Condition of Peasants in the 16th and 17th Centuries | History Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Introduction

India's Population and Economy:

• India is primarily a land of villages, with the majority of its population still residing in rural areas today. This was even more pronounced in historical times when industrial production was minimal, limited to scattered artisan and handicraft industries. Agriculture was the main occupation for a large part of the population.

Social Structure During the Sultanate and Mughal Periods:

• During the Sultanate period and continuing under Mughal rule, India's social structure exhibited both continuity and change.
• Key changes included:
• Stratification of rural society: The rural population became more divided into different social strata.
• Urbanization: There was a significant growth in urban areas and the emergence of a class of artisans and master-artisans.
• Ruling class: A composite ruling class developed, accompanied by increased bureaucratization and commercialization.
• Middle segments: There was growth in the middle segments of society.
• Commercial classes: The commercial classes expanded and strengthened.

Rural Population in the 16th and 17th Centuries:

• In the 16th and 17th centuries, about 85 percent of India’s population lived in rural areas.
• Despite this, contemporary historical sources, including accounts from foreign travelers, often lack detailed descriptions of rural life.

Sources of Information on Rural Life:

• The deficiency in accounts of rural life has been somewhat addressed by documents related to land revenue and rural affairs, especially from Rajasthan, 18th-century Marathi records, and Mughal documents focusing on the Deccan region.
• Literary sources also provide some insights into rural life and conditions.

Stratification in Rural Society:

• Rural society, excluding tribal areas, was characterized by a highly stratified nature.
• People were grouped based on resident status, caste, and position as office holders.
• Material status, while varying, was not the primary factor determining one's position in rural society.

Role of Peasants:

• Peasants were a crucial unit of the rural population, as their productive efforts were essential for the survival of all other rural and non-rural classes.

Structure of rural society

The basic unit of rural society in India was the village. A village had two principal physical features:

• A group of families
• A collection of dwellings cultivated land

Peasants 

• Peasants formed a crucial part of the rural population, and their productive efforts were essential for the survival of all other rural and non-rural classes.
• Peasants were divided by inequalities of wealth and social status.
• There were rich peasants(such as
  khudkasht, gharuhala, and mirasdar) and poor peasants(such as rezariaya, malti, and kunbi).
• Peasants were also classified as permanent(mirasdar, thalkar) and temporary residents (paikasht, upari).
• Caste associations and kinship ties(bhaichara) contributed to divisions among the peasantry.

Intermediate proprietors 

Role and Recognition:

• Zamindars were known for claiming a share in the agricultural produce and exerting control over villages based on historical tradition.
• They were recognized by medieval rulers for their assistance in collecting revenue from peasants.
• In return for their services, zamindars were entitled to a percentage of the total revenue collected.

Social Structure:

• The zamindars as a social group were fragmented along lines of caste associations and social ties.

Craft and service communities 

• The rural population of India included many craft and service communities, such as iron-smiths, carpenters, rope-makers, potters, leather workers, barbers, washermen, and village watchmen.
• These communities provided valuable services and also acted as a cheap source of labor for agricultural work.
• In Maharashtra, there were twelve service sectors known as balutedars, who received a prescribed share (baluta) of the village produce.
• Another group called alutedars, mainly found in larger villages, included village priests, tailors, water carriers, gardeners, drum-beaters, vocalists, musicians, oil pressers, betel nut sellers, and goldsmiths. They received a lower share of the produce or were given a strip of land for their remuneration.
• The landless and most of the service classes were designated kamin or low, which included a significant section of dalits.

Estimate of the proportion of the three principal sections – the riyayati, the raiyati, and the service classes

• In eastern Rajasthan, estimates suggest that the riyayati or privileged classes made up 13 percent of the population, while the service classes accounted for 11 percent, and the remaining 76 percent belonged to other categories.
• Evidence indicates that most cultivators were of middling status. However, in larger villages, there were 4 to 15 asamis(financially affluent cultivators), making up 5 to 10 percent of the total population. Conversely, many villages had 15 to 30 percent of cultivators who were either landless or lacked the means for cultivation, classifying them as poor. This statistic does not include landless individuals from the service classes or poorer sections within those classes.

Disparity had both positive and negative effect on the growth pattern of the village

Negative Aspects:

• The wealthier members of the community, such as the mahajans, would lend oxen, ploughs, seeds, and even money to the poorer sections for cultivation. They would charge interest on these loans and collect their dues at the time of harvest.
• In case of default, they would foreclose on the land.
• During famine, the richer sections would lend money to the weaker sections and use their resources to cultivate abandoned fields.
• The state interfered little, mainly ensuring that raiyati lands were not converted into riyayati lands, which paid a lower land-revenue.

