The Chettiars could have rivalled the Marwaris had history played out differently: New book

In his new book Fortune Seekers, economic historian Raman Mahadevan maps the rise of the Chettiars — and why their vast Southeast Asian network didn't last.
The Chettiars were reportedly known as the 'bankers of the East'. Exactly how powerful were they in their heyday?
They were really big and economically quite influential. Some estimates suggest that the total assets of the Chettiar community, which were valued at around ₹10 crore in the 1880s, had by 1929 grown phenomenally to about ₹200 crore. Keeping in mind that this was a small community — some surveys suggest they numbered just around 1,25,000 in the 1930s — this was a very impressive achievement. Their migration to the Far East picked up in the 1870s, catalysed by the opening of the Suez Canal, which effectively shrank the distance between Asia and global markets. That had a huge impact on the whole process of commercialisation and created business opportunities, which, in a sense, triggered the movement of Chettiar capital to these regions. In Burma, for instance, while Europeans owned the big rice mills, the financing of agricultural production was almost entirely in the hands of the Chettiars. That's where they made their money. Similarly, the global automobile industry required rubber and tin — both of which came from Malaya — and again, the Chettiars financed the production of these commodities. In Ceylon, they funded the non-European coffee, tea, and coconut plantations. The crisis began with the Great Depression and deepened with the Second World War. Counterfactually, you could argue that had these global shocks not occurred, the economic landscape in India might have been very different. If the Chettiars had managed to bring all that capital back to India, they could well have become what the Marwaris were in Bombay and Calcutta.
How did they differ from the Marwaris and Banias? One major difference was that the Chettiars went abroad in large numbers. The Marwaris did go too, but far fewer. While many Marwaris were bankers, they were also predominantly traders. My theory is that the transition from trade to manufacturing is easier — their access to market and commercial intelligence provided a certain edge to the trading class and gave them a head start in industrial ventures. In western India, Marwaris and Gujarati Banias were able to move into paper, sugar, and textiles. But the Chettiars' domestic footprint was relatively limited until the 1930s, as much of their capital remained locked overseas.
More importantly, as the return on investment through banking in Southeast Asia was significantly higher than in Indian industry, there was no major inclination on their part to invest in industry. The risk the Chettiars took was also much greater as compared to other business communities. All business communities are risk-takers, of course, but the Chettiars, by moving out of South India to Southeast Asia and by learning new languages, operating in remote foreign regions governed by different legal systems, would seem to suggest that they displayed greater risk-bearing qualities.
Another distinctly unique system they developed to enable them to make good use of their capital investment was the intra-community credit network — where one Chettiar would finance another. That speaks to a high degree of enterprise and trust. This is clearly suggestive of a system where mutual faith and a high degree of trust was central to their business enterprise.
While many Chettiar firms faded post-independence, a few built lasting business houses. What set them apart? The Chettiars began repatriating some of their capital back to India in order to invest during the 1940s, when World War II created highly profitable conditions for business.
Apart from textiles, a major area was plantations. Some Chettiars also ventured into Bombay. One such example is Alagappa Chettiar, who invested heavily in insurance companies but lost out due to overtrading. The MCT Group, which founded Indian Overseas Bank, also had investments in Elphinstone Mills. But large-scale domestic investment remained limited.
After independence, you see figures like M.A. Chidambaram, after whom the cricket stadium in Chennai is named, making more serious moves. He acquired Automobile Products of India, the makers of Lambretta scooters, and also invested in diesel engine production. Later, he diversified into chemicals.
The Murugappa Group is a standout example of Chettiar success. Two factors, I think, set them apart. First, the intrafamilial bonds were exceptionally strong, and the elders in the family ensured that the cohesive spirit was maintained across generations. Most business families begin to fragment by the third or fourth generation — but in their case, it seems clear this was anticipated and addressed early on.
Second, they maintained a disciplined focus on core competencies — especially engineering-related sectors like Tube Investments and Carborundum Universal. Only after consolidating in those sectors did they diversify, for instance, with the acquisition of Parry & Co., which was in a different line of business.
What can today's small and medium enterprises in India learn from the Chettiar model — especially in how to institutionalise trust, capital, and scale across generations?
I think the most important lesson that today's entrepreneurs — small and medium included — can draw is the notion of trust and mutual accommodation, a feature central to the Chettiar model. This would enable entrepreneurs to optimise costs and cut down competition. The export-oriented Tiruppur knitwear industry is a good example of the Chettiar model.
Chettinad cuisine is famous for its fiery meat dishes, but the community began as vegetarian. Did their migrations reshape their cuisine? Food isn't my area of expertise, but you could well be right. The Chettiars were — and are — devout Shaivites, and vegetarianism was a natural offshoot of this faith. In fact, the Tamil word for vegetarian food is 'saiva saappadu'.
So yes, the long years of exposure to overseas cultures must have played a significant role in the evolution of their cuisine — from an exclusively vegetarian to a more inclusive cuisine. Their use of spices is also quite distinct from what you find in other parts of South India, and even here, it is possible to discern other influences.
You've written about efforts to rekindle the Chettiars' entrepreneurial spirit. How far do you think this will go? Many Chettiars in the diaspora have moved into finance and IT, rather than traditional business. This shift worries some of the older generation, who feel there's a disconnect from their industrial legacy. So conferences and community events have been organised to revive that entrepreneurial zeal. But honestly, I think that time is over. The chapter of Chettiar dominance in traditional sectors is closed.
ALSO READ: Book commemorates life and legacy of abstractionist Bimal Das Gupta

