have some to sell found itfetchinga handsomebonus.31

IIIEnoughhasbeen said n the precedingpages o set out in rudimentary

28 Moreland ed.), Relations f Golconda, p; 35-6, 79-80; A.R.A., O.B., VOC.1055 loosepapers), anvanWesickandAnthonij chorer tMasulipatnamo Banten;finally, or the Bayana ase,van Santen,"VerenigdeOost-Indische ompagnie", p.153-4.29 A.R.A., O.B., VOC. 1062, fos. 45'-6V; an Santen,"VerenigdeOost-IndischeCompagnie", p. 139-42.30 A.R.A., O.B., VOC. 1113, fos. 316-6X, 25V;VOC. 1119, fos. 1110, 1152-3;

VOC.1122,fo.611-11V.31 A.R.A., O.B., VOC.1113, os. 316-6V)25V; OC.1119, os. 1110, 1152-3; sp.VOC. 1122, fo. 611-11V;ohande Meereand ArnoldHeussenat MasulipatnamoVan Diemenat Batavia,29 Dec. 1636.


16/40

9o NUMBER 126AST AND PRESENTforma schemaof the spatialdistribution f productionn the region.The essential elements are the two river valleys and their deltas,the major port of Masulipatnam nd the metropolitan entre ofHyderabad.The extant descriptionsby seventeenth-century b-serversallow us to gain a fair idea of the structure nd character fthe two last-named ities. Masulipatnams describedby DomingoNavarrete,who visited t in 1670, as "a very populousplace, and ofgreat rade",despite he fact hat ts climatewas"badandunhealthy".John Fryer, who visited the town aboutthe same time, for his partdescribes t as having broadstreetsand "high and lofty buildings"of wood and plaster,as well as "multitudes" f poorer onstructions,"thatched, ast roundas beehives,and walledwith mud". He men-tions too a largenumberof mosques n the town, besidesa customs-house and court, and three bazaars "crowdedboth with peopleand commodities".Finally,Fryer s our sole source or a populationestimate f Masulipatnamn the period:he claims hat"200,000 oulsreceivehere their daily sustenance".32Turning to Hyderabadand its twin Golconda, their structurederivedsubstantially rom the last decadesof the sixteenthcenturyand the reign of MuhammadQuli Qutb Shah. As a centrewhere alarge proportion f the sultanate's urplus-controllinglassesmain-tainedresidences, he capital ity was almostcertainlyarger han heporttown, andalso somewhatbetter tructured.WhereasMasulipat-nam tended to straggle nto the countryside t its edges, and had arelatively imitednumberof substantial onstructions,Golconda ndHyderabad maintained a hybrid commercial-cum-administrativecharacter.Hyderabad or Baghnagar)was locatedon a long plain,surrounded y hills; the fortress f Golcondawas somemilesdistant,situated n hilly country.The north-west ectionof the city containedthe sultan'spalace,while the Peshtva nd othermembers f the courtresided n the north-east.Just off the PeshwaHaveli, and adjoiningthe Musi river, was a populous suburb, while anothersignificantknotof population ame o be concentratedfter1640 n Mughalpura,south-eastof the Charminar.Still anothercentre, important romthe viewpointof manufacture nd textile production,but also theprincipalarea of residenceof the smallermerchant,was Karwan,betweenHyderabad nd Golconda.Navarrete,who passed hroughthis section n route fromHyderabado Golconda ort, was struckby

32 See TheTravels ndControversiesf FriarDomingo avarrete, 618-1686, vols.,ed. J. S. Cummins Cambridge, 961-2), i, pp. 322-3;JohnFryer,A New Accountof theEast Indiesand Persia London, 1698),pp. 26-35.


17/40

91URAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIAthe substantialactivity and vehicularmovement n the area, andnoted that it was "so full of people, that there were scarcemore inthe citiesof China".33 qually, his city-like Masulipatnam-hadseveralmarkets,and housedat any given time a substantial umberof residentand itinerantmerchants, nvolvedboth n trade o the eastcoast and in the overlandcommerce o Bijapurand pointswest.The Masulipatnam-Hyderabadink may be schematically ep-resented s one of the principal xes n relation o which he producingsub-regionswere arranged.In part, this route coincided with adistributary hannelof the Krishna,and one of the majorstaging-points-Bezwada occupied he headof the Krishnadelta.34Theroad followedthe river even furtherwest than Bezwada) nd it wasonly at Ibrahimpatnamhat the river and the traderoute diverged.The river now meandered outh-west,while the road pushed onnorth,throughPenuganchiprolu, nantagiri, angaland Malkapur,to Hyderabad.3sIt is instructive o note how agricultural roductionwas organizedin relation o this route. Close to the coastrice was produced, n thewetlandsof the Krishnadeltaand the rivervalley tself. Also of someimportancen the Krishnadeltawas tobacco,a cropwhichhad beenintroduced o the area n the late sixteenthcentury,probablyunderPortuguesenfluence.36 he extensivedependence n rice continuedas one moved up-river,as far as Bezwadaand even a little beyond.Thereafter,however, the agriculturalandscape hanged.The areanorth and north-westof Ibrahimpatnam as describedby DanielHavart whose acquaintancewith the region n the 1670sand 1680swas close and detailed)as devoted above all to cotton and millet,rather than rice. Extensive cotton cultivationcontinued north ofNandigama,and almost to Nagulvancha.37 y now, however, webeginto approachndigocountry,whichstretchesn a longarcacross

33 Travels ndControversiesf FriarDomingo avarette,i, pp. 322-3.Cf. Dharmen-dra Prasad,Socialand CulturalGeographyf Hyderabad ity:A Historical erspective(Delhi, 1986),pp. 1-13,27-57;alsoH. K. Sherwani,History f theQutbShahiDynasty(New Delhi, 1974), pp. 543-56.34 For a contemporaryescription f Bezwada, ee Travelsn Indiaof3rean-BaptisteTavernier, aronof Aubonne, vols., ed. V. Ball and W. Crooke London,1925), ,

passim.35 Habib,Atlas of theMughalEmpire,Map 15-B;JeanDeloche, La circulationnIndeavant a revolutionestransports,vols. (Paris,1980), , pp. 64-71, 75-82;Pietervan denBroeckenAzie, 2 vols., ed. W. P. CoolhaasThe Hague, 1962-3), , pp. 156-64.36 Moreland ed.), Relations f Golconda, . 36.37 DanielHavart,Op-en Ondergangan Cortnandel,vols. (Amsterdam, 693), i,pp. 5-16.


