British Rule & Decline of Indian Handicrafts

India’s Pre-Colonial Economic Landscape

Before the 18th century, India’s textile industry was exceptionally advanced. It enjoyed a comparative advantage due to factors like climate, skilled labor, and established trade networks. Indian textiles, particularly cotton muslins from Bengal and Gujarat, were highly sought after in Europe, Asia, and Africa. The industry was organized around a putting-out system, where merchants supplied raw materials to artisans who worked in their homes, creating a decentralized and flexible production model. This system supported millions of livelihoods and contributed significantly to India’s wealth. François Bernier, a French traveler in the 17th century, vividly described the thriving textile industry in Bengal.

British Policies and Their Impact

The British East India Company, initially focused on trade, gradually gained political control and implemented policies that profoundly impacted Indian handicrafts. Key policies included:

• High Tariffs on Indian Textiles (1700s onwards): British tariffs on Indian textiles imported into Britain increased significantly, making them less competitive in the European market.
• Import of Duty-Free British Textiles into India (18th & 19th centuries): Simultaneously, British manufactured textiles were allowed to enter India duty-free, flooding the Indian market with cheaper, machine-made goods.
• Destruction of Spinning Wheels (Charkhas): While the extent is debated, there are accounts of the deliberate destruction of spinning wheels, particularly in Bengal, to discourage local production.
• Discouragement of Indian Exports & Promotion of Raw Material Exports: British policies shifted India from exporting finished textiles to exporting raw cotton, benefiting British textile mills.
• Land Revenue Policies (Permanent Settlement, Ryotwari System): These policies increased the tax burden on Indian farmers and artisans, forcing many into debt and ultimately leading to the loss of their livelihoods.

Nationalist and Marxist Critiques

Nationalist historians, like R.C. Dutt in his “The Economic History of India,” argued that British policies were deliberately designed to deindustrialize India and transform it into a supplier of raw materials for British industries. They viewed this as a key component of colonial exploitation and a deliberate attempt to impoverish India. They emphasized the moral responsibility of the British for the decline of Indian handicrafts.

Marxist scholars, such as D.D. Kosambi and Irfan Habib, offered a more structural analysis. They argued that the decline of Indian handicrafts was an inevitable consequence of the transition from a pre-capitalist to a capitalist mode of production. British policies facilitated this transition by dismantling the existing economic structures and creating a market for British industrial goods. They saw the destruction of handicrafts as a necessary, albeit brutal, step in the development of global capitalism.

Counterarguments and Complexities

While the evidence of detrimental British policies is substantial, some historians argue that the decline of Indian handicrafts was not solely due to British actions. Factors such as:

• Internal Factors: Lack of innovation, rigid guild structures, and internal political instability within India also contributed to the decline.
• Demand Shifts: Changes in global demand and the rise of new textile technologies elsewhere also played a role.
• Regional Variations: The impact of British policies varied across different regions of India. Some areas were more severely affected than others.

Furthermore, the narrative of complete destruction is an oversimplification. Some handicrafts continued to thrive, albeit on a smaller scale, and new forms of artisanal production emerged. The decline was a complex process with multiple contributing factors, not simply a deliberate act of destruction.

Comparative Table of Policies & Impacts