Chapter Iv: The Age Of Industrialisation

So students, welcome to today's history lesson. I am so happy to see all of you here, ready to learn about one of the most important periods in world history – the Age of Industrialisation. This is Chapter 4 of your NCERT History textbook, and I promise you, by the end of this lesson, you will have a complete understanding of how industrialisation changed the world, particularly how it affected Britain and our own country, India.

Let us begin by understanding what this chapter is all about. The chapter opens with a very interesting picture from 1900 – a music book cover showing what people at that time thought about the new century. There is a goddess-like figure, the angel of progress, perched on a wheel with wings, flying into the future. Behind her are symbols of progress – railway, camera, machines, printing press, and factory. This picture tells us how people in those days viewed industrialisation – as a story of development, of wonderful technological progress.

Then there is another picture showing two magicians. One is Aladdin from the Orient, who built a beautiful palace with his magic lamp – representing the East and the past. The other is a modern mechanic with his tools, building bridges, ships, towers and high-rise buildings – representing the West and modernity. Students, these images tell us something very important – that industrialisation was seen as something that brought progress, that machines and factories were glorified.

But the chapter asks us some very important questions. Is industrialisation always based on rapid technological change? Can we continue to glorify continuous mechanisation of all work? What has industrialisation meant to people's lives? To answer these questions, we need to study the history of industrialisation. And that is exactly what we are going to do in this lesson.

Now, the chapter tells us that we will focus first on Britain, which was the first industrial nation, and then on India, where the pattern of industrial change was very different because of colonial rule.

Before we begin, let me tell you about an activity in the chapter. The chapter asks you to give two examples where modern development associated with progress has led to problems. You may think of environmental issues, nuclear weapons, or disease. So students, think about this – while industrialisation brought progress, it also brought problems. For example, pollution from factories has led to environmental degradation. Nuclear weapons, which are products of advanced technology, can cause massive destruction. So this is something to keep in mind as we study the chapter.

Now let us move to the first section of the chapter – Before the Industrial Revolution.

Students, we often think that industrialisation means factory production. When we talk of industrial workers, we think of factory workers. But here is something very interesting – even before factories began to appear in England and Europe, there was already large-scale industrial production for an international market. This was not based on factories at all. Historians call this phase proto-industrialisation. The word proto means the first or early form of something. So proto-industrialisation means the early form of industrialisation.

Let us understand how this worked. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, merchants from towns in Europe began moving to the countryside. They supplied money to peasants and artisans and persuaded them to produce goods for an international market. Now, why did they do this? Because the demand for goods was growing due to expansion of world trade and acquisition of colonies.

But here is an important point. Merchants could not expand production within towns because urban crafts and trade guilds were very powerful. Students, you need to understand what guilds were. These were associations of producers that trained craftspeople, maintained control over production, regulated competition and prices, and restricted the entry of new people into the trade. Rulers granted different guilds the monopoly right to produce and trade in specific products. So it was very difficult for new merchants to set up business in towns. That is why they turned to the countryside.

In the countryside, poor peasants and artisans were facing difficult times. This was a period when open fields were disappearing and commons were being enclosed. Cottagers and poor peasants who had earlier depended on common lands for their survival – gathering firewood, berries, vegetables, hay and straw – had to now look for alternative sources of income. Many had tiny plots of land which could not provide work for all members of the household. So when merchants came with offers of advances to produce goods, they eagerly agreed. By working for merchants, they could remain in the countryside and continue cultivating their small plots. Income from proto-industrial production supplemented their shrinking income from cultivation. It also allowed them a fuller use of their family labour resources.

So students, let me recap what we have learned so far. Before factories came, there was proto-industrialisation, where merchants from towns employed peasants and artisans in the countryside to produce goods for international markets. This happened because guilds in towns were powerful and restricted new merchants, and because peasants in the countryside needed additional income.

Now, within this system, a close relationship developed between the town and the countryside. Merchants were based in towns but the work was done mostly in the countryside. Let me give you an example from England. A merchant clothier purchased wool from a wool stapler – a stapler is a person who sorts wool according to its fibre – and carried it to the spinners. The yarn that was spun was taken in subsequent stages of production to weavers, fullers, and then to dyers. The finishing was done in London before the export merchant sold the cloth in the international market. London came to be known as a finishing centre.

This proto-industrial system was part of a network of commercial exchanges. It was controlled by merchants and goods were produced by a vast number of producers working within their family farms, not in factories. At each stage of production, 20 to 25 workers were employed by each merchant. This meant that each clothier was controlling hundreds of workers. Students, this is important to understand – even before factories, there was large-scale production, but it was spread across households in the countryside.

Now, let us move to the next section – The Coming Up of the Factory.

The first symbol of the new era was cotton. Its production boomed in the late eighteenth century. In 1760, Britain was importing 2.5 million pounds of raw cotton to feed its cotton industry. By 1787, this import soared to 22 million pounds.

