Mahesh-Artisan and Monastic Credit

8/4/2019 Mahesh-Artisan and Monastic Credit

1/20

http://ier.sagepub.comSocial History Review

Indian Economic &

DOI: 10.1177/0019464699036002041999; 36; 239Indian Economic Social History Review

Mahesh SharmaArtisans and monastic credit in early twentieth century Himachal

http://ier.sagepub.com The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Indian Economic & Social History ReviewAdditional services and information for

http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://ier.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

1999 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.by mahesh sharma on February 2, 2007http://ier.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://ier.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://ier.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://ier.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://ier.sagepub.com/http://ier.sagepub.com/http://ier.sagepub.com/http://ier.sagepub.com/http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://ier.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts


2/20

Artisans and monastic credit in earlytwentieth century Himachal

Mahesh Sharma

DAV

CollegeChandigarh

In recent years scholarship on the artisans has rapidly grown, enabling certain

generalisations about the social and economic conditions of artisans in colonial

India, and changes in these conditions both before and after Independence. Scholarshave analysed the rituals and traditional symbols associated with various crafts,caste and subcaste formation, social mobility, kinship structure and art history.

1

However, gaps remain in our knowledge of specific regions and crafts.Also, theeconomic history of artisans requires greater research.

Acknowledgements: I am grateful to Mr Harbans Garg, Deputy Director of HimachalArchives,Simla, for introducing and providing access to the account book which forms the main source ofdata. Thanks are due to the anonymous referee for critical comments. I am also grateful to B.N.

Goswamy, KarunaGoswamy, Jyotirmaya Khatri, Nandini Dutta, P. V. Rao, Deepak Singh,Amitabh

Dwivedi, Lakesh Sharma and Nitika Tiwari for their valuable suggestions and comments.

See,for

example,Jan

Brouwer,The Makers

ofthe World: Caste,

Craftand Mind

ofSouth

IndianArtisans, New Delhi, 1995; Nita Kumar, TheArtisans of Benaras: Popular Culture and

Identity, New Jersey, 1988; P.K. Misra, The Nomadic Gaduliya Lohar of Eastern Rajasthan, Calcutta,1978; Renaldo Maduro,Artistic Creativity in a Brahmin Painter Community, Berkeley, 1976, pp.83-89; S.K. Choyal, NathdwaraAnArt Centre: Study of Nathdwara School of Painting from 19thto mid 20th Century (Ph.D. thesis), Meerut University, 1977; Eberhard Fischer and Haku Shah,Rural Craftsman and Their Work: Equipment and Techniques in the Mer Village of Ratadi in

Saurashtra,Ahmedabad, 1970; S.P. Ruhela, The Gaduliya Lohars of Rajasthan:A Study in the

Sociology of Nomadism, New Delhi, 1968. Studies on weavers and the textile industry includeMattison Mines, The Warrior Merchants: Textiles, Trade and Territory in South India, Cambridge,1984 and Vijaya Ramaswamy, Textiles and Weavers in Medieval South India, Delhi, 1985. On

Punjab, the artisans in general, see H.C. Sharma, Changing World ofArtisans, 1849-1947, inIndu Banga, ed., Five Punjabi Centuries: Polity, Economy, Society and Culture, c. 1500-1900,Delhi, 1997.

http://ier.sagepub.com/http://ier.sagepub.com/http://ier.sagepub.com/http://ier.sagepub.com/


3/20

240/

This article addresses these gaps by studying some aspects of the socio-economicconditions of two artisan groups, the Dumna basket-makers and Lohar blacksmith/

iron-smelters, in the 1920s and the 1930s in a Himachal village. It describes aneconomic relationship not well-known to scholars, between religious establishmentsand rural classes and uses a rather unusual source of information. The article

suggests that the chiefambition of these establishments in maintaining such relation-

ships was not only to maximise their capital but also to extend their influence overlocal society. The case discussed in this study is that of a Shankarite monastic

order,2 a Brahmanical revival movement which mirrored and safeguarded theinterests of the landed high-caste community, with important implications onthe political economy of the region.

There are a few studies about the artisans in

generalon Himachal.

Goswamyhas provided the contested genealogies and reconstructed the socio-economicsituation of the carpenter-painters who successfully sanskritised themselves asRaina Brahmins.1A subsequent study of these carpenter-painters by Sharmaconcludes that sanskritisation is not caste-inclusive but craft-oriented dependingupon demand, craft exclusivity and patronage. In other words, individuals sans-kritise but not all the members of the caste or group. Thus the painters, originallycarpenters, style themselves as Brahmins, while their kin, pursuing the originaloccupation, continue to retain the de-sanskritised identity. Thakur has used the

temple inscriptionsand

copper plate grants,issued

(betweenA.D.

700-1400,to

study the master craftsman, including metal workers, carpenters, architects, sculp-tors, and stone-carvers. He concludes that these low caste (sudras) artisans,professing the hereditary occupation were not organised at the regional level, butmoved from place to place in search of gainful occupation. They were generallypaid in kind, as in the jajmani system, though those attached to the household ofthe king were given special remuneration. The artisans sustained themselves partlyby agricultural output from the land and partly by professional earnings.5The emphasis in this article, by contrast with these studies, is on certain types

of economic transactions between rural classes, with special reference to tran-sactions between monasteries and rural labourers. In rural Himachal in the interwar

period, Kanets, the cultivator tenants, were numerically the dominant caste, thoughthey owned less than 10 per cent of the agricultural land. Rajputs, popularly knownas Thakurs, were the dominant landowners, holding 70 per cent of all cultivable

2 See G.S. Ghurye, Indian Sadhus, Bombay, 1953; Mahesh Sharma, Sidh Worship in HimachalPradesh:A Study of a Popular Cult in Historical Perspective Ph.D. Thesis, Punjab University,Chandigarh, 1995.

