NCERT Solutions for Class 12 History - Colonialism and the countryside

Answer in  100-150 Words

Q1. Why was Jotedar a powerful figure in many areas of rural Bengal?
Ans: Jotedars were influential figures in rural Bengal due to several key factors:

• They were wealthy peasants who owned large plots of land, sometimes thousands of acres.
• Jotedars controlled local trade and money lending, giving them significant economic power.
• They had a strong influence over the local population, often regarded as more powerful than Zamindars.
• To weaken Zamindars, they mobilised ryots (farmers) to delay or refuse land revenue payments.
• Jotedars actively opposed any attempts by Zamindars to increase the jama (tax) of the village.
• Living in the villages allowed them to interact closely with and influence the peasants.
• They often purchased estates from Zamindars who could not pay their land revenue, further consolidating their power.

Overall, the Jotedars played a crucial role in shaping the rural economy and politics of Bengal.

Q2. How did Zamindars manage to retain control over their zamindaris?
Ans: Zamindars employed several strategies to maintain control over their zamindaris during difficult times. These tactics were essential for their survival:

• Fictitious Sales: Zamindars would create fake auctions where their own men would bid high but never pay. This process would exhaust the government, leading to the estate being sold back to the zamindar at a lower price.
• Transfer of Property: Parts of the estate were often transferred to female family members, as the government could not seize property owned by women.
• Use of Muscle Power: Zamindars would intimidate potential buyers to prevent others from acquiring their estates.
• Peasant Resistance: Sometimes, peasants influenced by zamindars would oppose the auction of the estate, further securing the zamindar's control.

Q3. How did the Paharias respond to the coming of outsiders?
Ans: The Paharias, residing in the hills of Rajmahal, faced significant changes with the arrival of outsiders, particularly the British and Santhal settlers. Their responses included:

• The Paharias initially resisted the Santhal settlement but eventually had to accommodate them.
• They retreated to deeper areas of the hills to escape the encroachment.
• Over time, they were confined to more barren and rocky regions.
• The Paharias practiced shifting cultivation, which became increasingly difficult due to stable settlements.
• As forests were cleared, their reliance on these resources for livelihood diminished, leading to a significant change in their lifestyle.

Q4. Why did the Santhals rebel against British rule?
Ans: By 1832, the Santhals had settled in the Damin-i-Koh area, where their population and agricultural activities grew rapidly. However, dissatisfaction arose, leading to their rebellion against British rule. The main causes for this rebellion included:

• High Taxes: The Santhals were unhappy with the tax regime imposed by the British, which they felt was exploitative.
• Zamindar Control: Increased control by zamindars over Santhal lands, as part of British policy, caused resentment among the Santhals.
• Moneylenders: Rural moneylenders were viewed as agents of exploitation, often auctioning Santhal lands when debts were unpaid.

In response to these grievances, the British later established a separate district called Santhal Pargana and enacted laws to protect the Santhals.

Q5. What explains the anger of Deccan ryots against the moneylenders?
Ans: The anger of the ryots towards moneylenders stemmed from several key issues:

• Excessive Interest Rates: Traditionally, interest was expected to be less than the principal amount. However, in some cases, the interest charged exceeded the principal, such as a loan of Rs 100 accruing Rs 2000 in interest.
• Lack of Receipts: Moneylenders did not provide receipts for partial or full loan repayments, allowing for manipulation and disputes over payments.
• Fraudulent Practices: Ryots reported instances of moneylenders forging documents and engaging in other dishonest activities.
• Insensitivity and Exploitation: Many ryots felt that moneylenders were indifferent to their struggles, viewing them as arrogant and exploitative.

Write a  Short Essay (250-300 words)

Q6. Why were so many Zamindaris auctioned after the Permanent settlement?
Ans:  The Permanent Settlement of 1793 was introduced by the British in Bengal with the expectation that it would ensure a stable revenue system. Under this system, zamindars were required to pay a fixed land revenue to the British, irrespective of the agricultural output. However, this system led to widespread auctioning of zamindaris due to multiple reasons.

First, the revenue demand was excessively high, and it did not take into account the fluctuating nature of agricultural productivity. During the late 18th century, Bengal suffered from famines and declining agricultural output, making it difficult for zamindars to collect rents from the peasants. Unable to pay the fixed revenue to the British on time, many zamindars defaulted.

Second, the strict payment schedule imposed by the British, known as the Sunset Law, stated that if the zamindars failed to make payments by a specific deadline, their lands would be auctioned. Unlike in the past, where revenue collection was flexible, the British enforced a rigid system, leading to a loss of estates for many zamindars.

Additionally, the British reduced the political power of zamindars, disbanding their armed forces and restricting their ability to enforce tax collection. This empowered rich peasants and jotedars, who often withheld payments to zamindars, further contributing to defaults.

Despite auctions, many zamindars found ways to retain control over their estates through fictitious purchases, where their own agents would bid on the auctioned lands and return them to their original owners. However, over time, many old zamindari families lost their influence as new landowners emerged.

