Abstract
It is a general belief that when a person undertakes any business enterprise, he calculates profit as his ultimate aim. Profit is defined as the monetary gain made by a person by selling something for more than it costs him. As per the norms of the economic concept of medieval Europe, moral scruples such as greed and avarice were associated with the notion of profit. This in turn acted as a hindrance to pursue profit while undertaking the profession of business. In the sixteenth century, due to Calvinism, the life of business was given a new sanctity. In the context of India, we can anchor the fact that the calculation of profit was an integral aspect of the existence of the community of bania. This can be established with the help of a study of the Ardhakathanaka—an autobiographical memoir. It was written by Banarasidas in A.D. 1641 (V.S. 1698) when he was living at Agra. Banarasidas was a middle-class Jain merchant. While understanding the notion of profit, the present article looks into the aspect of whether religion acts as a restraint or promotes business as a profession. It enables us to seek an insight into the mercantile world of the early sixteenth and late seventeenth centuries. This was also the time when the Mughal Empire was in its heyday. The Ardhakathanaka is an invaluable contemporary source; hence, it has great historical value. Profit being an integral aspect of mercantile life, this feature is explicitly highlighted in the Ardhakathanaka. We get to know about the motives and methods employed by the bania community to earn profit. Despite providing immense, crucial information associated with mercantile life, historians have not highlighted this aspect of the Ardhakathanaka. The article is an attempt to draw the gaze of historians to a primary source providing vital first-hand information regarding the motives and methods in the pursuit of profit during the medieval period.
It is almost a universal fact that the objective of a businessman’s enterprise is the pursuit of profit. Profit can be literally defined as any financial gain in a business venture calculated on the basis of the difference between an outlay and the amount earned on it. Although the means employed to achieve profit remain diverse, it is realised primarily through buying cheap and selling dear, anything commanding a price in the market. In the medieval European economic concept, the notion and pursuit of profit were interpreted differently. The normative literature associated certain moral scruples with the notion of profit, which led to a difference of opinion between the ‘medieval’ and ‘modern’ scholars regarding the reason for their justifying and not justifying the notion of profit, respectively. The latter justified a particular action on the basis of economic expediency, while the former held that the considerations of economic expediency ought to be subordinate to a moral authority.
The practical application of medieval thought demanded that every transaction should be carried out by a rule of what is right, something that is largely independent of the serendipitous combinations of economic circumstances. The crux of the matter was that a man must not ask for more than the price fixed, either by public authorities or by common estimation. The opinion held was that though prices do vary with scarcity, they ought not to vary according to a person’s necessity or individual opportunity. The bugbear is the man who uses or even creates an interim shortage, the man who makes money by means of the turning markets, the man who, according to Wycliff, must be immoral or else he could not have been poor yesterday and rich today. 1 Medieval economic thought associated the moral scruples of greed, lust and avarice with profit, which acted as impediments rather than promoters of the notion of profit. This kind of attitude, which once regarded the appetites divitiarum infinities (the unlimited lust for gain) as anti-social and immoral, was overcome by rationalism, which was an economic system based on the systematic and conscious adjustment of economic means in order to attain the objective of fiscal profit. Weber opined that this was the result of the religious revolution of the sixteenth century and, more specifically, of Calvinism, one of the sects of Protestantism. Calvinism provided a new sanctity to the life of business. Money-making and piety, which were earlier considered to be natural allies, became the most dependable passport to commercial affluence. 2 In this way, the ascetic tradition of medieval philosophy, which censured all commerce as the domain of iniquity, was softened by an acknowledgement of practical necessities. 3
In the Indian context, the fact that the bania community calculated profit can be anchored through a study of the Ardhakathanaka. It is an autobiographical memoir written by Banarasidas, a middle-class Jain merchant, while he was living in Agra. He named the work Ardhakathanaka as he had reached the age of 55 years and believed, as per an ancient tradition of the Jains, that a man is allocated 110 years to live; thus, the assumption that he would be alive for the next 55 years. It was written in A.D. 1641 (V.S. 1698), the prime time of Mughal rule. The time span covered is late sixteenth and first half of the seventeenth century.
