Question

An excerpt from Bernier’s description of the peasantry in the countryside: Of the vast tracts of country constituting the empire of Hindustan, many are little more than sand, or barren mountains, badly cultivated, and thinly populated. Even a considerable portion of the good land remains untilled for want of labourers; many of whom perish in consequence of the bad treatment they experience from Governors. The poor people, when they become incapable of discharging the demands of their rapacious lords, are not only often deprived of the means of subsistence, but are also made to lose their children, who are carried away as slaves. Thus, it happens that the peasantry, driven to despair by so excessive a tyranny, abandon the country. In this instance, Bernier was participating in contemporary debates in Europe concerning the nature of state and society, and intended that his description of Mughal India would serve as a warning to those who did not recognise the “merits” of private property.

What, according to Bernier, were the problems faced by peasants in the subcontinent? Do you think his description would have served to strengthen his case?

Answer 1

According to François Bernier, the peasantry in Mughal India suffered extreme misery and systemic exploitation due to the crown’s ownership of land.

I. The problems faced by peasants are as follows:

• Cruel Exploitation: Governors and rapacious lords subjected peasants to severe tyranny and excessive demands.
• Loss of Livelihood: Failure to meet revenue demands led to deprivation of their basic means of subsistence.
• Enslavement of Children: Debt-ridden peasants had their children taken away by force to be sold as slaves.
• Forced Migration: Driven to absolute despair by oppressive taxation, many peasants abandoned the countryside entirely.
• Agricultural Decline: Left without land ownership or incentive, labourers refused to farm, leaving good land untilled.

II. Yes, his grim description directly strengthened his case by acting as a warning to European monarchs about the dangers of state land ownership.

• Private Property Advocacy: Bernier wanted to prove that a lack of private property inevitably leads to tyranny and economic ruin.
• Binary Contrast: He contrasted a “ruined” India against a prosperous Western Europe to flatter and influence European rulers.
• Exaggerated Rhetoric: By framing the Mughal Emperor as the sole owner of all land, he created a powerful, cautionary political fable.