A must read link posted elsewher by Jinit very relevant to this topic
The British had caused a silent holocaust of 60 million people and I had never even realised it till now
Some links about famines during the Mughal period
3 important Economic Conditions of Mughal Empire in India
The Mughal Empire - Economy
"One negative aspect of the Mughal administration was that they did not make any major efforts in agricultural development. Hence the citizens were subject to various famines, which had devastating results. With no assistance from the centre, the situation was usually grim. Quite often severe famines led to large scale migration of the population within the empire, and in some cases they even left India. Some Mughal emperors did try initiatives to alleviate the problems, but most of the time it was a case of too little too late. These famines had a detrimental effect on the economy."
A very interesting article on little ice age
Little ice age severity in South-Asia 1600-1700 AD, beak up of Mughal empire and role of Marathas in South India, Sikhs in the Punjab and Kalhoras in* Sindh in gaining independence and unifying their states
"Famines are in general recorded from 1550-1850 for South Asia, by local historians, European travellers and East India Company’s reports and very were frequent, leading to huge losses of lives. Frequent famines was more than thirty times in the seventeenth a century. Since there was lack of communications information never came in time and lack of roads made transport of grains to affected areas difficult. Official corruption was another factor hindering movement of grains as it increased grain cost to unaffordable degree. In general this made local Mughal administrators unpopular and rebellions in the seventeenth century as will be detailed further."
and
"The rate of land revenue was fixed at the highest rate practically possible to recover, to maintain military strength of Mansabdar/Jagirdar, used both for recovery of tax and support of wars of emperor whenever or wherever needed. The high taxes left only barest minimum needed for subsistence of farmer, whose position was no different from an untouchable. Probably never in history of South Asia worst subjugation and poverty of common man was go great as under Mughal. [Arfan Habib 319-20 quoting Pelsaert andBernier.]
Since tenure of governor/Mansabdar/Jagirdar in Sindh was on the average of only two years, and at other places slightly more to three years, he was not at all ready to invest in development of land, construct wells, tanks or small dams for storage of water, excavate new canals and desilt and maintain existing ones, the production went down and yet burden of taxes was not relaxed, the peasant were being robbed and plundered. Governors/Jagirdars always in fear of transfer demanded payment of revenue before harvest. When the farmers were not able to pay the land revenue, they were tortured, made to endure hunger and thirst and compelled to sell their women, children and cattle to pay the taxes. Villages were attacked, women and children sold in slavery on the pretext of rebellion, but actual cause being inability to pay the tax. Even the farmer were taken in heavy iron chains and sold as slaves. [Irfan Habib, 222-23 quoting Manrique, Manueci, Badauni, Mazahar Shah Jehani Pelsaert etc.]
Khafi Khan is more vocal and supports all above views of local and foreign observers and states that “Since there is no confidence that Jagirdars will be confirmed in the office next year, they size both parts of produce i.e., share of state and as well as of peasant and sell it away. Only God fearing officials do not sell away peasants bullocks, carts or what ever remains. Many Parganas and townships which used to yield full revenue have been ruined and devastated so much that they have been replaced by forests infested with tigers. Peasants one crushed by oppression and cruetty of ill-fated revenue collectors. [Khafi Khan-I pp158-58.] "
1555-1556. This was also cold period and had lead to terrible famines for two successive years, which ravaged all eastern parts of India (exuding Bengal and probably Bihar), particularly territories around Agra, Bayana and Delhi. People died in tens and twenties and dead got neither graves nor coffin. Common people lived on weed seeds, wild green grass and cow hides and Badauni himself witnessed cannibalism. From then on due to cold, famines recurred a number of times upto 1850. [Badauni Vol.2, Ain Akbari Vol.II p.35.]
1555-56. Delhi, Agra and adjoining regions faced severe famines, men eat their own kind. The whole country was deserted and no man remained to till the fields. Five famines occurred between 1573-1795, a period of twenty years. Cold prevailed, snow melt in the Himalayas reduced, and river levels went down. [HCIP-VII, 734.]
1560-1670. In this decade there was severe famine in Gujarat and parents sold their children in slavery, so that they may live (Purchas X, p.90). This traveller saw famines in Cambay (Gujarat) in during 1663-1667. [Tabqati-Akbari-II, 301, Bbadauni-II, 186.
1564. Akbar abolished Jiya [CHI-IV, p.87]
1571-1586. Akber built his new capital at Fatehpur Sikri, but only abandon it in 1586 without fully functioning of it, as due to low level of the Jummuna water could not be lead to it, due to cold and low snow melt iin Himalayas, for many years. [HCIP-VII, 125.]
1572-73. Severe famine in Sirhind [Ain-I-Akbari, III p.229.]
1573. Famine occurred in Gujarat due to low rainfall caused by cold of the Little Ice Age. It was so severe that both rich and poor left the country for fear of starvation. [HCIP-VI, 735.]