The intent of the present article is to understand the notion of profit, and whether religion puts restraints on our protagonist’s profession as a merchant or promotes it as a way of life. Were there any specific motives that prompted merchants to calculate profit? If so, then what were the methods that were employed to calculate profit? The Ardhakathanka, being a contemporary source, has immense historical value as it provides us with first-hand information regarding profit, one of the most significant aspects of mercantile life. Despite providing crucial details, this facet of the Ardhakathanaka has eluded the gaze of historians.
In the Ardhakathanaka religion, it appears to promote business as a way of life and does not seem to impinge upon economic life. Kharagsen and Banarasidas do undertake vows and pilgrimages at various times in their lives, but religion does not hinder the domain of business. In a study on the attitudes of eighteenth-century merchants, Ashin Das Gupta held that their business dealings were generally untouched by religious considerations. In this approach to business, there was no difference between a Hindu and a Muslim, a Christian and a Jew. 4 Goitein observed in a study that the Geniza people were mostly businessmen, and it was natural for them to make money. But curiously, the Geniza letters give the impression of a strange detachment towards material gains. He found that these people were excited neither by large profits nor by heavy losses. He concluded that it was partly due to Adab, or ‘good form’, which played such an enormous role in this society, but that it must have also been a philosophy of life. They felt that if they served Mammon too much, God the Almighty would not approve and would retaliate. 5
Religion never presented any moral scruples for the three generations of Banarasidas’s family. Business had been Banarasidas’s family profession, at least since his grandfather Muldas’s time. He emphasises the fact that his grandfather had adopted the vocation of a bania (Muldas Biholiya, banik vritti ke bhes). 6 This was the reason that, besides being the modi of a Mughal noble, Muldas also ran his own business of giving money on credit (uchapati). Muldas spent a good amount of money to celebrate his son Kharagsen’s birth, and it seems that he was doing well. Kharagsen belonged to the second generation doing business, and he too did well in life. He started at the young age of eighteen and twice entered into partnerships, which turned out to be quite profitable. Regarding his own self, Banarasidas informs us that at the age of nine, he was initiated into the business of money-changing by selling cowrie shells (kauri bech banij tin ghiyo). 7 The author first bought the cowries and then sold them for copper coins. Tavernier noticed that when cowries were sold in places that had a closer proximity to the sea, it amounted to eighty cowries for one paisa, while at Agra, it was sold at fifty or fifty-five for one paisa. 8 Cowries formed the lowest denomination of money in the Mughal Empire. Therefore, dealing in the exchange of cowries against copper coins was the humblest form of money-changing. Hence, the margin of profit was modest. Banarasidas earned a profit (nafa) of one or two copper coins, which gave him a great sense of pride and confidence. After adding up the small profits, he presented them all to his grandmother (ek taka dva taka kamai, kahuki na dharai tamai. Jorai nafa ektha karai, lei dadike aage dharai). 9 This was the only time when the author engaged in money-changing. No matter how small the profit was, it was handed over to the head of the family and celebrated. Though this was a very small scale of business, it must have given him great satisfaction for having made some contribution to the family at a time when the Mughal noble Chin Qulij’s extortions had forced them to leave Jaunpur.
The above incident strengthens the impression that a merchant’s professional instincts were guided not by livelihood but by profit. Raychaudhuri has argued that whatever an Indian merchant’s other concerns were in pre-colonial India, he calculated his prospects of profit as carefully as a modern merchant banker. 10 A merchant bought something with the hope that he might gain by selling it again. It is the result of his own hard work. This sentiment is expressed by Calvin in the following expression:
Why should not the income from business be more than the earnings from the ownership of land? Where does a merchant earn his profit if not from his own steady perseverance and industriousness. 11 This leads to the concept of private profit and private trade, both of which are crucial to the spirit of capitalism. Bernier’s observation regarding private property is that it did not exist in India. His understanding was that the whole empire was considered as the sovereign’s property; there could be no earldoms, marquisates and no duchies as well. 12
Significantly, Bernier’s observation concerned the absence of all landed property. 13 We are concerned here with the mercantile class. In connection with his father’s first partnership, Banarasidas specifies that Kharagsen did make some private property of his own (kini nij sampatti). 14 Braudel held that most of the features of European capitalism were present in India as well, such as capital, brokers, merchandise, banking, wholesale merchants, the tools of business (hundi), alongside the artisanal proletariat and domestic working for merchants, as well as local and long-distance trade. 15 Max Weber accepted this, but he also held that the mental and social restrictions of the caste system prevented the emergence of socio-economic historical developments that took place in Europe. 16 We will attempt to evaluate these opinions by examining the information we have in the Ardhakathanaka regarding the motives and methods of earning profit.