18/40

92 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126from Khammam nd Nagulvancha o Palvancha,being particularlymarked n the lattervicinity. This bringsus, in turn, almost o thesouthernbankof the Godavari.Following he riversouth-east o thesea, once again it is rice productionwhich is the rule, in the deltaand on Nagaram sland.38Moreover,embedded n this nicely diversified griculturaland-scape, manufacturing roduction oo tendedto concentraten pock-ets. This could be for eminentlyphysicalreasons: he diamondbelt,for nstance,wasnecessarilyocated n limited ocalities, ne spanningthe Krishnanear Ibrahimpatnam,he other furtherup-river n thevicinityof Chitalpalem.39imilarly, he salt-panswere locatedcloseto the sea-shore n both the Godavari nd Krishnadeltas, as thesewerethe areaswheresaltwatercollection nd evaporation singsolarheatweremosteasily acilitated.But in the caseof textileproduction,we know that such physical constraintswere of somewhat esserimportance.The vicinityof areasproducing ed chay-roots used asa dyestuff) was certainlya reason for the concentration f textileproducersaroundPeddapalli n the southernKrishnadelta, just asthe existenceof groundwaterwith specificchemicalpropertieswashelpful to the paintersand dyers of the east Godavari illages ofGolepallem nd Gondawaram.40ne shouldnot, however,exagger-ate the importance f such factors n determining he distribution fweavers; nd once these aspectsareplaced n properperspective, hefact of concentration nd specialization f textile-related ctivities struly remarkable.For my purposes, I shall consider three broad areas:first, theKrishnadelta;secondly, he Godavari elta;and thirdly,productionfurther nland, especiallyaroundNagulvancha. n the weavingvil-lagesof the Krishnadelta, a good partof productionwas of the finergradesof fancycloth, and the principalmarkets or which they weredestinedwerethe Indonesian rchipelago ndwestAsia.On the otherhand, Godavari elta weaverswere, for the most part, producers fplain calicoand hence their productswere the ones which the Com-panies sought for sale in Europe. Finally, in the inland producingcentres Warangal,Khammam,Nagulvancha, tc.) the textilesprod-ucedwere mainly alampuns, ercallas, inghamsnd guinea-cloth, s

38 Ibid., ii, pp.19-26,ii, pp.15-17.39 Ibid., ii; Travels n India of 3rean-Baptisteavewnier,; also Indian Travels fThevenotnd Careri, d. S. N. Sen (New Delhi, 1949), pp. 130-52.40 Havart, Op- en Ondergangan Corm(lndel,ii, p. 54; van Dam, Beschrijvingeande Oost-Indischeompagnie,i, pt. 2, pp. 159-60.


19/40

93URAL INDUSTRYAND AGRICULTUREN INDIAwell as bethilles,all either plain or striped. Of these, all exceptbethilleswhicharemuslins)wouldfallunder heclassificationf finecalicoes.4lWherethe weavingvillagesof the Krishnadeltaare concerned,the studies of Joseph Brennigthrow considerable ight on theircharacterndspatialdistribution.Histranscriptionfa Dutchdocu-ment of the 1680s, listing villageson a route from Palakollu oNagulvancha, ncludes a good numberof weavercentresin the

TABLE2WEAVERVILLAGESN THE KRISHNADELTA1682*Village WeaverHouseholdsTuluru 10Viravasaram 40Srungaravuksham 10Gunupudi 60Doddanapudi 15Sisali 20Kallakuru 16Elurupadu 20Pararamundrieta 50Bomminapadu 10Korraguntapalem 50Vadala 5Bampalapalem 5Peyyeru 30Ventrapragada 20Katuru 5Bezwada 50Total 416* Source:JosephJ. Brennig,"TextileProducers nd Productionn LateSeven-teenth-Centuryoromandel",ndianEcon.andSocial list. Rev., xxiii(1986),Table3,p.339.

Krishnaelta, which I list in Table 2 (excludingthose betweenBezwadand Nagulvancha,which do not fall in the delta).Twoaspectsf thetableshouldbe emphasized.First,it doesnotpretendto rovidea comprehensive, r evena near-comprehensive,urveyofweavingvillagesin the Krishnadelta. Secondly,theseweavingvillagesppearin the originaldocument(which is an itinerary)interspersedith a largenumberof villageswithoutany weavinghouseholdst all, whicharedescribedas beingsolelyagricultural.41 JosephJ. Brennig,"TheTextileTradeof Seventeenth-CenturyorthernCoro-mandel:StudyofaPre-Modern sianExport ndustry"Univ.ofWisconsinPh.D.thesis,975),pp.226-8;alsoJohnIrwinandP. R. Schwartz, tudiesnIndo-EuropeanTextileIistory Ahmedabad, 966).


20/40


21/40

95URAL INDUSTRYAND AGRICULTUREN INDIAbetweenthe villageand the administrativeown. The role of thismarkets to facilitatewhatthe recentCambrxdgeconomic istory fIndia,volumeI, terms"thepredominantlyne-waylowofcommodi-ties from the villagesto the towns".45At best, it is claimed,theindividualvillage could be "partof a narrowcircuitof exchangewhichencompassedeveralvillages",whilethebulkof inlandtradecomprisedexchangesbetweenthe towns. Sucha patternof trade,portrayed,moreover,as a hothouse lower"peculiaro Indiaratherthanthe wholeof Asia",was quiteevidentlynot whatobtained ntheregionunderourconsideration.Nor weremarket entres"typi-cal",withauniformprofile.Centreswerefunctionally istinguished,and hisisclearly eflectedntheoccupationalrofiles ftheirresidentpopulations.I havealreadynotedhowthelistof villagesavailable n a route ntheeasternKrishnadeltashowspredominantlygriculturalillagesinterspersedithcentresofweaving.Occasionally,necomesacrossavillagesuch as Kankipadu,describedas a largecentre,with anumberof milk-sellerswho suppliedvillagesin the vicinity.46Ortakehevillageof Ma-sahibaPeta(namedafter hequeenmotherofGolconda),whichin the 1680sis saidto havehad a "considerableMondaymarket".47This centrewas one wherea wide varietyofgoodswas bought and sold; but such was not the case with allmarkets.f onelooksto thetrade n rawcotton,Rajahmundrytthehead f the Godavaridelta, Teeparu n west Godavari,and othercentrespecialized n this product;on the otherhand, it was notgenerallyn salein Masulipatnam.The fragmentarynformationhatis available n theoccupationalcharacteristicsf thesepettyurbancentresandmarket-placesn theregions of some interestin this context. (See Table 3.) On theassumptionfaround4.5 personsperhousehold,t maybesuggestedthathesecentreshouseda population romaround2,250 to 5,000personsWhatis remarkable boutthem is theirdiversity.If oneconsidershe proportion f merchantso agriculturalists,his itself45 TapanRaychaudhuri,InlandTrade", nTapanRaychaudhurindIrfanHabib(eds.),heCambridgeconomicHistory f India,2 vols. (Cambridge, 982-3), , p.327.46 Brennig,"TextileProducers nd Production", . 354;PietervandenBroecke,d.oolhaas, , p. 162.47 Havart,Op-en OnderganganCor7nandel,i, p. 6, ". . . nochdrie-vierde-deelanen mijl,dwerstmenmiddendooreen Dorp,genaamdMa-zahibpeentaoftehetDorpan Mevroude Koninginnemoeder),hierwordsmaandagsreffelijkemerktgehouden".