3 B.N. Goswamy, Painters at the Sikh Court, Wiesbaden, 1975; also, Pahari Painting: Family as

the Basis of Style, Marg, Vol. 21(4), 1968; and recently, with Eberhard Fischer, Pahari Masters:Court Painters of Northern India, Zurich, 1992.4Mahesh Sharma, A Painter Family of Nurpur; The Mirasi Genealogies as a New Source of

Information, in B.N. Goswamy, ed., Indian Painting (Essays in Honour of Karl J. Khandalavala),Delhi, 1995.5L.S. Thakur, Artisans in Himachal Pradesh circaA.D. 700-1400:A Study Based on Epigraphics,

The Indian Economic and Social History Review (hereafter IESHR), Vol. 23(3), 1986.



4/20

241

land. Brahmins were the other land-owning people, along with the religious esta-blishments, which were provided with khidmati or service grants. The Kanetstilled the land for these land-owning castes, as co-sharers and tenants.Also con-

spicuous were the landless artisans, who performed agricultural labour, and fulfilledthe craft requirements of the village. In 1916, in the state of Sirmaur, the regionstudied here, there were 4,126 Dumnas, accounting for 3.7 per cent of the total

population, and there were 1,707 Lohars accounting for 1.4 per cent.7

The main source for this article is a singular bahi or an account book, recoveredfrom the Saivite Dasanami math (monastery) of Giri order from the village Thor

(Hadbast no. 131, or revenue boundaries), in tehsil (revenue circle) Rajgarh, districtSirinaur.1 This bahi was recovered from the Mahant ofThor and is presently in the

possession of Himachal archives, Simla. It is written in a Pahari-Hindi dialect

using Devanagari script in black ink, signed by the witnesses in Devanagari,occasionally in Urdu, and rarely in English. It is bound in red cloth cover in theform of an account book, similar to those maintained by shopkeepers. The foliosare unnumbered but contain the contracts signed by the artisans with the Mahantof Thor between 1926-34. The bahi is of significance in not only providing uswith the information regarding the, economic relations between the artisans and

Mahant, but also on the income and expenditure pattern of the artisans. Significantly,it acts as an authentic inventory of castes in an area on which there is otherwiselittle information. Moreover, the contracts implicitly emphasise the nexus betweenthe state functionaries and the religious establishment.A fair notion about thecontents ofthe bahi may be gathered from two representative contract documents,signed by the Mahant and the Dumna as well as Lohar artisans, translated and

reproduced in theAppendix.These documents detail the terms of contract arrived at with the Mahant, authenti-

cated by two witnesses and occasionally accompanied by a mortgage. The contract

specified that the borrower will plough the lands of Mahant [without wages] andone person of his family will sow for Mahant on the payment of daily wages.

6 These grants were renewed by the colonial settlement regime. For definition see. ILR 7All. 191:1884Aw No. 331; also O.P.Aggarwala, Punjab Land RevenueAct, 1887, Delhi, 1991 (hereafterPLRA).

7 D. Ibbetson, Panjab Castes, Lahore, 1916, pp. 328-29, 310-11. The Dumna population inSimla was 457 (1.1 per cent); 11,095 in Kangra (1.5 per cent); 11,540 in Mandi (7.9 per cent); 1,881in Chamba (1.6 per cent); 1096 in Nalagarh (2 per cent); and 4,126 in Suket (6 per cent). In 1901,the Dumnas classified as sweepers etc. were 1,30,568 in Kashmir and 68,971 in Punjab, There were

50,568 Dumnas classified as caneworkers in Punjab and the Himachal hill states, see Census ofIndia, Vol. II, 1901, General Tables for Provinces and Feudatory States, pp. 13, 36. In 1916, Lohar

population in Simla was 715 (1.7 per cent); 1632 in Mandi (2.1 per cent); 1537 in Chamba (1.1per

cent); 1,914 in Bilaspur (1.3 per cent); 916 in Bashair (2.2 per cent); 773 in Nalagarh (1.4 per cent);and 1,201 in Suket (1.4 per cent). In 1901, there were 1,609 men and 845 women Lohars, with 1,702Hindus, one Sikh and 211 Muslims, General Tables for Provinces and Feudatory States, p. 293.

8 Not yet with an accession number, it is in possession of Himachal Pradesh StateArchiveshoused in the Language and Culture Department, Simla. Folios are not serialised. Further referencesto the bahi are implied, though not mentioned.



5/20

242

Moreover, they were required to perform all the domestic chores ofthe Mahant,working as unpaid labour, and tending to the water mill. If the borrower refusedor showed a lack of interest, he was charged interest or penalty or both, thoughexplicitly the Mahant agreed not to charge interest. The contract is followed bythe balance-sheet, showing both the receipts and subsequent loans advanced. Theaccount sheet provides an interesting insight into the rural credit as maybe inferredfrom Document 2 (3 in Table 1). Thus, a sum as paltry as four annas was contractedwhile proceeding for hunting trip; 12 annas to buy a turban; as well as Rs. 4 to buya sheep. The social dimension of rural credit is also interesting. Thus, the Mahantadded Rs. 8V2when the sheep of the borrower worth Rs. 4, damaged his crop. Inorder to have a closer look at the functioning of the system, or its scope, theinformation regarding 14 complete documents has been tabulated in Table 1.The article has three more sections. The first section describes the occupational

groups involved and rural transactions in general. The second deals with monasticcredit and its significance. The last section ties up the information surveyed and toarrive at some tentative conclusions.

Artisans and the Rural Economy

The Dumnas were cane-workers and basket-makers, one ofthe lowest in hierarchyand

equatedwith the

Chuhraor

scavangers. Theymanufactured

sieves, winnowingpans, fans, mats, grass-ropes and strings, screens and various types of basketssuch as kilas, odas, karandis, chhabaris, etc.9 These commodities were made from

locally available raw materials comprising various grasses, and sharpened fibres

of kag willow (Salix pindroo) and ringal bamboo (Arundinaria falcata). 10 Theartisans purchased the raw material from the local farmers or the proprietors oncash/kind payment, or against certain services. The goods made could be sold in

nearby towns or in such villages where the Dumna artisans were not available. Onan average, a basket fetched 25 to 50 paisa in the market in 1961. The Dumnas

could manufacture around 30 kilas, 20 odas, 30 dhals, 45 karandis, 55 chhabaris,and 65 other baskets in a month.&dquo; However, only an insignificant proportion of

output was sold, as the bulk of manufacture was for the villagers with whom theseartisans had reciprocal jajmani relations.The Lohars were also low caste artisans and could belong to any one of the

religions practised in the neighbourhood. There were, thus, Hindu, Sikh or MuslimLohars. In the Himachal hills they belonged largely to the higher rung of the kaminsor the occupational castes, differentiated from other kamin castes (Chamars for

instance) by their dietary habits. The differentiation was associated with consump-tion of naturally dead animals as against those slaughtered for consumption, and

9 H.A. Rose, Glossary of Tribes and Castes ofthe Punjab and North West Frontier Province,Lahore, 1883 (rpt. Chandigarh, 1989), Vol. II, p. 250; also, Panjab Castes. pp. 234, 333-34.

