Search results

"A radical new reading of the emergence of modern India, one in which the interaction between the environment and the economy takes the centerstage."

"This new edition of An Economic History of Early Modern India extends the timespan of the analysis to incorporate further research. This allows for a more detailed discussion of the rise of the British Empire in South Asia and gives a fuller context for the historiography. In the years between the death of the emperor Aurangzeb (1707) and the Great Rebellion (1857), the Mughal Empire and the states that rose from its ashes declined in wealth and power, and a British Empire emerged in South Asia. This book asks three key questions about the transition. Why did it happen? What did it mean? How did it shape economic change? The book shows that during these years, a merchant-friendly regime among warlord-ruled states emerged and state structure transformed to allow taxes and military capacity to be held by one central power, the British East India Company. The author demonstrates that the fall of warlord-ruled states and the empowerment of the merchant, in consequence, shaped the course of Indian and world economic history. Reconstructing South Asia's transition, starting with the Mughal Empire's collapse and ending with the great rebellion of 1857, this book is the first systematic account of the economic history of early modern India. It is an essential reference for students and scholars of Economics and South Asian History."

From the end of the 18th century, two distinct global processes began to transform livelihoods and living conditions in the South Asia region. These were the rise of British colonial rule and globalization, that is, the integration of the region in the emerging world markets for goods, capital, and labour services. 200 years later, India was the home to many of the world's poorest people as well as one of the fastest growing market economies in the world. Does a study of the past help to explain the paradox of growth amidst poverty? 'The Economic History of India' claims that the roots of this paradox go back to India's colonial past, when internal factors like geography and external forces like globalization and imperial rule created prosperity in some areas and poverty in others.

Chapter 1: Introduction -- Chapter 2: The making of British India -- Chapter 3: The business of the cities -- Chapter 4: Unyielding land -- Chapter 5: A poor state -- Chapter 6: End of famine -- Chapter 7: A different story? The princely states -- Chapter 8: Conclusion

In recent decades, private investment has led to an economic resurgence in India. But this is not the first time the region has witnessed impressive business growth. There have been many similar stories over the past 300 years. India's economic history shows that capital was relatively expensive. How, then, did capitalism flourish in the region? How did companies and entrepreneurs deal with the shortage of key resources? Has there been a common pattern in responses to these issues over the centuries? Through detailed case studies of firms, entrepreneurs, and business commodities, Tirthankar Roy answers these questions. Roy bridges the approaches of business and economic history, illustrating the development of a distinctive regional capitalism. On each occasion of growth, connections with the global economy helped firms and entrepreneurs better manage risks. Making these deep connections between India's economic past and present shows why history matters in its remaking of capitalism today

This book explores the historical roots of rapid economic growth in South Asia, with reference to politics, markets, resources, and the world economy. Roy posits that, after an initial slow period of growth between 1950 and the 1980s, the region has been growing rapidly and fast catching up with the world on average levels of living. Why did this turnaround happen? Does it matter? Is it sustainable? The author answers these questions by drawing connections, comparisons, and parallels between the five large countries in the region: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal. It shows why, despite differences in political experience between these countries, similarities in resources and markets could produce similar trajectories. Home to a fifth of the world's population, South Asia's transformation has the power to change the world. Most accounts of the process focus on individual nations, but by breaking out of that mould, Roy takes on the region as a whole, and delivers a radical new interpretation of why the economy of South Asia is changing so fast.

"Cross-cultural exchange has characterized the economic life of India since antiquity. Its long coastline has afforded convenient access to Asia and Africa, and trading partnerships formed in the exchange of commodities ranging from textiles to military technology and opium to indigo. In a journey across 2,000 years, this enthralling book written by a leading South Asian historian, describes the ties of trade, migration, and investment between India and the rest of the world, showing how changing patterns of globalization reverberated on economic policy, politics, and political ideology within India. Along the way, the book asks three major questions. Is this a particularly Indian story? When did the big turning points happen? And is it possible to distinguish the modern from the pre-modern pattern of exchange? These questions invite a new approach to the study of Indian history by placing the region squarely at the center of the narrative. This is global history written on India,Ŵs terms and, as such, the book invites South Asian, Indian, and global historians to rethink both their history and their methodologies"--

Introduction -- Economic history and modern India : redefining the link -- Rural labour and colonialism -- Agricultural labour : lessons from wage data -- Was there an industrial decline in India in the early nineteenth century? -- Labour-intensive industrialization -- Women and industrialization -- Women in the crafts -- Labour and power : a critique of 'subaltern studies' -- Conclusion