President, Delegates and friends,
I heartily welcome you all to this one-day Seminar on Agriculture in Ancient India arranged under the auspices of the Institute for Oriental Study, Thane.

When this topic was announced a year back, many eyebrows were raised and doubts expressed - Did anything worth that could stand in comparison with today's agricultural advances in all its technology and methodology exist in the past ? Or is it an empty boast ? You are the best judges today as more than 20 papers - ranging from Vedic times to mediaeval times, exposing the many hidden or concealed expertise in ancient Indian agriculture, will be presented to you. By the end of the day you will realize that it is not the ignorance about ancient Indian agricultural system prevalent in India, but a kind of resistance due to heavy bias towards modernity, prevents us to imagine, understand or even appreciate that any achievement of merit by earlier generations of civilisation was possible. We take our period of past as a period of infancy and progress as linear growth.

Alas ! We are not totally aware of the cost we are paying for our agicultural achievements of to-day. Our ignorance of modern agricultural system is a matter of greater concern to-day than how much more or little we know about our ancient agicultural system. We talk about the world having come nearer to-day due to newer systems of communication. All success stories of green and white revolutions are not a global phenomena in the true sense but a sucess story of a few advanced countries or of a few States in a country or a few districts in a State. Some portion of the civilization is suffering from the hazards of over-eating while a much larger section of the civilization has hardly anything to eat. It is those, who have produced more to consume more are responsible for the present global ecological problems. We have more than 20 million hungry people in Africa, not due to any natural disaster, but due to man-made destruction of natural resources. Everyday there is some news of shrinking of tropical rain forest. Now Australia and California in the U.S.A. etc., are on the verge of facing a drought. What about our own country and for that matter, our own State of Maharashtra, which is supposed to be one of the most progressive and prosperous States in India ? We are reading in the newspepars that Maharashtra is facing drought and there is going to be an acute shortage of water. Are all these things suggestive of any sound progress or achievements over our past agricultural system ? The crux of the problem lies in the lifestyte, which we have adopted to suit to scientific achievements, so-called progress and modernity. And in this background, we have to compare the modern and ancient systems of agriculture, not in terms of per acre output or per capita consumption of wheat or rice or any other such indices, which have no relevance or accountability to our environment and natural resource tapping. Sheer greed to produce more has damaged our environment beyond our imagination, and I am afraid, if we do not realise this in time, we will be facing a situation of irreversible damage to natural resources. Our indiscriminate use of inorganic fertilizers and pesticides to-day will make my point clear. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has shown, with adequate supportive data that many of those pesticides used today are known to accumulate in plants, water and living organisms; they are potentially cancer-inducing. They have also shown inducing genetic changes. Most of these chemicals are non-bio-degradable or have a very delayed bio-degradability, which has proved to have adverse impact on our nervous system.

In today's seminar, we have two very interesting papers on the types, nature and system of the use of fertilizers in ancient India. A more detailed study of ancient Indian literature will open the floodgates of information and knowledge on this vital subject and may give us some clues for safer practices of those agents. The highest scientific body in USA and various other researchers in other parts of the world have proved that organic farming is more productive than the use of inorganic fertilizers and pesticides. But Indians in their haste and trying to become more 'modern' are imitating the West blindly· To-day, in India, there are more than 132 pesticides which have been granted provisional registration under the Act. But out of these only 13 have been fully cleared and scientific data, on the effect of pesticides when inhaled by living organisms, are available only in respect of five out of 132.

We are entering into the Eighth Five Year Plan and crores of rupees have already been spent in earlier plans on irrigation and for provision of clean drinking water. On this front also, the picture is not only grim but frightening. Every passing day brings before us a State or a region entering newly on the map of the country with either water table going down or salinity increasing due to indiscriminate, excessive and uncontrolled attempts to tap water from natural resoures.

I will be failing in my duty, if I do not mention here the name of Shri Sunderlal Bahuguna, who is fighting a highly dignified and restrained battle against our deaf and mute planners. His fight to save Himalayan ecology is going to protect future generations from the impending disaster.

We have four papers in to-day's seminar from water-divining to irrigation system in ancient India. The information presented is just the tip of the iceberg and the subject deserves another fuller seminar exclusively.

The literature available on agriculture in ancient Sanskrit and  Prakrit literature is very vast. Apart from specific texts on the science of agriculture which are numerous, one also gets ample information about agricultural systems in the works of grammarians like Panini and Patanjali, from texts of Silpasastra, other works like Kautilya's Arthasastra and Varshamihira's writings and even in drama and poetry works of writers like Kalidasa. We have more than six papers related to this topic in this seminar. For a fuller justice, one has to sift all ancient Indian literature irrespective of its subject proper it deals with.

