Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-28T18:21:59.290Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The 1866 Grain Riots in Sri Lanka

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2009

John D. Rogers
John D. Rogers
Affiliation:
Somerville, Massachusetts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Until fairly recently, grain riots were viewed as spontaneous reactions of the poor to hunger, not worthy of detailed analysis. Over the past twenty years, partially as a result of pioneering studies by George Rudé and Edward Thompson with reference to France and Britain, a considerable body of scholarly writing about these disturbances has appeared. Consistent cross-cultural patterns have emerged from this research. Grain riots were not necessarily a product of hunger, although they were a facet of struggles over the control of food. They have normally taken one of two forms. One was the market riot, where the crowd protested against the price or lack of availability of grain. Such disturbances often commenced with the offer to buy grain at a “just” or “customary” price. If this demand was not met, more drastic action was taken. Sometimes rioters seized grain and sold it to the crowd for a just price, and then turned the receipts over to the owners of the grain. More often grain was strewn about, destroyed, or stolen. The second main form of grain riot was the blockade. In times of shortage, people prevented the export of grain from a town or district because they believed that merchants and landlords should not benefit from scarcity and that such exports would drive up the price locally. Sometimes retributive action accompanied or followed both types of protest, meting out punishment to traders, landlords, or others who were perceived as wrongly profiting from food shortages. Such action usually took the form of wholesale looting. In general, grain rioters avoided serious violence.

Type
How Peasants Rebel
Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , July 1987 , pp. 495 - 513
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Tilly, Charles, “Food Supply and Public Order in Modern Europe,” in The Formation of National States in Western Europe, Tilly, Charles, ed. (Princeton, 1975), 380–455Google Scholar.

2 Thompson, Edward P., “The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century,” Past and Present, no. 50 (1971), 76–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Tilly, Louise A., “The Food Riot as a Form of Political Conflict in France,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 2:1 (1971), 23–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Wong, R. Bin, “Food Riots in the Qing Dynasty,” Journal of Asian Studies, 41:4 (1982), 767–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Wong, R. Bin, “Les émeutes de subsistances en Chine et en Europe occidentale,” Annales, 38:2 (1983), 234–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Arnold, David, “Looting, Grain Riots, and Government Policy in South India 1918,” Past and Present, no. 84 (1979), 111–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, “Famine in Peasant Consciousness and Peasant Action: Madras 1876–78,” in Subaltern Studies III: Writings on South Asian History and Society, Guha, Ranajit, ed. (Delhi, 1984), 87–88Google Scholar; Choudhary, Sukhbir, “Post-war Awakening (1919–21),” in Peasant Struggles in India, Desai, A. R., ed. (Bombay, 1979), 242–48Google Scholar; Bayly, C. A., Rulers, Townsmen, and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British Expansion, 1770–1870 (Cambridge, 1983), 295–96, 330–34Google Scholar; Washbrook, David, The Emergence of Provincial Politics: The Madras Presidency, 1870–1920 (Cambridge, 1976), 65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dalyell, R. A., Memorandum on the Madras Famine of 1866 (Madras, 1867), 27, 37Google Scholar; Srivasta, Hari Shanker, The History of Indian Famines and Development of Famine Policy (1858–1918) (Agra, 1968), 63Google Scholar. I have also discussed grain riots in nineteenth-century Sri Lanka and their relationship to other forms of collective violence in Crime, Justice, and Society in Colonial Sri Lanka (London, 1987), ch. 5Google Scholar.

7 Paul R. Greenough has commented that “apparently no well-established habit of food rioting existed” in South Asia. Arnold, on the other hand, believes that the grain riot was a recurrent form of protest, at least in southern India, and that its incidence may have been increasing in the nineteenth century. Bayly, , Rulers, 295–96, 330–34Google Scholar, seems to support Arnold's first point. SeeGreenough, , “Comments from a South Asian Perspective,” Journal of Asian Studies, 41:4 (1982), 793–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Arnold, , “Looting,” 111–14Google Scholar; idem, “Crime and Crime Control in Madras, 1858–1947,” in Crime and Criminality in British India, Yang, Anand A., ed. (Tucson, 1985), 69Google Scholar.

8 de Silva, K. M., A History of Sri Lanka (London and Berkeley, 1981), 127, 171–76Google ScholarPubMed.