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Business Standard

2 hours ago

• Business Standard

Jaishankar calls India's trade pacts with mature markets 'space to watch'

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has termed India's bilateral trade agreements as the 'space to watch', and said New Delhi in the last 11 years pursued trade pacts with countries that have 'more mature markets', and are more, 'transparent and rule bound' compared to the East Asian countries. Jaishankar said India is now more interested in key free trade agreements. He said the one with the United Kingdom is more or less finalised, the one with the European Union is in advanced stages of negotiations and there have been several rounds of negotiations between the Indian and American officials for the bilateral trade agreement. In an interview to public broadcaster DD India, a link of which the minister posted on X on Saturday (June 21), Jaishankar said in the years after the economic reforms, most of India's trade agreements were with Southeast Asian nations, which 'skewed the balance' as several of these economies competed with India and didn't market access. It was important to make the correction and have an understanding with more mature markets, which are more transparent and rule bound. Jaishankar said India's trade pacts with the United Arab Emirates and Australia are significant achievements, describing New Delhi's push for FTAs as the 'space to watch'. In 2019, India did not join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) trading block that comprises the 10-member Asean grouping, and other Asia-Pacific economies, including China, Australia and Japan. He said India in the last 11 years has systematically tried to "deepen our posture, our strategic posture, to have good relations with all major countries, but also other regions, so that we get into the optimal position". In the last 11 years, the EAM said, the consistent theme underpinning India's foreign policy has been planning for a multi-polar world, which India not only desires, as it gives it a higher profile and more influence. 'But it is not just the question of our wishes, that is the direction in which the world is moving,' he said, which is why New Delhi, despite enormous pressure on it, maintained its relationship with Russia, he added. About India's ties with the US, he said, 'Where the US is concerned, yes, there is unpredictability, therefore at a systemic level, you stabilise it with as many linkages and relationships as possible.' On India's relations with China, Jaishankar said, 'With China, if you have to stand up to that country and we have had some very difficult periods, (and) so it is important to prepare the capabilities.' The minister said a "really perplexing" aspect of India's China policy before 2014 was the 'complete neglect of our border infrastructure in the previous decades'. 'To have a China policy and neglect your border infrastructure was absurd,' he said. 'And, that is one of the things which has changed. We have today that standing up, in defence of our national interests, along the LAC. It is because we have built the border infrastructure to make that possible," Jaishankar said. On India's ties with its immediate neighbours, Jaishankar said that India "should not expect smooth sailing" all the time. He said New Delhi has attempted to shape a 'collective interest' to build an inherent stability in relationships, irrespective of changes in regimes. At the end of the day, 'the logic every one of our neighbours must realise' is that working with India will 'give you benefits', and not working with India 'has a cost', he said. 'Some take longer to realise, some understand it better. One exception of course is Pakistan, because it has defined its identity under the army, in a way it has an in-built hostility in it. So if you put Pakistan aside, the logic will apply everywhere else,' the EAM said.

