Assess the frequency and impact of Famines in the 17th century. How did the Mughal state respond to these crises?

In the 17th century, despite being one of the wealthiest empires in the world, Mughal India was frequently ravaged by devastating famines. These were primarily caused by the failure of the Monsoon, though the rigid land revenue system and lack of quick transportation often exacerbated the crises. For an OPSC aspirant, understanding these famines is crucial as they reveal the vulnerability of the medieval agrarian economy and the limits of the Mughal state's welfare capabilities.

1. Frequency and Major Famines

The 17th century witnessed several localized and widespread famines. The frequency was high due to the erratic nature of rainfall and the prevalence of agricultural pests.

• The Great Famine of 1630–32 (Deccan and Gujarat): This occurred during the reign of Shah Jahan. It was one of the most catastrophic famines in Indian history, caused by three consecutive years of drought.
• 1650s Famines: Several parts of North India and the Deccan faced food shortages during the early part of Aurangzeb's reign.
• 1680s and 1690s (Deccan): Prolonged warfare between the Mughals and Marathas, combined with drought, led to severe food scarcity in the South.

2. Impact on Society and Economy

The impact of these famines was often apocalyptic, as recorded by foreign travelers like Peter Mundy and Bernier:

• Demographic Collapse: Millions perished due to starvation and subsequent epidemics (like cholera and plague). Entire villages were depopulated.
• Economic Ruin: Agriculture was the first to suffer, but the textile industry also collapsed as weavers died or fled. In Gujarat (1630), the export of calico stopped completely as there were no artisans left to work.
• Social Disturbance: Famines led to mass migrations toward cities. There were reports of cannibalism and parents selling their children for a few grains of rice, reflecting total social breakdown.
• Decline in Revenue: Since the Jagirdars could not collect revenue from parched lands, the state faced a temporary financial crisis.

3. The Mughal State's Response

The Mughal response was a mix of charity and administrative relief, though it was often "too little, too late" due to the scale of the disaster:

• Langar (Free Kitchens): The state opened community kitchens in major cities to provide cooked food (usually Khichdi) to the poor. Shah Jahan reportedly spent thousands of rupees daily on Langars in Burhanpur and Ahmedabad.
• Revenue Remissions: The government often announced remissions or reductions in land revenue. During the 1630 famine, Shah Jahan remitted nearly 7 million rupees of land revenue to ease the burden on peasants.
• Taccavi Loans: The state provided advance loans (Taccavi) to farmers to buy seeds and bullocks once the rains returned, facilitating agricultural recovery.
• Import and Control: The state tried to import grain from surplus regions (like Bengal) to deficit areas, though the slow speed of bullock carts limited the effectiveness of this move.
• Price Regulation: To prevent hoarding and profiteering, the Kotwals were instructed to keep a strict check on the prices of essential grains in the mandis.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while the Mughal Emperors displayed a sense of paternal duty during famines, their efforts were hampered by the structural limitations of a medieval state. The lack of canal irrigation and mechanized transport meant that a local drought almost always turned into a national tragedy. This highlights the critical link between environment, economy, and governance in Indian history.