Motives for Earning Profit
A merchant devises ways and means to carve out potential opportunities to fulfil their objective of accumulating wealth.
Subsistence and Payment of Debts
Profit is always calculated over and above the need for subsistence. During his first Agra visit, Banarasidas could not even earn enough to subsist himself when all his deals went awry. When he drew up the balance sheet after selling his stock of cloth, he realised that he had been a loser. This was because, after deducting interest, the money that he had made turned out to be less than the original outlay (bastra bechi jab lekhakiya, byaj-moordai tota diya). 17 Banarasidas was aware that there was no scope for profit in the cloth he had sold, for he could not even earn enough to support himself. However, he was not disheartened and concentrated on selling a second set of commodities, ghee and oil, both of which fetched him a modest profit of ₹4 (becha gheeu tel sab jhari, badhati nafa rupaiya chyari). 18
Debts signify interest paid on consumption and commercial loans. First, we deal with the loan taken for consumption. The first phase of business was a miserable time for Banarasidas. He stopped going to the market and sustained himself merely by eating kachauris, and that too on credit (karaj kachauri khahi). 19 He was relieved from these dire straits by his father-in-law’s brother, Tarachand Tambi. After a brief respite, Banarasidas plunged himself into business again. This time, he entered into a partnership with Dharamdas. The two of them worked hard, and soon after, their business picked up (bechahi bahuri kharidahi ghani). 20 From his profits, he paid the kachauriwala and cleared his accounts with him (diye kachauriwale dam). 21 But soon, he got disinterested and decided to terminate the partnership. He realised that in two years he had earned ₹200, but that too got consumed in expenses (jo paya so khaya sarv). 22 With this amount, Banarasidas also clears a commercial loan. The reference comes in relation to his second journey to Agra for business in which he had difficulty in selling the Khairabad cloth, which was of inferior quality. After selling it for ₹4 less than its cost, Banarasidas used this money to pay off some interest that had fallen due (mul byaj dai farik bhaye). 23
Investment in Business
The pursuit of higher profit could drive merchants and businessmen to undertake bold ventures. The author alludes to a similar venture undertaken by his father, Kharagsen, although he is silent about its nature. He specifies, however, that Kharagsen’s margin of profit was 100%. Not only was Kharagsen happy, but the whole house rang with the sound of lively, festive gaiety. Besides bold ventures, the sustenance of any business requires the ploughing back of profit into business. The diligence of Banarasidas and his partner Dharamdas made them win goodwill among the customers. They bought precious stone dust, rubies and gems (mani), sold them, and then purchased them again in greater quantities (bechahi bahuri kharidahi ghani). 24 In another instance, the author informs us about adding his earnings to the capital (bechi milavahi punjimahi). 25 At this time, he had settled into his career as a businessman, and it was his third journey to Agra. The earnings that he ploughed back into the business were made on the cloth that he had purchased from Jaunpur. The profits earned were utilised to facilitate the comfortable journeys undertaken by Kharagsen and Banarasidas. Kharagsen’s journey from Agra to Jaunpur and Banarasidas’s journey from Jaunpur to Agra were undertaken with the help of horses (turangam) and servants (nafar), both of which required money to be spent (ek turangam, ek rath, bahu paik bahu dam; ek turangam nau nafar). 26 It should be noted that on both of these occasions, the father and the son were doing well in their respective businesses.
Expenditures and Requirements of a Respectable Life
Banarasidas believed that without money, a man’s life was not worth living (binu dhan manush ka dhig jiya). 27 This simply reflects the author’s views regarding the importance of money, the presence of which, he believed, guarantees a respectable life. European travellers have often indicated a tendency for hoarding among the Indians. 28 But they tend to forget that hoarders were also spenders. The Ardhakathanaka documents the fact that the author’s family of banias, first earned profit, saved it and then spent it. The profit earned through money-lending made his grandfather Muldas to celebrate his son’s birth by spending an unspecified yet reasonably huge sum of money (Muldas ghar sut avataryo. Bhayo harakh kharche bahu dam). 29 This celebration also suggests that Muldas’s business of money-lending was quite profitable. The author’s own birth was similarly celebrated with joy and festivity (dijahi dan bhayo ati harsh). 30 Besides birthday celebrations, wedding ceremonies also incurred heavy expenditures. It was out of the profit acquired from business that Kharagsen spent lavishly on the marriages of his two daughters. The author informs that the elder one was married on the basis of the wealth hoarded by his father (sathe byahi beti badi, bitri pahili sampatti gadi). 31 We can easily speculate that this wealth was part of the profit from his first partnership, which he must have set aside as his savings. This hoarded wealth helped him to meet the marriage expenses. This illustrates the farsightedness of Kharagsen and his family commitments.