The Hindu

2 days ago

• The Hindu

Anand Sharma slams Piyush Goyal for calling ASEAN the B team of China

Hitting out at Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal for his remarks against the India-ASEAN trade agreements, former Commerce Minister and Congress veteran Anand Sharma on Friday said that labelling the Southeast Asian countries as the 'B team of China is irresponsible and insulting'. Mr. Goyal, speaking at the India Global Forum (IGF) session on UK-India Science, Technology and Innovation Collaboration at the Science Museum in London on Thursday, had said that 15 years ago India was more focused on doing Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with countries 'who were our competitors'. 'So, if I am doing an ASEAN agreement, it really is silly because (that is) opening up my market to my competitors, many of whom have now become the B team of China. So, effectively and indirectly, I have opened up my market for goods that find their way from China into India,' he had said. Watch | Piyush Goyal optimistic about India-US trade pact ahead of July 9 tariff deadline Rebutting the statement, Mr. Sharma said successive Indian governments have consciously pursued this policy and elevated India-ASEAN relations to a strategic partnership. 'Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal's statement belittling India ASEAN Trade Agreements is unwarranted, ill advised and unfortunate. India and ASEAN group of countries are for over three decades engaged in a multi-faceted relationship which is mutually rewarding and important,' he said in a statement. 'Integral part of Look East policy' 'This is an integral part of the Look East policy to deepen and diversify India's relations with a region that is economically vibrant and of enormous Geo-Strategic importance for engagement with the Asia-Pacific region,' Mr. Sharma said.1 The Congress leader said India is also a member of East Asia Summit (EAS) of ASEAN + six (Japan, India, South Korea, China, Australia and New Zealand) and Indonesia, Vietnam and Malaysia are strategic partner countries. 'Piyush Goyal's statement terming the Trade agreement with ASEAN as silly and labelling these countries as B team of China is irresponsible and insulting. He has forgotten that President of Indonesia Prabowo Subianto was the chief guest for 2025 Republic Day Parade,' Mr. Sharma said. He said the CECA (Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement) with ASEAN and trade agreements with Japan and South Korea are aimed at promoting investments and trade in goods and services. 'Suboptimal trade agreement with USA' 'Piyush Goyal needs to be reminded of the fundamental rule of trade: 'No country can export what it does not produce nor imports what it does not need'. It needs mention that ASEAN is India's fourth largest trading partner accounting for over 11% of India's total global trade with bilateral trade at 120 billion USD and accounts for over 11% of India's Exports. FDI inflows from ASEAN to India account for over 18% of total FDI inflows since 2000,' the Congress veteran said. Mr. Sharma argued that the agreements were diligently negotiated considering India's interests with this vibrant region and in-built checks and review mechanisms were put in place. He added that trade in goods with ASEAN countries includes essential imports: iron ore and coal from Indonesia, palm oil from Malaysia and Indonesia, oil - petroleum products from Brunei Dares Salam and Malaysia and pulses from Myanmar. 'In an interconnected and interdependent world, partnerships are the way forward and not exclusion and isolation. The commerce minister should be prioritising strengthening trade relations with partner countries and not insulting them while bending backwards to negotiate a suboptimal trade agreement with USA on its terms,' Mr. Sharma said.

India Gazette

2 days ago

• India Gazette

Piyush Goyal's statement on India ASEAN Trade is unwarranted, says former Union Minister Anand Sharma

ANI 20 Jun 2025, 15:09 GMT+10 New Delhi [India], June 20 (ANI): Former Union Commerce & Industry Minister of India, Anand Sharma, on Friday said in a statement that the statement by Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal on 'belittling India ASEAN Trade Agreements is unwarranted, ill-advised and unfortunate.' Anand Sharma believes that both India and ASEAN has been together for three decades engaged in a multifaceted relationship which is mutually rewarding and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, is a regional bloc of ten Southeast Asian countries. Formed in 1967, its primary goals are to foster economic growth, social progress, and cultural development, while also promoting regional peace and further believes that this relationship is important for 'Look East policy to deepen and diversify India's relations with a region that is economically vibrant and of enormous geo-strategic importance for engagement with the Asia-Pacific region.''Piyush Goyal's statement terming the Trade agreement with ASEAN as silly and labelling these counties as B team of China is irresponsible and insulting. He has forgotten, that President of Indonesia Prabowo Subianto was the chief guest for 2025 Republic Day Parade,' Anand Sharma said. The former Union Minster in his statement also emphasized that, 'trade in goods with ASEAN counties also includes essential imports: Iron ore and Coal from Indonesia, Palm oil from Malaysia and Indonesia, Oil - Petroleum products from Brunei Dares Salam and Malaysia and pulses from Mayanmar.''It needs mention that ASEAN is India's 4th largest trading partner accounting for over 11% of India's total global trade with bilateral trade at 120billion USD and accounts for over 11% of India's Exports. FDI inflows from ASEAN to India account for over 18% of total FDI inflows since 2000,' he further about the Commerce Minister, he also said that, 'Commerce Minister should be prioritising strengthening trade relations with partner countries and not insulting them while bending backwards to negotiate a suboptimal trade agreement with USA on its terms.' (ANI)