Solution:

Answer:

• ryot - peasant
• mahal - village
• nij - cultivation on planter’s own land
• ryoti - cultivation on ryot’s lands

Solution:

2. Fill in the blanks:

(a) Growers of woad in Europe saw indigo as a crop which would provide competition to their earnings.

(b) The demand for indigo increased in late eighteenth-century Britain because of the expansion of the British textile industry.

(c) The international demand for indigo was affected by the discovery of synthetic dyes.

(d) The Champaran movement was against the indigo planters and the exploitation of farmers.

Solution:

Main Features of the Permanent Settlement

The Permanent Settlement was introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1793 in Bengal. It was a system of land revenue collection in which the rights of the zamindars (landowners) were fixed permanently. The main features of the Permanent Settlement are as follows:

• Fixed Land Revenue: The zamindars were required to pay a fixed amount of land revenue to the British government. This amount was set based on the estimated agricultural income from the land.
• Hereditary Rights: The zamindars were granted the hereditary right to collect taxes from the peasants. They could transfer or sell their land, but the right to collect revenue remained with them.
• Responsibility of Zamindars: The zamindars were responsible for paying the fixed revenue to the British government, regardless of the actual agricultural yield or other circumstances.
• Impact on Peasants: The peasants were burdened with high taxes, and the zamindars often exploited them, leading to hardships for the rural population.
• Revenue Collection: The zamindars collected the revenue from the peasants and passed it on to the British government. If the zamindar failed to pay, their land could be auctioned off.
• Impact on Agriculture: The system did not encourage investment in land or improvements in agriculture, as the revenue was fixed and not linked to the actual productivity of the land.
• Consolidation of Power: The system helped the British consolidate their control over Indian land revenue and the rural economy by strengthening the position of the zamindars.

Difference between the Mahalwari System and the Permanent Settlement

The Mahalwari System and the Permanent Settlement were both land revenue systems introduced by the British in India, but they had key differences:

• Introduction: The Permanent Settlement was introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1793 in Bengal, while the Mahalwari System was introduced by Holt Mackenzie in 1822 in the north-western provinces and parts of the Gangetic valley.
• Revenue Collection: Under the Permanent Settlement, zamindars (landowners) were given the right to collect revenue from the peasants, but the amount was fixed permanently. In the Mahalwari System, the revenue was not fixed permanently but was assessed periodically, usually every 30 years, and was collected by the village headman or the 'Mahal' (a group of villages).
• Land Ownership: In the Permanent Settlement, zamindars were considered the owners of the land, and they had the right to transfer land. In the Mahalwari System, the ownership of land remained with the peasants, but the responsibility for paying taxes was shifted to the local village community.
• Nature of the Tax: In the Permanent Settlement, the tax was a fixed amount, irrespective of the harvest or agricultural conditions. In contrast, under the Mahalwari System, the revenue was assessed based on the potential productivity of the land, and it varied according to the circumstances.
• Impact on Farmers: The Permanent Settlement often led to the exploitation of peasants as the fixed taxes could not be reduced even in times of crop failure. In the Mahalwari System, the local community was more involved in the management, and the tax could be adjusted according to local conditions.

Solution:

Two Problems with the New Munro System of Fixing Revenue

1. The new Munro system of fixing revenue led to the fixation of high land revenue demands, which put excessive financial pressure on the farmers. This often resulted in them being unable to pay the taxes, leading to widespread distress and poverty.

2. The system also encouraged the commercialization of agriculture, focusing primarily on cash crops for export, which reduced the area available for food crops, thereby leading to food shortages and famines.

Solution:

Why were ryots reluctant to grow indigo?

The ryots (peasants) were reluctant to grow indigo due to several reasons:

• Low Profitability: Indigo cultivation was not as profitable for the ryots as other crops like rice or wheat. The cost of cultivation was high, and the returns were not enough to cover the expenses.
• High Demands from Planters: The ryots were forced to grow indigo under oppressive contracts with the European planters, who often dictated the terms, including the price and quantity to be produced.
• Debt Trap: Many ryots were trapped in a cycle of debt. They had to borrow money from the planters at high interest rates, and in return, they were obligated to grow indigo, regardless of the low returns.
• Depletion of Soil Fertility: Indigo cultivation depleted the soil, making it less fertile for growing other crops. This led to long-term agricultural problems for the ryots.
• Oppressive Practices: The planters used coercive tactics, including threats and force, to ensure the ryots grew indigo. This created a sense of resentment and reluctance among the peasants.
• Limited Land Availability: The ryots were often forced to allocate a portion of their land to indigo cultivation, reducing the area available for food crops, which affected their livelihood.

Solution:

Circumstances Leading to the Collapse of Indigo Production in Bengal

Indigo production in Bengal faced several challenges in the late 19th century, which eventually led to its decline. Some of the key factors that contributed to its collapse include:

• Exploitation of Peasants: The British indigo planters forced the peasants to grow indigo under exploitative conditions. The peasants were often forced to cultivate indigo on a portion of their land, and the prices paid for indigo were very low, leaving the farmers in poverty.
• Unfavorable Agricultural Conditions: Indigo was a crop that required a lot of labor and specific climatic conditions to thrive. In some years, the soil conditions were not suitable for indigo cultivation, which led to poor yields and financial losses for the farmers.
• Indigo Revolt (1859-60): The oppressive policies of the planters led to widespread resentment among the peasants. The revolt, known as the Indigo Revolt, took place in Bengal when farmers refused to grow indigo. The uprising was brutally suppressed, but it marked the beginning of resistance to the indigo cultivation system.
• Competition from Synthetic Dyes: In the late 19th century, the invention of synthetic dyes in Europe reduced the demand for natural indigo. Synthetic dyes were cheaper and easier to produce, which led to a decline in the global market for indigo.
• Changing Economic Conditions: As the British Empire began to industrialize, the demand for indigo as a dye decreased, and alternative agricultural products began to replace it in Bengal. This shift in the economic landscape made indigo less viable as a cash crop.
• Government Policies: After the Indigo Revolt, the British government implemented some reforms, but these were insufficient to address the deep-rooted issues. The government’s indifference to the plight of the peasants, combined with increasing pressure from the farmers and nationalists, contributed to the decline of indigo production.