22/40

96 NUMBER 126AST AND PRESENTTABLE 3

OCCUPATIONAL ROFILESOF FIVECENTRES BYHOUSEHOLD) . 1689*

t .g

Occupation X / / @ zWeavers 150 100 176 50 50Washers 20 20 35 ? ?Painters - 206LandedAgriculturists 80 200 99 200 300Goldsmiths 15 20 20 ? ?Textile traders 130 150 110Othermerchants 13 400 56 50 100Brahmins 150 20 ? 200 150Drovers 100 10 ? ?Pions 45 150 22 ? ?Untouchables 30 50 ? ? ?Others 37 25 64 ? 4Total 690 1235 848 500 604

* Note and source:Brennig, "Textile Trade in Seventeenth-CenturyorthernCoromandel", ppendixB, pp. 290-2, also pp. 293-4. In the case of Nagulvancha,Havartprovidesslightly different igures,also includingwithin his purviewsomeneighbouring illages: Daniel Havart, Op- en Ondergangan Cormandel, vols.(Amsterdam, 693).varies considerably rom 1:4 in Bezwada o 2.75:1 in Makkapeta.Other eaturesalso differsubstantially:or instance, he extentof theBrahminpopulation n relation o the total-particularly high inBezwadaas a consequenceof the substantial emplecomplex here.These features can be explainedwith reference o the particularfunctionsperformedby each centre.Makkapeta as a majormarketfor the distributionof imported goods which arrivedthere fromMasulipatnam, nd spices as well as metalswere traded here on aconsiderable cale. This servesto explainwhy just underone-halfofits households 550 froma totalof 1,235)comprisedmerchants.As forPalakollu, ts mostmarked"special" eaturewasthe predominancenits occupational rofileof "painter"households; hese were in factcloth-painters,who prepared he kalawharz loth of the area, andhence formedan ancillarypart of the textile ndustry.Also of majorsignificancen each of these centres s the presenceof a large number of goldsmithand silversmithhouseholds.Since


23/40

97URAL INDUSTRYAND AGRICULTUREN INDIAthese smiths usuallyperformed he roles of assayersand money-lendersaswell, theytestifyto the extentof money-usen theregionin the period,and also suggestthatthe bullionimported nto theregion againstextileandotherexports)didnotsimply low ntothecoffersof stateandnobility.

IVI havealreadyargued n an earliersectionof thisessaythatthe lateseventeenth enturymarked he peakof an expansionary haseforthetextileindustry n northernCoromandel.t hasalsobeennotedthatby this time, as a resultof a processextendingfromthe lastquarter f the sixteenthcentury,therehaddeveloped n the regionanextensivelydifferentiatedconomywhenviewed n spatial erms;theregionas a whole exportedand importedkey commoditiesindigo, extiles,rawcotton,somerice,bullion butwasalsoclearlydifferentiatedithinitself, in relation o the locationof bothruralindustry nd agricultural ctivities.Supporting his differentiatedlandscapewas a gridof specialistandnon-specialistmarket owns.Atone end of the spectrumwere the very largestcentresof theregion namelyMasulipatnamndHyderabad, achof whichhadapopulationof around200,000in this period.But in the extensivespace etween hesecentresandtheverysmallestproducing illageswere thercentres:some, like Makkapeta ndPalakollu,of 3,000-5,000 ersons;others, ikeNarsapur,Kondapalli rNizamapatnam,ratherarger.This last set of centres s of someinterest,sinceit isherehat one typicallyfinds residentthe havaldarand sar-samtuadministratorsf the Golconda ultanate; lso, in thoseareaswherecentraldministrationadwhollyfailed o penetrate, nemightfindpettyamindartourts,where ocalnotablesofTeluguwarrior astesheldway,whilepayingtribute o thesultanate.Suchcentrescouldhouse residentpopulationof 10,000personsandmore,andhadacommercials well as administrativeharacter.On the otherhand,marketentressuchasMakkapeta, alakollu rPenuganchiproluoror thatmatterDraksharamandPalvancha hada somewhatdifferentharacter,on accountof their still partlyagrarianoccu-pationaltructure.The lackof systematic ttentiondevoted o theproblemof spatialdifferentiationndspecializations, I havenoted,oneof thefeaturesofhe orthodoxhistoriographyf pre-colonialndia.It shouldalsobetressedthat this accompanies nother eatureof the literature:


24/40

98 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126namelya highly simplisticconceptionof verticaleconomicdifferen-tiation n the period. The classicmodel for northern or "Mughal")Indiaof the Aligarhschool of historians tressesaboveall a divisionbetweenproducers ndthe surplus-controllinglassesattached o thestate. In this view, producers re exploited o the extentpossiblebythe statemachinery,and left with only their subsistenceneeds: thusthere s, on the one hand, a largemassat the edge of existence,whileon the otherhand, a proportionatelymallfragment f the economyenjoysan extremelyhigh standard f livingfromexpending urplus."Thus", writes Tapan Raychaudhuri, an infinitesimal roportionof the populationdisposedof the bulkof the agriculturalurplusandin doing so influenced rucially he courseof the economy".48f theoccasional aveat s introduced, t is in the form of suggesting hatlocal war-lordsand members of the "dominantcaste" in a givenregionwereprobablybetteroff than he others,andthe untouchablesworse off. But this is as far as qualification oes.On the other hand, some recentwork on the eighteenthcenturyhas providedevidence o challenge he model summarized bove.Astudyof magnatehouseholds n the MarathaDeccanby FrankPerlindemonstrates he existence of a complex of assets held by suchhouseholds,whichwere oftentraded hrough he market,andwhichcontributed o their superiorposition n the agrarianandscape. nthe caseof northernTamilnadu,TsukasaMizushima rovides imilarevidence or the eighteenth enturyof economicdifferentiationasedon rightsto land, cattle,accessto the revenue-collection achinery,and so on.49Wherethe areaof this study is concerned,we are so fortunate sto have for the earlyyearsof the 1690sa detaileddescription f twovillages n the easternGodavari elta, n what s nowKakinadaaluka,which sheds light on this issue. The revenuerightsto these villageshad beenacquiredby the DutchCompanyn farm rom he Mughals,whoseconquestof the regionoccurredn 1687-8.In order o facilitatethe collection of revenue, as well as for other reasons, the Dutchcollecteddetailed nformation n the villagesas a whole, as well ason eachhousehold ndividually.They enumerated ouseholdsby thenameof the head, noted the numberof men, womenand children n

48 TapanRaychaudhuri, The Stateand the Economy:The MughalEmpire", nRaychaudhurind Habib(eds.), Cambridgeconomic istory f India, i, p. 179.49 Frank Perlin, "Of White Whaleand Countrymenn the Eighteenth-CenturyMarathaDeccan",TI.PeasantStudies,v (1978),pp. 178-237;T. Mizushima,Nattarand heSocio-Economichangen South ndia n the18th-19th enturiesTokyo,1986).


