1. Why was jotedar a powerful figure in many areas of rural Bengal ?

Ans: Jotedars were rich peasants in Bengal. They owned big plots of land
sometimes running into thousand of acres of land. They controlled local trade and
commerce including the money lending business. They had great influence on the
local village population. They were regarded more powerful than the Zamindars
even. Following are the main reasons for the high status of Jotedars.

1. The Jotedars controlled trade and commerce including money lending

business at the local level.
2. In order to weaken the Zamindars, Jotedars would mobilise ryots not to pay or
delay payment towards land revenue.
3. The Jotedars opposed the moves of Zamindars to increase the Jama of a
village.
4. The Jotedars lived in villages only. Hence they were in a better position to
interact with and influence the peasants.
5. Jotedars were rich and owned big areas of land under cultivation. Many a time
they would buy estates of Zamindar. That would be auctioned due to failure to
pay up land revenue.

2. How did zamindars manage to retain control over their zamindaris?

Ans: The zamindars manage to retain control over their zamindaris in the following
manners :

1. Fictitious sale : It involved series of manoeuvres. For example, Raja of Burdwan,

first transferred some of his zamindari to his mother because the company had
decreed that property of women would not be taken over by the company. Secondly,
his agents manipulated the auctions by buying the property, outbidding other
purchasers. Subsequently, they refused to pay up the purchase money. As a result
of it, the Estate was again resold at auction. But as the zamindar’s agents used to
purchase it again and again, and did not pay the purchase amount, the auctions
were repeated endlessly. Ultimately, the estate was sold at a lower price back to the
zamindars, who never paid the full revenue demand. Such transactions took place
on a large scale in Bengal including Burdwan.

Attack on outsiders : Whenever outsiders purchased an estate at an auction, they

could not always take possession because their agents would be attacked by
lathyals of the former zamindar.

3. Sometimes even the ryots resisted the outsiders due to their close relations with
the zamindar. The ryots considered themselves to be the proja (subjects) of the
zamindar.

Thus, the zamindars could not be displaced. Thereafter the rules of revenue
payment were made flexible. As a result of that, the zamindar’s power over the
villages were strengthened. It was only during the Great Depression of 1930s that
their power collapsed and the jotedars consolidated their power in the countryside.
3. How did the Paharias respond to the coming of outsiders?
Ans: Paharias live in the hills of Rajmahal. The British people began to interact with
them and later Santhals began to settle down there. The response of the Paharias
was as follows:

1. Paharias resisted the settlement of Santhals initially but had to accommodate

them in course of time.
2. The Paharias shifted to deeper areas into the hills.
3. They were confined to more barren and rocky areas of the hills in course of
time.
4. The paharias did shifting cultivation. Now shifting cultivation was becoming
more and more difficult as proper and stable settlements.
5. As forest began to be cleared, the paharis could not depend on it for livelihood.
Thus, the lifestyle and living of Paharias underwent change due to coming of
outsiders.

4. Why did the Santhals rebel against British rule?

Ans: By 1832 the Santhals had settled in Damin-i-Koh area. Their settlement
expanded rapidly. Forests were cleared to accommodate them. The Company also
benefitted as it got more and more land revenue. However, the Santhals too got
dissatisfied. They rebelled against the British rule. Following are the main causes for
their rebellion.
1. Santhals were not happy with the tax regime of the company. They thought that
the land revenue rates were high and exploitative .
2. The Zamindars began to exercise greater control on the areas brought under
cultivation by Santhals, apparently it was a part of the British Policy. But Santhals
resented that.
3. Moneylenders in the rural areas were seen as villain and agent of Company rule
by the Santhals. Moneylenders could auction the land of Santhals in case of
defaulter. All this was not liked by the Santhals.
The British took steps to placate the Santhals later on. A separate district of Santhal
Pargana was carved out and law was enacted to protect the santhals.

5. What explains the anger of the Deccan ryots against the moneylenders?
Ans: During the civil war in USA, Indian merchants hoped to capture the world
market in raw cotton, but that did not happen. On the other hand, the following
events took place after the civil war:

 Cotton production in America revived and the Indian cotton exports to British
steadily declined.
 Export merchants and sahukars in Maharashtra refused to give long-term
credit. They restricted the advances to peasants and demanded repayment of
outstanding debts.
 At the same time as the term of first revenue settlement was over, the demand
for revenue was increased from 50 to 100 per cent.