10 Himachal Pradesh District GazetteerSirmaur (hereafter HPDGS),Aligarh, 1961, p. 249." Ibid., p. 195.



6/20



7/20

244

with the consumption or non-consumption of beef.12 The occupation of Loharswas vital for the farmers and hence their social status was higher than theirtheoretical one. They were particularly in demand in the areas where the terrain

was rough and climate inhospitable, such as Lahul. In fact in Lahul, they wereencouraged to immigrate by the offering of rent-free agricultural land, called

garzang.3 This was over and above the customary payments for the services theyrendered. Nevertheless, in such cases also they were subordinated by the highcaste landed community. For instance, it was reported that even when they couldwear gold ornaments, they may only don a sihra or chaplet of flowers by per-mission. The artisans were also prevented from draw[ing] drinking water fromthe same well as the members of high castes, or even the peasants.4

Occupationally, the Lohars were both blacksmiths and iron-smelters. They manu-

factured pipes, tinder boxes, bits, locks and keys, knives, choppers, hoes, plough-shares, various cutting and digging implements, chains, axes, etc.&dquo; They were

dependent upon the Chamar, leather workers, for the supply of cowhides out ofwhich bellows were made, and on local market for the supply ofcoal or fuelwoodand iron.6 Though the bulk of their production was for the village they resided in

and paid for in customaryjajmani dues, they could sell a part of their output in thelocal market. Thus, in 1961, they could sell an axe for a rupee, and a spade or asickle for 50 paisa. On an average, they designed and manufactured in a weekabout 30 to 40 spades, 50 to 70 sickles, 15 to 16 axes, 50 to 55 hoes, 20 to 25 ham-

mers, etc. In 1950, in Moginand village, where four Lohar households of 13 peoplewere in operation, they could earn as much as Rs 26 to Rs 50 per household permonth.&dquo; This was a time when the market wage rate for blacksmiths was around

Rs. 3.25 per day.8These artisans, both Dumnas and Lohars, interacted economically with the

villagers on the basis of jajmani system (sep in the Punjab). The artisan householdscatered to the villagers requirements, for which fixed obligatory dues were paidat the end of each harvest. When the members of practising families were larger,the village was divided into service sectors, served exclusively by an earmarked

family. Thus, each jajman family (i.e., those receiving service) had a relation witha particular craft-family by way of an exclusive right. This right was mutual and

hereditary. Interestingly, in such reciprocal obligatory rights, the family was the

unit, instead of an individual. Hence, the household was responsible for the servicesand as such obliged to receive the customary dues.&dquo; Similarly, the jajman did not

12 Ibbetson, Punjab Castes, pp. 332; Rose, Glossary, III, p. 36.13 Ibbetson, Punjab Castes, pp. 310-11.

14Rose, Glossary, II, refers particularly in the context of Dumnas, p. 250.

15Ibid., III, p. 36.16HPDGS, p. 196.

17Census of India, 1961, Vol. XX, (Part VI no. 8),A Village Survey of Moginand, pp. 39, 44.18HPDGS, p. 248.19 Census of India, 1961, XX, (Part VI) no. 6,A Village Survey of Kolar, p. 45; Ibbetson, Punjab

Castes, pp. 270-71; Rose, Glossary, II, p. 250; and III, p. 38.



8/20

245

get his craft requirements from anybody else except when the concerned craft-

family expressed its inability or surrender him to the other.2 Such monopoly of

the artisans over the j ajman family has been observed in other contexts, for example,the Muslim potters of Kutch.2 This example shows that services could not only beinherited but also sold or mortgaged to other artisan households. Such a needarose particularly when the number of artisans increased relative to the patronfamilies, as observed by Reddy in his study on Senapur village in Uttar Pradesh.22In this case, the blacksmith-carpenters ensured their survival by practising anothercraft besides their traditional occupation.The farmers or the jajmans supplied the raw material required for production.

For the days that the artisans worked for a particular family, it provided them with

food. However, the paymentwas

made at the end of the seasonal harvesting, calledfaslana or sakta. This seasonal payment was linked to the amount of land tilled,generally measured in the number of ploughs one owned. If a zamindar, for

instance, owned a plough of land in 1961, he paid 20 seers of cereals, one seer

jaggery, one seer cotton or 10 seers of sugarcane juice.At that time, wheat costRs. 24 to Rs. 40 per kg; a metre of cotton cloth cost Re 1 to Rs. 3; and 40 kgjaggery cost Rs. 27 to Rs. 45.13

In order to have a finer understanding of jajmani, the comparison may be madebetween the system in Punjab and Thor (Table 2).

Moreover, thejajmani rights involved the social perquisites of the jajmans also.For example, Dumnas were expected to perform as bards, like the Mirasis, to singand play for the low caste cultivators like the Kanets for instance, and as musicians

during the occasion of marriage or festivals. 21 Similarly, the Lohars were supposedto discharge certain duties in case of a death in the family of their jajmans. Bames,for instance, informs that

When a Kanet dies, his heir call the kosidar dagis (the workers of the courtyard)through their jatis or headman; they bring in fuel for the funeral pile and funeral

feast, wood for torches, play the pipes and drums in the funeral procession, anddo other services, in return for which they get food and the kira or funeral perqui-sites. 21

Thus, jajmani was a socio-economic interdependence where the artisans were

paid biannually in kind for the specialised craft services rendered, as well as for

20Census of India, 1961, XX, (Part VI) no. 6,A Village Survey of Kolar, p. 52.21E. Fischer and H. Shah, Some 19th Century Garas Patas or Jajmani Documents of Muslim

Potters in Kutch, Verhandl. Narurf Ges., rpt, Basel, Band 97, 1987.22 N.S. Reddy, Functional Relations of Lohars in a North Indian Village, The Eastern

Anthropologist, Vol. 8, 1966, pp. 129-40.23 Census of India, 1961, XX, (Part VI) no. 8, Village Survey of Moginand, p. 44.24 Mahesh Sharma, A Painter Family ofNurpur, pp. 374-91; Rose, Glossary, II, p. 253.25 G.C. Barnes, Settlement Report of District Kangra (signed 1852), Lahore, 1891, p. 6; Ibbetson,

Punjab Castes, p. 352.