25/40

99RURAL INDUSTRYAND AGRICULTUREN INDIAeach, the cattleendowmentof each, the numberof loomsin each,andnumerousotherdetails.Theyalsocompilednformationnhowlandrevenuewascollected n therecentpast,thevariousdeductionsandthe logicbehindthem,anda gooddealof relateddata.It is probablethat the principalsourcefrom which the Dutchderivedtheirinformationwas the Brahminnterpreterswhomtheyused in the region.However,it is unlikelythattheirdatawerenomorethana replication f karnamorvillageaccountant)ecords,asis seen to be the case very often with late eighteenth-and earlynineteenth-centuryritishdocumentationromthe region.Foronething,the narrowareaoverwhichdatawerecollectedby theDutch(incontrastotheirBritish ounterpartsfacenturyater)was imitedandtractable;econdly,the information oesnotreferto categoriesofdata for instance,ploughsor landdistribution-which arequitetypicalof situationswhen karnam ecordswere used. Andfinally,tisimportantonotethat heV.O.C.maintainedcontinuouspresencen the villageswherethe informationwascollected,whichmade heir little census ratherdifferent romthe rapidcollectionproceduresspousedunderearlycolonialrule.The dataon thehouseholdsarepresentedn Table4 forthelargerof hetwovillages,Golepallem,whichhad252households ndatotalpopulationn 1692of 1 071 Thissummary rovides omeremarkableinsightsntothe natureof thevillage,aswell as its functioning.Letusbeginwiththedemographicspect.Oneobserves, irstof all, thattheexratio s adverse o malesby 1:1.176;whilethiscanin partbeexplainedy the existenceof twelvefemale-headed ouseholds, tisalso noteworthy hat threeof the majoroccupational ategories(weavers,aintersandkomattis)howa maleto femaleratioof lessthan :1.Equallyof interest s the remarkablymallnumberof children;though,n viewof theepoch n whichtheinformationwascollected,wemaysuppose hatadultsweretaken o be thoseovertwelveyearsofge. Still,evenso, thedemographic yramidwasfarfromacutelyangledn the Godavarideltaof the period,if this evidencemaybegeneralized. furtheraspect of interestis that for most of theoccupationsnderconsiderationhe nuclear amilywas the norm.This aybe observedby dividingforeachcategory he numberofmenythenumberofhouseholds.Thereemergesaratioofoveroneinhecaseofweavers 1.3), komattimerchants1.72)andcultivators( 1.4). Buthouseholdswithtwoormoreresidentmalesarerelativelyrare:y enumerationn the villageas a whole, they addup to 61,


26/40

CategorvWeax rsKaikkolasSalisDevangas

'rotal

KomattisOilmenPaintersWashersGoldsmithsCultivatorsToddy-tappers"Whores"Betel-sellersRlilkmenTobacco-sellersCoppersmithsBrahminsEmbroiderersCarversBarbersPeonsTextile-beatersPoor widowsCarpentersSmithsCooliesMusiciansPottersMuslimsCobblersPariahsTotals

34 31 39 47 33 4249 46 61 65 76 586 6 8 8 14 689 83 108 120 123 106----

11 19 24 17 14 114 10 13 2 6 1257 86 94 60 686 12 9 15 17 165 6 9 7 10 611 17 19 23 16 4612 12 15 17 13 -8 - 19 14 11 -3 3 4 - 3 -1 2 2 _ -(?) 11 1 3 5 1 -4 4 4 10 4 -3 4 5 5 4 -1 1 1 2 1 -3 6 6 1 3 -2 3 2 1 2 -5 5 3 2 6 -3 5 3 3 3 -4 - 4 2 4 -2 4 6 5 3 -2 2 3 2 2 -4 4 4 2 4 -1 1 2 - 1 -2 4 4 7 4 -3 3 1 1 3 -1 2 2 4 1 -10 10 12 14 10 -

252 334 393 344 320 92

-

4 mills

89* Source:AlgemeenRijksarchief, heHague hereafterA.R.A.), OvergekomenBrievenen PapierenhereafterO.B.),dorp Golepalem n de MaandJuls Anno 1692 sig met der woon onthoudende", os. 1135-42; ee also fos. 1144, 1147-

TABLE 4THE HOUSEHOLDSOF GOLEPALLEM692

oF tz t t X S S


27/40

RURAL INDUSTRYAND AGRICULTUREN INDIA 101froma villagetotal of 252. The occupational ategorieswherethisoccursmost conspicuouslyare the oilmen,washers,milbnen, car-vers, carpenters nd potters.Thereis thus a close reXonship be-tween crafts other than textile manufacture nd familieswith tworesidentmales; n contrast,only a quarter fweaverhouseholdshavemorethanone residentadultmale.Itis alsopossible o infer rom hedatacertain onclusions oncern-ing the natureof inequality n the village.In the absenceof infor-mationon incomes,or on landholding, r on the possession f stocksof preciousmetals,the assetsthat canbe usedin the presentcontextarecattle. While thereexistslittle or no workon the placeof cattlein the pre-colonial uraleconomyof India,it is almostcertain hatthosein the east Godavari egionwould have been of the so-calledOngolebreed.By the nineteenth entury,although he productivityof theseas milch-cattlewas low, they continued o have a place ofgreatimportance n the ruraleconomy;equally,the possessionofplough-cattlewas an importantdifferentiator. wo other functionsperformedby these cattlemade themquite crucial n an economywhichwas seeking to establishan expandedparticipationn trade:theiruse as packanimalsinwhichbuffaloeswereparticularlyrized),and as breedingbulls. Thus the ownerof a substantial umberofcattlehadamajor ubsidiaryourceof income,and t is not surprisingto findin otherpartsof southern ndia n theeighteenth entury, orinstance,a close correlation etween evel of wealth n generalandownershipof cattlein particular.S?Of the 252 householdsn the villageof Golepallem, 1 possessedsome cattle, the remaining181 none. Moreover,61 of these 71householdsaccount for the bulk of cattle held in the villageas awhole, as TableS indicates. f one takes heuse of cattleas a measureof statusor wealth, it emergesthatnot only was the villagehighlydifferentiated y occupationgroupand caste, but that a greatdealof differentiationxistedwithin groups such as weavers,washers,merchants nd even cultivators.Of 83 weaverhouseholds,only 34ownedcattle; at one end of the spectrum s a Kaikkolahouseholdcomprising ne adultmale,one femaleandtwo children,possessedof eight cows, sixteencalves, two milch-buffaloes nd two calves,while at the otherend of the spectrumwere49 cattle-lessweaverhouseholds.While there does seemto be some relationship,n the

50 See, for instance, S. Y. Krishnaswami,Rural vroblemsnMadrasMadrasn1947),pp. 186-9; on the eighteenth century, Mizushima, Nattxzr ndthe Socio-Economic(,hange.


