Conclusion

This chapter has shown that in the eighteenth century standards of living, calculated in terms of grain wages, were comparable between Britain and South India and Bengal, which were both major centres of population and economic activity in the Indian subcontinent.

clothing. Therefore, it is quite plausible to conclude that the real standard of living was higher in South Asia.

The chaper has argued that the key to the high standards of living on the Indian subcontinent was the structure of the labour market. Labour market institutions directly contributed to the well-being of labourers by giving them enormous bargaining power. For this the mobility of producers, artisanal as well as agricultural, was crucial. The easy option to exit the ‘employment relation', which was further enhanced by the labour shortages of the eighteenth century, meant that labourers were able to lay claim to a secure share of the social product.

The structure of the labour market also indirectly contributed to the standard of living in India. As the use of coercive powers to limit labour mobility was not a legitimate exercise of state power, holders of political power were forced to undertake agricultural improvements in order to attract and fix labour. This translated into higher productivity in agriculture as higher quality land could be brought under the plough, systems of water control could be constructed and more valuable crops could be cultivated. All of these made possible high standards of living for those engaged in agricultural production. A highly productive agriculture also benefited artisans as cheap food meant cheap prices for their manufactures on global markets, and high demand for their services. Therefore, the standard of living in eighteenth-century India was very much a product of the political institutions that were characteristic of the Indian subcontinent.