9/20

246/

Table 2

Dues and Obligations in the Traditional Jajmani System

Sources: District Gazetteer, Multan1883-84, Lahore, 1885, p. 80; District Gazetteer, Montgomary1883-84, Lahore, 1885, p. 80; H.C. Sharma, Changing World ofArtisans, in Indu Banga, ed.,/


10/20

247

tailors. The Dumnas and Lohars also raised livestock to augment their income.&dquo;

Interestingly, the development of craft skills other than the hereditary one is

generally to be seen among the higher caste artisans like Lohars, Tarkhans, Batehras

(carvers) or Thathiyars (metalsmiths). These artisans also functioned, exclusivelyor along with their traditional practices, as painters, architects, masons, sculptorsand carvers, particularly in the religious establishments of Thor. In order to

supplement their income, lower caste artisans usually employed themselves as

agricultural labour only. This does not mean that the higher caste artisans were not

employed as agricultural labour.Since almost all these artisans were landless and paid ground,rent (khudi kamiani)

and non-proprietary residents cess (kuri kamiani) to the village headman, 21 theywere dependent upon the proprietors for sustenance. In the present case, these

artisans were employed by the Mahant of Thor to cultivate the monastic land.They were paid the customary wages for the work done in the fields, which is

comparable to the customary wage rate in Punjab (see Table 3).

Table 3

Customary Payment Made to theArtisans asAgricultural Labour. -........ - ...

Sources: District Gazetteer of Ghazipur, 1883-84, Lahore, 1885, p. 39; B.K. Madan, SomeAspects

of Rural Economy in the Punjab, Lahore, 1934, pp. 1 S-18; HPDGS, pp. 247-49.

In Punjab, and perhaps in Thor also, a distinction in payment existed betweenthe artisans as unskilled agricultural labourers and agricultural labourers. In 1934,while the former received the customary dues in kind, the latter was paid in cash.The agricultural labour rate also varied from region to region. Thus in Sangla,

Gurdaspur and Jhelum the rate was Rs. 15 to Rs. 16 per month, Rs. 7 per month

26 Rose, Glossary, II, p. 253; III, pp. 36-38; Ibbetson, Punjab Castes, pp. 310-12.27PLRA, p. 51. These were to be paid at the end ofthe agricultural year, which commenced from

every 16th of June, pp. 52, 54.



11/20

248

and Rs. 4 to Rs. 5 per month respectively, along with food and clothes. However,in Shaikhupura the rate was Rs. 8 to Rs. 10 per month along with a yearly pair ofshoes and two cotton shawls. 18 In contrast, the gardener, a skilled labourer,received Rs. 30 per month along with three annas a day instead of food.z9 Similarly,by 1961, the blacksmith received Rs. 3 to Rs. 4 per day in Thor.3 Thus, while the

agricultural labour was paid mostly in cash, the artisan agricultural labour, as withtheir craft obligations, continued to be paid in kind.

In the period of the account book, trends in real wages are revealed in a com-

parison between wages and weighted agricultural prices (Table 4). The price-wage comparison is significant because the localised prices of Thor, though not

stable, were higher than that of Punjab. Further, while general weighted agriculturalprice index declined through 1920s and 1930s, the local prices almost doubled

during this time.3 Thus, there was a sharp decline in both money and real wages inPunjab as well as in Thor. The decline in money wages may have made littledifference to the artisans who continued to be paid mostly in kind. But wherever

wages were paid in cash, the artisans, particularly masons and carpenters suffered. 32It has been suggested that in Punjab an agricultural labourer on an average earnedbetween Rs. 100 and Rs. 130 per year in 1934, and a blacksmith earned approxi-mately Rs. 150 per annum in 1930.33 The income of artisans at Thor seems sub-

stantially lower than Punjab.

Table 4Relation between theAgricultural Prices and Wages

Source: For all entries on Thor, HPDGS, appendix XVIII. For entries on Punjab, Madan, SomeAspects of Rural Economy in the Punjab, Lahore, 1934, p. 51.

Given declining wages, why did the artisans continue producing for the Mahantor the landowners? Possibly, the artisans wanted jajmani relations to continue

28 M.L. Darling, Wisdom and Waste in the Punjab Village, London, 1934, p. 277.29Ibid., p. 8.30 HPDGS, p. 248.31 On general price index, see Michelle McAlpin, Price Movements and Fluctuations in Economic

Activity, in Dharma Kumar, ed., TheCambridge

Economic History of India, 1757-1970, Cambridge,1982, p. 904.

32By 1912, 58 per cent of the villages paid only in cash; 40 per cent partly in cash and partly in

grains; while only 2 per cent of the villages continued to make customary payments in grains,Report on the Moral and Material Progress ofthe Punjab 1901-11, Lahore, 1915, p. 5. See also

Darling, Wisdom and Waste, p. 316.33Ibid., p. 208; B.K. Madan, SomeAspects of Rural Economy in the Punjab, Lahore, 1934, p. 16.