A series of inventions in the eighteenth century increased the efficacy of each step of the production process – carding, twisting and spinning, and rolling. Carding is the process in which fibres such as cotton or wool are prepared prior to spinning. These inventions enhanced the output per worker, enabling each worker to produce more, and they made possible the production of stronger threads and yarn.

Then Richard Arkwright created the cotton mill. Till this time, cloth production was spread all over the countryside and carried out within village households. But now, the costly new machines could be purchased, set up and maintained in the mill. Within the mill, all the processes were brought together under one roof and management. This allowed a more careful supervision over the production process, a watch over quality, and the regulation of labour – all of which had been difficult to do when production was in the countryside.

In the early nineteenth century, factories increasingly became an intimate part of the English landscape. So visible were the imposing new mills, so magical seemed to be the power of new technology, that contemporaries were dazzled. They concentrated their attention on the mills, almost forgetting the bylanes and the workshops where production still continued.

Now, there is an activity in the chapter that I want you to think about. The chapter says that the way in which historians focus on industrialisation rather than on small workshops is a good example of how what we believe today about the past is influenced by what historians choose to notice and what they ignore. The activity asks you to note down one event or aspect of your own life which adults such as your parents or teachers may think is unimportant, but which you believe to be important. Students, this is a very thoughtful question. It is telling us that history is not just about big events and famous people – it is also about everyday life, about ordinary people, about things that may seem unimportant but are actually significant.

Now, let us look at the next section – The Pace of Industrial Change.

How rapid was the process of industrialisation? Does industrialisation mean only the growth of factory industries? Let us answer these questions.

First, the most dynamic industries in Britain were clearly cotton and metals. Growing at a rapid pace, cotton was the leading sector in the first phase of industrialisation up to the 1840s. After that, the iron and steel industry led the way. With the expansion of railways in England from the 1840s and in the colonies from the 1860s, the demand for iron and steel increased rapidly. By 1873, Britain was exporting iron and steel worth about 77 million pounds, double the value of its cotton export.

Second, the new industries could not easily displace traditional industries. Even at the end of the nineteenth century, less than 20 per cent of the total workforce was employed in technologically advanced industrial sectors. Textiles was a dynamic sector, but a large portion of the output was produced not within factories, but outside, within domestic units.

Third, the pace of change in the traditional industries was not set by steam-powered cotton or metal industries, but they did not remain entirely stagnant either. Seemingly ordinary and small innovations were the basis of growth in many non-mechanised sectors such as food processing, building, pottery, glass work, tanning, furniture making, and production of implements.

Fourth, technological changes occurred slowly. They did not spread dramatically across the industrial landscape. New technology was expensive and merchants and industrialists were cautious about using it. The machines often broke down and repair was costly. They were not as effective as their inventors and manufacturers claimed.

Consider the case of the steam engine. James Watt improved the steam engine produced by Newcomen and patented the new engine in 1781. His industrialist friend Mathew Boulton manufactured the new model. But for years he could find no buyers. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, there were no more than 321 steam engines all over England. Of these, 80 were in cotton industries, nine in wool industries, and the rest in mining, canal works and iron works. Steam engines were not used in any of the other industries till much later in the century. So even the most powerful new technology that enhanced the productivity of labour manifold was slow to be accepted by industrialists.

Students, this is a very important point. We often think that industrialisation happened quickly and that everyone was eager to adopt new machines. But the reality was very different. Industrialists were cautious, machines were expensive and often broke down, and many industries continued to use hand labour. Historians now have come to increasingly recognise that the typical worker in the mid-nineteenth century was not a machine operator but the traditional craftsperson and labourer.

Now, let me recap what we have learned in this section. Industrialisation was not as rapid as we might think. Cotton and metals were the leading industries, but traditional industries still employed most workers. Technological changes occurred slowly, and many industrialists preferred hand labour over machines.

Now, let us move to the next section – Hand Labour and Steam Power.

In Victorian Britain, there was no shortage of human labour. Poor peasants and vagrants moved to the cities in large numbers in search of jobs, waiting for work. When there is plenty of labour, wages are low. So industrialists had no problem of labour shortage or high wage costs. They did not want to introduce machines that got rid of human labour and required large capital investment.

In many industries, the demand for labour was seasonal. Gas works and breweries were especially busy through the cold months. So they needed more workers to meet their peak demand. Book-binders and printers, catering to Christmas demand, too needed extra hands before December. At the waterfront, winter was the time that ships were repaired and spruced up. In all such industries where production fluctuated with the season, industrialists usually preferred hand labour, employing workers for the season.

A range of products could be produced only with hand labour. Machines were oriented to producing uniforms, standardised goods for a mass market. But the demand in the market was often for goods with intricate designs and specific shapes. In mid-nineteenth-century Britain, for instance, 500 varieties of hammers were produced and 45 kinds of axes. These required human skill, not mechanical technology.

In Victorian Britain, the upper classes – the aristocrats and the bourgeoisie – preferred things produced by hand. Handmade products came to symbolise refinement and class. They were better finished, individually produced, and carefully designed. Machine-made goods were for export to the colonies.

