UPSC MainsHISTORY-PAPER-I201415 Marks
Q23.

India had been for hundreds of years the Lancashire of the Eastern world. Critically examine this view.

How to Approach

This question requires a nuanced understanding of India's economic history, particularly its pre-colonial and colonial phases. The core argument – India as the ‘Lancashire of the East’ – implies a sophisticated textile production system comparable to that of Lancashire, England. The answer should critically examine this claim, acknowledging the strengths of Indian textile production while also highlighting its limitations and the disruptive impact of colonial policies. Structure: Introduction defining the analogy, Body detailing pre-colonial strengths, colonial disruption, and comparative analysis, and Conclusion offering a balanced assessment.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

The assertion that “India had been for hundreds of years the Lancashire of the Eastern world” posits a historical parallel between India’s pre-colonial textile industry and the industrialised textile production of Lancashire, England. This analogy, popularised by historians, suggests that India possessed a highly developed, globally competitive textile sector long before the Industrial Revolution. However, a critical examination reveals a more complex picture. While India undeniably held a prominent position in global textile trade for centuries, its production system differed significantly from Lancashire’s, and colonial policies fundamentally altered its trajectory. This answer will explore the validity of this claim, considering both the strengths and weaknesses of India’s textile industry before and during British rule.

Pre-Colonial India: A Hub of Textile Production

Prior to the arrival of the British, India enjoyed a reputation for high-quality textiles, particularly cotton. This reputation wasn’t merely based on volume but also on the diversity and sophistication of its products. Different regions specialized in different types of textiles:

  • Dacca Muslin: Known for its exceptional fineness, it was highly sought after globally.
  • Calico from Gujarat: A plain-woven cotton fabric, also popular in international trade.
  • Bengal Silk: Renowned for its luxurious quality and intricate designs.
  • Woolen textiles from Kashmir: Famous for shawls and carpets.

This production wasn’t limited to rural cottage industries. Urban centers like Surat, Murshidabad, and Dhaka were thriving hubs of textile manufacturing, with a complex network of merchants, weavers, and dyers. Indian textiles dominated global markets, finding buyers in Europe, Africa, and Southeast Asia. Evidence suggests a significant share of global textile exports – estimates range from 25% to 85% in the 18th century (source: various economic history texts, knowledge cutoff 2023).

Comparing India and Lancashire: Similarities and Differences

While India’s textile production was substantial, comparing it directly to Lancashire requires careful consideration. Here’s a comparative analysis:

Feature India (Pre-Colonial) Lancashire (Industrial Revolution)
Production Method Primarily handloom weaving, cottage industry Mechanized production, factory system
Scale of Production Large volume, but decentralized Mass production, centralized
Technological Innovation Incremental improvements in weaving techniques, dyeing processes Rapid technological advancements (spinning jenny, power loom)
Market Reach Global, but reliant on existing trade networks Global, facilitated by industrial capacity and colonial power
Organization Merchant-based, putting-out system Capitalist, factory-based

The key difference lies in the mode of production. India’s system, while sophisticated, was fundamentally based on skilled labor and artisanal techniques. Lancashire’s, driven by the Industrial Revolution, was characterized by mechanization and mass production. This allowed Lancashire to achieve economies of scale and lower production costs, ultimately surpassing India in terms of volume and price competitiveness.

The Disruptive Impact of Colonial Policies

The British East India Company’s policies systematically undermined India’s textile industry. These included:

  • High Tariffs on Indian Textiles: Imposed by Britain to protect its own nascent textile industry.
  • Import of Duty-Free British Textiles: Flooding the Indian market with cheaper, machine-made goods.
  • Decline of Indian Merchant Classes: British policies favored Company agents, marginalizing Indian merchants.
  • Forced Cultivation of Raw Cotton: Indian farmers were compelled to grow cotton for export to Britain, rather than for domestic textile production.

These policies led to a dramatic decline in Indian textile exports and a widespread displacement of weavers. The once-thriving textile centers of Dacca and Surat suffered immensely. By the mid-19th century, India had become a supplier of raw cotton to British mills, rather than a producer of finished textiles. The de-industrialization of India is a direct consequence of these colonial policies. The Permanent Settlement (1800) also contributed by creating a landowning class focused on revenue extraction rather than investment in local industries.

Revival Attempts and Later Developments

Attempts were made to revive the Indian textile industry in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with the establishment of textile mills in Bombay, Ahmedabad, and other cities. However, these mills were largely owned by Indian capitalists but relied heavily on British technology and capital. The Swadeshi movement (1905-1911) provided a temporary boost to indigenous textile production, but it was not enough to fully restore India’s former dominance. Post-independence, the Indian textile industry continued to grow, but it faced challenges from global competition and internal inefficiencies.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while the analogy of India as the “Lancashire of the East” captures the historical significance of its pre-colonial textile industry, it is an oversimplification. India possessed a sophisticated and globally competitive textile sector, but it differed fundamentally from Lancashire’s in terms of its mode of production. The disruptive impact of British colonial policies, designed to benefit British industry, ultimately led to the decline of India’s textile dominance. The claim holds some validity when considering the centuries-long prominence of Indian textiles, but it must be qualified by acknowledging the limitations of its production system and the devastating consequences of colonial exploitation.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Putting-out System
A method of production where merchants provide raw materials to artisans, who work in their homes, and then collect the finished goods for sale. This was a common system in pre-colonial India’s textile industry.
De-industrialization
The process of a society losing its industrial capacity, typically due to economic or political factors. India experienced significant de-industrialization under British rule, particularly in the textile sector.

Key Statistics

In 1815, British cotton goods imported into India were worth £0.4 million. By 1836, this figure had risen to £4.3 million, demonstrating the rapid displacement of Indian textiles by British imports.

Source: Economic History of India, 1858-1938 by Parthasarathi

India’s share of world textile exports fell from an estimated 25% in 1750 to less than 1% by 1900 (source: Angus Maddison, The World Economy: Historical Statistics, 2006).

Source: Angus Maddison, The World Economy: Historical Statistics, 2006

Examples

The Decline of Dacca Muslin

Dacca, once renowned for its exquisite muslin, experienced a dramatic decline in textile production during the 19th century due to British policies. The city’s weavers were impoverished, and the muslin industry virtually disappeared.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why didn't India industrialize like Britain?

Several factors prevented India from industrializing like Britain, including the lack of capital accumulation, the suppression of indigenous industries by colonial policies, and the absence of a supportive institutional framework.

Topics Covered

HistoryEconomyColonial EconomyTextile IndustryEconomic History