For a correct understanding of any Indian system - be it spiritual or material science - a complete knowledge of both the systems is essential. Indian way of looking at human life, human relations his relations with Nature ete., have a common thread of thought process which binds them all and its appreciation is essential for a study of any of one of them independently. Agriculture is no exception to this.

Agriculture was a part of the whole system. A non-agricultural section of the society was equally responsible for agriculture and those who were involved in agricultural operations were equally accountable to the non-agricultural happenings in the society. Every trade or vocation was important and complementary to each other. The concept of India as a purely agricultural country is also far from truth, and is just a product of modern ldealogical theory and jargon of economics. All ancient Indian literature and historical evidence goes contrary to this belief and suggests Indla as a very powerful agricultural as well as commercial and industrial power on the earth prior to the advent of the British. There are innumerable references to Indian products all kinds exported to all parts of the world. I quote below a few glaring examples which speak for themselves.

In the early days of the Christian era (lst century A.D. - say about 2000 years before) Roman women's passion for Indian cloth was so intense that they decorated themselves in seven folds of Indian muslin (called 'Nubula' by the Romans) and paraded in the streets, which brought an embarassing situation to the city fathers and the Roman Senate had to intervene and put an embargo on the import of that fine stuff from India. Pliny, a Roman writer, complained in the early 2nd century A.D. that "... in no year does India drain our empire of less than 550 millions of sesterces", whicb was approximately equivalent to about pounds 1,400,000 in the 19th century. Another author has noted that in the year of Aurelian, i.e., around the latter half of the third century A.D., this cloth was worth its weight in gold. The Indian exports to Europe of all commercial and agricultural products were much higher at the time of tbe arrival of the British than in the post-British period. Peter the Great of Russia (1682-1725 A.D.) considered the commerce of India as the commmerce of the world, and ..... be who can exclusively control this is the dictator of Europe. While Indian exports were so high, Europe almost had nothing to sell to India except bullion. The East India Co., which was chartered in 1600 A.D. used to send to India pounds 400,000 to pounds 500, 000 a year to buy Indian goods for exports before 1757 A.D. It was in 1757 A.D. that the Battle of Plassey was fought and the victorious British started extending their tentacles in India. I quote Sir George Bidwood, who observes-

The whole world has been ceaselessely pouring its bullion for 3000 years into India to buy products of her industries.

It is said, history repeats itself. The drain of Britiss bullion was so painful and again tbe Indian textiles, which had become very popular in England became the victims of enactments for their prevention from entry into England.William III of England in 1700 A.D. prohihited the entry of Indian textiles by imposing a fine of pounds 200 to the wearer or the seller of Indian silk and calico.

As in textile and in many other basic industrial products India supplied the best quality of steel then known to Europe. In 1794 A.D. Dr. Scott, M.D., sent to the President of the Royal Society a specimen of wootz steel from India. The sample was put to thorough examination and was analysed by several experts. One such was Mr. Stodart, wbo qualified the variety of steel from India for fine cutlery and particularly for all edged instruments used for surgical purposes. After this that variety of steel was much in demand in Europe and even after 18 years later, Stodart was of the opinion that

If a better steel if offered to me, I will gladly attend to it; but the steel of India is decidedly the best I have yet met with.

 These achievements are possible only when there is optimum socio-economic stability in the society. Is this not adequate testimony to suggest that by and large, the common people of India were living in greater cooperation and harmony, in better and prosperous conditions and had better skills and better earnings as against the perpetrated stories of thousands of years of atrocities so near and dear to idealogically committed sociologists. historians, economists and politicians of today? My point here was just to bring to your notice that to India agriculture was not the sole vocation or industry on which people depended upon but agriculture, trade and commerce prospered simultaneously and not at the cost of each other.

Now we will see the position of agriculture and irrigation prior to the advent of the British. The position was far more superior and almost all travellers' accounts speak highly of Indian agriculture and the crops. I quote a few.

A Report from British Commission of the North-West Provinces (present Uttar Pradesh) in 1808 says-

In passing through the Rampore territory, we could not fail to notice the high state of cultivation which it had attained... If the comparison for the same territory be made between the management of the Rohillas and that of our own Government, it is painful to think that the balance of advantage is clearly in favour of the former.