As a result of above, the ryots were not in position to pay the inflated demand
because the prices were also falling. Thus, they had no option except to take a
further loan from the moneylender who also refused to loans. This enraged the ryots.
The moneylenders became insensitive to their plight. They were violating the
customary norms of the countryside. For example, general norm was that the
interest charged could not be more than the principal. They were not charging fair
interest. In one of the cases, investigated by the Deccan Riots Commission, the
moneylender charged over ? 2000 as interest on a loan of ? 100. There were
complaints of injustice of such extractions and the violation of custom. A new law –
Limitation Law – was passed in 1859 where validity of loan bonds was fixed for three
years but the moneylenders manipulated new systems to exploit the ryots. Under
these circumstances, the ryots’ anger against the moneylenders increased.

6. Why were so many Zamindaris auctioned after the Permanent settlement?

Ans: Many Zamindaris were auctioned as the Zamindars failed to pay up the agreed
land revenue on time. The reason for the same:
1. Many believed that the land revenue settlemnt was on the higher side. Moreover
soon after the permanent settlement the foodgrain prices declined. The ryots could
not pay up the land revenue and hence Zamindars also defaulted.
2. The revenue was to be deposited on time irrespective of harvesting cycle. This
was another reason for default by the Zamindars.
3. The power of Zamindars was curbed by the Company. They were no longer law
and order enforcing agency at local level. Their musclemen were also weakened. As
a result of this Zamindars could not effectively collect taxes at times.
4. Many a time Jotedars and peasants deliberately delayed the land revenue
payment. This resulted in default by Zamindars and the auction thereafter.

7. In what way was the livelihood of Paharias different from that of Santhals?
Ans: Paharias were living in the foothills of Rajmahal. They lived a life that was
different from Santhals. Most of the information on their lives is based on the report
of Buchanan, the physician of the East India Company who wandered into the terrain
of Rajmahal Hills.

1. The paharias were nomads. They lived a wandering life. They, however,
sometimes did shifting cultivation.
2. Their another important source of livelihood of forest resources and animals.
3. They extracted mahua and used it. Colonialism and the countryside: Exploring
official archives
4. Paharias used to look at outsiders with suspicion and even were hostile with
them.
5. The Santhals were different from them on many counts.
6. The Santhals took to agriculture fast and soon got into settled life.
7. They had better relation with the outsiders including the East India Company.

8. What are the problems of using the official sources in writing about the
history of peasants.
Ans: Official sources of the Company Raj are not regarded as reliable source of
history when it came to the lot of Ryots.
Following are the main problems associated with official source of history.
1. The official records reflect only the Company raj perspective. They did not look at
events from different angles. For example when the Deccan Riot Commission was
instituted, it was required to find out if the land revenue was just or not. Other issues
of Ryots were not taken into account.
2. The British people looked down upon the local people, their culture and tradition
as lowly. They ended up giving a lowly picture of peasants even if without intention of
the same.
3. The record of the Company Raj was created by the officials in such a manner that
it suits their masters. Thus, evidences were tempered with. For example the Deccan
Ryot Commission concluded that Ryots were angered not by the high land revenue
but by moneylenders.
4. Thus, official sources are to be read alongwith other sources and need to be
weighed before we take them to our stride.

9. Examine the main aspects of the fifth report which was submitted to the British
Parliament in 1813.
Answer:
Many of the changes occurred at the time of the East India Company were
documented in detail in a report that was submitted to the British Parliament in 1813.
It was the fifth report on the administration and activities of the East India Company
in India.

The main aspects of the fifth report are discussed below:

1. The fifth report had been covered into 1002 pages of which over 800 pages were
appendices that reproduced petitions of zamindars and ryots reports of collectors
from different districts, statistical tables on revenue returns, and notes on the
revenue and judicial administration of Bengal and Madras (present-day Tamil Nadu)
written by officials.

2. From the time the company established its rule in Bengal in the mid 1760s, its
activities were closely watched and debated in England. There were many groups in
Britain who were opposed to the monopoly that the East India Company had over
trade with India and China.

