Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The nineteenth century in British India was tragically marked by a series of devastating famines, recurring with alarming frequency. These were not simply natural disasters, but complex events shaped by a confluence of ecological vulnerabilities and, critically, by the economic and administrative policies of the British East India Company and, later, the British Crown. While drought was often a triggering factor, the severity of these famines was significantly exacerbated by pre-existing socio-economic conditions and the colonial government’s initial laissez-faire approach. Understanding the factors responsible for these recurrences, and the subsequent remedial measures adopted, is crucial to comprehending the impact of colonial rule on Indian society.
Factors Responsible for Recurrence of Famines
Several interconnected factors contributed to the frequent famines in 19th-century India:
1. Land Revenue Systems
- Permanent Settlement (1793): Introduced in Bengal, it created a rigid system where land revenue was fixed irrespective of harvest yields. This led to increased pressure on peasants during bad years, forcing them into debt and landlessness.
- Ryotwari System (early 19th century): While theoretically more flexible, its implementation often resulted in high revenue demands and similar pressures on peasants in South India.
- Mahalwari System (North-Western Provinces): Revenue was assessed on the entire village community, leading to collective responsibility and potential hardship for all members during failures.
These systems prioritized revenue collection over peasant welfare, leaving little room for flexibility during times of scarcity.
2. Economic Policies & De-industrialization
- Destruction of Traditional Industries: British policies favored British manufactured goods, leading to the decline of Indian handicrafts and industries. This reduced alternative sources of income for rural populations, making them more vulnerable to agricultural failures.
- Commercialization of Agriculture: Peasants were encouraged to grow cash crops like indigo and cotton, often at the expense of food crops. This reduced food security and increased dependence on market forces.
- Free Trade Policy: The adoption of free trade policies allowed for the export of grain during times of scarcity, exacerbating local shortages.
3. Infrastructure Deficiencies
- Poor Transportation Network: Limited railway and road infrastructure hindered the efficient movement of food grains from surplus to deficit areas.
- Lack of Storage Facilities: Inadequate storage facilities led to significant post-harvest losses, reducing the overall availability of food.
4. Colonial Misconceptions & Laissez-Faire Approach
Early British administrators often viewed famines as natural occurrences beyond their control, adhering to a strict laissez-faire economic philosophy. They were reluctant to interfere with market forces, believing that intervention would distort the economy. This resulted in delayed and inadequate responses to early warning signs of famine.
Remedial Measures Adopted by the British Indian Government
1. Early Responses (Pre-1870s)
- Limited Relief Works: Initial relief efforts were often limited to providing employment on public works projects, such as road construction, at low wages.
- Grain Imports: Grain was sometimes imported, but often too late and in insufficient quantities to address the crisis.
- Export of Grain Continued: Despite widespread starvation, grain continued to be exported from India, highlighting the prioritization of British economic interests.
2. Shift Towards a More Structured Approach (Post-1870s)
- Famine Codes (1880): Lord Lytton initiated the development of Famine Codes, providing guidelines for famine administration and relief measures. These codes were further refined by subsequent administrations.
- Establishment of Famine Commissions (1880, 1897): These commissions investigated the causes of famines and recommended measures for prevention and mitigation. The 1880 commission, headed by Sir Richard Strachey, emphasized the importance of free trade in grain.
- Improved Transportation Infrastructure: Expansion of the railway network facilitated the movement of food grains.
- Development of Irrigation Projects: Large-scale irrigation projects were undertaken to reduce dependence on rainfall.
- Relief Works & Grain Distribution: Relief works were expanded, and grain distribution systems were established to provide food to the affected population. Wages on relief works were gradually increased.
3. Later Reforms (Early 20th Century)
- Indian Famine Commission (1901): This commission, under the chairmanship of Sir Henry Fowler, criticized the earlier emphasis on free trade and advocated for greater government intervention in famine management.
- Development of Cooperative Credit Societies: These societies were established to provide peasants with access to credit, reducing their vulnerability to debt.
| Famine | Years | Estimated Deaths |
|---|---|---|
| The Great Bengal Famine | 1860-61 | ~1 million |
| Orissa Famine | 1866 | ~1 million |
| Rajasthan Famine | 1869-70 | ~1.5 million |
| Great South Indian Famine | 1876-78 | ~5.5 million |
| Indian Famine of 1896-97 | 1896-97 | ~3 million |
| Indian Famine of 1899-1900 | 1899-1900 | ~1.5 million |
Conclusion
The recurrence of famines in 19th-century India was a direct consequence of a complex interplay between natural factors and flawed colonial policies. While drought often triggered these crises, the rigid land revenue systems, de-industrialization, inadequate infrastructure, and initial adherence to laissez-faire economics significantly exacerbated their severity. The British government’s response evolved over time, moving from a hands-off approach to a more interventionist one, culminating in the development of Famine Codes and improved relief measures. However, these measures were often inadequate and came too late to prevent widespread suffering, highlighting the enduring legacy of colonial exploitation and mismanagement.
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.