1573-1595. Five famines occurred in twenty two years [HCIP-VII, 735.]
1574-1682. Malukdas a follower of Ramanada preached Bhakti.
1574-75. Another famine in Gujarat, [Tabaqat-e-Akbari and CHI-IV, 112].
1575-1585. Worst drought in Sindh (under Mirza Baqi’s rule), which lead to cannibalism in rural areas, Jani Beg stored grain, which he did not part with until his death. [Masumi, Daudpotta 243.] Abandonment of Fatehpur Sikir also coincides with this cold and drought.
1575-1679. Northern Sindh (Bakhar Sarkar) under control of Mughals, who sent fifty one governors (Mansabdars) in one hundred and four years with average tenure of two years each. Then local tribes were allowed to run the country on a kind of lease, by paying taxes and maintaining law and order them-selves.
1578-79. Famine condition and food scarcity. [Ain-e-Akbari-III, 224.]"
AND SO ON AND SO FORTH FOR THE WHOLE OF THE MUGHAL PERIOD
http://www.toledotechnologyacademy.o...y/M3A02CAD.PDF
"But while Shah Jahan was building lovely things, his country was
suffering. A Dutch merchant who was in India during a famine at that time reported
that “. . . men abandoned towns and villages and wandered helplessly . . . eyes sunk
deep in head, lips pale and covered with slime, the skin hard, the bones showing
through. . . .”
Economic History of India - N. Jayapalan - Google Books
And many other similar links on a google search of Mughal empire famines.
My take after a day of reading:
Mughal empire was definitely as bad as British rule as far as famines are concerned.
It is likely that the Mughals were more cruel and harsh as compared to the British, who at least did have the famine commissions.
Perhaps it is better to blame the East India Company rather than the British - but still, tax revenue in cash was what both Mughals, EIC and British were after.
That is what exacerbated the drought and caused the preventable famines.
Similarly British and Japanese imperialism in China after 1840s also contributed a great deal to worsening of the famines.
In India there were no famine deaths (of this kind of magnitude) after independence, but China had a great famine killing millions in the late 50s and early 60s.
So a well intentioned administration even if inefficient and rickety can definitely mitigate starvation deaths during droughts.
Any dictatorship by Mughals/British/Mao/Japanese, focussed on either tax extraction - or in the case of Mao - just simply crazy megalomania - causes the slow excruciating starvation deaths of millions of people in the most unimaginably horrendous ways possible.
The relative peace provided by the Mughal, British, Ming and Manchu also provided the possibility of great population increase in normal times, of many millions of people.
These increased population following Malthusian (still relevant !) principles, died in their millions when drought came.
To me the Mughals and British both seem guilty of genocide by excessive greed, tax extraction and poor administration.
There were no famines in the Gupta period. However it is possible that this was because the population of the empire was quite low by Indian standards after the famines of the Mauryan times and the disruptions after the Kushan Shaka invasions
History of Ancient India: Earliest Times to 1000 A. D. - Radhey Shyam Chaurasia - Google Books
Population crises and cycles in history - OzIdeas
Mauryans had famines and tried their best to provide relief.
Chandragupta Maurya And His Times - Radhakumud Mookerji - Google Books
The Rise and Fall of the Mauryan Empire - College Essays - Arusso
Interestingly, Chandragupta Maurya converted to Jainism in his old years after relinquishing his throne and fasted in sympathy with his starving people in a famine - and fasted to death. That is pretty amazing and I didnt know that
Conquests of the Mauryan Empire, c.324-261 BC
The Maurya Empire and a Dark Age
There is little data available for the Rashtrakuta Pratihara Pala period. There were many terrible famines during Delhi Sultanate including when Timur invaded and destroyed the Tughlak empire.
Coming to post British times:
Famines in Bangladesh ocurred after 1971
The politics and economics of food and famine in Bangladesh in the early 1970s – with special reference to Amartya Sen's interpretation of the 1974 famine - Dowlah - 2006 - International Journal of Social Welfare - Wiley Online Library
Bangladesh: Out of the basket | The Economist
One hundred years of famine
There was massive loss of life in the Bangladesh famines just after the 1971 disruptions coinciding with drought in the Indian subcontinent. There was lot of hunger in India also but no such starvation deaths like Bangladesh from 1972 to 1974.
Excellent article below on famines of 20th century.
The 1972 famine of Maharashtra with 100,000 famine deaths is mentioned.
http://www.sarpn.org/documents/d0000076/Devereux.pdf
All in all - a mixed bag of information. Singling out British rule alone would be unfair but any and all outsiders ruling has exacerbated the results whereas benign rule by Mauryans and Guptas and modern India has mitigated the effects.
There have been no famines despite many droughts in Indian subcontinent after 1974.
