The Indian Economy flourished as the world drained her gold for Indian merchandise

In the early days of the Christian era (lst century A.D. - say about 2000 years before) Roman women's passion for Indian cloth was so intense that they decorated themselves in seven folds of Indian muslin (called 'Nubula' by the Romans) and paraded in the streets, which brought an embarassing situation to the city fathers and the Roman Senate had to intervene and put an embargo on the import of that fine stuff from India. Pliny, a Roman writer, complained in the early 2nd century A.D. that "... in no year does India drain our empire of less than 550 millions of sesterces", whicb was approximately equivalent to about pounds 1,400,000 in the 19th century. Another author has noted that in the year of Aurelian, i.e., around the latter half of the third century A.D., this cloth was worth its weight in gold. The Indian exports to Europe of all commercial and agricultural products were much higher at the time of tbe arrival of the British than in the post-British period. Peter the Great of Russia (1682-1725 A.D.) considered the commerce of India as the commmerce of the world, and ..... be who can exclusively control this is the dictator of Europe. While Indian exports were so high, Europe almost had nothing to sell to India except bullion. The East India Co., which was chartered in 1600 A.D. used to send to India pounds 400,000 to pounds 500, 000 a year to buy Indian goods for exports before 1757 A.D. It was in 1757 A.D. that the Battle of Plassey was fought and the victorious British started extending their tentacles in India. I quote Sir George Bidwood, who observes-
The whole world has been ceaselessely pouring its bullion for 3000 years into India to buy products of her industries.
It is said, history repeats itself. The drain of Britiss bullion was so painful and again tbe Indian textiles, which had become very popular in England became the victims of enactments for their prevention from entry into England.William III of England in 1700 A.D. prohihited the entry of Indian textiles by imposing a fine of pounds 200 to the wearer or the seller of Indian silk and calico.
As in textile and in many other basic industrial products India supplied the best quality of steel then known to Europe. In 1794 A.D. Dr. Scott, M.D., sent to the President of the Royal Society a specimen of wootz steel from India. The sample was put to thorough examination and was analysed by several experts. One such was Mr. Stodart, wbo qualified the variety of steel from India for fine cutlery and particularly for all edged instruments used for surgical purposes. After this that variety of steel was much in demand in Europe and even after 18 years later, Stodart was of the opinion that
If a better steel if offered to me, I will gladly attend to it; but the steel of India is decidedly the best I have yet met with.
These achievements are possible only when there is optimum socio-economic stability in the society. Is this not adequate testimony to suggest that by and large, the common people of India were living in greater cooperation and harmony, in better and prosperous conditions and had better skills and better earnings as against the perpetrated stories of thousands of years of atrocities so near and dear to idealogically committed sociologists. historians, economists and politicians of today? My point here was just to bring to your notice that to India agriculture was not the sole vocation or industry on which people depended upon but agriculture, trade and commerce prospered simultaneously and not at the cost of each other.

Excerpted from the speech of Dr.V.V.Bedekar at the Institute of Oriental Studies, Thane
http://www.orientalthane.com/speeches/speech_5.htm