12/20

249

because they valued the payment in kind, and because jajmani meant employmentfor all the potential hands in the household. Further, rural manufacturers had littleor no urban market. By 1916, there were only two large population centres in the

erstwhile state of Sirmaur, Nahan, with a population of 6,859 and Shamsherpurwith 949.34 Other small towns like Rajgir, Paunta or Renuka had populations lessthan 500 each. These towns, which served as the redistribution centres, particularlyfor agricultural commodities, had scarce need of craft commodities especiallywhen compared to the villages. Since most of the villages had their own artisans,the scope ofproduction outside the jajmani network was minimal. In such circumsta-nces the artisans in Punjab sought alternative employment, even as agriculturists.35But in Himachal, where agricultural productivity continued to be poor and therewas no industrialisation, such possibilities were remote. If the artisans barely met

subsistence, there was little left to meet such needs as purchase of cattle, disease,festivities, etc.36 Thus, they had to borrow from the moneylenders at exorbitantinterest. In 1961, loans could be obtained at takina byaz, i.e., after paying the feeof an anna per rupee over and above the yearly interest of 12/2 per cent. Sometimesthe loan was contracted at 12/2 per cent per mensum.3 The loans contracted weredifficult to return. For instance, in 1961, in Moginand, it was established thatthere were 18 indebted artisan families owing Rs. 2,870 at the rate of 12/2 per centannum.38 The Mahants, however, ostensibly advanced interest free loans.

Monastic Credit

The modus operandi of raising loans was simple. The borrower usually becamethe bonded labour ofthe monastery whenever the amount was more than Rs.100.

His dependants were obliged to work for the Mahant at the current agriculturalwages, in such tasks as domestic chores or agricultural labour. The craft specialitywas also the prerogative of the Mahant, who received the manufactures againstfood supplied by the monastery, without any customary or monetary payment.The labour only accounted for the interest and it was obligatory to return the

principal. In order to guarantee the principal usually an assurance was required,both in person and in terms of material objects. The Mahant however was notfastidious about the material assurance. In most cases only personal assurance,provided by the borrowers witness, was required. The amount of loan was not

always handed over in cash, particularly when it was a successive loan, but paid in

34Census of India, Vol. II, 1901, General Tables for Provinces and Feudatory States, p. 28.35H.C. Sharma, Changing World of theArtisans, p. 500.36C.A.H. Townshend, Director of Civil Supplies, Punjab, has provided the comparative costs of

living fora

family of aworker or an artisan between 1914 and 1918. The base income is consideredRs. 50 per month as in 1914. The calculations show that subsistence and other basic needs accounted

for almost the whole of the income. See Ravinder Kumar, The Rowlatt Satyagraha in Lahore, inhis Essays in the Social History of Modern India, Delhi, 1983, p. 187.37Census of India, 1961, XX, (Part VI) no. 17, Village Survey Rajana, p. 39.38Census of India, 1961, XX, (Part VI) no. 8, Village Survey Moginand, p. 42.



13/20

250

the form of wages. Thus when Balaki contracted a successive loan of Rs. 140, tobe added to an outstanding amount of Rs. 15, he accepted the payment in dailywages for the work done. This was despite the fact that he mortgaged the ring ofhis father and provided a personal assurance of one Ghanu. In other words, thesuccessive loan in this particular case signifies only a change in the position froman unpaid labourer to a paid labourer, to be charged out of the principal.As thepayment would be made at the rate of current wages from the principal the workdone may be deemed as an interest. Thus, the interest would be as high as 100 percent. Indeed, the loans contracted were seldom returned in entirety (see Table 1).

Apparently, the Mahant was not even interested in the principal being returned.Thus, a flow of cheap labour was ensured to work upon the sizeable land and forother economic interests, like running the water or the flour mill, of the monastery.However, the Mahant while claiming to charge no interest, deducted 61/2per centfrom the principal as takina fee.The loan contracted was hereditary. In case of death, the next of kin inherited

the loan, for which a separate deed was signed. Masmata, the widow ofSadhu-a Dumna basket-maker-inherited the debt of Rs. 312 and promised to work forthe Mahant along with her family. That the craft was not an exclusive male

prerogative is clear when the widow promised the craft expertise to meet therequirement of the monastery. Moreover, there is also an instance of the loan beingtransferred to the person providing an assurance, as in the case of Allchu, a chamar,who was a guarantor of Jawani, who died without paying the debt.

Sometimes, people of neighbouring villages also took monastic loans. On suchoccasions, the Mahant forced the debtors to shift themselves along with familyand goods. Thus a chamar, Khadku, of village Jawan, migrated with his familyand cattle to the monastic estate when he borrowed Rs. 100 to return an outstandingdebt.

The Mahant was also entitled to free help of the debtors as a right wheneversuch need arose. Therefore, a debtor promised in writing that, when ever suchoccasion arise, he will leave hisown work, how so important it may be, and accord

primacy to the job of the Mahant. These workers operated the flour and watermills, performed tilling, threshing and harvesting, rearing of the monastic livestock,irrigation and manufactured for agricultural and ritual purposes.The credit kept on multiplying in this system as the artisans requisitioned to

meet their necessities. Short-term loans in kind were also advanced. One ThapluDumna borrowed 80 kg ofwheat, to be returned in the next harvest, on assurancethat he would be employed as a return favour. Similarly Mehar Lohars labour ofthe season (Rs. 39 and 12 annas) was adjusted against the grains he owed and itwas found that there was still an outstanding credit offour annas against his account.

These paltry loans were issued in a current bahi (chalat roja-namah) and after theend ofthe year, counted on 2 Magh (February-March), the total being transferredto the original account khata. So when Devatus account was settled it was foundthat he had borrowed, piece-meal, Rs. 27. This was added to the original credit,Rs. 92. The chalat roja-namah is rather a merciless document: maintaining such



14/20

251

accounts as rupees eight to be added because ofsheep damaging the crop (ujjada) .Ironically, the same person borrowed only four rupees to buy sheep. In anotherinstance a person was charged an interest at the rate of 7/2 annas per day, to beadded to an outstanding loan, for the number of days he could not work due toillness. This is when the local agricultural wage rate ranged from two to sevenannas per day.All the credit documents were legal contracts, signed on the promissory note of

the Sirmaur state worth an anna or three.All the contracts were written by anofficial Brahmin scribe, as most ofthem seem to bear the same hand-writing.Allof them were accompanied by a personal guarantee; though, in some cases material

guarantee was also sought. The debtors signed the contracts or their thumb markswere printed. Interestingly not even a single contract is countersigned by theMahants of Thor. Two types of witnesses were also required, comprising mostlyof lambardars, zaildars, or the village headman. Ninety per cent of the documents

carry the signature of lambardar, seven per cent that ofthe headman, 2 per cent ofthe members of the high castes not carrying any administrative office, and one percent members ofthe low caste artisan community, perhaps the leaders.All the contracts in the bahi are between the artisans and the Mahant. Unlike