Famine_in_IndiaThe British had caused a silent holocaust of 60 million people and I had never even realised it till now
Some links about famines during the Mughal period
3 important Economic Conditions of Mughal Empire in India
The Mughal Empire - Economy
"One negative aspect of the Mughal administration was that they did not make any major efforts in agricultural development. Hence the citizens were subject to various famines, which had devastating results. With no assistance from the centre, the situation was usually grim. Quite often severe famines led to large scale migration of the population within the empire, and in some cases they even left India. Some Mughal emperors did try initiatives to alleviate the problems, but most of the time it was a case of too little too late. These famines had a detrimental effect on the economy."
A very interesting article on little ice age
Little ice age severity in South-Asia 1600-1700 AD, beak up of Mughal empire and role of Marathas in South India, Sikhs in the Punjab and Kalhoras in* Sindh in gaining independence and unifying their states
"Famines are in general recorded from 1550-1850 for South Asia, by local historians, European travellers and East India Company’s reports and very were frequent, leading to huge losses of lives. Frequent famines was more than thirty times in the seventeenth a century. Since there was lack of communications information never came in time and lack of roads made transport of grains to affected areas difficult. Official corruption was another factor hindering movement of grains as it increased grain cost to unaffordable degree. In general this made local Mughal administrators unpopular and rebellions in the seventeenth century as will be detailed further."
and
"The rate of land revenue was fixed at the highest rate practically possible to recover, to maintain military strength of Mansabdar/Jagirdar, used both for recovery of tax and support of wars of emperor whenever or wherever needed. The high taxes left only barest minimum needed for subsistence of farmer, whose position was no different from an untouchable. Probably never in history of South Asia worst subjugation and poverty of common man was go great as under Mughal. [Arfan Habib 319-20 quoting Pelsaert andBernier.]
Since tenure of governor/Mansabdar/Jagirdar in Sindh was on the average of only two years, and at other places slightly more to three years, he was not at all ready to invest in development of land, construct wells, tanks or small dams for storage of water, excavate new canals and desilt and maintain existing ones, the production went down and yet burden of taxes was not relaxed, the peasant were being robbed and plundered. Governors/Jagirdars always in fear of transfer demanded payment of revenue before harvest. When the farmers were not able to pay the land revenue, they were tortured, made to endure hunger and thirst and compelled to sell their women, children and cattle to pay the taxes. Villages were attacked, women and children sold in slavery on the pretext of rebellion, but actual cause being inability to pay the tax. Even the farmer were taken in heavy iron chains and sold as slaves. [Irfan Habib, 222-23 quoting Manrique, Manueci, Badauni, Mazahar Shah Jehani Pelsaert etc.]
Khafi Khan is more vocal and supports all above views of local and foreign observers and states that “Since there is no confidence that Jagirdars will be confirmed in the office next year, they size both parts of produce i.e., share of state and as well as of peasant and sell it away. Only God fearing officials do not sell away peasants bullocks, carts or what ever remains. Many Parganas and townships which used to yield full revenue have been ruined and devastated so much that they have been replaced by forests infested with tigers. Peasants one crushed by oppression and cruetty of ill-fated revenue collectors. [Khafi Khan-I pp158-58.] "
1555-1556. This was also cold period and had lead to terrible famines for two successive years, which ravaged all eastern parts of India (exuding Bengal and probably Bihar), particularly territories around Agra, Bayana and Delhi. People died in tens and twenties and dead got neither graves nor coffin. Common people lived on weed seeds, wild green grass and cow hides and Badauni himself witnessed cannibalism. From then on due to cold, famines recurred a number of times upto 1850. [Badauni Vol.2, Ain Akbari Vol.II p.35.]
1555-56. Delhi, Agra and adjoining regions faced severe famines, men eat their own kind. The whole country was deserted and no man remained to till the fields. Five famines occurred between 1573-1795, a period of twenty years. Cold prevailed, snow melt in the Himalayas reduced, and river levels went down. [HCIP-VII, 734.]
1560-1670. In this decade there was severe famine in Gujarat and parents sold their children in slavery, so that they may live (Purchas X, p.90). This traveller saw famines in Cambay (Gujarat) in during 1663-1667. [Tabqati-Akbari-II, 301, Bbadauni-II, 186.
1564. Akbar abolished Jiya [CHI-IV, p.87]
1571-1586. Akber built his new capital at Fatehpur Sikri, but only abandon it in 1586 without fully functioning of it, as due to low level of the Jummuna water could not be lead to it, due to cold and low snow melt iin Himalayas, for many years. [HCIP-VII, 125.]
1572-73. Severe famine in Sirhind [Ain-I-Akbari, III p.229.]
1573. Famine occurred in Gujarat due to low rainfall caused by cold of the Little Ice Age. It was so severe that both rich and poor left the country for fear of starvation. [HCIP-VI, 735.]
