Stream: How has the formation of the Bengal Delta shaped land and politics in the contexts of East and West Bengal?
Azizul Rasel: The formation of the Bengal Delta did not happen overnight. It took many years, through different processes. Rivers, hills, even the Himalayas were involved. Two major rivers played a role. The streams flowing down from melting Himalayan ice contributed to its formation. This is a process of thousands of years, and it has not always unfolded in the same way. Changes have come at different times.
The formation shows that West Bengal is slightly higher in elevation, while East Bengal is lower. As the water flowed downwards, the land of East Bengal has gradually become more fertile over time. By contrast, the land of West Bengal slowly turned into more of a red-soil region, with higher iron content, making some parts comparatively infertile.
The land in the eastern part of the delta is largely flat, often called floodplains.
I believe that not only in the Bengal Delta, but everywhere in the world, the formation of land and geography influences politics, labor, and culture. But we cannot say that land alone determines human life because that would be an orientalist way of thinking. There is always human interaction as well. How people respond to geography and environment also matters.
In East Bengal, there was some degree of commonality in life and politics across the delta, but also differences. Where West Bengal's land was infertile, people had to choose agriculture in difficult conditions or pursue other professions. Historian Richard M Eaton in his "The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760" showed that in the early modern period, when rivers changed course, West Bengal's environment worsened and lands became infertile, while East Bengal's agriculture became more productive. Hence, more people migrated eastward.
This had some impact on politics too. Since the area became more important, rivalries began. East Bengal also had a unique historical context: On one side was the Arakan kingdom, which frequently raided for crops, and on the other side, the Mughals valued it for food supply and revenue. Later, during British colonial rule, it became even more important. British historians even called Bengal the empire's "bridgehead", a secure foothold in enemy territory from which to expand further. East Bengal's productive agriculture played a vital role here.
Meanwhile, West Bengal was politically unstable during both Mughal and colonial times, with more conflict and disorder due to competing rivals.
Under colonial rule, especially, Calcutta functioned as an economic frontline. From this metropolitan hub, raw materials and surplus wealth were extracted.
I think all of this needs much deeper analysis.
Stream: Many researchers say that this delta, environmentally, has repeatedly shaped society and culture here. What do you think?
Azizul: Many researchers say this, and more recently it has been emphasised further. For example, Iftekhar Iqbal in his "The Bengal Delta" shows how ecosystems and environmental changes shaped people's lives here. These changes happened in different ways, and they affected livelihoods, politics, and culture alike.
Richard M. Eaton also wrote that in colonial times, environmental change altered river courses, making some lands infertile and abandoned while creating new lands, where people moved in and engaged in new economic, social, and political activities.
Take the Sundarbans, for example. During colonial rule, the British cleared parts of it and forced people to cultivate there, pushing them into extreme marginality. This created environmental changes and, in turn, disasters. Many died in natural calamities, such as the devastating 1970 cyclone. When people are in distress and under pressure, various movements arise. Historian Iftekhar Iqbal argues that one major reason behind the Faraizi movement was environmental change, which pushed peasants into activism.
The construction of railways increased waterlogging, reducing agricultural fertility. People tried to cope with these changes in different ways, sometimes by resisting colonial authority, sometimes by struggling on their own.
Geography also made this a jute-producing region. Tarek Omar Ali in his "Jute, Global Capital, and the Local" shows how people here became tied to global capitalism through jute. Their lives rose and fell with the fluctuations of that global economy. Figures like Abul Mansur Ahmad were able to pursue education thanks to earnings from jute. This is how a new middle class closely linked to environmental conditions arose in East Bengal.
The delta's alluvial soil was ideal for jute. But farmers and laborers did not receive the profits they should have. After World War I, especially during the Great Depression of the 1930s, jute farmers suffered losses and even starvation. Their futures depended on the price of jute.
But during colonial times, no jute mills were built in East Bengal. Industrialists in Calcutta set them up along the Hooghly River. Thus, East Bengal's farmers saw little profit.
So, in many ways, the environment had an impact, but people also found creative ways to respond to it.
Stream: How would you identify the decline and evolution of civilization around the Bengal Delta?
Azizul Rasel: As I said earlier, whether we call it change or evolution, it has always been happening. When the delta was first formed, the land, environment, society, and people were very different from today. Change has been constant. West Bengal's land has become infertile, rivers have changed course.
In the late Sultanate and early Mughal period, West Bengal faced upheaval, while East Bengal's socio-economy underwent significant transformation, despite being considered a frontier region at the time. The Mughals even attempted to make Dhaka the capital, which they did. With that, economic and political activities flourished, palaces were built, and later they also declined. Around 1707, when the capital was moved away from Dhaka, naturally its political importance declined.
During Mughal times, Dhaka became a globally renowned economic hub. A European observer in "Countries Round the Way" wrote that he was astonished at how Dhaka had become such a vibrant city, a major textile centre, with many Dutch factories.
But later, the capital shifted to Murshidabad, and Dhaka declined. Under colonial rule, this decline deepened further, as the British made Calcutta their capital. Thus, through cycles of rise and fall, civilization in the delta has evolved. And this is not unique to Bengal—the delta's history is part of global history.
Stream: What are the defining features of the social structures of East and West Bengal, and where do they diverge?
Azizul: The partition of Bengal has been widely discussed by many scholars, including Joya Chatterji.
In East Bengal, Muslims were the majority. If politics was based on numbers, Muslims held stronger ground. Hindus, though fewer in number, were wealthier and more powerful in trade and business.
This created both convergence and divergence: Muslims had numbers, Hindus had wealth. For this reason, many Hindus in West Bengal supported partition.
After partition, many wealthy Hindus from East Bengal migrated westward, believing it unsafe to stay, and seeing fewer opportunities for expanding wealth here. In West Bengal, they felt safer and saw better prospects.
Both regions spoke Bangla, though dialects differed. Culturally too, there were similarities, but regional distinctions were noticeable.
Economically, there was a big difference. People of East Bengal were generally more open-handed in spending, while those of West Bengal were more calculating. The reason is that West Bengal's land was not always fertile, so people learned to save up.
Before partition, East Bengal was mainly a source of raw materials for Calcutta's factories. After partition, that connection was severed, creating a big economic and mental gap between the two regions.
Politically too, differences emerged. After partition, West Bengal became tied to Indian national politics, under central authority, and failed to develop an independent role, gradually lagging behind in all-India politics.
Meanwhile, East Bengal, later Bangladesh, began developing aspirations for its own statehood. Even within Pakistan, East Bengal sought political autonomy. That consciousness paved the way for independent Bangladesh.
Stream: In light of history, what major evolutions do you see in the society and culture of deltaic Bangladesh?
Azizul: It is true that West Bengal declined, but that created opportunities for East Bengal. The real question is: How much were people here able to make use of those opportunities?
In 1971, people of East Bengal freed themselves from Pakistani oppression and built a state called Bangladesh.
But what happened after independence? Frantz Fanon noted that postcolonial states often face a very hard path. They become free but remain dependent. Bangladesh too became independent yet stayed dependent. The conditions of the people have not changed as much. The expected intellectual growth, or economic liberation, has not fully come. Because the new ruling class here became part of a "neo-colonial economy."
That said, Bangladesh has great potential. Many young people here are working in diverse fields. This is hopeful. But the instability—unless we overcome it and move forward with more stability—we will not be able to achieve our full potential.
Comments