Punjab, there is not an instance of loan being contracted by any of the high caste

people or significantly, even those belonging to the cultivating castes like Kanets.39This deserves closer examination. The Kanet cultivators too were not economicallywell offand were in occasional need ofcredit. Such transactions, if any, must havebeen informal as the Kanets were intimately connected to the proprietors. Theywere the latters tenants, sharing the output at the ratio of3/4: 1/4in favour of theowners. Moreover, the Kanets were mostly the taxed residents of the village owninga plot of land, as against the artisans who paid non-proprietary cess (haq buha) forthe occupation of a residential plot within the habitat (abadi) of the village. Thisdifference meant that the Kanets did not need to work for the Mahant. The artisans

borrowed from the Mahant because of easily accessible loan on an interest paidback in the form of labour. The Kanets could always borrow from other money-

lenders, as they had land as guarantee. Moreover, it was not in the interest ofMahants to enter a contract with cultivators.At this time, the nationalist movementwas picking up in Nahan, a nearby town, and Kanet cultivators were its vocal

participants. Land for the tillers was one of the slogans raised by the cultivators.4o

They were the first to defy the local niche ofpower enjoyed by the Mahants in thisarea. On the other hand, the Mahant by ensuring access to artisan labour gainedinfluence on the cultivators, in that they could reduce the cultivator-tenants sharein output or evict them that much more easily.A similar strategy was followed bythe high landed castes, which tacitly supported the Mahants in raising sucla groupto replace the cultivator tenants.

39Contrary to Thor, in Punjab Malcolm Darling concludes that those who have no credit will

have no debt, The Punjab Peasant in Prosperity and Debt, Delhi, 1947, p. 211.40 HPDGS, chapter two.



15/20

252,

The involvement of the village functionaries is notable from a legal perspective.The illiterate artisans always feared the written word as they had no way ofknowingthe exact wording of the contract or its nature. Writing, throughout the subcontinent,was a symbol of power, due to its ritual and legal usage. The basis of fear was notunsubstantiated as these functionaries, the high caste landowners, and to an extentthe state, connived with Mahants in marginalising the artisans.4 Since these artisanswere non-proprietary residents, they were at the mercy of the village functionaries.The lambardar was not only the collector of revenue, but also a strong man, whofeels that he will be able to exercise influence in restraining a doubtful characterfrom committing offence.42 The Mahants invoked his office against any non-com-

plying artisan defaulting on a loan agreement. Indeed, the lambardar, seems to bemore

powerfulthan the

headman,and hence was used

mostlyas a witness

bythe

Mahant. Moreover the Mahants and the lambardar complemented each otherbecause the former also had the right to collect revenue as the landowners,43 butwere in turn assessed by the lambardar after the deduction of all dues and paymentsnot only to the artisans and agricultural labour but also the tenants. The office ofthe headman was used by the Mahants not only to seek protection against the non-

conforming artisans, agricultural labourers, but also the tenants, as was done bythe Mahants of Balakrupi, near Sujanpur. In this case the low caste cultivatorswere marginalised by displacing them and the land was appropriated with the help

ofstate

machinery, the headman, lambardar, and the civil court at Lahore andDharamsala.44 Both the lambardar and the headman received 5 per cent ofthe net

output from the Mahant as well as the artisans or other tenants.45 Nevertheless, the

Mahant always had something extra for these officials.The officials as well as the state connived with the moneylenders in general,

and the Mahants in particular, to extend their local niche of power. They intervened

directly in the 1930s when the prices of agricultural goods were declining. Con-

sequently, those getting cash payments stood at an advantage, as against those

receiving payment in kind. The artisans receiving cash payment were forced to

accept a 25 per cent cut in their wages.At the same time an adjustment was madebetween the debtor and the creditor, as well as the landowner and the government,as in both cases cash payment was insisted upon. The negotiations were such thatit doubled the burden of agriculture debt. Thus, in 1929, a peasant who couldclear his debt by selling 100 maunds of produce, had to sell 200 or more in 1934.46

41An example has been discussed about Himachal, Mahesh Sharma, Marginalisation and

Appropriation: Jogis, Brahmins and Sidh Shrines, IESHR, Vol. 33(1), 1996.42PLRA, p. 54; IOPR 1890 (Rev)

43 PLRA, p. 52, 54.44 Mahesh Sharma, Marginalisation andAppropriation, pp. 73-92.45 Veena Sachdeva, Agrarian Production and Distribution in the late 18th Century, in Indu Banga,

ed., Five Punjabi Centuries: Polity, Economy, Society and Culture, c. 1500-1900, Delhi, 1997, p.288.

46Darling, Wisdom and Waste, p. 316.



16/20

253

The pre-colonial state had created the niche ofpower for the Mahants, realisingthe influence of religious symbols over the agrarian populace. Land grants andother small concessions were made the symbols of power.&dquo; Thus, in Gurdaspur,the functionaries were directed to give water free ofcharge to the Mahant, thoughthe cultivators were charged for irrigation.&dquo; The revenue act of 1887 also reinforcedthe authority of the Mahants.As far as the law was concerned the land legallybelonged to the monastery and the pontiffs were only the trustees. Therefore, itmattered little if the revenue records showed the name of the pontiffs.49 Howeverthis legal position was ambiguous as proved in the case of Balakrupi, where bysuccessive recordings in the settlement and the revenue records the Mahants provedhereditary right over the land. 50The legal documents invoked the fear of the unknown among the artisans, and

this was further accentuated by the exotic judicial system of which they understoodlittle. Moreover, the cost of litigation devastated them. The Mahants exploitedthis fear to maximise their interests. The colonial government also expressed its