Money was also spent to maintain social status. When Banarasidas had to fetch his wife from Khairabad for the first time after marriage, he had not started earning himself and had no savings of his own. Therefore, he spent money from his father’s savings and got new clothes for himself and probably ornaments and clothes for his wife. He set out for Khairabad with a palanquin and servants (chadhi doli sewak liye, bhushan basan banai). 32 Social status was also maintained by obliging friends and Banarasidas was not unaware of this fact. He was asked by Tarachand Mothiya to accompany him to a baraat (marriage party). In order to cover the expenses of the journey, Banarasidas sold some of his pearls, which fetched him ₹32. But this obligation did not go waste, for Tarachand was a distant relative of Narottamdas—the most intimate friend of Banarasidas. He soon presented a very lucrative offer to the two friends.
Greed
Profits can be pursued out of simple greed, and it is very difficult sometimes to extricate this motive from others. Ovington’s observation in the context of banias in India and their tendency of greed is quite picturesque. He found them clinging to the pursuit of their material interests, which lay in the stockpiling of treasure. Though they held lakhs of rupees, they would fly the moment they secured a pice. They were always preoccupied with the thoughts of enhancing their wealth and trudging for gain. 33
While giving an account of his personal merits and demerits, Banarasidas admits that his greed (lobh) for money was great (pai lachhimiko lobh bisekh). 34 Banarasidas’ greed could be equated with the habit of continuously desiring more money, a habit called avarice by medieval theologians, who held that people who had enough to satisfy their needs but still strove for more were considered to be driven by avarice. 35 The author further says that a little gain made him inordinately happy, while a little loss plunged him into the depths of despair. This greed for money made him vulnerable to the machinations of magicians and tricksters. A sanyasi told Banarasidas that he had a magic mantra that, when uttered for a whole year in complete secrecy, would, at the end of the period, reward a person with a gold dinar placed on his doorstep. He would continue receiving one dinar in this manner for years. The author got tempted, and his greed was aroused. He implored the sanyasi to reveal the mantra (pakre paai lobh ke liye, mangai mantra binti kiye). 36 Since he religiously adhered to what the sanyasi had told him, all his hopes were dashed to the ground when he found nothing. His greed had led him to grief (byakul bhayo lobh ke kaj, chinta badhi na bhavai naj). 37 Banarasidas’ greed for money also gets reflected in his prayers that were offered at a Jain shrine. He went on a pilgrimage along with his two friends to a Jain shrine and made the following request to the deity: O Lord, please grant us abundant bounties, for this will incentivise us to revisit your shrine and offer our prayers yet again (Pratima agai bhakhai ehu, humko nath lachhimi dehu. Jab lachhimi dehu tum taat, tab phir karhi tumhari jaat). 38 We cannot find more direct evidence than this of religion complimenting the desires of a merchant who strove for wealth. Banarasidas invokes God to grant him money. Pilgrimage itself could not be undertaken without any funds, and Banarasidas and his friends had hired a carriage, which must have cost them some money.
Methods of Earning Profit
The Ardhakathanaka articulates three methods to earn profit, namely buying cheap and selling dear, partnership and a rational allocation of resources.