28/40

102 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126TABLES

CATTLEOWNERSHIP N GOLEPALLEM692*

Occupation $ tS oA7 S 4 g ffCultivators 8 82 46 69 9 12 7Weavers 34 40 - 56 39 49Washers 2 16 16 32Oilmen 4 3 12 3Komattis 8 3 11 6Goldsmiths 4 7 6 11 1 2 2Milkmen 1 - - 6 - 8Total 61 151 91 177 55 14 66

* Source:A.R.A., O.B., VOC. 1511, fos. 1135-42.case of weavers,betweenhouseholdswith more thanone residentadultmaleand cattleownership, t canonly remain entative.Of 21weaverhouseholdswith morethanoneadultmale, twelve(or 57 percent) owncattle,while only21 per centof the 62 single-male ouse-holds aresimilarly avoured.On the other hand, there seems to beno relationshipwhatsoeverbetweenpossessionof a second loom inthe householdand cattleownership.Again, using cattle as an index, it is possible to pin-point thepresenceof some particularly ealthyhouseholds mongotheroccu-pationalcategories.Thus a certaingoldsmithhousehold one adultmale, twofemales,one child)ownedasmanyas six oxen,fourcows,six calves,a buffalo, wo plough-buffaloesnd two calves.A certainwasher household (with four adult males, two femalesand fourchildrenresident)ownedten oxen, ten cows and twentycalvesthis in contrast o fourwasherhouseholdswith no cattlewhatsoever.Interestingly, his radicaldifferentiation ersistseven when weturn to cultivatorhouseholds.Here, from a totalof eleven, threeowned no cattle, five werefairlywell endowed n this respect,andthree were extremelywell off. One of these, headedby a certainKotapalliAkkanna, omprised hreeadultmen, twowomenand nochildren;it owned twelve oxen, sixteen cows and fifteen calves,besidesfourplough-buffaloes,our milch-buffaloesnd four calves.Equally remarkablewas the householdheaded by KottagullapudiAppanna,wherewe find residentonemaleadult,onefemaleandfive


29/40

103URAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIAchildren; he householdpossessedby wayof cattle welveoxen, thirtycows, thirty calves and two plough-buffaloes.

Before concludingthis section, I shall turn brieflyto the infor-mation availableon another village of the same region, namelyGondawaram. his was a far smallervillage, both in termsof culti-vable land (135 acres to 413 in Golepallem)and population 91households,a totalpopulation f 431 persons).The most interestingaspect of this village is its extremespecialization; f the total of 91households, 74 were designated"washers" those who washed,bleachedand starched loth, once woven. Therewas a reason or thisextreme specialization, or the village was locatedat the edge of alargetank, noted for its alkalinewater,which was important or theprocessingof raw, unbleachedcloth. The occupational nd asset

TABLE 6GONDAWARAMN 1692*

Occupation 3:? wcS : @ / $ oS cS 3 3 ,Weavers(Kaikkolas) 14 15 20 20 37 14Washers 74 107 113 117 75 2 4 4 20 7Cultivators 1 2 2 7 1 12 8 12Carvers 1 2 1 1Pariahs 1 1 1 1 1Total 91 15 132 137 162 92 14 12 16 20 7

* Source:A.R.A., O.B., VOC. 1511,fos. 1160-3,"Rolleen Staatder inwoondersbinnens'CompCsorp Gondewaromn de maantJuly Anno 1692sig met der woononthoudende".profile of Gondawarams set out in Table 6. The high degree ofspecialization vident in the overwhelmingproportionof washersimplies that the village serviced not only the cloth producedbyweaversresident herein,but the produceof weaverselsewhere forinstance, say, Golepallem).The Dutch took cloth to Gondawaramfromeven as far as Draksharama, hichwas some wo hoursdistantby road, to have it rashed, bleachedand prepared or packing nbales.51It is not necessary o enter n this case into the detailsof inequality

51 Havart, Op- en Ondergangan Cormandel,ii, pp. 54-5.


30/40

104 NUMBER 126AST AND PRESENTas I havedonewithGolepallem:whatobtains hereequallyobtainshere. The oxen and cattleenumeratedn the tablewereownedbyonly two of the households,the asses and mules by nine washerhouseholdswhichwere,however,distinct rom hoseowningcattle).Incidentally,houghtherearetwohouseholdsdesignated"hoovdenderwassers'(orhead-washers),hesearenotthecattle-owningnes.Wemayalsonotethatthewasherhouseholdswhichownedassesandmulesprobablydid so in orderto moveclothto andfromthetank,andalsoquitepossibly orthecollectionanddistribution f clothtoandfromnearbyweavingcentres.

VThe "snapshot"picture,as we have seen it captured n the lastsection, elates otheperiodwhenthetextile ndustry f theKrishna-Godavariegion,as well as the commercial conomy hatextendedfurthernland,was at its peak.The stagnation nddeclinethatsetin hereafter asbeendiscussed n quiteexplicittermsby Brennig,andmorerecentlyhintedat in a characteristicallyautious ashionbyArasaratnam.52he key to the decline is seen by both theseauthorss the Mughalinvasionand the confusionthat followed.Brennigas arguedfor a recoveryof sortsthereafter, lthoughhenoteshat even after Mughal consolidation"the region'sexporttradeeverreached he levelsof the early1680s".53The economicdislocations sitedbyJ. F. Richards,n his studyof theMughalsnGolconda,n two phases:one in the late 1680s,andtheothermoreimportanthasefrom1702to 1704.54 n the latterphase,RichardshasrguedhatMarathancursionsurtailed verlandrade oHyder-abad, hile an extendeddroughtand plagueaddedto problems.However,is evidencesuggests hatthesedifficultieswerefarmoreseveren the interior hanon the coast.In the presentstateof evidence,it seemssafe to arguethattheperiodmmediatelyafter1690was moreone of stagnationhanofprecipitateecline. In a studyof the Vizianagaramrea,B. Hjeljehasocatedthe actualdeclineof the agrarianand manufacturingeconomynlyfromthe 1740s,andit is possible hatthiswasalsothe52 Brennig, "Textile Trade of Seventeenth-CenturyNorthern Coromandel", pp.0-51;rasaratnam,Merchants, 'ompaniesndC'ommerce,p. 151-2, 159-60.3Brennig, "Textile Tradeof Seventeenth-CenturyNorthernCoromandel",p. 276.4Richards, ;tIughalAdministrationn (wolconda,p. 220-3.


31/40

105URAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIAcase further outh, in the Krishna-Godavariegion.55For the period1700 o 1740 iguresareavailable or Dutch and Englishexports romCoromandel,he Dutch to Europeas well as to Asia, andthe Englishto Europealone. (See Graph3.) These suggest he export rade romCoromandel f the Companieswas not expanding; here s evidencetoo from the same periodthat the tradeof Asian merchantswas onthe wane. Perhaps he only personswhose export radewas growingwere the Englishprivate radersoperating rom the area.Within this pictureof stagnation n the export rom Coromandelnthere s furtherperceptible shift fromprocurementn the northernpartof the region to more southerlyareas.This suggests hat whileCompanyexports from Coromandel s a whole stagnated,exportsfromthe Krishna-Godavarind the Warangal-Khammamreasactu-ally declined.The evidence rom he Dutchfactories t Palakollu ndDraksharaman the 1720sand 1730spresentsa picture n tune withthis conclusion: here are complaints hatweaversare scarce,orderscannot be met, and that it were best to concentrate n the areasfurther outh.56 n the last decadesof the eighteenth entury,Dutchrecords romPalakollu how this centre o be a shadowof its formerself, housingperhapsa thirdof its 1682population.57 hus before heEnglish East India Company ntroduced he PermanentZamindariSettlement n the area in 1802-4, the weaver populationhad beenmuch reduced romwhat obtaineda centuryearlier.The faminesofthe early 1770sand the period 1790-2may also have playeda part nthis process.Unfortunately, he earliestquantitative videnceavailable n theweavingcommunity n the colonialperiod s in the 1820s,but sincethis was very soon afterthe beginningof the importof Britishmill-cloth into India, it may still providea basis for comparisonwith thelate seventeenth-centuryituation.By this comparison, intend toshow that a decline in the textile industryof the area had alreadytakenplacebeforeBritish mportsmadea major mpacton the region.This does not preclude,naturally, he possibility f a furtherdeclinein the subsequentperiod.In the years 1824 to 1828 the number of looms operating nRajahmundry istrict which ncludedboth east and west Godavari)55BenedicteHjelje, "Economic nd SocialStructure f VillageSociety n CoastalAndhraPradeshabout the Year 1800" (paper presented o conference n IndianEconomicand SocialHistory, St. John'sCollege,Cambridge, 3-5 July 1975).