In countries with labour shortage, industrialists were keen on using mechanical power so that the need for human labour can be minimised. This was the case in nineteenth-century America. Britain, however, had no problem hiring human hands.

So students, let me explain why some industrialists in nineteenth-century Europe preferred hand labour over machines. There were several reasons. First, there was plenty of labour available, so wages were low. Second, machines required large capital investment. Third, in seasonal industries, hand labour was more flexible – workers could be employed when needed and let go when not needed. Fourth, some products required human skill and could not be produced by machines. Fifth, the upper classes preferred handmade products, which became a symbol of status and refinement.

Now, let us look at the next section – Life of the Workers.

The abundance of labour in the market affected the lives of workers. As news of possible jobs travelled to the countryside, hundreds tramped to the cities. The actual possibility of getting a job depended on existing networks of friendship and kin relations. If you had a relative or a friend in a factory, you were more likely to get a job quickly. But not everyone had social connections. Many job-seekers had to wait weeks, spending nights under bridges or in night shelters. Some stayed in Night Refuges that were set up by private individuals; others went to the Casual Wards maintained by the Poor Law authorities.

Seasonality of work in many industries meant prolonged periods without work. After the busy season was over, the poor were on the streets again. Some returned to the countryside after the winter, when the demand for labour in the rural areas opened up in places. But most looked for odd jobs, which till the mid-nineteenth century were difficult to find.

Wages increased somewhat in the early nineteenth century. But they tell us little about the welfare of the workers. The average figures hide the variations between trades and the fluctuations from year to year. For instance, when prices rose sharply during the prolonged Napoleonic War, the real value of what the workers earned fell significantly, since the same wages could now buy fewer things. Moreover, the income of workers depended not on the wage rate alone. What was also critical was the period of employment: the number of days of work determined the average daily income of the workers. At the best of times till the mid-nineteenth century, about 10 per cent of the urban population were extremely poor. In periods of economic slump, like the 1830s, the proportion of unemployed went up to anything between 35 and 75 per cent in different regions.

The fear of unemployment made workers hostile to the introduction of new technology. When the Spinning Jenny was introduced, workers saw it as a threat to their livelihoods. Let me explain what the Spinning Jenny was. Devised by James Hargreaves in 1764, this machine speeded up the spinning process and reduced labour demand. By turning one single wheel, a worker could set in motion a number of spindles and spin several threads at the same time.

The chapter provides a source that illustrates this. A magistrate reported in 1790 about an incident when he was called in to protect a manufacturer's property from being attacked by workers. He said: "From the depredations of a lawless Banditti of colliers and their wives, for the wives had lost their work to spinning engines... they advanced at first with much insolence, avowing their intention of cutting to pieces the machine lately introduced in the woollen manufacture; which they suppose, if generally adopted, will lessen the demand for manual labour."

So students, now you can understand why many workers were opposed to the use of the Spinning Jenny. They feared that machines would take away their jobs. This is why colliers and their wives in Britain attacked the Spinning Jenny – because it threatened their employment. The machine reduced the demand for manual labour, and workers depended on spinning for their livelihood.

Now, there is an activity in the chapter that asks you to imagine that you are a merchant writing back to a salesman who has been trying to persuade you to buy a new machine. You need to explain in your letter what you have heard and why you do not wish to invest in the new technology. Based on what we have learned, you could write about how machines are expensive, how they break down often, how there is plenty of cheap labour available, and how workers might cause trouble if machines are introduced.

Now, let us move to the next major section of the chapter – Industrialisation in the Colonies.

Let us now move to India to see how a colony industrialises. Once again we will look not only at factory industries but also at the non-mechanised sector. We will limit our discussion primarily to textile industries.

The first sub-section is about the Age of Indian Textiles.

Before the age of machine industries, silk and cotton goods from India dominated the international market in textiles. Coarser cottons were produced in many countries, but the finer varieties often came from India. Armenian and Persian merchants took the goods from Punjab to Afghanistan, eastern Persia and Central Asia. Bales of fine textiles were carried on camel back via the north-west frontier, through mountain passes and across deserts. A vibrant sea trade operated through the main pre-colonial ports. Surat on the Gujarat coast connected India to the Gulf and Red Sea Ports; Masulipatam on the Coromandel coast and Hoogly in Bengal had trade links with Southeast Asian ports.

A variety of Indian merchants and bankers were involved in this network of export trade – financing production, carrying goods and supplying exporters. Supply merchants linked the port towns to the inland regions. They gave advances to weavers, procured the woven cloth from weaving villages, and carried the supply to the ports. At the port, the big shippers and export merchants had brokers who negotiated the price and bought goods from the supply merchants operating inland.

By the 1750s, this network, controlled by Indian merchants, was breaking down. The European companies gradually gained power – first securing a variety of concessions from local courts, then the monopoly rights to trade. This resulted in a decline of the old ports of Surat and Hoogly through which local merchants had operated. Exports from these ports fell dramatically, the credit that had financed the earlier trade began drying up, and the local bankers slowly went bankrupt. In the last years of the seventeenth century, the gross value of trade that passed through Surat had been 16 million rupees. By the 1740s it had slumped to 3 million rupees.