Buying Cheap and Selling Dear
The concept of buying cheap and selling dear has a direct bearing on profit. When Banarasidas did business for the first time in Agra, his father bought various commodities from the local market of Jaunpur so that they could be sold at a higher price in the Agra market (sath yeh saunj samast, jaee Agre bechahu bast). 39 This was the reason that Kharagsen made a list of the various goods and properly noted the price of each article (kagad mahi likhyo sab bhaoo). 40 This made it easy to calculate profit by taking into consideration the cost and sale prices. If the sale price was above the cost price, it would result in a profit. However, far from making any profit, Banarasidas ended up as a pauper. Banarasidas made another effort in the same direction. Bankrolled by his wife, he got down to buying fabrics and getting them washed. Besides, he also started looking for pearls, rubies, diamonds and a pearl necklace. He made the various purchases and got things ready; once his stock of cloth was duly washed and ready for the market (karai kharid dhovaai cheer, dhoondai moti manik heer), 41 he set out for Agra for the second time. It appears that on this occasion, Banarasidas was prepared to act more rationally in his dealings. He meticulously surveyed the marketplace. However, despite all his efforts, he could not sell his stock of cloth.
He then regretted having bought cloth of an inferior quality and realised that it had been a burden on him. He could not push the product by any means and decided never to buy cloth again. By this, possibly, he meant cloth of inferior quality, for he did buy cloth again by raising money on credit. Not only this, he invested a larger sum of money in cloth alone, which amounted to ₹500, more than double the investment made by him in his earlier transaction. Probably, he was now more careful regarding the quality of the cloth purchased. Bigger merchants were more familiar with this basic concept of commodity trade. The rich sahu, Tarachand Mothiya, asked Banarasidas to go to Patna to do business and gave him money, with which commodities were bought. Since we are not specifically informed about what purchases were made, it can only be surmised that it was probably cloth, something in which Banarasidas had already done business twice. Cloth being bulky, a porter was also hired to carry it (sath ek liya bojhia). 42
Partnership
Partnership is considered an important method of doing profitable business. There are four instances of partnership in the Ardhakathanaka, and one can trace the element of profit in all such arrangements. Kharagsen’s collaboration with Sundardas, his paternal uncle (who was a sarraf), provided him with good profits. Our evidence from other sources suggests that sarrafi was a profitable occupation. Shantidas Jhaveri, the most famous merchant of Ahmadabad, made most of his money in the jewellery business and in his operations as a banker and a sarraf. 43 Banarasidas emphasise that the two were skilled in the art of carrying out business (kala nipun), for without skill, a business cannot prosper and provides no scope for profit. There are three strong reasons to believe that this partnership was very profitable for Kharagsen. First, after four years of its continuation, Kharagsen went to Meerut to get married. It can be safely assumed that not only does a marriage ceremony require expenses, but after marriage, money is also required to support a family. Second, after his marriage, Kharagsen rented a separate house for his wife and himself. This also involved some expenditure. It is significant to note that Kharagsen made his return journey to Jaunpur with a horse, a rath, many guards and a lot of money (ek turangam ek rath, bahu paeek bahu dam). 44 All of this, of course, came from the profit earned from business done in partnership.
Within ten days of his arrival in Jaunpur, he opened a shop (haat) in the town and immediately entered into a fresh partnership. The opening of the shop and the partnership further reflect that, at this time, Kharagsen had sufficient resources. Within no time the business of money-changing of Kharagsen and his partner Ramdas Agarwal doubled (karhi sarafi dou guni). 45 They also did profitable business in pearls, rubies and precious stone dust. It was only because their business was doing well and they earned a good profit that a smooth and happy relationship prevailed (sukhso kaal bhali bidhi gamai). 46
The author himself did business in partnership with Dharamdas. They worked hard and their business seems to have fared well. The partnership continued for two years, but in order to terminate it, Banarasidas sold the goods in haste. He did make a profit out of it; however, it got consumed in expenses. If he had been a little more patient, he would have definitely earned some more. The profit earned from his partnership with the Mothiya household was a turning point in Banarasidas’s life. It was initially a commenda arrangement, which finally evolved into a partnership. The resultant profit was good enough to enable Banarasidas and his friend-cum-partner Narottamdas to employ agents of their own. Banarasidas’s success as a businessman is attributed to this partnership.