Luke Scrafton, a member of Clive's Council, in his book Reflections of the Government of Hindustan (printed in 1770) writes :

The manufacturers, commerce and agriculture flourished exeedingly and none felt the hand of oppression.... nor is there a part of the world where arts and agriculture have been more cultivated of which the vast, plenty and variety of manufactures and the merchants were proofs sufficient

As traveller in Berar says :

We experienced very civil and hospitable treatment and found plenty of every kind of grain which this highly cultivated country produced at a very cheap rate

The picture got radically changed after the Britishers started ruling the country, through their imported system of ownership of land, land tenure, land revenue, laws, education etc.

    In the l8th and l9th centuries, in the free countries of the world, the number of people engaged in agriculture was becoming less, while those in industry and service sectors of the economy was increasing. In India, exactly the reverse was heppening. There was `agricuituralisation', of the people with increasing 'deindustrialisation' of the society. The bond of coordination of industry and agriculture in India was destroyed and a new bond of India's agriculture and Britain's industry was established. Destruction of rural and cottage industries, allied trades and commerce ruined all supportive vocations of the bulk of population and the people thus thrown out from their vocations crowded in the agricuiture sector. Coupled with new land ownership policy of the British, even the peasants started getting uprooted from land ownership. Land was never a mortgagable commodity in India earlier to British. It was rarely transferable as a matter of right. The laws enacted around 1835 A.D. and in the following years by the British conferred unrestricted rights of transfer of land on occupants of all classes. It could be mortgaged now and could be recovered through the British Court of Law. The chief architect of'Survey Settlement' George Wingate saw this facility as a means of getting rid of uneconomic cultivators and substituting them by pensioners, traders and other parties having capital. This was a turning point in the history of Indian agriculture. In the pre-British India, land had no exchange value and labour was costly. During British rule all those who were deprived of their vocations and trade, flocked to agricultural land and labour became cheap. These things are evident by the repeated famines during the early British rule in India. This has been endorsed by the Famine Commission appointed in 1878, which says :

At the root of much of the poverty of the people of India, and the riaks to which they are exposed in seasons of scarcity, lies the unfortunate circumstance that agriculture fonns almost the sole occupation of the mass of the population, and that no remedy for present evils can be complete which does not include the diversity of occupations through which the surplus population may be drawn from agricultural pursuits and led to find the means of subsistence in manufactures or some such employment....

These were the crocodile tears as the British themselves were responsible for destroying diversity of occupation which was available to society before their rule.

Another blow to the whole system of agriculture was given by introducing zamindari in India in the British style. In pre-British India the State or tbe Crown was not the sole owner of the soil unlike in Britain. Even if the king wanted land for his personal use, he had to buy it from the person under whose cultivation it was. Peasants had to pay a fixed share of their produce which was minimal and which  was paid normally in kind and occasionally in cash. No agency - zamindar or State could ever deprive the peasants of their holdings while in Britain the actual cultivators were mere labourers.

These changes in land policy and revenue system literally shattered the whole system of agiculture and trade in the country. In every territory the British conquered, they tried to raise their revenue through land, irrespective of its potentialities. Poona went in the hands of the British in 1818. In 1817, the revenue was pounds 800,000. In 1818, it was raised to pounds 1,150,000 and after a few more years it rose to pounds 1,500,000. The people were getting poorer and poorer and the rulers were getting richer and richer. But there is not dearth of people in India who see divinity in the British people and condemn the Peshwa for petty political gains. Similar is the case with Punjab, which was annexed in 1849. In 1847-08 the land revenue in Punjab was pounds 8,20,000. Within three years it escalated to pounds 1,060,000.

The case of the Peshwa is very interesting. The year 1800 is considered as the beginning of the downfall of the Peshwa rule. Whatever may be the political  situation or circumstance, but at least till the advent of the British, the common man  in Peshwa raj had a superior lifestyle and enjoyed prosperity. The social history of people need a total re-writing with newer available sources. Sir John Malcolm  visited the Maratha country around 1803 and his findings are -

It has not happened to me ever to see countries better cultivated, and more  abounding in all produce of the soil, as well as in commercial wealth, than the  Southern Maharashtra distircts.... Poona, the capital of the Peshwah, was very  wealthy and a thriving commercial town, and there was as much cultivation in  the Deccan as it was possible an arid and unfruitful country would admit.