3. An increasing number of private traders wanted a share in the India trade, and the
industrialists of Britain were keen to open up the Indian market for British
manufactures.

4. Information about Company misrule and maladministration was hotly debated in

Britain and incidents of the greed and corruption of company officials were widely
publicised in the press.

5. The British Parliament passed a series of acts in the late 18th century to regulate
and control company rule in India. It forced the company to produce regular reports
on committees to enquire into the affairs of the company.

6. The fifth report was one such report produced by a select committee. It became
the basis of intense parliamentary debates on the nature of the East India company’s
rule in India.
7. The evidence contained in the fifth report is invaluable. But the recent researches
show that the argumeilts and evidences offered by the fifth report cannot be
accepted uncritically.

8. After careful examination of the archives of various Bengal zamindars and the
local records of the Districts, researchers found that the report exaggerated the
collapse of traditional zamindari power and also overestimated the scale on which
zamirdars were losing their land. As we have seen even when zamindaris, were
auctioned, zamindars were not always displaced, given the ingenious methods they
used to retain their zamindaris.

9. It does not mean that there were not any malpractices done by the East India
Company, infact they were very oppressive towards the rural society of Bengal.
Thus, the fifth report had been proved to be a good source to understand the India’s
economy in the colonial times.

Question 10.
Explain two reasons for the failure of the Permanent Settlement of the land revenue
introduced by the British in Bengal.
Answer:
The reasons for the failure of the Permanent Settlement of the land revenue
introduced by the British in Bengal are as follows:
1. The early revenue demands fixed by the company were very high. Under
permanent settlement, the state revenue demand was fixed in ’ perpetuity. It meant
that company was not claiming an additional share of increased income from land
with rising prices and expanding cultivation. Therefore, the Company wanted huge
revenue for high demand in order to minimise this anticipated loss.

2. It is worth mentioning that the high demand of land revenue was fixed in 1790s.
The price of agricultural produce were depressed during this period. Consequently, it
became difficult for the ryots to pay their dues to the zamindars. Thus, the zamindar
could not collect the rent and were unable to pay their fixed amount to the company.

uestion 11.
Examine the land revenue system that was introduced in Bombay Deccan. How did
the peasants fall into the dept-trap of the moneylenders? Explain.
Answer:
Ryotwari Settlement was introduced in the Bombay Deccan by the British. It has the
following features:

 Direct Settlement with the Ryots: The revenue was settled directly with the ryot.
 Calculation of Revenue: Unlike the Permanent Settlement, the revenue was
estimated taking into consideration all types of soil, the average income of the
harvest was estimated. It assessed how much revenue a ryot could pay.
 Share of State: The share of the state was fixed in proportion to the income of
the ryot.
 Re-survey of Land After every 30 years the lands were re-surveyed and the
rates of revenue were increased accordingly.
  Temporary Demand: The demand for revenue was not permanent but
temporary.
It is true that the ryots came to see the moneylenders as devious and deceitful.
As the moneylenders were much insensitive to the plight of the peasants. They
got deeper and deeper into debt trap and were dependent on the
moneylenders for their survival.

Source Based Questions

Question 1
A Ryot Petitions:
This is an example of a petition from a ryot of the village of Mirajgaon, Taluka Karjat,
to the Collector, Ahmednagar, Deccan Riots Commission.

The sowkars (sahukars)… have of late begun to oppress us. As we cannot earn
enough to defray our household expenses. We are actually forced to beg of them to
provide us with money, clothes and grain, which we obtain from them not without
great difficulty, nor without their compelling us to enter into hard conditions in the
bond.

Moreover, the necessary clothes and grain are not sold to us at cash rates. The
prices asked from us are generally twenty five percent or fifty percent more than
demanded from customers making ready money payments. The produce of our
fields is also taken by the sowkars, who at the time of removing it assure us that it
will be credited to our account, but they do not actually make any mention of it in the
accounts. They also refuse to pass us any receipts for the produce so removed by
them.

1. Why were the ryots not given loans by sowkars?

2. Explain the difficulties, the ryots had, to face for getting loan from the sowkars.
3. Why were the ryots unable to pay the inflated demand? Explain. (All India

Answer:
1. The ryots were not given loans by sowkars because they no longer had
confidence in the ryots capacity to repay. This was at the time when ryots were able
to pay the inflated demand when prices were falling and cotton fields were
disappearing.

