History
Politics
Colonialism
Land Ownership
Economic Systems
British Colonialism
British Rule
Taxation System
Colonial Studies
Who owned* the land during British rule? (18th century)
*By owned, we mean was responsible for paying land tax to the British.
*By owned, we mean was responsible for paying land tax to the British.
All cultivable land in British India fell under one of three
alternative systems based on who was liable to pay land tax
1. landlord-based system (zamindari or malguzari),
2. individual cultivator-based system (raiyatwari)
and 3. village-based system (mahalwari)
alternative systems based on who was liable to pay land tax
1. landlord-based system (zamindari or malguzari),
2. individual cultivator-based system (raiyatwari)
and 3. village-based system (mahalwari)
In the landlord areas, the revenue liability for
a village or a group of villages lay with a single
landlord. The landlord was free to set the revenue terms for the peasants, sell, or transfer his zamindari powers.
a village or a group of villages lay with a single
landlord. The landlord was free to set the revenue terms for the peasants, sell, or transfer his zamindari powers.
Landlord systems were established mainly in Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, the Central Provinces (modern Madhya Pradesh state), and some parts of the Madras Presidency (modern Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh
states).
states).
In most areas of Madras and Bombay Presidencies, and Assam, the raiyatwari system was adopted under which the revenue settlement was made directly with the individual raiyat or cultivator.
Unlike the Zamindari system, in Raiyatwari system, tax was calculated as the share of the estimated average annual output. This share typically varied from place to place, was different for different soil types, and was
adjusted periodically acc to the productivity of the land
adjusted periodically acc to the productivity of the land
In the North-West Provinces and Panjab, the village-based (mahalwari) system was adopted
in which village bodies which jointly owned the
village were responsible for the land revenue.
in which village bodies which jointly owned the
village were responsible for the land revenue.
In some areas it was a single person / family that made the village body much like the zamindari, while in other areas share was determined by ancestry (pattidari), or based on actual possession of the land (bhaiachara), much like the individual-based raiyatwari system
I wonder if years of differential taxation systems could have made its way to how societies psychologically perceive and organise power and hierarchy in different areas of India.
What are your thoughts?
What are your thoughts?
Source: Banerjee, Abhijit; Iyer, Lakshmi (2005). History, Institutions, and Economic Performance: The Legacy of Colonial Land Tenure Systems in India. American Economic Review, 95(4), 1190–1213. doi:10.1257/0002828054825574
Note: Parts of UP (Oudh) and Madras did have the landlord system but the demarcations aren't shown here because the accuracy of such borders would be really low.
Loading suggestions...