Rational Allocation of Resources
In business, it was always considered a great risk to invest in one commodity alone. This was the reason that Kharagsen, being an experienced and rational person, allocated his resources wisely. While collecting commodities for his son’s business, he invested the money properly between two types of goods—basic consumer goods like cloth, ghee and oil and expensive goods like jewels, which included rubies, sapphires, emeralds, precious stone dust, bracelets and rings. This was done so that the chances of loss in one could be balanced with gains in the other. Banarasidas had a practical experience of this. The sale of cloth incurred him a loss, while ghee and oil gave him a small margin of profit of ₹4. After selling bulkier goods, he decided to sell items that were lighter but higher in value, like gems. But he handed over his articles indiscriminately to people purely on the basis of trust and never tried to find out whether the person he was dealing with was really trustworthy. People took advantage of his misplaced trust and never came back to pay him for the things they had taken on credit. Some people even pawned his jewels to borrow money for personal gains and never paid him anything at all (dehi tahi jo mange koi, sadhu kusadhu na dekhai toi. Koi bastu kahun lai jai, koi lei giron dhari khai). 47 Though the first business in Agra failed, it was a learning lesson for Banarasidas. Keeping in mind the wise decision of his father, he also invested his money at Khairabad in buying two types of commodities—cloth and jewels. Once again, he decided to try his luck in Agra, but he found it very difficult to sell the cloth, for it was not of very good quality. After selling it at whatever price he could get, he found that, on the whole, he was a loser on this account. He got ₹4 less than the original sum he had invested in buying the cloth (Khairabadi kapra jhari, bechyo ghate rupya chyari). 48 Once again, he had failed. On the other hand, he sold the pearl necklace for ₹70, which he had bought for ₹40, and earned a profit of 75% on this deal. The second trip to Agra taught Banarasidas that the business in jewels was more profitable than cloth (tab Banarasi karai bichar, bhala jabahar ka byapar. Huye paun dune is mahi). 49
‘Unlawful’ Ways
The medieval Christian and Islamic worlds viewed the lending of money on interest as unlawful. When money was lent at an exorbitant rate of interest, rather than what is allowed by the law, it assumes the form of usury. In medieval Europe, usurious gains were considered contrary to the scriptures, as they meant to live a life without labour and the sell of time, which belonged to God. 50 The ecclesiastical assault on usury led to various legislations, and the usurers were to be denied confession, absolution and a Christian burial. The moneylender was virtually made an outlaw. The object, however, was to prevent the prosperous moneylender from capitalising upon the needs of the craftsman or the peasant, and it was for these people that the Church had worked out its scheme of economic ethics. 51 In Northern Europe, it was Protestantism that finally broke the prohibition against usury.
The Islamic Law (Sharia) does not permit the giving and taking of interest (riba). In order to avoid a collision with the legal theory, special devices (hiyal) were evolved by merchants and businessmen, which helped them to circumvent the prohibition against usury. The origins of hiyal can be traced back to the writings of Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf. 52 In India, lending money on interest was permitted only to the Vaishya caste by the Indian lawgivers of the fifth–third centuries B.C. For usury, the ancient and medieval Indian Sanskrit texts used the terms kusida, vardhusa, vriddhi and vyaja. 53 Manu, who is considered to be the greatest lawgiver of ancient times prevailed upon the king to: Make a commoner engage in trade and lend money, besides other occupations. 54 A person who lent money was called Vardhusi by Manu. He allowed a moneylender to use interest to augment his capital, as Vashistha decreed, on the condition that it did not exceed double (the principal), at one time. According to him, excessive interest above the customary rate was not legal. 55 Vashistha considered usury worse than the murder of a Brahmin, while Baudhayana declared usury worse than committing the crime of abortion. 56 Since the Vaishya caste was largely composed of the banias, and the Jains also formed a part of this larger community, Muldas, being a Jain, had adopted the profession of a bania and specialised in money-lending (Muldas sau bahut kripal, kare uchapati sonpai mal). 57 Lath has translated the relevant verse as: Having his employers trust, he conducted a profitable business of money-lending on his behalf. 58 While reviewing Lath’s translation of the Ardhakathanaka, Bhadani has criticised his translation of the relevant verse. Bhadani translates it as: He (the jagirdar) had confidence in Muldas, and in return, he (that is, Muldas) realised the revenue and handed it over to the jagirdar. 59 Hence, Bhadani’ explanation is more accurate.