2. The difficulties, the ryots had to face for getting loan from the sowkars were:

 The oppression of the sowkars.

 Compelled the ryots to enter into hard conditions in the bond for obtaining loan
from them.
 The produce of their fields was also taken by the sowkars.
 They refused to pass them any receipts for the produce so removed by them.

3. The ryots were unable to pay the inflated demand because as the credit dried up,
the revenue demand increased. The first revenue settlement was made in the 1820s
and 1830s, presently it W’as the time for the next settlement. In this settlement, the
demand was increased dramatically from 50 to 100 per cent. So the ryots were
unable to pay the innate demand at the time when the prices were failing and cotton
fields disappearing.

Question 2.
Deeds of Hire:
When debts mounted, the peasant was unable to pay hack the loan to the
moneylender. He had no option, but to give over all his possessions-land, carts and
animals to the moneylender. But without animals he could not continue to cultivate.

So, he took land on rent and animals on hire. He now had to pay for the animals
which had originally belonged to him. He had to sign a deed of hire stating very
clearly that these animals and carts did not belong to him. In cases of conflict, these
deeds could be enforced through the court.

The following is the text of a deed that a peasant signed in November 1873 from the
records of the Deccan Riots Commission.

I have sold to you, on account of the debt due to you, my two carriages having iron
axles, with their appurtenances and four bullocks… I have taken from you on hire
under this deed the very same two carriages and four bullocks. I shall pay every
month the hire thereof at rupees four a month and obtain a receipt in your own
handwriting. In the absence of a receipt, I shall not contend that the hire had been .
paid.

1. How did the peasants pay back the loan to the moneylenders?
2. What was the deed of hire?
3. What light does the deed of hire throw on the relationship between the
peasants and the moneylenders? (All India 2013)

Answer:
1. When debts increased the peasants were unable to pay back the loan to the
moneylenders. As a result, the peasants had no option, but to give all their
possessions to the moneylender. They had to surrender their land, carts and animals
to the moneylender.

2. The peasant had to sign a deed of hire stating very clearly that all his possessions
(land, carts and animals) did not belong to him. The peasant had to sell, on account
of the debt to the moneylender his carriages having iron axles, with their accessories
and bullocks. A peasant had to sign a deed that he had taken from the moneylender
on hire. The peasant had to pay every month the hire there of at rupees four a
month.

3. The deed of hire clearly shows that the relationship between the peasants and the
moneylenders was based on exploitation. The deed of hire was absolutely loaded in
favour of the moneylenders and the peasants were at the receiving end.
Question 3.
When the Santhals settled on the peripheries of the Rajmahal hills, the Paharias
resisted but were ultimately forced to withdraw deeper into the hills. Restricted from
moving down to the lower hills and valleys, they were confined to the dry interior and
to the more barren and rocky upper hills. This severely affected their lives,
impoverishing them in the long term. Shifting agriculture depended on the ability to
move to newer and newer land and utilisation of the natural fertility of the soil. When
the most fertile soils became inaccessible to them, being part of the Damin, the
Paharias could not effectively sustain their mode of cultivation. When the forests of
the region were cleared for cultivation the hunters amongst them also faced
problems.

The Santhals, by contrast, gave up their earlier life of mobility and settled down,
cultivating a range of commercial crops for the market, and dealing with traders and
moneylenders.

1. What effect can be seen on the lives of Paharias when the Santhals were
settled on the peripheries of the Rajmahal hills? Discuss.

Answer:
1. The lives of Paharias were completely changed when the Santhals came and
settled on the peripheries of the Rajmahal hills.

 When Santhals came, the Paharias resisted them, but were ultimately forced to
withdraw deeper into the hills.
 The movement towards lower hills and valleys was restricted and they were
only confined to live on the dry upper hills which was completely barren and
rocky.
 Paharias were mainly depended on shifting cultivation and hunting. When the
most fertile soils became inaccessible to them the Paharias could not
effectively sustain their mode of cultivation.

2. When Santhals cleared most of the parts of the forests region, the hunters
amongst the paharias also faced problems. These changes severely affected their
lives, impoverishing them in the long term.