East India Companies and Long-Term Economic Change in India (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Economic Legacies of Colonial Rule in India Another Look
The essay reinterprets the British colonial empire in India (the Raj, for short) as a state. Based on that reinterpretation it offers fresh assessments on three issues: how its policies shaped the economy of India, what lessons the postcolonial state drew from history, and the gains and costs of the postcolonial development strategy. T he long-term legacy of the European empires that ruled over large parts of the non-European world is an enduring theme in world history. Although " imperial history " does not mean the same thing in different academic traditions, the economic consequences of the empires form a more or less coherent discourse. Within that discourse, the British Empire occupies a place of special importance, because in some regions of the world, British rule started at the same time that Britain started on a course of rapid modernisation leading to unprecedented rise in productivity in agriculture and manufacturing industry. Some of the ingredients of the modernisa-tion, including new institutions and new technologies, were transferred to the territories ruled by Britain. And yet, the rule expected to serve the interests of the imperialists. Those who take part in the discourse ask, did the Empire, on balance, modernise and develop the regions that it ruled, or left them poorer than before? The present paper revisits this issue with reference to the history of India. I ask two questions in this essay. What were the most important economic consequences and enduring legacies of European rule in India? And how far did postco-lonial India modify or retain these effects? In order to answer these questions, we need to consider fi rst those traditions of analytical history that draw lessons about the prospect of economic development from the history of the European empires. Linking Empire with Development: The Old Theory The debate around these questions is almost as old as the empires themselves. In the last 15 years, however, the debate has taken a new turn. There is an old theory, and a set of new theories about how empires shaped the prospect of economic development in the regions once ruled by them. In part, the motivation to write this paper arises from these intellectual developments and the need to rethink India's place in them. The simplest way to describe the difference between the old and the new theories is that, whereas the old theory focused mainly on trade between the colonist and the colonised economies , the new interpretations are centred on people. People, it is recognised with increasing force in all strands of world history , embody ideas, and ideas change the world. Following up that intuition, some writers see European settlement in the non-European regions to represent channels through which institutions and technologies travelled around the world, and others see the growing scale of international migration of capital and labour in the 19th century, which were enabled and
Economic History and Modern India: Redefining the Link
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2002
This paper argues that to restore the link between economic history and modern India, a different narrative of Indian economic history is needed. An exclusive focus on colonialism as the driver of India's economic history misses those continuities that arise from economic structure or local conditions. In fact, market-oriented British imperial policies did initiate a process of economic growth based on the production of goods intensive in labor and natural resources. However, productive capacity per worker was constrained by low rates of private and public investment in infrastructure, excessively low rates of schooling, social inequalities based on caste and gender and a delayed demographic transition to lower birthrates and the resultant heavy demographic burden placed on physical capital and natural resources.
How Should We Approach the Economy of ‘Early Modern India’? A Review Article
Modern Asian Studies, 2015
Tirthankar Roy’s recent synthesis on the economic history of early modern India claims to provide a new, overarching narrative placing this period within the broader sweep of the history of what Roy defines as ‘capitalism’ in India in the very long term. This paper provides a detailed critique of Roy’s monograph, suggesting that it suffers from some serious methodological deficits, arising not least from a future-oriented paradigm that imposes anachronistic concepts on this period, including the very notion of ‘India’. Furthermore, his view of the economy as being fundamentally driven forward by the rise of a coastal polity expanding inwards from Bombay, Madras, and Calcutta, sits awkwardly with his repeated claim that colonialism was of little significance for Indian economic history. Finally, the present paper suggests that this period might be more fruitfully approached not only by abandoning the telos of what we know of India’s future, but also by adopting both regionally-focused and comparative approaches, turning away from long-distance trade as the primary lens through which to view the economy, and instead examining endogenous factors in the economies of individual regions and enriching our understanding of them by reference to studies of other world regions with comparable patterns of development in the same period. More nuanced ways of approaching economic change in the very long run, including the importance of developments in modes of consumption and market- and profit-oriented economic behaviour, are suggested as a better means of understanding both the economies of the late pre-colonial centuries in the Indian subcontinent, and the development of capitalism, which should also be understood in a more specific manner than Roy allows.
South Asian Colonial Economy, Market Devices and Merchant Communities in Context of Global History
This research paper explores the themes of mercantile capitalism in a polycentric world, with a special focus on colonial expansion in India. This paper will demonstrate India’s organized, profit-driven activity that had certain levels of sophistication due to competition and occurred with and independent of Europeans. The examples provided will question the dated notion of European exceptionalism, as well as the trope of Asia’s fall. Examples will show that mercantile tools did not originate solely from Europe, but also emerged elsewhere. Rather than the antagonistic narrative of colonial drain, this paper also demonstrates how merchant communities flourished alongside British colonial interests.
2018
In the early 20th century, the British Empire primarily governed South Asia, and these regions shared similar administrations, institutions and commercial practices. After the Second World War, decolonization in South Asia became evident through the partition of India and countries gaining independence. These subsequent events can be seen as regional disintegration, and they offer a potential scope for examining the impacts of such institutional changes on maritime transport networks. By examining a new database detailing vessel movement between South Asian ports and the rest of the world from 1890 to 2000, we explore how maritime transport networks evolved in South Asia. Specifically, we compare the trends of shipping routes among ports before and after 1947. Applying the methodology developed by Redding, Sturm, and Wolf (2011) and Xu and Itoh (2017), we show that regional disintegration clearly lowered vessel movements for the routes that became international after 1947. Additiona...
Towards a Reinterpretation of Nineteenth-Century Indian Economic History
The Journal of Economic History, 1963
Indian society is one of the most complex in existence, and we know little about its structure, functioning, or—more important—its development and dynamics. The neglect of Indian's economic history, particularly the period 1800–1947, is one of the most distressing gaps. It is dismaying to realize that even within very broad ranges of error we do not know whether during the past century-and-a-half the economy's performance improved, stagnated, or actually declined. Not only is ignorance of Indian economic behavior over time disturbing in itself, but the attempts at planning since 1947 have suffered because of this. It is difficult to predict outcome and consequences of any major development policy in the absence of any clear clues about the long-run dynamics of the Indian economy and society.
Flourishing branches, wilting core: research in modern Indian economic history
Australian Economic History Review, 2004
The core theme in modern Indian economic history until recently was economic growth in colonial India and models explaining stylised facts about growth or stagnation. From the 1980s, research moved away from the general toward more specific and local issues, a trend that has allowed new questions to be asked, has approached other fields and introduced a healthy scepticism for overarching models. But it also made macro-questions somewhat outdated, thereby weakening the link between history and models of economic growth and development. This essay reviews scholarship on new themes and asks how problems of economic growth can be motivated anew. * I wish to thank Santhi Hejeebu, Pierre van der Eng, and G. Balachandran for incisive and helpful comments on an earlier draft.