While Surat and Hoogly decayed, Bombay and Calcutta grew. This shift from the old ports to the new ones was an indicator of the growth of colonial power. Trade through the new ports came to be controlled by European companies, and was carried in European ships. While many of the old trading houses collapsed, those that wanted to survive had to now operate within a network shaped by European trading companies.

So students, let me explain why the port of Surat declined by the end of the eighteenth century. The East India Company gradually gained power and secured monopoly rights to trade. This led to the decline of the old ports through which local merchants had operated. Exports from Surat fell dramatically, credit dried up, and local bankers went bankrupt. Meanwhile, new ports like Bombay and Calcutta grew, controlled by European companies.

Now, how did these changes affect the life of weavers and other artisans? Let us find out.

The consolidation of East India Company power after the 1760s did not initially lead to a decline in textile exports from India. British cotton industries had not yet expanded and Indian fine textiles were in great demand in Europe. So the company was keen on expanding textile exports from India.

Before establishing political power in Bengal and Carnatic in the 1760s and 1770s, the East India Company had found it difficult to ensure a regular supply of goods for export. The French, Dutch, Portuguese as well as the local traders competed in the market to secure woven cloth. So the weaver and supply merchants could bargain and try selling the produce to the best buyer. In their letters back to London, Company officials continuously complained of difficulties of supply and the high prices.

However, once the East India Company established political power, it could assert a monopoly right to trade. It proceeded to develop a system of management and control that would eliminate competition, control costs, and ensure regular supplies of cotton and silk goods. This it did through a series of steps.

First, the Company tried to eliminate the existing traders and brokers connected with the cloth trade, and establish a more direct control over the weaver. It appointed a paid servant called the gomastha to supervise weavers, collect supplies, and examine the quality of cloth.

Second, it prevented Company weavers from dealing with other buyers. One way of doing this was through the system of advances. Once an order was placed, the weavers were given loans to purchase the raw material for their production. Those who took loans had to hand over the cloth they produced to the gomastha. They could not take it to any other trader.

So students, this is how the East India Company procured regular supplies of cotton and silk textiles from Indian weavers. It appointed gomasthas to supervise weavers and used the system of advances to tie weavers to the Company.

As loans flowed in and the demand for fine textiles expanded, weavers eagerly took the advances, hoping to earn more. Many weavers had small plots of land which they had earlier cultivated along with weaving, and the produce from this took care of their family needs. Now they had to lease out the land and devote all their time to weaving. Weaving, in fact, required the labour of the entire family, with children and women all engaged in different stages of the process.

Soon, however, in many weaving villages there were reports of clashes between weavers and gomasthas. Earlier supply merchants had very often lived within the weaving villages, and had a close relationship with the weavers, looking after their needs and helping them in times of crisis. The new gomasthas were outsiders, with no long-term social link with the village. They acted arrogantly, marched into villages with sepoys and peons, and punished weavers for delays in supply – often beating and flogging them. The word sepoy is how the British pronounced the word sipahi, meaning an Indian soldier in the service of the British. The weavers lost the space to bargain for prices and sell to different buyers: the price they received from the Company was miserably low and the loans they had accepted tied them to the Company.

In many places in Carnatic and Bengal, weavers deserted villages and migrated, setting up looms in other villages where they had some family relation. Elsewhere, weavers along with the village traders revolted, opposing the Company and its officials. Over time many weavers began refusing loans, closing down their workshops and taking to agricultural labour.

By the turn of the nineteenth century, cotton weavers faced a new set of problems.

Now, let us look at the next sub-section – Manchester Comes to India.

In 1772, Henry Patullo, a Company official, had ventured to say that the demand for Indian textiles could never reduce, since no other nation produced goods of the same quality. Yet by the beginning of the nineteenth century we see the beginning of a long decline of textile exports from India. In 1811-12, piece-goods accounted for 33 per cent of India's exports; by 1850-51 it was no more than 3 per cent.

Why did this happen? What were its implications?

As cotton industries developed in England, industrial groups began worrying about imports from other countries. They pressurised the government to impose import duties on cotton textiles so that Manchester goods could sell in Britain without facing any competition from outside. At the same time industrialists persuaded the East India Company to sell British manufactures in Indian markets as well. Exports of British cotton goods increased dramatically in the early nineteenth century. At the end of the eighteenth century there had been virtually no import of cotton piece-goods into India. But by 1850 cotton piece-goods constituted over 31 per cent of the value of Indian imports; and by the 1870s this figure was over 50 per cent.

Cotton weavers in India thus faced two problems at the same time: their export market collapsed, and the local market shrank, being glutted with Manchester imports. Produced by machines at lower costs, the imported cotton goods were so cheap that weavers could not easily compete with them. By the 1850s, reports from most weaving regions of India narrated stories of decline and desolation.