56 Arsip NasionalR.I., Jakarta,PatriascheMissiven, 1725-30,no. 73, fos. 9-17;Arsip Nasional,Buitenland o. 150 (c), 1732.57 ArsipNasionalR.I., Buitenland o. 150 (l), letters1, 17.


32/40

GRAPH3DUTCHAND ENGLISHEXPORTSFROMCOR'000 pieces

Dutch exports

* Source:Derived romS. Arasaratnam,TheDutchEastIndiaCompany nd tsCoromandenVolkenkunde,xxiii 1966);K. N. Chaudhuri,TheTradingWorldfAsiaand heEnglishEastIn542-3.


33/40

107URAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIAwas as follows:1824,6,689; 1825,7,229; 1826, 12,031;1827, 11,934;1828, 11,747.58 n the sameperiod he Britishcollector f Rajahmun-dry districtsurveyed he 34 villageswhere textile production n thearea had been most important,and gathered hat these contained2,610 weaverhouseholdsand 3,026 looms. This provides he basisfor an instructivecomparison, or we have from 1682 a Dutch listof eighteen centres in east and west Godavariwhich supplied theDraksharamaactory. From this list, it emerges hat there were inthese centresalone 5,960 weaverhouseholdsoperating ,530 looms.This figure s nearly wo and a half times the loomage n the 34 mostactiveproducing entresof the samearea n the period1824-8.Table

TABLE 7WEAVER HOUSEHOLDS AND LOOMS IN ANDHRA 1680s AND 1820s*

1680s 1820sName of centre Households Looms Households LoomsPalakollu 176 ? 150 256Peddapuram 400 500 203 238Pithapuram/Samalkota 600 800 97 102Oupada 500 600 167 200Dulla 400 500 129 130Mandapeta 180 200 180 210Angara 80 100 134 168Amalapuram 900 1200 45 118

*Source: Konrad Specker, Weber n Wettbewerb: as Schiksaldes sudindischenTextilhandwerksm 19. ZahrhundertWiesbaden,1984), p. 272; Brennig, "TextileProducers and Production", p. 339.7 providesa comparison f eight weaving-centres f the region forwhich dataare available romboth the 1680sand 1820s.Only one ofthese centresshows an increase n weavingactivityover the period(Angara); wo have relativelystable weaverpopulations Palakolluand Mandapeta); nd the othersall registerprecipitate eclines.Thischange s all the more remarkable-it is worth stressingagain-since K. Specker'srecent study of weaving in nineteenthcenturysouthIndiaplaces he majorphaseof de-industrializationnddeclinein handicrafts fterthe mid-1820s.Thus there is a case to be madefor a phenomenonwhich we may term "de-industrializationeforede-industrialization"To what may we attribute his decline?Traditionally, ourcesof

58 Cf. Rao, "Stagnation nd Decay", p 236.


34/40

108 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126explanationavebeenpolitical narchyntheaftermathftheMughalinvasioncirca1690)orafter hecollapseoftheAsafJahidispensationin coastalAndhra circa1740).Between hesetwoyears, n thehalf-century1690-1740,hetwindeltasof theKrishna ndGodavariwerecontestedby regionalpowersdependenton theMughalstate.In the1730s,forinstance,RustamKhan,theMughal-appointedovernorof Rajahmundry,oughta seriesof campaignso reducethe powerof localHinduzamindars,ndinstituted ubstantialiscalchangesasa consequence.After1740Charlesde Bussy,the FrenchEastIndiaCompany's nterprisingmployee,sought o createa territorial aseforhis Companyn thisregion,andonceagainengagedn extensiveconflictwithlocalelites.59Frenchcontrolwasshort-lived,however,andwas succeededby a combination f BritishofficialsandHinduentrepreneurs,who continued o dominate he regionuntil late inthe century. These changes, accompaniedby periodicoutburstsof conflict,may be thoughtto have disruptedearlierpatternsofconsumption:oronething,theytendedto disturb hetradinginksoverlandbetweenthe region and the westernDeccan (the areasaroundAurangabadnd Bidar,forexample); oranother, heyarelikely ohavehadadetrimentalffectonconsumptionntheKrishna-Godavaxi rea itself, in the small towns and centreswhich wereorganized round he pettyzamindarzourts.60In addition o thesefactors,whichareof utility n explaininghevisiblecontractionf the eighteenthcentury,it may be useful toadducecertaineconomicfactorswhichexplainthe stagnationhatwasalready videntatthecloseof theseventeenthentury.Wehaveseenthatthe growthof the textile ndustryof the region n the latesixteenthand seventeenthcenturieswas basedon a sortof spatialdivision f labourandgrowing ub-regionalpecialization. hezonesproducingice, indigoandcottonsoonbecamedistinctandcomp-lementary, s did the areasof weaverconcentration.However,bythesecondhalfof the seventeenth entury, mports bothof riceand,more importantly,of cotton had become crucialin the

59 Cf.C. A. Bayly,IndianSociety nd heMaking ftheBntishEmpireCambridge,1988),pp. 55-7;alsoJeanDeloche,"LeMemoirede Moracin urMacilipattinamu:un ableaudes conditions conomiquest socialesdesprovinces otieresde l'Andhraaumilieudu xviiicsiecle",Bulletindel'EcoleFrancaise 'Extreme-Orient,xii (1975),pp.126-4960 For aviewof lateeighteenth-centuryndianpolitical conomywhichstresseshecrucialoleof consumptioninks, see C. A. Bayly,Rulers,TownsmenndBazaars:NorthndianSocietyntheAgeofBritishExpansion,770-1870Cambridge,983),pp.201-11assim.