Banias, who were known as sahu, sahukars and mahajans, engaged themselves in usury. Another major group of the banias was the sarrafs, who, primarily being money changers, also acted as moneylenders. 60 The author’s father also transacted in giving money on credit when he was in Allahabad (leva dei rok udhar). 61 Throughout the text, we are nowhere informed about the rate of interest charged on the money that was lent out on credit by Muldas and Kharagsen. Therefore, it is difficult to say if the interest was usurious or not. The French official Roques attributed to the Indian bania a passion for illicit profit. 62 Roques’s concern, as an office-bearer of the French East India Company, was to achieve the desired margin of profit from trade in India. In the pursuance of this objective, the bania was the greatest obstacle. It was on the basis of his technical expertise that the bania earned profit. Since Europeans were unfamiliar with the technicalities, at least initially, they felt that they were cheated by the banias. It was perhaps in the same spirit that Fryer made the comment that the banias were the befit test ‘tools’ for any kind of unscrupulous undertaking. 63
Calculation of Profit
The Ardhakathanaka makes implicit references to the fact that any business undertaking involves the calculation of profit. Banarasidas himself calculated profit, and it gets reflected in the sombre expression he uses of incurring losses everywhere (ghatati hot chali chahu or). 64 Profit was calculated in two ways: by deducting interest on loan and by weighing time and labour against returns. We will see how Kharagsen and Banarasidas calculated profit.
Deducting Interest on Loan
The failure of Banarasidas’s first business venture should be viewed in the light of his own naivety, his unfamiliarity with the market and market people as well as some bad luck. But his losses should not be attributed to the fact that he did not calculate profit. The author’s fear that kept him from informing his father about the failure of his business had its origin in the notion of profit calculation. He received several letters from his father, but he could not bring himself to reply to even one of them. However, Kharagsen got the news through his elder daughter’s husband, Uttamchand. He wrote back home that Banarasidas had lost all his money and had become a pauper (punji khoyi Banarasi bhaye bhikari mekh). 65 Since the commodities were partially financed through credit (rok udhar), 66 Kharagsen reacted violently to the fact that his son had not earned enough to pay interest on the money taken on credit (punji khoyi behaya gaya banaj ka sut). 67
Weighing Time and Labour Against Returns
It is basic to the nature of a businessman to weigh time and labour against returns. The author and his father would not have undertaken frequent journeys if their business did not give them profitable returns after covering the expenses. This shows that they did calculate profit. When Banarasidas and Narottamdas went to Patna to do business, they toiled very hard but realised that the returns were not so significant. Therefore, both of them decided that it was useless to put in so much hard labour when the returns were not great.
Conclusion
Medieval European scholars held moral authority superior to economic life, although this view may not have found favour with the mercantile groups and may not have permeated the economic life to the extent that the scholastics would have liked. In India, religion and economic life seem to have had a similar relationship. But the Jain religion, to which our protagonist belonged, contributed to a great extent in promoting the profession of business among its adherents.
Jainism imposed limits on the undertaking of the occupations of agriculture and warrior, for they were not in conformity to the principle of Ahimsa. Therefore, followers of the Jain religion decided to take up business as their source of livelihood, as it did not clash with their religious concepts. In this way, the Jain religion played an important role in promoting business and trade. From the Ardhakathanaka, it can be seen that Kharagsen and Banarasidas always conducted business in the hope of making a profit. All their relatives—Madan Singh, Sundardas, Kalyanlmal Tambi and Uttamchand, friend Narottamdas and partner Ramdas Agarwal, did business in jewels, money-changing, gold and silver. All of these were profitable businesses. When Banarasidas admits that trade in jewels was more profitable, he has in mind the notion of a hierarchy of profitable goods. Profit was pursued with the aim of earning, investing, maintaining social status and sometimes even out of greed. It seems that at one time or another, all these motives were operational with varying degrees of success. The historical value of the Ardhakathanaka is immense, especially as it provides us with an insight into the mercantile world of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries from the perspective of a Jain trader. It provides us with invaluable information on a very important aspect of mercantile life: that the pursuit of profit is the guiding principle of all merchants. The historical significance of the work is enormous, as through the Ardhakathanaka, our protagonist provides valuable information and interesting details in the context of the various motives that incentivised his grandfather, father and the author himself to pursue profit. We also get to know about the various methods through which they earned profit and how the same was calculated. It was profit that lay behind the various professional activities undertaken, be it money-lending, money-changing, business in jewels or other commodities. Thus, the Arthakathanaka can be hailed as an important contemporary source, illuminating the notion of profit and the motives and methods to calculate it.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.