By the 1860s, weavers faced a new problem. They could not get sufficient supply of raw cotton of good quality. When the American Civil War broke out and cotton supplies from the US were cut off, Britain turned to India. As raw cotton exports from India increased, the price of raw cotton shot up. Weavers in India were starved of supplies and forced to buy raw cotton at exorbitant prices. In this situation, weaving could not pay.

Then, by the end of the nineteenth century, weavers and other craftspeople faced yet another problem. Factories in India began production, flooding the market with machine-goods. How could weaving industries possibly survive?

The chapter provides two important sources that illustrate this decline. Source C is a quote from the Commissioner of Patna: "It appears that twenty years ago, a brisk trade was carried on in the manufacture of cloth at Jahanabad, and Behar, which has in the former place entirely ceased, while in the latter the amount of manufacture is very limited, in consequence of the cheap and durable goods from Manchester with which the Native manufactures are unable to compete."

Source D is from the Census Report of Central Provinces, 1872, reporting on the Koshtis, a community of weavers: "The Koshtis, like the weavers of the finer kinds of cloth in other parts of India, have fallen upon evil times. They are unable to compete with the showy goods which Manchester sends in such profusion, and they have of late years emigrated in great numbers, chiefly to Berar, where as day labourers they are able to obtain wages…"

So students, this is why the port of Surat declined and why Indian weavers faced problems. The East India Company's control, followed by the influx of cheap Manchester goods, destroyed the traditional textile industry.

Now, let us move to the next section – Factories Come Up.

The first cotton mill in Bombay came up in 1854 and it went into production two years later. By 1862, four mills were at work with 94,000 spindles and 2,150 looms. Around the same time jute mills came up in Bengal, the first being set up in 1855 and another one seven years later, in 1862. In north India, the Elgin Mill was started in Kanpur in the 1860s, and a year later the first cotton mill of Ahmedabad was set up. By 1874, the first spinning and weaving mill of Madras began production.

Who set up the industries? Where did the capital come from? Who came to work in the mills?

Let us look at the early entrepreneurs. Industries were set up in different regions by varying sorts of people. The history of many business groups goes back to trade with China. From the late eighteenth century, as you have read in your book last year, the British in India began exporting opium to China and took tea from China to England. Many Indians became junior players in this trade, providing finance, procuring supplies, and shipping consignments. Having earned through trade, some of these businessmen had visions of developing industrial enterprises in India.

In Bengal, Dwarkanath Tagore made his fortune in the China trade before he turned to industrial investment, setting up six joint-stock companies in the 1830s and 1840s. Tagore's enterprises sank along with those of others in the wider business crises of the 1840s, but later in the nineteenth century many of the China traders became successful industrialists.

In Bombay, Parsis like Dinshaw Petit and Jamsetjee Nusserwanjee Tata who built huge industrial empires in India, accumulated their initial wealth partly from exports to China, and partly from raw cotton shipments to England. Seth Hukumchand, a Marwari businessman who set up the first Indian jute mill in Calcutta in 1917, also traded with China. So did the father as well as grandfather of the famous industrialist G.D. Birla.

Capital was accumulated through other trade networks. Some merchants from Madras traded with Burma while others had links with the Middle East and East Africa. There were yet other commercial groups, but they were not directly involved in external trade. They operated within India, carrying goods from one place to another, banking money, transferring funds between cities, and financing traders. When opportunities of investment in industries opened up, many of them set up factories.

As colonial control over Indian trade tightened, the space within which Indian merchants could function became increasingly limited. They were barred from trading with Europe in manufactured goods, and had to export mostly raw materials and food grains – raw cotton, opium, wheat and indigo – required by the British. They were also gradually edged out of the shipping business.

Till the First World War, European Managing Agencies in fact controlled a large sector of Indian industries. Three of the biggest ones were Bird Heiglers and Company, Andrew Yule, and Jardine Skinner and Company. These Agencies mobilised capital, set up joint-stock companies and managed them. In most instances Indian financiers provided the capital while the European Agencies made all investment and business decisions. The European merchant-industrialists had their own chambers of commerce which Indian businessmen were not allowed to join.

Now, where did the workers come from? Factories needed workers. With the expansion of factories, this demand increased. In 1901, there were 584,000 workers in Indian factories. By 1946 the number was over 2,436,000. Where did the workers come from?

In most industrial regions workers came from the districts around. Peasants and artisans who found no work in the village went to the industrial centres in search of work. Over 50 per cent workers in the Bombay cotton industries in 1911 came from the neighbouring district of Ratnagiri, while the mills of Kanpur got most of their textile hands from the villages within the district of Kanpur. Most often millworkers moved between the village and the city, returning to their village homes during harvests and festivals.

Over time, as news of employment spread, workers travelled great distances in the hope of work in the mills. From the United Provinces, for instance, they went to work in the textile mills of Bombay and in the jute mills of Calcutta.

