Bengal Famine of 1770

The Bengal Famine of 1770, one of the most catastrophic famines in Indian history, devastated large parts of the Bengal Presidency under the rule of the British East India Company. It resulted in the death of an estimated 10 million people, nearly one-third of Bengal’s population at the time. The tragedy was not merely a natural disaster but was exacerbated by exploitative colonial economic policies, administrative negligence, and a lack of effective relief measures. The famine left a lasting mark on Bengal’s socio-economic structure and exposed the failures of early British rule in India.

Background: Political and Economic Context

The Bengal Famine of 1770 occurred only a few years after the East India Company had established its diwani rights (revenue collection rights) over Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa in 1765, following the Battle of Buxar (1764) and the Treaty of Allahabad. This transfer of fiscal power from the Mughal Empire to a trading corporation marked a major turning point in Indian history. The Company, primarily concerned with profit, was ill-equipped and largely uninterested in the welfare of the population.
Before British rule, Bengal had been one of the richest regions in Asia, famous for its fertile lands and thriving textile industry. However, under Company administration, the revenue system became increasingly exploitative. The Permanent Settlement had not yet been introduced, but the revenue demand was already set arbitrarily high, forcing cultivators to sell their produce at low prices while paying excessive taxes.
In addition, the British administrators, motivated by commercial interests, encouraged the cultivation of cash crops such as indigo, opium, and jute at the expense of food grains. The shift in agricultural priorities, coupled with the extraction of wealth from the countryside, severely undermined the region’s economic resilience.

Causes of the Famine

The famine of 1770 was the result of a complex interplay of natural calamity and man-made factors. Its main causes can be summarised as follows:

• Failure of Monsoon: The immediate cause was the failure of the monsoon rains in 1769 and 1770, leading to drought conditions across Bengal and parts of Bihar and Orissa.
• Crop Failure: The drought destroyed the rice crop—the staple food of Bengal—causing severe food shortages.
• Revenue Demands: The East India Company refused to reduce land revenue assessments, even as agricultural output collapsed. Peasants were compelled to pay taxes despite starvation.
• Commercial Exploitation: Company agents and private traders continued to purchase and export grain to other regions for profit, worsening the local scarcity.
• Absence of Relief Measures: The Company administration lacked an effective mechanism for famine relief. No significant public works, grain distribution, or tax remissions were introduced in time.
• Administrative Inefficiency: Many officials prioritised revenue collection over human welfare. The bureaucratic structure of the Company lacked accountability and coordination.

The result was widespread destitution. Villages were deserted, agriculture collapsed, and thousands perished daily. Contemporary accounts describe people dying on roadsides and entire tracts of land turning barren.

The Course of the Famine

The famine began to take shape in late 1769, when reports of drought and food shortages started arriving from districts such as Murshidabad, Birbhum, and Rajshahi. By the summer of 1770, famine conditions had spread across most of Bengal. Grain prices soared to unprecedented levels; a seer of rice, which previously cost one paisa, rose to several times that amount, putting food beyond the reach of the poor.
As starvation intensified, disease followed. Epidemics such as smallpox and cholera ravaged the weakened population. Mortality rates rose sharply, and by early 1771, entire villages had been depopulated. Livestock perished, and fields remained uncultivated for years afterward.
British officials such as Warren Hastings, who later became the first Governor-General of Bengal, acknowledged the severity of the disaster. In his correspondence, Hastings estimated that nearly one-third of Bengal’s population had died. Contemporary travellers like William Bolts and Alexander Dow also documented the horrors, criticising the Company’s inaction and greed.

Impact on Bengal’s Economy and Society

The famine’s impact was catastrophic and far-reaching, altering the demographic and economic structure of Bengal:

• Population Decline: The death of nearly ten million people led to labour shortages, with many villages completely abandoned.
• Agricultural Collapse: Cultivable lands lay barren, and the following year’s harvests failed due to the lack of farmers and cattle.
• Revenue Loss: Ironically, the Company’s insistence on revenue collection backfired, as the depopulation reduced taxable land and income.
• Rise of Zamindars and Speculators: Many peasants, unable to pay taxes, lost their lands, which were taken over by zamindars, moneylenders, and speculators. This contributed to a growing class divide.
• Rural Distress and Migration: Surviving peasants fled to less affected regions, disrupting traditional rural settlements.
• Decline of Local Industry: With the death of artisans and traders, the once-flourishing textile and handicraft industries suffered severe setbacks.

The famine marked the beginning of Bengal’s long economic decline under colonial rule, transforming a prosperous region into one plagued by poverty and underdevelopment.

The Role of the East India Company

The East India Company’s mismanagement remains central to historical interpretations of the famine. Although drought was a natural trigger, the catastrophe was magnified by the Company’s revenue policies and commercial priorities. Company officials focused on maintaining revenue collection and remitting profits to Britain rather than alleviating human suffering.
Even as famine raged, Company revenues for 1771 showed only a modest decline, suggesting that taxes continued to be extracted ruthlessly. Grain traders connected with the Company made enormous profits by hoarding supplies and selling them at inflated prices. There was little concern for famine relief or food distribution.
Historians such as R.C. Dutt and Romesh Chunder Dutt later described the event as a man-made disaster caused by the “drain of wealth” and exploitative colonial governance. In modern historiography, the famine is often cited as an early example of the “colonial economic drain” theory.

British Response and Aftermath

The Company administration was slow to respond. In 1772, Warren Hastings initiated limited reforms aimed at improving revenue administration and governance. He reorganised the collection system to reduce corruption among local revenue officers and emphasised the need for better record-keeping and supervision.
However, these measures were primarily administrative rather than humanitarian. The famine’s long-term consequences were never adequately addressed. The British Parliament, concerned about the Company’s mismanagement and the economic losses it caused, initiated an inquiry that contributed to the Regulating Act of 1773, marking the first step towards parliamentary oversight of the East India Company’s activities.
Despite the magnitude of the disaster, the famine did not result in any systemic relief framework. It would take more than a century before colonial authorities established famine commissions and codified famine relief policies, such as those following the Famine Commission of 1880.

Contemporary Accounts and Historical Significance

Eyewitnesses and contemporary writers painted harrowing pictures of the famine’s devastation. William Bolts, a former Company employee, wrote that people were “feeding on the leaves of trees and the carcasses of dead animals,” while others sold their children for food. These accounts shocked readers in Britain, revealing the moral bankruptcy of the Company’s rule.
The Bengal Famine of 1770 thus holds profound historical significance:

• It was the first major famine under British rule and exposed the incapacity of the Company’s administration.
• It revealed the exploitative nature of colonial economic policies, where profit was prioritised over people.
• It demonstrated the vulnerability of Bengal’s agrarian economy under external pressures.
• It catalysed early debates in Britain about imperial responsibility and the need for political control over the East India Company.