Positive Aspects:

• The privileged groups, including village zamindars and rich cultivators, played a crucial role in providing money, implements, and organization for expanding and improving cultivation.
• They introduced higher quality crops like wheat and cash crops such as cotton, indigo, and oil-seeds, which required more investment and water, and were more labour-intensive.
• New crops like tobacco and maize were also introduced.
• There is insufficient information to determine whether poverty was increasing or the rich were becoming richer.

A common assumption is that when the control of the government weakened, the richer sections in the villages shifted their burdens onto the weaker sections.
However, rural society in Mughal India was not a uniform mass of impoverished peasants.
The processes of stratification, income disparity, expansion, and improvement of cultivation occurred simultaneously.
These processes could be disrupted by a general breakdown of law and order or an unequal approach to land-revenue collection.

Standard of living

• Indigenous sources and accounts of foreign travellers from the 16th and 17th centuries depict a stark contrast in India, where a small ruling elite lived in extreme luxury, while the majority, including peasants, artisans, and laborers, faced dire poverty.
• This disparity was not unique to India; similar contrasts existed in various "civilized" countries, including Europe, during that time.
• The Indian village was socially and economically segmented, with significant land inequality.
• Despite the availability of cultivable waste land (banjar), the distribution of land was uneven.
• Rural society was marked by inequalities within the same village, but historical references often portray the rural population as a uniform group.
• Not every village was alike; some larger villages acted as grain collection centers or local markets (mandis).
• In difficult times, such as famines, wealthier peasants took advantage of the situation to further impoverish the poorer peasants by indebting them or seizing their land and tools.
• Clothing was a significant indicator of poverty among rural classes.
• Men were often described as going about naked or wearing minimal clothing, such as a lungi.
• During winter, they wore quilted cotton gowns and caps.
• Women typically wore cotton saris, though there were regional differences in blouse usage.
• In regions like Malabar and eastern India, women often went without a blouse, while in other areas, blouses were common.
• In parts of western and central India, women wore lahangas (skirts) with a blouse instead of a sari.
• The overall impression is one of scantiness in clothing, which, along with the quality of clothes, distinguished the upper classes from the poor.
• Shoes were not commonly worn among rural folk, with the richer sections being more likely to wear them.
• Jewelry was worn profusely by women of all classes, with detailed descriptions provided by contemporary writers and depicted in paintings.
• Housing varied significantly, with many rural people living in mud houses with thatched roofs, typically consisting of a single room.
• There were regional variations in housing material and design.
• In Bengal and Orissa, huts were made of bamboo and mud, while in Gujarat, tiles and bricks were common.
• In Assam, wood, bamboo, and straw were used, and in Kashmir, wooden huts were prevalent.
• In northern and central India, mud was the primary material, and in the South, Cajan leaves were used for roofing.
• Utensils were mostly made of earth, with metal utensils being rare among the poor.
• The diet of common people primarily consisted of rice, millets, and pulses, with regional variations in staple grains.
• Famine and epidemics were frequent scourges in village life, but some regional writers depicted village life as ideal, facing joys and sorrows with equanimity.
• The standard of living for workmen varied, with wages documented in historical texts.
• Peasant shares of produce typically ranged from one-third to half, influenced by factors like soil type, caste, and local customs.
• Upper castes often enjoyed concessional land-revenue rates in some regions.
• Village officials might also be assessed at lower rates under certain circumstances.

Social life in rural India

Reconstruction Efforts Despite Limited Documentation:

• Reconstruction of historical events or periods has been attempted despite the lack of extensive documentation.
• This effort is based on scattered information found in contemporary literature and occasional references in historical chronicles from the same period.
• The process involves piecing together available information to form a clearer picture of the past, even when the records are not comprehensive.

Festivals and Amusements

Fairs and Festivals in Rural Life:

• Fairs and festivals were a common expenditure for villagers, providing a much-needed break from their routine.
• These events offered an opportunity to purchase goods not locally produced.
• Despite different religious backgrounds, Muslim and non-Muslim villagers often participated in each other’s festivals.
• Non-Muslim festivals were typically aligned with seasonal changes and occurred during times of relative leisure, such as after harvests.
• Popular non-Muslim festivals included Basant Panchami, Holi, Deepavali, and Shivratri.
• By the 16th to 18th centuries, Muslim festivals like Eid, Shabbarat, and Muharram were also influenced by the local culture. Some, like Shabbarat, were thought to be inspired by Hindu traditions such as Shivratri.
• Dancing and singing were the primary forms of entertainment for the rural population.
• Significant amounts of money were also spent on birth and death ceremonies and marriages, sometimes necessitating the taking on of debt.