35/40

109URAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIAsustenanceof the path of expansionof the economy. It is highlyprobable, hen, that it was from these very sources hat the checkscame.A rise in the price of cotton s perceptible rom the third quarterof the seventeenth enturyon. It is possiblethat there had been anearlier ncrease,between he mid-1630s when rawcottonwas avail-able in Masulipatnam t 53 lbs. a pagoda)and about 1660, when theprice had stabilizedat roughly40 lbs. a pagoda.However,Brennighas shown the existenceof a definiteupward rend in the price of

TABLE 8RAW COTTONPRICES N NORTH COROMANDEL 660-1680 in pagodas)*

Price Price(per 100 lbs.) (per 100 lbs.)1660 2.50 1674 4.001668 2.50 1675 4.081669 2.63 1676 4.541670 2.63 1677 3.841671 2.63 1678 4.351672 3.12 1679 4.541673 3.84 1680 4.35* Source:Brennig,"TextileProducers nd Production",Table 1, p. 339.cotton from the late 1660s. (See Table 8.) Arasaratnam,moreover,has arguedthat the period after 1710 saw a still furtherrise in rawcottonprices,andthat"a further teepriseoccurred romabout1725and went on increasingyear by year''.61The other item whose price is likely to have had an impact onweavers,and hence on the costs of textiles(through he producers'cost of living), is rice. But, as I have shown elsewhere, here is noevidence o support he hypothesisof an increase n the priceof rice(measured n pagodas) n the Masulipatnam egion for the period1610 to 1650.62For the subsequentperiod, from roughly 1660 to1680,Brennig xamines he evidence orthe sameareaandconcludesthat "the priceof rice in termsof gold remained table n this periodof increasing rade".63This is in markedcontrast o what seems tooccur after 1680 if we are to follow Arasaratnam. e statesthat"fromthe 1680s is noted the beginningof a steady ncrease n thepriceof rice in northCoromandel, ttributableo continuous ailing

61 Arasaratnam,Merchants, ompaniesnd Commerce,p. 337-9.62 See Subrahmanyam,oliticalEconomy f Commerce,p. 351-2.63 Brennig,"TextileTrade of Seventeenth-CenturyorthernCoromandel", p.206-9.


36/40

110 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126harvests,warsandpolitical nstability".64n the absenceof a priceseriespresented n its support,this assertion emainsat presentanunverifiablene. Butthere s certainly ircumstantialvidenceof anincrease n the priceof ricein the courseof theeighteenth entury,for otherwise t is difficult o explainhow large-scalemports romArakannto the region(whichwerecertainlynot practicablen theearlyeighteenth entury)hadbecomea sourceof profit ortradersacentury ater.65In sum then, my argument unsas follows.The growthof ruralindustryandcommercial griculturen theKrishna-Godavarieltasand owervalleys s astriking aseofpre-modernconomic xpansionaccompanied y a growingspatialdivisionof activity.The resultofthisprocesss toproducentheseareasbythecloseoftheseventeenthcenturyaneconomyofproducing entres,underpinned yamarket-ing network,wherein mports,exportsandlocallytradedgoodsallfounda place.66This resulted,on theonehand,in thecreationof asetof intermediateentresof a mixedcharacter,whoseoccupationalprofilesdifferedconsiderablyromoneanother a farcryfromthestereotype f a "typical"village,withits characteristicomposition;ontheotherhand,it alsomeant hatconsiderableconomicdifferen-tiationoccurredwithin the centresof production.While the castehierarchymay providea rough and readyfirst approximationfgainersand losers the dominantagricultural aste as gainers,untouchables s devoidof accessto gains it doesnot adequatelyemphasize owwithineachcasteandoccupationalroup,wealthandincomecameto be unequallydistributed.Sucha processcould,however,proceedonlysofar,becauseof theconstraintset by the extentof spatialspecialization especiallygiven he stateof long-distanceransportn peninsularndia.As theruralndustryof the regiongrewincreasingly ependenton distantsupplies fcottonandrice,brought itherover andorbywater romoutside he area,this broughtwith it a set of constraints.The firstcheckswereapplied hrough herisein thepriceof rawcotton,andthis had become a serious phenomenonby the late seventeenthcentury.Subsequently,he priceof food whichis to sayrice

64 Arasaratnam,Merchants, ompaniesndCommerce,. 336.65 Rao, "StagnationndDecay",p. 231;KonradSpecker,WebermWettbewerb:DasSchiksal essudindischenextilhandwerksm19.3tahrhundertsWiesbaden, 984).66 It shouldbe clarified hatmy intention s not to denytheexistenceof trade ofacilitateurplusextraction y thestatenor,forthatmatter,of non-marketxchangerelations.However,since thesearethe relationships onnallytressed n studiesofpre-colonialndia,I havechosento focusinsteadon free-marketxchange.


37/40

lllURAL INDUSTRY AND AGRICULTURE N INDIAprobablyalso rose in the region, as a resultof growingdependenceon importsby water.It is possible o attribute he stagnation f ruralindustry n the regionaftera longphaseof growth o this combinationof factors.To explain he perceptible ecline f the eighteenth entury,accompanied y the process hathasherebeentermed"de-industrial-ization before de-industrialization",his argumentmay seem lessthan adequate. Two additionalexplanationshence present them-selves.First, t is possible hat he eighteenth entury awa disruptionin consumptionpatterns, n part as a consequenceof the changeswroughtunder irstde Bussy, and aterBritishandIndianentrepren-eursoperating nder he umbrella f the EnglishEast ndiaCompany.Secondly,given the factthatDutch letters romthe region n the lateeighteenthcenturycomplainunceasingly f the failureof producersto meet demandeven when it existed,one may suggest hatthe latterhalf of the eighteenthcenturysaw a demographic ownturn n thearea of which the most dramatic ausesare the faminesof the early1770sand early 1790s).This may in turnhave ed to a declineof theweavingpopulation, s well as a shift o agriculture.A finalconclusionon the latterquestionawaits irmdemographic vidence.Finally, hesecond quarterof the nineteenthcenturyseems to have witnessedafurthercontractionn manufacture, artlyaccounted or in termsofthe importation f mill-cloth,and partlydue to the conditions n theagrarian conomyof the period. Not until the 1850sdid the processof recovery n the regionbegin. But this recoverywas basedon theexpansionof the agrarian conomy, and was not accompaniedbyequallypositivechanges n ruralmanufacture.67

VIIn his important ssay cited at the outsetof this article,FrankPerlinexamined, n the contextof certainchanges n the economyof Indiain the sixteenth o the eighteenth enturies, he utilityof the conceptof "proto-industrialization". hile a few of the featuresof proto-industrializationo seem relevant n the Indiancase the regionasthe ocusof productive ctivity ndthe symbiosisbetween ommercialagricultureand manufacturebeing two examples these seemphenomena f far too generala character or one to forcethe Indianinstances nto the strait-jacket f "proto-industry".ndeed, this wasPerlin'sown conclusion for althoughbeginninghis essaywith theintention of "applyinga modified form [of the concept] to pre-

67 Rao, "Stagnation nd Decay";Specker,Weberm Wettbewerb,p.93-112.


38/40

112 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126colonial ndia",heproceededoreplacet successivelywiththeterms"commercialmanufacture"ndthe"broader evelopmentaloncept. . . of proto-capitalism". is reasons or the rejectionof the term"proto-industrialization"ested above all on what he termedits"evolutionist spect . . [in]theslottingofruralndustriesntowhatis essentiallya sequenceof notionallydevelopmentaltages".68Amoreobviousproblemwiththeuseof theterm"proto-industrializa-tion" ntheIndiancontext- andonewhichseems oescapePerlinis thatrural ndustry n the periodwas by andlargenot carriedonbypeasantproducers napart-time asis.InthecaseoftheKrishna-Godavari egion, evidencein this respectis perfectlyclear:whilesome weaverhouseholdsmay have held land and rentedit out,they were not themselvescultivators.69 ince the whole "proto-industrialization"iteraturedependsto a largeextenton the notionof manufactures an activity hatis conducted, n theinitialphase,intheinterstices f theannualagrarianabour ycle,wemayquestionitsapplicabilitynthisspecificground,besides hebroader bjectionraisedby Perlin to use of "proto-industrialization"er se in anycontext.0The alternativeuggestedby Perlin,namely"proto-capitalism",derives roma notionof commercial roduction,whethern agricul-ture or manufacture,as characterized y a growingtendencyformercantileapital ogaincontroloverthemeansofproduction.Thisprocess s seenas largelyemergent hrougha debt-trapmechanism:thus, forPerlin,"industrialproducerswereincreasinglyaughtupin advancepayment ystems"alreadyn the seventeenth entury,aprocessfurtheraccentuatedby "a considerableextensionof the