Solution:

Champaran Movement and Mahatma Gandhi’s Role

The Champaran Movement was a significant event in India's struggle for independence, which took place in 1917 in the Champaran district of Bihar. This movement was primarily aimed at addressing the grievances of the indigo farmers who were being exploited by the British planters.

Before the movement, the indigo farmers in Champaran were forced to grow indigo on a portion of their land under the "Tinkathia System". The British planters, who owned the land, compelled the farmers to cultivate indigo instead of food crops. The farmers were paid very little for the indigo, and the conditions were harsh and exploitative.

In 1917, Mahatma Gandhi, who had returned to India from South Africa, took up the cause of the indigo farmers. He was invited to Champaran by local leaders like Raj Kumar Shukla, who was concerned about the farmers' plight. Gandhi agreed to visit Champaran, and this marked his first major involvement in the Indian freedom struggle.

Upon his arrival, Gandhi began to investigate the conditions of the indigo farmers and their exploitation. He soon realized that the British planters had imposed unfair practices on the farmers, leading to widespread distress and poverty. Gandhi's approach was non-violent and based on truth (Satyagraha), and he sought to expose the injustices faced by the peasants.

During his visit, Gandhi was arrested by the British authorities for leading the movement, but this act of defiance only strengthened the resolve of the farmers. In response, a large number of peasants, along with supporters from all over the country, came together to protest against the British planters.

The movement gained widespread attention, and as a result, the British government had to form an inquiry committee to investigate the situation. The committee, after its investigation, recommended a reduction in the amount of indigo that the farmers were forced to grow, and the planters were made to compensate the farmers for their losses.

The Champaran Satyagraha is seen as a turning point in Indian history because it was the first time that Mahatma Gandhi led a mass movement based on non-violent resistance. This movement also marked the beginning of Gandhi’s larger role in the Indian independence movement.

Solution:

Life of Workers in Tea or Coffee Plantations vs Indigo Plantations in India

The history of plantation labor in India is closely linked to the production of cash crops such as indigo, tea, and coffee. These plantations were established by European colonial powers, and the workers on these plantations faced difficult and often exploitative conditions. While there are some similarities in the lives of workers in tea or coffee plantations and those in indigo plantations, there are also significant differences.

Workers in Indigo Plantations

Indigo was a vital cash crop in colonial India, especially in the 19th century. The workers on indigo plantations were primarily rural peasants from Bengal and other parts of India. The British East India Company and later British planters forced farmers to grow indigo instead of food crops. These workers were often subjected to severe exploitation, as they had to sell their indigo to the planters at very low prices, leaving them in debt. This practice led to the famous Indigo Rebellion (also known as the Nil Vidroha) in 1859-60, where farmers protested against the oppressive practices of the planters.

The workers in indigo plantations were mainly sharecroppers or agricultural laborers. They lived under difficult conditions and had limited access to education, healthcare, or other basic services. Their lives were controlled by the demands of the indigo planters, and they were subject to long working hours, low wages, and harsh treatment.

Workers in Tea and Coffee Plantations

The tea and coffee plantations in India were established primarily in the hill stations and regions such as Assam, Darjeeling, and the Nilgiris during the 19th century. The British brought in workers from various parts of India, especially from Bengal, Odisha, and Bihar, as well as from other countries like China and Sri Lanka. These workers were recruited through contracts that often promised better wages, but in reality, many of them were trapped in a cycle of debt and exploitation.

In the tea and coffee plantations, workers lived in specially created worker colonies. They were provided with basic housing, but the living conditions were often cramped and unsanitary. The workers faced long working hours and were paid very low wages, much like the workers in indigo plantations. However, the workers in tea and coffee plantations were usually more mobile because they could sometimes escape to nearby towns for work or better conditions.

Similarities and Differences

Both the workers in tea or coffee plantations and those in indigo plantations faced harsh working conditions, long hours, low wages, and were often in a state of debt bondage. In both cases, the workers were exploited by the planters, who controlled most aspects of their lives, from the crops they grew to the wages they earned. The colonial rulers and planters profited greatly from the labor of these workers.

However, a key difference was in the types of work. While indigo plantation workers were involved in cultivating a single crop (indigo), the workers in tea and coffee plantations had to deal with the cultivation of a variety of crops, and the work was more specialized. Additionally, the workers in tea and coffee plantations were often housed in separate colonies, whereas indigo workers were usually spread out in rural villages.

In terms of resistance, the workers in indigo plantations were involved in the Indigo Rebellion, which was a direct challenge to the exploitative practices of the British planters. In contrast, while there were labor movements in tea and coffee plantations as well, they were less organized and often less violent compared to the indigo rebellion.