Getting jobs was always difficult, even when mills multiplied and the demand for workers increased. The numbers seeking work were always more than the jobs available. Entry into the mills was also restricted. Industrialists usually employed a jobber to get new recruits. Very often the jobber was an old and trusted worker. He got people from his village, ensured them jobs, helped them settle in the city and provided them money in times of crisis. The jobber therefore became a person with some authority and power. He began demanding money and gifts for his favour and controlling the lives of workers.

The chapter provides two important sources about workers. Source E is from Vasant Parkar, who was once a millworker in Bombay: "The workers would pay the jobbers money to get their sons work in the mill... The mill worker was closely associated with his village, physically and emotionally. He would go home to cut the harvest and for sowing. The Konkani would go home to cut the paddy and the Ghati, the sugarcane. It was an accepted practice for which the mills granted leave."

Source F is from Bhai Bhosle, a trade unionist of Bombay, recollecting his childhood in the 1930s and 1940s: "In those days, the shift was 10 hours – from 5 pm to 3 am – terrible working hours. My father worked for 35 years; he got the asthma like disease and could not work any more...Then my father went back to village."

The number of factory workers increased over time. However, they were a small proportion of the total industrial workforce.

Now, let us move to the next section – The Peculiarities of Industrial Growth.

European Managing Agencies, which dominated industrial production in India, were interested in certain kinds of products. They established tea and coffee plantations, acquiring land at cheap rates from the colonial government; and they invested in mining, indigo and jute. Most of these were products required primarily for export trade and not for sale in India.

When Indian businessmen began setting up industries in the late nineteenth century, they avoided competing with Manchester goods in the Indian market. Since yarn was not an important part of British imports into India, the early cotton mills in India produced coarse cotton yarn rather than fabric. When yarn was imported it was only of the superior variety. The yarn produced in Indian spinning mills was used by handloom weavers in India or exported to China.

By the first decade of the twentieth century a series of changes affected the pattern of industrialisation. As the swadeshi movement gathered momentum, nationalists mobilised people to boycott foreign cloth. Industrial groups organised themselves to protect their collective interests, pressurising the government to increase tariff protection and grant other concessions. From 1906, moreover, the export of Indian yarn to China declined since produce from Chinese and Japanese mills flooded the Chinese market. So industrialists in India began shifting from yarn to cloth production. Cotton piece-goods production in India doubled between 1900 and 1912.

Yet, till the First World War, industrial growth was slow. The war created a dramatically new situation. With British mills busy with war production to meet the needs of the army, Manchester imports into India declined. Suddenly, Indian mills had a vast home market to supply. As the war prolonged, Indian factories were called upon to supply war needs: jute bags, cloth for army uniforms, tents and leather boots, horse and mule saddles and a host of other items. New factories were set up and old ones ran multiple shifts. Many new workers were employed and everyone was made to work longer hours. Over the war years industrial production boomed.

So students, this is why industrial production in India increased during the First World War. British mills were busy with war production, so Manchester imports declined. Indian mills had a vast home market to supply. They were also called upon to supply war needs – jute bags, cloth for army uniforms, tents, leather boots, etc. New factories were set up and old ones ran multiple shifts. Many new workers were employed and everyone worked longer hours.

After the war, Manchester could never recapture its old position in the Indian market. Unable to modernise and compete with the US, Germany and Japan, the economy of Britain crumbled after the war. Cotton production collapsed and exports of cotton cloth from Britain fell dramatically. Within the colonies, local industrialists gradually consolidated their position, substituting foreign manufactures and capturing the home market.

Now, let us look at the next sub-section – Small-scale Industries Predominate.

While factory industries grew steadily after the war, large industries formed only a small segment of the economy. Most of them – about 67 per cent in 1911 – were located in Bengal and Bombay. Over the rest of the country, small-scale production continued to predominate. Only a small proportion of the total industrial labour force worked in registered factories: 5 per cent in 1911 and 10 per cent in 1931. The rest worked in small workshops and household units, often located in alleys and bylanes, invisible to the passer-by.

In fact, in some instances, handicrafts production actually expanded in the twentieth century. This is true even in the case of the handloom sector that we have discussed. While cheap machine-made thread wiped out the spinning industry in the nineteenth century, the weavers survived, despite problems. In the twentieth century, handloom cloth production expanded steadily: almost trebling between 1900 and 1940.

How did this happen?

This was partly because of technological changes. Handicrafts people adopt new technology if that helps them improve production without excessively pushing up costs. So, by the second decade of the twentieth century we find weavers using looms with a fly shuttle. This increased productivity per worker, speeded up production and reduced labour demand. By 1941, over 35 per cent of handlooms in India were fitted with fly shuttles: in regions like Travancore, Madras, Mysore, Cochin, Bengal the proportion was 70 to 80 per cent. There were several other small innovations that helped weavers improve their productivity and compete with the mill sector.

A fly shuttle is a mechanical device used for weaving, moved by means of ropes and pullies. It places the horizontal threads (called the weft) into the vertical threads (called the warp). The invention of the fly shuttle made it possible for weavers to operate large looms and weave wide pieces of cloth.