9 Arasaratnam, S., “Dutch Commercial Policy in Ceylon and Its Effects on the Indo-Ceylon Trade (1690–1750),” Indian Economic and Social History Review, 4:2 (1967), 109–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Ibid; Kanapathypillai, V., “Dutch Rule in Maritime Ceylon, 1766–1796” (Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1969), 266–71Google Scholar.

11 de Silva, Colvin R., Ceylon under the British Occupation 1795–1833: Its Political, Administrative, and Economic Development (Colombo, 1962 [1942]), II, 354–55, 389, 445–50Google Scholar; Wickremeratne, U. C., “The British Administration of the Maritime Provinces of Ceylon, 1796–1802” (Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1964), 250–58Google Scholar; Bertolacci, Anthony, A View of the Agricultural, Commercial, and Financial Interests of Ceylon (London, 1817), 69–72, 124–28, 164, 200, 206–7Google Scholar; Sir Thomas Maitland to William Windham, 28 February 1807, Colonial Office Records, Public Record Office, Kew, London (hereafter cited as CO), 54/25.

12 Peebles, Patrick, Sri Lanka: A Handbook of Historical Statistics (Boston, 1982), 217Google Scholar.

13 Roberts, Michael, “Land Problems and Policies, c. 1832 to c. 1900,” in University of Ceylon History of Ceylon, de Silva, K. M., ed. (Colombo, 1973), III, 134Google Scholar.

14 SirRobinson, Hercules, “Reply of Governor in Legislative Council” (10 1866), Enc, CO 54/416(251)Google Scholar.

15 Observer (Colombo), 15 October 1866, 19 September 1866.

16 Rice was normally sold to consumers by the “measure” or “half-measure.” In Sinhala, one measure was indicated by the term seruva. There were thirty-two measures in a bushel. All prices in this article are expressed in bushels for the sake of convenience.

17 Ceylon Examiner (Colombo), 13 10 1866Google ScholarPubMed; Lakrivikirana (Colombo), 26 10 1866, p. 22Google Scholar; Ceylon Times (Colombo), 9 10 1866Google ScholarPubMed.

18 Charles Layard to Colonial Secretary, 14 October 1866, Sri Lanka National Archives, Colombo (hereafter cited as SLNA), 6/2987; J. Scott to General Secretary, Methodist Missionary Society, 29 October 1866, Methodist Missionary Society archives, library of the School of Oriental and African Studies, London, Box 450.

19 Times, 19 October 1866, 16 November 1866; Morris to Colonial Secretary, 27 October 1866, SLNA 6/2995; Lakrivikirana, 23 November 1866, p. 40; Examiner, 27 October 1866.

20 Examiner, 13 October 1866.

21 Robinson, , “Reply of Governor in Legislative Council” (10 1866), Enc, CO 54/416(251)Google Scholar.

22 Colonial Secretary to F. Templer, 25 October 1866, SLNA 6/2992.

23 Examiner, 20 October 1866; Nananha Pradipaya (Colombo), 25 10 1866, p. 82Google Scholar; Times, 18 October 1866; Observer, 18 October 1866.

24 Times, 19 October 1866.

25 Observer, 23 October 1866.

26 Nanartha Pradipaya, 25 10 1866, p. 82Google Scholar; Times, 23 October 1866, 27 October 1866, 30 October 1866; Observer, 22 October 1866, 23 October 1866; Examiner, 24 October 1866, 31 October 1866; Digby, William, Forty Years of Official and Unofficial Life in an Oriental Crown Colony; Being the Life of Sir Richard F. Morgan, Kt. (Madras and London, 1879), I, 327–31Google Scholar; Dep, A. C., A History of the Ceylon Police (1866–1913) (Colombo, 1969), II, 6–7Google Scholar.

27 Times, 23 October 1866; Observer, 23 October 1866; Examiner, 27 October 1866.

28 Robinson, , “Reply of Governor in Legislative Council” (10 1866), E n c, CO 54/416(251)Google Scholar.

29 Examiner, 31 October 1866.

30 Digby, , Forty Years, 328Google Scholar.

31 Observer, 29 October 1866.

32 Examiner, 31 October, 1866.

33 Times, 23 October 1866, 9 November 1866; Observer, 22 October 1866; Lakrivikirana, 2 November 1866, p. 26, and 9 November 1866 pp. 30, 31; Nanartha Pradipaya, 25 October 1866, p. 83.