 This statement of Sir Malcolm is not the only proof of well-being of the Poona country agriculturally. But we also have a supportive evidence of prosperity of people through other sources. Nagpur, in the year 1800, had a very flourishing textile trade. Before tbe downfall of Peshwa in l8l8, the export of cloth woven in Nagpur city and around to Pune was of the value between Rs. 1,200,000 to Re: 1,400,000. Within eight years of British raj i.e., in 1826, it was hardly Rs300,000. Tbe agricultural prosperity of Pune people in turn helped the craftsmen and tradesmen in Nagpur area to prosper. Peter Harhnetty in his paper ,·De-industrialisation' Re-visited: The Handloom Weaver of the Central Province of India C. 1800-1947, published in Modern Asian Studies (1991, Great Britain) writes-

They(Kosthis) employed Brahmins for their weddings and were not stigmatised as impure, as were most weaving castes. They enjoyed high standard of living and spent lavishly on wedding and other cermonies.

He further writes-

The general population wore coarser cloth woven by Mahars(Dhers) though the best such cloth sold for Rs. 20 a peice. In Nagpur, Dhers spun an extremely fine thread which was then woven by Kosthis into dhotis and saris which were the common dress of all classes in Maharashtra.

This evidence again strengthens tbe fact that in the pre-British India wben vocations were coordinating with each other, people lived in perfect harmony without any caste taboos, while after the advent of tbe British, due to the British policies, their vocations were destroyed. They became landless and occupationless and poorer

As we study and peep in other subjects and literature for ancient Indian agricultural system, the study of agricultural system in ancient India also gives us in turn newer visions and broader horizons for a better understanding of other branches of science, life and culture in ancient India. What we need is an unbiased, non-modern, a truly neutral approach to the study of ancient Indian systems. I quote two examples before I conclude. One again is of British times and another of recent times.

  Dr. Hove travelled through Konkan, Gujrat and Kathiawar during 1787-88. While passing through Thane, this very town, he has written a very interesting experience as to how the local indigenous experience and knowledge was more useful regarding construction of a sluice. He writes-

In consequence, a sluice was proposed, whicb cost tbe Company several lacs of rupees. However, as it was begun too late in the season and finished in tbe beginning of the rains, so that the combination of the bricks was but slight, and soon demolished by tbe first freshes, and at last found useless. The engineer who built it, gave it as his opinion, that no sluice could be made sufficiently resistible, or else they would have allowed him double the sum of the former. The expense incident on the former occasion being already too great, and without the least advantage, the Governer in Council thought it fit to declining, and left it to decay, till a Banian addressed himself to the Governor, with the following proposal. That he would build it up again and keep it in repairs, if they would grant him the plantations for fifteen years free from every tax. The Governor, having given up every thought of receiving any benefit from it, granted him the demand. The Banian, having obtained the permission set on to work in the proper season, and finished it a considerable time before the rains. I had the satisfaction of congratulating him today on his good success, which to my idea he will enjoy, to the infinite censure of the engineer. The rainy season this year was rather severe; however, I could not observe the least damage the sluices have been received. I have not seen the Engineer, but must give as my candid opinion that he  little understood his profession.... The Banian, having obtained permission, made the secret known, by opening four sluices more, which be accomplisbed with a trivial expense and has every prospect of enjoying it.

This simple example speaks of the people who had adequate knowledge to support their own agicultural systerm and irrigation, where theoretical knowledge without experience of the local conditions hardly helps or sometimes leads to disasters.

I quote a very interesting modern example from an authoritative scientific journal Nature' (Vol. 353, October 24, 1991) :

US studies on the amount of methane - a potent contributor to the greenhouse effect - produced by Indian cows overstated their threat by a third because they assumed the Indian animals were as large as their US counterparts, a new Indian study finds. Researchers at the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), as part of an exercise to collect data for tbe 1992 world climate conference in Brazil, say that US researchers simply extrapolated US bovine measurements made "under very different conditions" from those in India. Indian cows eat and weigh less than US cows. Similarly, methane emissions from Indian rice paddies are less than from US paddies of the same size because of smaller biomass of Indian rice plants. Based on world measurements, CSIR estimates tbat total Indian metbane output is just over 10 million tonnes a year - less than a quarter of tbe 48 million ronnes s year that the US Enviromnemal Protection Agency and Oak Ridge National Laboratory have calculated.

I am sure, Indian systems will have to be studied by avoiding such mathematical and statistical superimpositions of western culture, mind and data, and they also not fall a victim to idealogical and political zealots.

I hope to-day's Seminar will be a step in this direction.

I thank you all for honouring the invitation of the Institute to participate in the Seminar.
Dr. V.V. Bedekar