Historical Perspectives on Manipur’s Agrarian Economy: A Critical Review

Title of the book: Agrarian System of Manipur 1826-1947 A.D.

Author: Ningombam Basanta

Publisher: Sunmarg Publishers & Distributors, New Delhi

Price: 500/-

Nearly a century ago, Sir Shafa’at Ahmad, during his presidential speech at the first session of the Indian History Congress in 1935, remarked that “Economic history is almost a virgin field.”[1] This observation remains pertinent, particularly in the context of the economic history of India’s Northeast, even in the twenty-first century. Although historians like Amalendu Guha, S.K. Barpujari, J.B. Ganguli, Aditya Mukherjee, and Bodhisattva Kar have shown interest in this area, it still lacks comprehensive exploration. David Ludden’s “An Agrarian History of South Asia” also reflects this gap, where Ludden apologizes for not covering the region due to the poor state of research.[2] Against this backdrop, Ningombam Basanta’s “Agrarian System of Manipur 1826-1947” is a significant contribution as it hopefully fills some of these gaps.

The first edition of “Agrarian System of Manipur 1826-1947” was published in 2016 and reprinted in 2023 by Sunmarg Publishers, New Delhi. The book’s relevance has surged, especially after the recent rise in ethnic politics in Manipur, which has renewed interest in the ‘land question’. The book is divided into seven chapters, extending its analysis to periods earlier than its title suggests.

The author begins with an analysis of Manipur’s unique geography, including landforms, drainage systems, soil quality, and productivity. He then goes on to explain the ‘indigenous knowledge’ and local tradition of agrarian practices, crop and farming patterns, tools and techniques and the list of varieties of rice available. The author points out that the varieties of rice available during the colonial period were less compared to the precolonial period. This may be the case in the valley. Nevertheless, whether hills experienced a similar case is not explained.

Out of the seven chapters, two are focused on the contributions made by the rulers. In these chapters, the author discusses the notable contributions of the various kings, specifically in water management, such as regular checks of drainage systems, dredging rivers, digging canals, etc, starting from the formation of the Meitei State till 1947. He argues that such special attention to water management combined with other factors like the introduction of transplantation by Pangals led to agricultural prosperity in the pre-colonial period. He goes on to argue that state interest in water management and drainage systems waned after 1891, which led to the occurrence of recurring floods and famines in the 1890s and 1900s.

The last four chapters focus on land ownership, peasants, and their social life. The author observes that in the pre-colonial period, land was owned by the king, with no formal land tenure system in place. Following the British takeover of Manipur, significant reforms were implemented, leading to the introduction of new institutions and the abolition of many existing ones. This transformation had a profound impact on the agrarian system. Land was now surveyed, revenue was fixed, and tenants were granted rights of occupancy, inheritance, and transfer, contingent on the payment of revenue.

The state’s economy underwent a major shift, transitioning from a system of in-kind revenue collection to one based on cash. Previously, revenue was collected solely in kind, but the British administration preferred cash payments. The author argued that the poor management of the water system under the British administration impoverished the condition of the peasants.

In discussing the growth of agricultural productivity during the pre-colonial period, the author mentions several granaries situated in various locations, primarily around Imphal. However, the author fails to explain why there were so many royal granaries, why they were dispersed across different sites, or why a single centralized granary was not used. This lack of explanation leaves readers questioning the strategic or practical reasons behind such a distribution, missing an opportunity to delve into the logistical and economic considerations of the period.

The authors vividly illustrated numerous instances where rulers prioritized water management over time. It is widely acknowledged that the Imphal Valley is highly prone to flooding. Consequently, the dredging of rivers and the digging of canals were likely undertaken to prevent floods and control the overflow of water from the channels. While these efforts undoubtedly provided direct and indirect benefits to agriculture, it would be incorrect to assert that they were specifically intended for agricultural purposes. These measures were primarily aimed at flood management, with agricultural benefits being a secondary, albeit significant, outcome.

Had famines, in the strictest sense of the term, occurred in Manipur? Scholars hold differing views on the nature of famine, which highlights the challenge of defining it precisely. Economists like Robert Malthus argue that famines are natural and inevitable, while Adam Smith contends that famines are man-made. Historians of famine, such as Cormac Gráda, caution that “the term famine is an emotive one that needs to be used with caution.”[3] The author notes the occurrence of famines in Manipur after 1891 but fails to provide any detailed description of their causes and nature. This omission leaves readers without a clear understanding of what triggered these famines and how they impacted the region.

Similarly, I found the author overlooking or confused about the issues of land ownership. He gave a lengthy discussion on water management, but he did not do a similar discussion on land management.

Covering such complex issues in a single volume is an ambitious task, and understandably, this book has several limitations. The most notable is the methodology employed by the author. While the author asserts that oral sources were used to fill gaps in the literary sources, this approach is not without its flaws. Although oral sources can indeed bridge gaps in existing literature, the author fails to provide detailed information about these sources. Instead, only the names of informers are mentioned, leaving readers without any context regarding the origin or reliability of the information. Moreover, the author seems to conflate oral interviews with oral sources, further muddying the methodological waters. This issue exemplifies a lack of proper source criticism, a fundamental practice for historians. The author appears to have overlooked this critical evaluation step, even with literary sources. Source criticism is essential for delivering any credible judgment on the past, and its absence here undermines the book’s overall scholarly value. This reminds me of the statement, “history of Manipur is rich but not so the historiography.”[4]

The second major limitation is the lack of a robust theoretical framework. The agrarian history of the colonial period typically focuses on policy studies. As Neeladri Bhattacharya[5] explains, there are two broad approaches to this field. The first approach examines the imposition of Western ideology and doctrine as reflected in colonial policies. The second approach considers the unique characteristics of local or traditional setups and how policies were framed to accommodate these peculiarities. Basanta’s work, however, is purely narrative in nature and does not align with either of these established approaches. This absence of a theoretical foundation limits the depth and analytical rigour of his study, reducing its impact and contribution to the field of agrarian history.

In addition to these limitations, the author rarely utilizes the Tour Diaries of political agents and other key state functionaries, overlooking a vital source of historical insight. Furthermore, the book frequently suffers from improper citation practices and lacks an index at the end, making it challenging for readers to navigate and verify the information. The author also fails to discuss the evolving perspectives, popular imagination, and understanding of the land, particularly in the transition from pre-colonial to colonial phase, missing an opportunity to provide a deeper, more nuanced analysis of the topic.

While the “Agrarian System of Manipur 1826-1947” has its limitations, it remains a valuable resource for students specializing in economic history or agrarian studies. It provides insights into the development of agriculture in Manipur from the earliest periods to 1947 and serves as a reference for several interesting facts.

NOTES

[1] Quoted in, Bhattacharya, S. (1987, rep. 2015). Introduction. In S. Bhattacharya (Ed.), Essays in Modern Indian Economic History (p. xiii). New Delhi: Indian History Congress; Primus Book.

[2]Ludden, D. (1999). The Agrarian History of South Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[3] Gráda, C. Ó. (2009). Famine: A Short History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

[4] Verma, L. B. (1986). Historiography in Manipur: Some Problems. Proceedings of North East India History Association, Seventh Session.

[5] See, Bhattacharya, N. (1992). Colonial State and Agrarian Society. In B. Stein (Ed.), The Making of Agrarian Policy in British India 1770-1900 (pp. 113-122). Delhi: Oxford University Press.

MD UMAR FARUQUE

The writer is a research scholar, CAS, Department of History, Aligarh Muslim University