34 Examiner, 27 October 1866; Observer, 22 October 1866, 29 October 1866; Templer to Colonial Secretary, 26 October 1866, SLNA 6/2992; Nanartha Pradipaya, 25 October 1866, p. 83.

35 Observer, 1 November 1866; Lakrivikirana, 9 November 1866 pp. 30, 31; Times, 26 October 1866.

36 Observer, 1 November 1866.

37 Observer, 29 October 1866; Examiner, 24 October 1866, 27 October 1866; Lakrivikirana, 26 October 1866, p. 23; Nanartha Pradipaya, 25 October 1866, p. 83; Times, 26 October 1866; R. W. T. Morris to Colonial Secretary, 18 October 1866, 23 October 1866, SLNA 6/2995; Morris to Colonial Secretary, 3 March 1868, SLNA 6/3180.

38 Morris to Colonial Secretary, 27 October 1866, SLNA 6/2995; Templer to Colonial Secretary, 26 October 1866, SLNA 6/2992; Colonial Secretary to Templer, 25 October 1866, SLNA 6/2992.

39 Times, 2 November 1866; Observer, 22 October 1866; Nanarlha Pradipaya, 25 October 1866, p. 82.

40 Colonial Secretary to Layard, 25 October 1866, SLNA 7/1517; Nanartha Pradipaya, 25 October 1866, p. 82.

41 Morris to Colonial Secretary, 26 October 1866, SLNA 6/2995.

42 Lakrivikirana, 9 November 1866, p. 30.

43 Digby, , Forty Years, 328–32, 338Google Scholar.

44 Ibid., 321–22.

45 Lakrivikirana, 23 November 1866, p. 40.

46 Examiner, 3 November 1866; Louis Liesching to Morris, 29 October 1866, SLNA 6/2995.

47 Morris to Colonial Secretary, 27 October 1866, SLNA 6/2995.

48 Ibid.

49 Examiner, 27 October 1866.

50 Times, 19 October 1866, 2 November 1866.

51 Nanartha Pradipaya, 25 October 1866, p. 82; Lakrivikirana, 26 October 1866, p. 23; Observer, 23 October 1866; Pieris, P. E., ed., Notes on Some Sinhalese Families Part IV: Mid XIX Century from the Diaries of E. R. Gooneratne (Colombo, n.d.), 14–15Google Scholar.

52 Observer, 25 October 1866; Examiner, 31 October 1866. The Ceylon Chettiars were a distinct group separate from the Nattukottai Chettiars.

53 Times, 23 October 1866.

54 Ibid., 9 November 1866, 16 November 1866, 20 November 1866; Scott to General Secretary, Methodist Missionary Society, 8 December 1866, Methodist Archives, Box 450.

55 Greenough, , “Comments,” 793–94.Google Scholar

56 In practice, these policies were sometimes implemented haphazardly, or not at all, especially when they came into conflict with the state's need for revenue. See Curley, David L., “Fair Grain Markets and Moghul Famine Policy in the Late Eighteenth-Century Bengal,” Calcutta Historical Journal, 2:1 (1977), 1–26Google Scholar; Karim, Abdul, “MurshidQuli Khan's Regulations Regarding Price and Supply of Rice,” Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh, 29:1 (1984), 1–20Google Scholar; Bayly, , Rulers, 330; Man Habib, The Agrarian System of Mughal India (Bombay, 1963), 66–67Google Scholar; Blair, Charles, Indian Famines: Their Historical, Financial, and Other Aspects (Edinburgh and London, 1874), 8–23Google Scholar.

57 Ambirajan, S., Classical Political Economy and British Policy in India (Cambridge, 1978), 63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dalyell, , Memorandum, 10–49Google Scholar.

58 Ambirajan, , Classical Political Economy, 69–80Google Scholar; Blair, , Indian Famines, 57–66Google Scholar; Srivasta, , History of Indian Famines, 55–91Google Scholar.

