Notes Introduction 1. Nicholas Dirks has calculated that the average conversion rate between British pounds and Indian sicca rupees was about 1:8 in the nineteenth cen- tury. Dirks, Scandal of Empire: India and the Creation of Imperial Britain (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006), 233. 2. Minto Minute, September 11, 1813, Extract Bengal Political Consultations, September 17, 1813; Minute by Alexander Seton, Member of the Bengal Council, October 1, 1813, Extract Bengal Political Consultations, October 1, 1813; both enclosed in Political Letter from Bengal to the Court of Directors, October 2, 1813, BL/APAC/IOR/F/4/453/11102. 3. Adam Minute, April 22, 1834, Extract Madras Judicial Consultations, June 3, 1834, BL/APAC/IOR/F/4/1480/58265. 4. Home and Ecclesiastical Despatch No. 2 of 1851 from Governor-General Lord Dalhousie to Court of Directors, August 30, 1851, BL/APAC/IOR/L/ P&J/3/144, f. 441. 5. John Jacob, Views and Opinions of Brigadier-General John Jacob (1851; London: Smith, Elder & Co., 1858, 2nd ed.), 127, 128. 6. Nugent Minute, June 20, 1813, Extract Bengal Military Consultations, September 25, 1813, BL/APAC/IOR/F/4/456/11119. 7. Douglas Peers, Between Mars and Mammon: Colonial Armies and the Garrison State in Early Nineteenth-Century India (London: I.B. Tauris, 1995), 62, 87. 8. Martha McLaren, British India and British Scotland, 1780–1830: Career Building, Empire Building, and a Scottish School of Thought on Indian Governance (Akron, OH: University of Akron Press, 2001), 188. 9. Burton Stein, Thomas Munro: The Origins of the Colonial State and His Vision of Empire (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989), 287. 10. Many scholars have written on this issue. See, for example: P.J. Marshall, “A Free though Conquering People”: Britain and Asia in the Eighteenth Century (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003 reprint of inaugural lecture in the Rhodes Chair of Imperial History delivered at King’s College, London, 1981); C.A. Bayly, Imperial Meridian: The British Empire and the World, 1780–1830 (London: Longman, 1989), 8–9; David Cannadine, 166 Notes Ornamentalism: How the British Saw Their Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001). 11. See, particularly: Ranajit Guha, Dominance without Hegemony: History and Power in Colonial India (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997); Guha and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, eds., Selected Subaltern Studies (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1988); James Scott, Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985); Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance: The Hidden Transcript of Subordinate Groups (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990). 12. Mikhail Bakhtin, Rabelais and His World, trans. Hélène Iswolsky (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993); Bakhtin, Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, ed. Michael Holquist, trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981). 13. The phrase “dialogic interaction” is Eugene Irschick’s. Dialogue and History: Constructing South India, 1795–1895 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994). Also see: Bayly, Empire and Information: Intelligence Gathering and Social Communication in India, 1780–1870 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Brian Pennington, Was Hinduism Invented? Britons, Indians, and the Colonial Construction of Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005); Robert Travers, Ideology and Empire in Eighteenth-Century Bengal: The British in Bengal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007). 14. C.A. Bayly Origins of Nationality in South Asia: Patriotism and Ethical Government in the Making of Modern India. The C.A. Bayly Omnibus (1998; New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009 ed.). 15. Jon Wilson, Domination of Strangers: Modern Governance in Eastern India, 1780–1835 (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008). 16. E.P. Thompson, Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture (New York: New Press, 1993), chaps. 2 and 4. For a very different interpretation of British political culture during this period, but one that again focuses on the high importance of “opinion,” see J.W. Burrow, Whigs and Liberals: Continuity and Change in English Political Thought (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), chap. 3. 17. Thompson, Douglas Hay, Peter Linebaugh, John G. Rule, and Cal Winslow, eds., Albion’s Fatal Tree: Crime and Society in Eighteenth-Century England (London: Pantheon, 1976). 18. For more on the role of “honor” and “trust” in Burke’s political thought, see: Abraham Kriegel, “Edmund Burke and the Quality of Honor,” Albion 12:4 (1980): 337–49; Richard Bourke, “Liberty, Authority, and Trust in Burke’s Idea of Empire,” Journal of the History of Ideas 63:1 (2000): 453–71; Frederick Whelan, Edmund Burke and India: Political Morality and Empire (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1996). 