Thus, the Permanent Settlement proved to be a flawed system that led to economic distress for zamindars, weakened their traditional authority, and resulted in the widespread auctioning of estates.

Q7. In what way was the livelihood of Paharias different from that of Santhals?
Ans:  The Paharias and Santhals were two distinct communities living in the Rajmahal hills, but their ways of life were significantly different due to their relationship with the land, economy, and interaction with outsiders.

The Paharias were hunter-gatherers and shifting cultivators who relied on the forest for their livelihood. They lived in small groups, practiced slash-and-burn (jhum) cultivation, and supplemented their diet with forest produce such as mahua and silk cocoons. Their economy was not market-oriented, and they avoided interactions with outsiders. They also engaged in raids on settled villages, forcing zamindars and traders to pay them protection money.

In contrast, the Santhals were agricultural settlers who cleared forests and established plough-based farming. Unlike the Paharias, they embraced settled agriculture and engaged in trade with outsiders, including the East India Company. The British and zamindars encouraged their migration to Rajmahal to expand cultivation, leading to a gradual decline of Paharia land and influence.

As the Santhals expanded their farmlands, the Paharias retreated deeper into the hills, facing economic hardship due to loss of forest resources. While the Santhals adapted to the colonial economy, the Paharias resisted British control, resulting in conflicts.

Thus, the Paharias remained forest-dependent and isolated, while the Santhals transitioned into settled farming, ultimately displacing the Paharias from their traditional lands.

Q8. How did the American Civil War affect the lives of the ryots in India?
Ans:  The American Civil War (1861-1865) had a significant impact on the Indian economy, particularly the ryots (peasants) in the Deccan. Before the war, British cotton mills relied heavily on raw cotton from the United States. However, as the war disrupted cotton exports from America, Britain turned to India as an alternative source.

This sudden rise in demand created a cotton boom in India, especially in Bombay and Deccan regions. British traders and moneylenders encouraged ryots to grow more cotton by offering easy credit. Many peasants took loans from moneylenders at high interest rates to buy seeds and expand cultivation, hoping for higher profits.

However, when the Civil War ended in 1865, American cotton production resumed, and Indian cotton demand plummeted. Cotton prices crashed, and the moneylenders, who had earlier given easy credit, now demanded immediate repayment. Ryots, who had taken heavy loans, were unable to repay and fell into deep debt.

To recover their money, moneylenders took over peasants' lands, forcing many ryots into bonded labor. This economic distress led to widespread peasant revolts, including the Deccan Riots of 1875, where ryots attacked moneylenders, burned account books, and looted grain stores.

Thus, the American Civil War initially brought prosperity but eventually led to severe financial distress for Indian peasants, exposing them to the exploitative moneylending system under British rule.

Q9. What are the problems of using official sources in writing about the history of peasants?
Ans: Official sources from the Company Raj are often deemed unreliable when examining the history of the Ryots. Here are the main issues associated with these sources:

1. One-Sided Perspective:
   British records were written from the viewpoint of colonial administrators and focused on their interests. They did not document the grievances, struggles, or everyday lives of peasants accurately. For instance, the Deccan Riots Commission Report largely blamed moneylenders for peasant unrest while ignoring the role of high revenue demands imposed by the British government.

2. Cultural Prejudice:
   British officials viewed Indian society through a Eurocentric lens, often portraying local customs and practices as backward. They assumed that peasants were lazy and resistant to change, rather than acknowledging the harsh economic conditions they faced.

3. Manipulation of Data:
   Many reports exaggerated or concealed facts to justify British policies. For example, the Fifth Report on Bengal claimed that zamindars were losing land due to mismanagement, while in reality, many were actively resisting British revenue policies.

4. Selective Recording of Information:
   Colonial records focused mostly on tax collection, legal disputes, and government policies, rather than the social conditions of peasants. Reports on rural revolts often downplayed peasant resistance, instead highlighting British attempts to restore "order."

5. Need for Cross-Verification:
   To get a complete picture of peasant history, official records must be compared with other sources such as folk stories, petitions, traveler accounts, and oral histories. Recent research has shown that many British reports exaggerated the collapse of traditional zamindari power and underestimated peasant resistance.

In conclusion, while official records provide valuable data, they must be critically analyzed and supplemented with alternative sources to accurately understand the history of peasants under colonial rule.

Map Work

Q10. On an outline map of the subcontinent, mark out the areas described in this chapter.Find out whether there were other areas where the Permanent Settlement and the ryotwari system were prevalent and plot these on the map as well.
Ans: In this chapter, the following areas of the subcontinent are highlighted:

• Bengal: Includes Bangladesh and parts of Bihar, Orissa, and hilly regions of Assam.
• Bombay Presidency
• Madras Presidency
• The British introduced the Mahalwari system of land revenue in eastern Punjab.
• Surat
• Rajmahal Hills: Inhabited by the Paharias and Santhals.