59 Ambirajan, , Classical Political Economy, 80–99Google Scholar;Srivasta, , History of Indian FaminesGoogle Scholar; Bhatia, B. M., Famines in India: A Study in Some Aspects of the Economic History of India (1860–1945) (Bombay, 1963)Google Scholar.

60 For the economic base of the Sri Lankan elite, see Roberts, , “Elite Formations and Elites, 1832–1931,” in University of Ceylon History of Ceylon, de Silva, , ed., III, 263–84Google Scholar.

61 Wong, , –Food Riots,” 770Google Scholar.

62 Observer, 11 September 1854.

63 Ibid.

64 Dep, , History, 84, 316Google Scholar; Ceylon Catholic Messenger (Colombo), 9 10 1873, 3 May 1870, 23 February 1904Google Scholar; Lakrivikirana, 30 April 1870; Bi-Monthly Examiner (Colombo), 3 05 1870Google Scholar; Ceylon Independent (Colombo), 7 01 1898, 5 April 1904Google ScholarPubMed; Attygalle, T. P., in Administration Report for the Western Province 1906 (Colombo, Government Printer), A13Google Scholar; Burrows, S. M., Administration Report for Nuvara Eliya District 1897 (Colombo, Government Printer), C17Google Scholar; Cumberland, C. R., Administration Report for Chilaw District 1897 (Colombo, Government Printer), G18Google Scholar; Correspondence in files SLNA 59/45 and SLNA 42/830.

65 Noyes, E. T., Administration Report for Puttalam District 1897 (Colombo, Government Printer), G9Google Scholar; Saxton, G. S., Administration Report for Matale District 1897 (Colombo, Government Printer), C7Google Scholar; Cumberland, , Administration Report for Chilaw District 1897 (Colombo, Government Printer), G14Google Scholar; J. West Ridgeway to Joseph Chamberlain, 19 November 1896, CO 54/632(332); Saunders, F. R., Administration Report for the Western Province 1877 (Colombo, Government Printer), 69Google Scholar; Green, H. W., Administration Report for Negombo District 1877 (Colombo, Government Printer), 94Google Scholar.

66 Ellis, F. R., Administration Report for the Western Province 1897 (Colombo, Government Printer), B5Google Scholar.

67 Ibid.

68 Administration Report for Customs and Shipping 1918 (Colombo, Government Printer), A3–4, A16–17Google Scholar.

69 Administration Report for Customs and Shipping 1918 (Colombo, Government Printer), A3–4Google Scholar.

70 “Report on Food Control in 1919,” Ceylon Legislative Council Sessional Paper 1 of 1920 (Colombo, Government Printer)Google Scholar.

71 Wait, W. E., Administration Report for Puttalam and Chilaw Districts 1918 (Colombo, Government Printer), F10Google Scholar; Browining, G. F. R., Administration Report for Kagalla District 1918 (Colombo, Government Printer), 112Google Scholar; Dowbiggin, H. L., Administration Report of the Inspector-General of Police 1918 (Colombo, Government Printer), B5Google Scholar.

72 Srivasta, , History of Indian Famines, 207Google Scholar.

73 Arnold, “Looting.”

74 For the concept that the rural rich guaranteed poorer villagers subsistence in return for most of the normal agricultural surplus and various services, see Scarlett Epstein, “Productive Efficiency and Customary Rewards in Rural South India,” in Themes in Economic Anthropology, Firth, Raymond, ed. (London, 1967), 229–52Google Scholar; Neale, Walter C., “Reciprocity and Redistribution in the Indian Village: Sequel to Some Notable Discussions,” in Trade and Market in the Early Empires, Polanyi, Karl, Arensberg, Conrad, Pearson, Harry, eds. (Glencoe, 111., 1957), 218–36Google Scholar. Most power rested at the top of this system, and at times of severe dearth the poor were often jettisoned. David Washbrook, for instance, suggests that the victims of the famine of 1876–78 in parts of southern India were the “dependents and workers of a small rural elite which treated some of them as expendable.” See Washbrook, , Emergence, 76–77Google Scholar. Arnold, , “Famine,” 75–81Google Scholar, makes a similar point. Also see Greenough, , Prosperity and Misery in Modern Bengal: The Famine of 1943–1944 (Oxford, 1982), 207–15Google Scholar.