68 Perlin,"Proto-IndustrializationndPre-ColonialouthAsia",pp. 42-3passim.Anextensive ritical iterature owexistson thesubject,whichpaucity f spacedoesnot permit me to survey. However,Perlin'sessay providesan extensiveset ofreferences;ee alsoPerlin'sexchangewithGeoffEley,EconomyndSociety,xiii-xv(1984-6), or bibliographical aterial.69 A.R.A., O.B., VOC. 1511, fos. 1144, 1147-8passim.See also Ramaswamy,TextilesndWeavers,p. 48-52,onweaverand-holding.Aslateasthe1940sweavinginAndhraandTamilnaduwasalmostwhollya full-timeoccupation;hussee B. V.Narayanaswamiaidu,Report f theCourtof EnquityntoLabourConditionsn theHandloomndustryMadras,1948),p. 6: "Ithas ongbeenbelieved hatweavingmaybepursued sasubsidiary ccupation;t is anerroneous elief,except oraverysmallnumberf scheduled-caste eavers n certainplaceswhomainlypursueagriculturebutweave n the off-season.Thus, it maybe statedas a broad ruth hathandloomweavingin MadrasPresidency]s a full-timeoccupation".Contrasthis to Perlin,"Proto-IndustrializationndPre-Colonial outhAsia",pp. 44, 57-8.70 Cf. Mendels,"Proto-Industrialization",p. 241-61;SamuelP. S. Ho, "Proto-industrialisation,rotofabriquest desindustrialisation:n analyseeconomique",Annales.S.C., xxxix(1984),pp. 882-95.


39/40

113URAL INDUSTRYAND AGRICULTUREN INDIAadvanceystem ntheeighteenthentury"71Thisisinpartamodifiedversionof a themefavouredby the "Sovietschool"of writerson thepre-colonialndianeconomy Chicherov,SurendraGopal),whohadsuggestedthat nascentcapitalismexisted in India on the eve ofcolonialconquest,andwouldhaveemergedhroughoneoftheroutessuggestedbyMarx,namely heriseof thecapitalistromoutside henarrowsphereof production.72In an earlyattackon thisview, IrfanHabibresorted o scripturalcitation namelyMarx's wnremarkhat"the ndependent evelop-mentofMerchantCapital tands . . inaninverse atio othegeneraleconomicdevelopment f society" in order odenythevalidityofthisformulation.73ince, however,this particularemarkof Marxwas made in the contextof a discussionof the carrying radeofmerchants asedin the Italiancity-states, t does not seemwhollyappositen thepresentcontext.In the European ase,thedebateonthe place of commercial mpulses("the rise of the market")asanindependent actorbehindthe growthof industrialcapitalismcontinues,ocusingcentrallyon the "world-systems"choolof Im-manuelWallersteinand others.74Thoughdistancinghimselffromthis choolof thought n his writings, he central oncernof Perlin's1983 ssay(whichhasserved n manysensesasa sounding-boardorthepresent tudy)remainshe"failure" fIndia odevelop ndustrialcapitalismn the eighteenthand nineteenthcenturies,approachedthroughrecisely uchacommercializationerspective.Thereversalof arliercommercial atternsn the lateeighteenthandearlynine-teenth enturiesis thus seen as centralin leadingfrom "proto-capitalism"o "de-industrialization".Withoutdenyingthe qualitativemportance f the impactof col-onialule on earlynineteenth-centuryndia,the presentstudyhassuggestedhatotherconstraints ftencheckedthe developmentofcommercialanufacture,ven nthepre-colonialeriod.Thisshould

71 Perlin, "Proto-Industrializationand Pre-Colonial South Asia", pp. 85-6; thisassertion,nencumbered by a substantiveframeworkof evidence, is to be encounteredlson the writings of S. Arasaratnamand K. N. Chaudhuri, cited in nn. 4 and 9above.72 A. I. Chicherov, Irzdia: conomic evelopmentn he16th-18th entunes: utlineistoryfCrafts ndTradeMoscow, 1971); SurendraGopal, CommercendCraftsn(wudarat,6thand17thC'entureesNew Delhi, 1975).73 Irfan Habib, "Banking in Mughal India", C'ontributionsoIndianEcon.Hist., i1960),. 20, citing Marx, Capital, ii, p. 260 (Moscow edn., pp. 327-8).74 See, for example, Robert Brenner, "Dobb on the Transition from Feudalism toCapitalism",'ambridgel.Economics,i (1978); also SanjaySubrahmanyam,"'World-Economies'nd South Asia, 1600-1750: A Skeptical Note", Revieuw,ii (1989).


40/40

114 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 126serve to stressthat detailedregional tudiesare a sinequanon or anunderstanding f the more generalprocessof change n the SouthAsian economy,and that "theory" howeverboldly conceivedcan never be separated rom "practice".One of the significantdevelopments ver the last decadeor so inthe historiography f severalparts of Asia has been the attempt ounderstand t a general evel formsofpre-modernconomicgrowth.It has been possible n some cases (as with Japan n the eighteenthcentury) o builddirectcausal inksbetween uchphasesof expansionand later modern economicgrowth.75However, such an approachdoes not prove fruitful n other cases, as is noted in severalrecentstudiesof Chinaand South-EastAsia. If one examines uch casesassouth-easternChina n the eighteenth enturyor Ambon n easternIndonesia n the seventeenth entury,and compares hem with thecase at hand, several mportant arallels merge.76All these casesofexpansionoccur n the contextof expanding xternal ommerce,yetit would be simplistic to see them merely as cases of"export-ledgrowth"which are snuffedout when autonomous xternaldemandceases o grow.Instead, n eachof thesecases,onewitnesses complexinteractionbetweenautochthonous ourcesof growth, processesofspatialdifferentation, nd the producingand consumingeconomy,all within the context of a period (from 1500 to 1750) broadlycharacterized y growing rade. The core of these experiences an,however,never be graspedunless one understands not throughacounter-factual xercise, but by examining he actual rocessesathand their well-spring,and also the natureof their limits.DelhiSchool fEconomics Sanjay ubrahmanyam

75 Cf. ThomasC. Smith, "Pre-Modern conomicGrowth: apanand the West",Past and Present,no. 60 (Aug. 1973), pp. 127-60.76 See, for example, Susan Naquin and Evelyn Rawski, ChineseSociety n the

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	priyanka-mokkapati
View:	220 times
Download:	0 times

Rural Industry and Commercial Agriculture in Late Seventeenth-Century South-Eastern India

Documents