So students, the introduction of the fly shuttle enabled handloom workers to improve their productivity. This is why the statement "The introduction of the fly shuttle enabled handloom workers to improve their productivity" is true.

Certain groups of weavers were in a better position than others to survive the competition with mill industries. Amongst weavers some produced coarse cloth while others wove finer varieties. The coarser cloth was bought by the poor and its demand fluctuated violently. In times of bad harvests and famines, when the rural poor had little to eat, and their cash income disappeared, they could not possibly buy cloth. The demand for the finer varieties bought by the well-to-do was more stable. The rich could buy these even when the poor starved. Famines did not affect the sale of Banarasi or Baluchari saris. Moreover, as you have seen, mills could not imitate specialised weaves. Saris with woven borders, or the famous lungis and handkerchiefs of Madras, could not be easily displaced by mill production.

Weavers and other craftspeople who continued to expand production through the twentieth century, did not necessarily prosper. They lived hard lives and worked long hours. Very often the entire household – including all the women and children – had to work at various stages of the production process. But they were not simply remnants of past times in the age of factories. Their life and labour was integral to the process of industrialisation.

Now, let us move to the next section – Market for Goods.

We have seen how British manufacturers attempted to take over the Indian market, and how Indian weavers and craftsmen, traders and industrialists resisted colonial controls, demanded tariff protection, created their own spaces, and tried to extend the market for their produce.

But when new products are produced people have to be persuaded to buy them. They have to feel like using the product. How was this done?

One way in which new consumers are created is through advertisements. As you know, advertisements make products appear desirable and necessary. They try to shape the minds of people and create new needs. Today we live in a world where advertisements surround us. They appear in newspapers, magazines, hoardings, street walls, television screens. But if we look back into history we find that from the very beginning of the industrial age, advertisements have played a part in expanding the markets for products, and in shaping a new consumer culture.

When Manchester industrialists began selling cloth in India, they put labels on the cloth bundles. The label was needed to make the place of manufacture and the name of the company familiar to the buyer. The label was also to be a mark of quality. When buyers saw "MADE IN MANCHESTER" written in bold on the label, they were expected to feel confident about buying the cloth.

But labels did not only carry words and texts. They also carried images and were very often beautifully illustrated. If we look at these old labels, we can have some idea of the mind of the manufacturers, their calculations, and the way they appealed to the people.

Images of Indian gods and goddesses regularly appeared on these labels. It was as if the association with gods gave divine approval to the goods being sold. The imprinted image of Krishna or Saraswati was also intended to make the manufacture from a foreign land appear somewhat familiar to Indian people.

By the late nineteenth century, manufacturers were printing calendars to popularise their products. Unlike newspapers and magazines, calendars were used even by people who could not read. They were hung in tea shops and in poor people's homes just as much as in offices and middle-class apartments. And those who hung the calendars had to see the advertisements, day after day, through the year. In these calendars, once again, we see the figures of gods being used to sell new products.

Like the images of gods, figures of important personages, of emperors and nawabs, adorned advertisement and calendars. The message very often seemed to say: if you respect the royal figure, then respect this product; when the product was being used by kings, or produced under royal command, its quality could not be questioned.

When Indian manufacturers advertised the nationalist message was clear and loud. If you care for the nation then buy products that Indians produce. Advertisements became a vehicle of the nationalist message of swadeshi.

Now, let us look at the Conclusion of the chapter.

Clearly, the age of industries has meant major technological changes, growth of factories, and the making of a new industrial labour force. However, as you have seen, hand technology and small-scale production remained an important part of the industrial landscape.

The chapter ends by asking you to look again at the images in figures 1 and 2 and think about what they now say to you after studying the chapter.

Now students, we have covered the entire chapter. But we still need to do the exercises at the end of the chapter. Let me go through them one by one.

The first set of exercises is "Write in brief". There are four questions here.

Question 1a: Explain why women workers in Britain attacked the Spinning Jenny.

Students, we have already discussed this. Women workers attacked the Spinning Jenny because the machine threatened their livelihoods. The Spinning Jenny speeded up the spinning process and reduced the demand for manual labour. Since many women were employed in spinning, they feared losing their jobs. This is why they attacked the Spinning Jenny.

Question 1b: Explain why in the seventeenth century merchants from towns in Europe began employing peasants and artisans within the villages.

Students, we discussed this when we talked about proto-industrialisation. Merchants from towns began employing peasants and artisans in the countryside because urban crafts and trade guilds were powerful in towns and restricted new merchants from setting up business. So merchants turned to the countryside where they could find cheap labour and avoid guild restrictions.

Question 1c: Explain why the port of Surat declined by the end of the eighteenth century.

Students, we discussed this too. The port of Surat declined because the East India Company gradually gained power and secured monopoly rights to trade. This led to the decline of the old ports through which local merchants had operated. Exports from Surat fell dramatically, credit dried up, and local bankers went bankrupt. Meanwhile, new ports like Bombay and Calcutta grew, controlled by European companies.

Question 1d: Explain why the East India Company appointed gomasthas to supervise weavers in India.

