The 18th Century India

Painting of the East India Company's settlement in Bombay and ships in Bombay Harbour (c. 1731)

The breakdown of centralized state structure in the 18th century had compelled colonial and nationalist historians to talk about the 18th century as a period of anarchy, decline and degradation – a ‘dark’ period.

To what extent is that interpretation tenable?

Can the absence of a centralized state power be read as a sign of decline?

18th Century Polity

There was increasing devolution of real power to the lower levels of sovereignty. Though many of them symbolically acknowledged the power of the Mughal state, in real terms, they imitated the Mughals and developed their own sovereign states.

There three kinds of regional states that emerged:

1. Independent states established by erstwhile provincial governors of the Mughal Empire. Eg. Nawab Alivardi Khan (Bengal), Nawab Saadat Khan (Awadh), Nizam Asaf Jah (Hyderabad), Nawabs of Carnatic.

2. Warrior States: Independent states that resorted to military fiscalism. These states were more effective and profitable than the Mughals in terms of combining military power with revenue collection.

Military Fiscalism: the primary aim of revenue collection being the sustenance and development of a powerful military.

Eg. Sikhs, Jats and Marathas.

3. Local kingdoms who already enjoyed some amount of distinctness as a state in itself, but asserted their sovereignty more in the light of decline in centralized state power. These kingdoms did not hesitate to turn to military fiscalism when it deemed necessary.

Eg. Rajput states, Mysore.

These regional kingdoms became powerful primarily because they were financially backed by various merchant bankers who had made huge profits through trading activities.

They did not hesitate to collaborate with the foreign joint stock companies, and becoming prosperous during this century.

Eg. Jagat Seths of Bengal.

18th Century Economy and Society:

The economy did well in three important spheres: agriculture, inland trade and urbanization.

Agriculture: (1) The agrarian production system was well integrated with the trading networks. (2) Except for the subsistence crisis of 1702 and 1704 in S. India, the first seven decades of 18th C were more or less free of famines. The Bengal Famine of 1770 and the famine of 1783 in N. India were more an outcome of the increasing colonial intrusion.

Inland Trade: (1) Inland trade in grains, cloth and cattle thrived. (2) Corporate merchant institutions ensured the transportation of goods and provision of credit and insurance services across regional political boundaries.

External Trade: European countries were beginning to have an upper hand. The traditional port cities went into decline and those under European control rose to prominence. Eg. Bombay, Madras and Calcutta.

Urbanization: (1) With growing prominence of regional kingdoms, regional capitals came to be further developed. Eg. Hyderabad, Lucknow. (2) The merchants who sponsored regional kingdoms had an important role in ensuring the growth of various regional cities.

18th Century Culture:

The tendency was towards greater diversification of religious and cultural traditions rather than homogenization.

The regional rulers patronized devotional cults that were popular among Hindus and Muslims.

The regional rulers patronized regional art, architecture and culture. Eg. Growth of Carnatic music and the patronage it received from regional rulers; Development of Kathak in Lucknow.

Development of regional intellectual traditions and ideological movements. This of course led to moments of both collaboration and conflict between various intellectual and ideological traditions.

Concluding Remarks:

Disintegration of centralized state power did not necessarily lead to any supposed ‘decline’ or ‘degradation’, rather it allowed greater diversification and growth of regional polities, economies and cultures.

The British harnessed the economic, political and cultural developments of 18th century to their own advantage.