inability, or lack of concern, to help such rural debtors. Darling accepts that withthe establishment of judicial courts, everywhere the debtors could be sued. More-over the villagers had no knowledge of the system and money-lenders exploitedit to the full.5 Thus, a blacksmith of Hissar mortgaged his small plot of land in1896 for Rs. 26 at 371/2per cent. By 1906 without further loans, the amount hadswelled to Rs. 500, and in 1918 a decree was given for the repayment of the

amount in ful l . 52

In the interwar period, the scale of moneylending and debts expanded in rural

Punjab. In this expansion, the vulnerability ofthe debtor may have played a role.In general, however, it is believed that it was creditworthiness that encouragedmoneylending and debts. In 1922, Calvert concluded that the number of money-lenders assessed to tax in Punjab increased from 8,400 in 1902-3 to 15,035 (outof the total number of moneylenders, 40,690) in 1917-18.At the same time the

money on loan increased from Rs. 130 million to Rs. 280 million in this period.53Darling concluded that by 1934 an average debt per proprietor (43,733 proprietors)was Rs. 463, which was 12 times the land revenue due from them. In contrast the

average debt of small proprietors was Rs. 310 and occupancy tenants (12,000tenants) Rs. 210. Thus, the more propertied a person, the more indebted he was.54

Darling in 1934 concluded that the debt follows credit, and that those who haveno credit will have no debt. Thus, in Jhang area where cultivation was uncertain,

47 For details on resumption and acceptance of the land grants, see Foreign PoliticalConsultations,2185-87, Dated 31/12/1847, NationalArchives, New Delhi.

48 Veena Sachdeva, Agrarian Production, p. 289.49 PLRA, pp. 570-71.50 Mahesh Sharma, Marginalisation andAppropriation, pp. 81-83.51Malcolm Darling, The Punjab Peasant in Prosperity and Debt, p. 171.

52Ibid.,p. 187.53H. Calvert, The Wealth and Welfare ofthe Punjab, Lahore, 1922, p. 129.54 Malcolm Darling, The Punjab Peasant, pp. 4, 14.



17/20

254

the people nomadic, there was no credit. Similarly, Ludhiana with weak soil andlittle irrigation was free from debt. On the other hand, the rich districts were moreindebted as the moneylender was ready to make more investments.55 In these

districts, the price of land was higher, thus the value of land as security was alsohigher. The rate of interest for secured loans was also lower, being 12 to 18/4percent as against jewellery. Only 5 per cent loans were secured thus. The rate ofinterest against land without possession was 12 per cent; but when possession wasalso given, the rate, measured in produce, figured only 6 to 9 per cent. The rate ofinterest on unsecured loan in Punjab, as in the case ofgrain loans, ranged from 12to 25 per cent. 16

To an extent, the moneylenders could be held in check by the strong villagecommunity, which enjoyed strong kinship ties-as in the case of Baloch tribe.

These tribals forced the moneylenders to remit their loans, or not to charge exces-sive interest, or to be sympathetic to the debtors, all at dagger point. 57 Sometimesresistance, organised or individual, also resulted in serious consequences for the

moneylenders. For instance, Darling reports a case in Punjab where there wassome resistance against the arithmetic progression ofinterest. Thus when a money-lender got a decree against the plaintiff in Shahpur district for Rs. 1,500, the

plaintiff resisted violently and killed the moneylender. 58 .This is where the monastery as an institution, and Mahants as a manifestation of

sacred-temporal power, acquires significance. The monastery diffused social ten-

sions. Theoretically, monasticism imparted a sense of communitas, and a feelingof liminal subversion of hierarchy. Such feeling deflates the consciousness of revolt

by deft social concessions. Thus the social status of some members of the Lohar

community was raised, who henceforth became Girs (the name of the order towhich the monastery belonged), though continuing with their ancestral occupationofsmithy. These Gir Lohars could serve inside the monastery, as against the Dumnasor Chamars or even other Lohars who served only in the fields.Although thesesanskritised Lohars were superior in status, they continued to marry within their

parental castes, and, as in the past, they were forced to observe the dietary and

touch taboos in relation to the high castes. Social mobility within the communitywas welcomed by the high castes. It did not affect their status but became a tool tocontrol the low castes. Significantly, the agents of mobility, the Mahants, wereabove caste stratification; they did not believe in the caste system but upheld oreven perpetuated it in the interest of the higher castes. Finally, the monastery as a

symbol of divine grace and retribution acted as a strong deterrent to revolt. Itthreatened the present life of &dquo;rebels&dquo; and was a curse which they carried into thenext one.

The significance of Mahants thus was manifold, especially as the renouncers

have always influenced social movements in the lower castes. The most powerful55 Ibid., p. 211.56 Malcolm Darling, The Punjab Peasant, pp. 180-81.57 Ibid., p. 170.58 Wisdom and Waste, p.16.



18/20

255

movement, which discredits the caste system, was that of Nath jogis, also knownas Siddha ascetics. Even though the monastic system of Thor adheres to the vedantic

thought of Shankaracharya, which was a revivalist movement and stood for the

empowerment of the brahmanical system, in the popular conception the Saivitemonastary, like the Siddhas, empowered the low castes amongst whom were theartisans. There are three basic reasons, among others, for the popularity of suchmonastic heads.59 First, the metamorphosis of a historically singular personality.

At Thor, for instance, it was Shankaracharya around whom a corpus of textual andoral tradition developed describing his unusual achievements. 60 Second, thecharisma of the Mahants, the sacred head of the order. The charisma was notinherent but was derived from the spiritual genealogy of the order, claiming spiritualequivalence with the preceptor. Third, the anti-householder ideals of the ascetics.

Although the ascetics as renouncers, remain outside social structures, theynevertheless live offsociety by devising alms, charity, donations, land grants, or-as in the case of Thor-even usury. The complex character of the relationshipsbetween the ascetics and local society is interesting to observe. While these asceticsdid not observe the caste norms themselves, they shaped stratification of thosearound them; they refused to be professionally occupied, yet they determined

occupational hierarchy; and while they recognised no kin, they controlled kinshipties .61All these factors enabled a relatively smooth credit relationship between theartisans of Thor and the Mahants.