19. Joanne Freeman, Affairs of Honor: National Politics in the New Republic (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001); Kenneth S. Greenberg, Honor and Slavery (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996); Bertram Wyatt-Brown, Southern Honor: Ethics and Behavior in the Old Notes 167 South (1982; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007, 2nd ed.); Stephen Patterson, Cult of Imperial Honor in British India (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). This book profoundly disagrees with Patterson, how- ever, in his frequent allusions to the preceding entire Company period, all the way up to 1857, as a time period without honor dominated by men of “questionable ethics and hazy morals.” (1). Rather, Company policymakers made concerted efforts from the 1790s onward to reform British behavior in India and worried that lapses in conduct among British covenanted servants, military officers, and soldiers might endanger British colonial prestige as well as the loyalty of Indians. 20. See, for example: Julian Pitt-Rivers, “Honor and Social Status,” in Honor and Shame: The Values of Mediterranean Society, ed. J.G. Peristiany (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1965), 22, 37; Pitt-Rivers, “Honor,” in International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences ed. David Sills. 18 vols. (New York: Macmillan, 1968–79), VI: 503, 506; Frank Henderson Stewart, Honor (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 21. 21. Wyatt-Brown, Southern Honor, 14, 34. 22. On the civil service: Robert Eric Frykenberg, Guntur District, 1788–1848: A History of Local Influence and Central Authority in South India (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), 7; on the military: Peers, Between Mars and Mammon, 257; and David Omissi, Sepoy and the Raj: The Indian Army, 1860–1940 (Houndsmills, UK: Macmillan, 1994), 133. 23. Greenberg, Honor and Slavery, 3. 24. On the social fussiness of dinner parties during the British Raj, see Patterson, Cult of Imperial Honor, 100–06; on the British obsession with Indians tak- ing their shoes off when in their presence, see Bernard Cohn, Colonialism and Its Forms of Knowledge: The British in India (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), 43, 133–34, 162. Cohn shows that British colonial officials regarded Indian shoe wearing in their presence as a sign of disre- spect, even though they did not have a custom of removing their shoes at home. For Indians, on the other hand, “the proper wearing of slippers or shoes stood for a whole difference in cosmology” (162). 25. J.E. Lendon, Empire of Honor: The Art of Government in the Roman World (1997; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001, 2nd ed.), 25, 26. 26. Wyatt-Brown, Southern Honor, 372. 27. Thompson, Whigs and Hunters (New York: Pantheon, 1975), 263. 28. Elizabeth Kolsky, Colonial Justice in British India (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010); Martin Wiener, Empire on Trial: Race, Murder, and Justice under British Rule, 1870–1935 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), chaps. 5–6. 29. Beginning in 1674, Company employees appointed directly to their posts by Company directors (versus the far larger numbers of “uncovenanted” employees) were required upon commencement of their employment to sign covenants protecting the Company from financial embarrassment, hence the origin of the term. 30. For example, holding an “Imperial Assemblage” in Delhi in 1877, at great expense, to announce the cronwing of Queen Victoria as Empress of India, 168 Notes all while a major famine in southern India was occurring. Bernard S. Cohn, “Representing Authority in Victorian India,” Anthropologist Among the Historians and Other Essays (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1987), 632–82. 31. Patterson, Cult of Imperial Honor, chap. 2, part. pp. 83–84. Alas, Patterson does not interrogate effectively why members of the ICS in the late nine- teenth century would be making such assertions. 32. See, for example: Patterson, Cult of Imperial Honor, which heavily implies that British colonial India before 1857 was a world without honor, and Heather Streets, Martial Races: The Military, Race and Masculinity in British Imperial Culture, 1857–1914 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), which contends that British martial races thinking was largely a product of the Sepoy Rebellion and the period after 1857. Coming at the issue from the other end, scholars of early Company India such as William Dalrymple and Maya Jasanoff have bought into the notion of a sharp break occurring in 1857 as a result of the Rebellion to argue that the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century was a period when close British-Indian social interaction was possible and, indeed, prevalent. Dalrymple, White Mughals: Love and Betrayal in Eighteenth-Century India (New York: Viking, 2002); Jasanoff, Edge of Empire: Lives, Culture and Conquest in the East, 1750– 1850 (New York: Knopf, 2005), part. pp. 45–88. For a good recent correc- tive to this argument, see Wilson, Domination of Strangers. 33. On the former issue, see: Kenneth Ballhatchet, Race, Sex, and Class under the Raj: Imperial Attitudes and Policies and Their Critics, 1793–1905 (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1980); C.J. Hawes, Poor Relations: The Making of a Eurasian Community in British India, 1773–1833 (Surrey, UK: Curzon Press, 1996); Betty Joseph, Reading the East India Company, 1720– 1840 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), chap.