1573-1595. Five famines occurred in twenty two years [HCIP-VII, 735.]
1574-1682. Malukdas a follower of Ramanada preached Bhakti.
1574-75. Another famine in Gujarat, [Tabaqat-e-Akbari and CHI-IV, 112].
1575-1585. Worst drought in Sindh (under Mirza Baqi’s rule), which lead to cannibalism in rural areas, Jani Beg stored grain, which he did not part with until his death. [Masumi, Daudpotta 243.] Abandonment of Fatehpur Sikir also coincides with this cold and drought.
1575-1679. Northern Sindh (Bakhar Sarkar) under control of Mughals, who sent fifty one governors (Mansabdars) in one hundred and four years with average tenure of two years each. Then local tribes were allowed to run the country on a kind of lease, by paying taxes and maintaining law and order them-selves.
1578-79. Famine condition and food scarcity. [Ain-e-Akbari-III, 224.]"
AND SO ON AND SO FORTH FOR THE WHOLE OF THE MUGHAL PERIOD
http://www.toledotechnologyacademy.o...y/M3A02CAD.PDF
"But while Shah Jahan was building lovely things, his country was
suffering. A Dutch merchant who was in India during a famine at that time reported
that “. . . men abandoned towns and villages and wandered helplessly . . . eyes sunk
deep in head, lips pale and covered with slime, the skin hard, the bones showing
through. . . .”
Economic History of India - N. Jayapalan - Google Books
And many other similar links on a google search of Mughal empire famines.
My take after a day of reading:
Mughal empire was definitely as bad as British rule as far as famines are concerned.
It is likely that the Mughals were more cruel and harsh as compared to the British, who at least did have the famine commissions.
Perhaps it is better to blame the East India Company rather than the British - but still, tax revenue in cash was what both Mughals, EIC and British were after.
That is what exacerbated the drought and caused the preventable famines.
Similarly British and Japanese imperialism in China after 1840s also contributed a great deal to worsening of the famines.
In India there were no famine deaths (of this kind of magnitude) after independence, but China had a great famine killing millions in the late 50s and early 60s.
So a well intentioned administration even if inefficient and rickety can definitely mitigate starvation deaths during droughts.
Any dictatorship by Mughals/British/Mao/Japanese, focussed on either tax extraction - or in the case of Mao - just simply crazy megalomania - causes the slow excruciating starvation deaths of millions of people in the most unimaginably horrendous ways possible.
The relative peace provided by the Mughal, British, Ming and Manchu also provided the possibility of great population increase in normal times, of many millions of people.
These increased population following Malthusian (still relevant !) principles, died in their millions when drought came.
To me the Mughals and British both seem guilty of genocide by excessive greed, tax extraction and poor administration.
There were no famines in the Gupta period. However it is possible that this was because the population of the empire was quite low by Indian standards after the famines of the Mauryan times and the disruptions after the Kushan Shaka invasions
History of Ancient India: Earliest Times to 1000 A. D. - Radhey Shyam Chaurasia - Google Books
Population crises and cycles in history - OzIdeas
Mauryans had famines and tried their best to provide relief.
Chandragupta Maurya And His Times - Radhakumud Mookerji - Google Books
The Rise and Fall of the Mauryan Empire - College Essays - Arusso
Interestingly, Chandragupta Maurya converted to Jainism in his old years after relinquishing his throne and fasted in sympathy with his starving people in a famine - and fasted to death. That is pretty amazing and I didnt know that
Conquests of the Mauryan Empire, c.324-261 BC
The Maurya Empire and a Dark Age
There is little data available for the Rashtrakuta Pratihara Pala period. There were many terrible famines during Delhi Sultanate including when Timur invaded and destroyed the Tughlak empire.
Coming to post British times:
Famines in Bangladesh ocurred after 1971
The politics and economics of food and famine in Bangladesh in the early 1970s – with special reference to Amartya Sen's interpretation of the 1974 famine - Dowlah - 2006 - International Journal of Social Welfare - Wiley Online Library
Bangladesh: Out of the basket | The Economist
One hundred years of famine
There was massive loss of life in the Bangladesh famines just after the 1971 disruptions coinciding with drought in the Indian subcontinent. There was lot of hunger in India also but no such starvation deaths like Bangladesh from 1972 to 1974.
Excellent article below on famines of 20th century.
The 1972 famine of Maharashtra with 100,000 famine deaths is mentioned.
http://www.sarpn.org/documents/d0000076/Devereux.pdf
All in all - a mixed bag of information. Singling out British rule alone would be unfair but any and all outsiders ruling has exacerbated the results whereas benign rule by Mauryans and Guptas and modern India has mitigated the effects.
There have been no famines despite many droughts in Indian subcontinent after 1974.
No comments:
Post a Comment