Conclusion

The article has attempted to show how religious establishments, mirroring and

safeguarding the interests of the landed high caste community, maintained controlof, and access to, rural labour by means of credit transactions with them. The pre-sence of such artisan-labourers served as a check on the bargaining power of thetenant-cultivators.Artisans entered such relationships because they could barelyeke out their survival from the existing craft economy. While the cultivators weremore restive as well as class conscious, artisans were much less so. The connivanceofstate functionaries, the clergy, and themembers of high caste, helped the monasticcredit system. While acting as the rural local bosses, the monastic system regulatedthe caste hierarchies. By manipulating its temporal and spiritual-ideological

59 For more discussion, see Mahesh Sharma, Marginalisation andAppropriation, p. 76.60

Interestingly, in the South, the Vishwakarmas have appropriated the hagiography and thus the

spiritual tradition of Shankracharya. It is interesting to compare the brahmanical variant of the

Shankracharya myth with that of the artisans, Brouwer, The Makers of the World, pp. 330-36; see

also Mahadeva-Vidyaranya, The Traditional Life of Sri Shankaracharya, Madras, 1980; and T.M.P.Mahadevan, Sankracharya, Delhi, 1979.

61 For a similar discussion at length, Romila Thapar, Renunciation: The Making of a Counter-

Culture?, in herAncient Indian Social History, Hyderabad, 1978, pp. 63-104; also, J.P. Parry, The

AghoriAscetics of Benaras, in R. Burghart andA. Cantile, eds, Indian Religion, Delhi, 1986, pp.51-78.



19/20

256

authority, it effected and legitimised changes in the rural social economy, anddeflated possible manifestations offprotest or unrest.

Appendix

Document No. 1

Dated 20Asuja, Samvat 1983 (A.D. 1925). Written that Balaki, son of Unthu, of the Dumnacaste, resident of Thor, has borrowed money in cash, for the purpose of marriage, from theMahant of Thor, Shankar Girji,-Rupees 140, in words One Hundred and Forty, to beadded to an outstanding loan of Rs. 107, One Hundred and Seven, which he borrowed onthe 24 Jyastha, S. 1980 (A.D.

1922)for

returninga

pre-existingloan. On the addition of

these two loans, the total credit amounts to Rs. 247, in words Two Hundred and FortySeven.

It has been agreed that the debtor will plough (halip) the lands of Mahant (withoutwages) and one person of his family will sow fo~ Mahant on the payment of daily wages.They willperform all the domestic chores of the Mahant, working as unpaid labour, andtend to the water mill. If the debtor or his dependants refuse to work or show a lack of

interest, the Mahant is authorised to charge interest and, or, penalty from this day anddate. If the debtor moves out of the math without the permission of Mahant, then he willbe penalised for the absconding days. It has been agreed upon that if all things abided toas in this

contract,the

Mahantwill

not charge any interest and the debtorwill

not receiveany wages. The above agreement is true and is admissible in the law-court as a legaldocument.

The debtors witness

Witnessed bySobha Ram of Thano Rati Ram of Gosan

(Thumb mark) (Thumb mark)Assurance of Ghargu(The left thumb mark of debtor)Mortgaged the cow One anna stamps of the state of Sirmaur

E (The writing tax has been paid)

This is followed by the accounts regarding the defrayment of the above loan as:Rs. 247, two hundred and forty-seven-total credit 23 Savan S. 1984 (A.D. 1926)Returned Rs. 32, thirty-two Received Rs. 32, thirty-two from the creditor.Creditors witness Jalim Singh of Chandra Witness Rati Ram of GosanReturned Rs. 200, two hundred 28Asuja S. 1985 (A.D. 1927)Debtors witness: Thap Ludum of Thor Received Rs. 200, two hundred

Signed: Bhag Chand of Nalag Witness: Payanu Dumna of ThorCedit: Rs. 15, fifteen from Balaki Dumna

Note: Balaki owes Mahant Rs. 15, in words fifteen. Today, the 22&dquo;d Chait, S. 1990 (A.D.

1932) on the occasion of marriage of Jawani, on the assurance given by Ghanu, Rs. 140,in words one hundred and forty, have been further borrowed, to be added to Rs. 15, inwords fifteen, an outstanding credit. On addition, the total credit comes to Rs. 155, in

words one hundred and fifty five. This money will remain with the Mahant who will

defray it as daily wages to the creditor. This has been agreed upon.



20/20

257

Debtors witness: Jalim Giri (Rough sign) Witness: Jalim Singh (Lambardar of Thor)Mortgaged the ring of Balakis fatherAssurance of Ghanu (thumb impression)

Agreed upon that the principal is Rs. 155, in words one hundred and fifty five.Signed: Pt. Bhag Chand

Document No. 2

Written that Ram Saran, son of Prabh Dyal, of Lohar caste, of Thor, has borrowed from

Mahant, Shankar Girji, in order to return. as outstanding loan Rs.18, in words eighteen.The borrower agrees that he will till the land of Mahant on wages and perform other

domestic jobs. If he refuses to work, it is agreed that he may be charged interest from thisdate and day. Written as agreed orally by Ram Saran on 20Asuja S. 1983 (A.D. 1925).Borrowers witness: Lachhman of Thor Witness: Rati Ram of GosanRam Saran (Thumb mark) __ One anna stampReceived Rs. 14, fourteen, from Ram Saran on 21 Magha S. 1984 (A.D. 1926) Outstanding:Re. 1, one.Borrowed: Rs. 4, four to buy a sheep -

Re. 1, one when going to Nahan on 1 Vaisakha S. 1984 (A.D. 1926)Rs. 81/2, eight and a half,

againstthe

sheep damagingthe

crop-on7

MaghaS. 1985 (A.D.

1927)4 annas, four annas for hunting on 24 Phalaguna S. (A.D. 1927)12 annas, twelve annas to buy turban from Solan on 24Asuja S. 1985 (A.D. 1927)Outstanding: Rs. 14-22, Rupees fourteen and twenty two annasRs. 4, four to buy a sheep on 23 Phalaguna, S. 1986 (A.D. 1928).

Mahesh-Artisan and Monastic Credit

Documents

Transcript of Mahesh-Artisan and Monastic Credit