Students, the East India Company appointed gomasthas to supervise weavers to eliminate existing traders and brokers connected with the cloth trade and establish direct control over weavers. This was done to ensure regular supplies of cotton and silk goods, control costs, and eliminate competition. The gomasthas collected supplies and examined the quality of cloth.

Now, the second set of exercises is "True or False". There are four statements here.

Statement a: At the end of the nineteenth century, 80 per cent of the total workforce in Europe was employed in the technologically advanced industrial sector.

This is FALSE. Even at the end of the nineteenth century, less than 20 per cent of the total workforce was employed in technologically advanced industrial sectors.

Statement b: The international market for fine textiles was dominated by India till the eighteenth century.

This is TRUE. Before the age of machine industries, silk and cotton goods from India dominated the international market in textiles.

Statement c: The American Civil War resulted in the reduction of cotton exports from India.

This is FALSE. The American Civil War actually resulted in the increase of cotton exports from India. When the American Civil War broke out and cotton supplies from the US were cut off, Britain turned to India. As raw cotton exports from India increased, the price of raw cotton shot up.

Statement d: The introduction of the fly shuttle enabled handloom workers to improve their productivity.

This is TRUE. The fly shuttle increased productivity per worker, speeded up production and reduced labour demand.

Now, the third exercise is "Explain what is meant by proto-industrialisation".

Students, proto-industrialisation refers to the phase of industrial production that existed before factories appeared. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, merchants from towns in Europe moved to the countryside, supplying money to peasants and artisans and persuading them to produce goods for an international market. This production was not based on factories but was carried out within household farms in the countryside. It was part of a network of commercial exchanges controlled by merchants. This is what is meant by proto-industrialisation.

Now, let us look at the "Discuss" questions.

Question 1: Why did some industrialists in nineteenth-century Europe prefer hand labour over machines?

We have already answered this question. Some industrialists preferred hand labour because there was plenty of cheap labour available, machines required large capital investment, hand labour was more flexible for seasonal industries, some products required human skill, and the upper classes preferred handmade products.

Question 2: How did the East India Company procure regular supplies of cotton and silk textiles from Indian weavers?

We have already answered this question. The East India Company appointed gomasthas to supervise weavers and used the system of advances to tie weavers to the Company. Once weavers took loans, they had to hand over the cloth they produced to the gomastha and could not sell to other traders.

Question 3: Imagine that you have been asked to write an article for an encyclopaedia on Britain and the history of cotton. Write your piece using information from the entire chapter.

Students, for this question, you need to write an article about Britain and the history of cotton, using information from the chapter. Your article should include points like: the growth of cotton industry in Britain, the inventions that increased cotton production, the establishment of cotton mills, the role of cotton in industrialisation, the export of cotton goods, and the impact on Indian textile industry.

Question 4: Why did industrial production in India increase during the First World War?

We have already answered this question. Industrial production in India increased during the First World War because British mills were busy with war production, so Manchester imports declined. Indian mills had a vast home market to supply. They were also called upon to supply war needs. New factories were set up and old ones ran multiple shifts. Many new workers were employed and everyone worked longer hours.

Now students, we have covered all the exercises in the chapter. Let me now give you a complete summary of everything we have learned in this lesson.

In this lesson, we studied the Age of Industrialisation. We learned about:

1. The concept of proto-industrialisation – how even before factories, there was large-scale production in the countryside controlled by merchants.

2. The coming of factories in England – how inventions in the eighteenth century led to the establishment of cotton mills.

3. The pace of industrial change – how industrialisation was slower than we think, and how traditional industries still employed most workers.

4. Why some industrialists preferred hand labour – because of abundant cheap labour, high cost of machines, seasonal demand, and the need for human skill.

5. The life of workers – how they faced unemployment, low wages, and harsh living conditions.

6. The impact on Indian textiles – how Indian textiles dominated the international market before colonial rule, and how the East India Company's control and Manchester imports destroyed the traditional industry.

7. The coming of factories in India – how the first cotton mills were set up in Bombay, jute mills in Bengal, and how Indian entrepreneurs emerged.

8. The peculiarities of industrial growth in India – how European managing agencies dominated, how Indian industrialists avoided competing with Manchester, and how the First World War boosted Indian industry.

9. The survival of small-scale industries – how handloom weavers survived by adopting new technology and focusing on specialised products.

10. The role of advertisements – how manufacturers used labels and calendars to sell their products.

11. We also answered all the exercises including the write in brief questions, true or false questions, and discuss questions.

Students, industrialisation was a complex process that brought both progress and problems. It changed the way goods were produced, the way people worked, and the relationship between countries. In Britain, it led to the growth of factories and the emergence of an industrial working class. In India, colonial rule shaped the pattern of industrialisation, leading to the decline of traditional industries and the emergence of new factories. However, hand technology and small-scale production remained important throughout this period.

I hope you have understood everything in this chapter. Thank you for listening attentively. Remember to revise this chapter thoroughly and practice answering the questions. Good luck with your studies!