3 - A Crisis of Trust

Summary

My troops, which are before you, are not greater in number than is customary. I have neither treasure nor provisions nor is my Fort prepared for war. ... I am the son of a brave soldier and therefore I am fond of military display.

Ghulam Rasul Khan, the Nawab of Kurnool

When we, i.e. M. Abraham, the third plaintiff and myself, were selling the [Nawab’s] arms, an Arab by the name of Khan Mahomed purchased a large number of guns, pistols and swords, and he prevailed upon M. Abraham to allow him to take these arms to Hyderabad and sell them there, promising to return with profits and the price.

Testimony of Henry Vincent Platcher, District Munsif of Bellary

During the early nineteenth century, Indian families underwent significant changes as they adjusted to rising British power. This was so not only for prominent families of Indian princes, but also for mercantile families such as the Abrahams, landholding zamindars, and high-caste Hindu households. Scholars have described a process of fragmentation that elite families experienced under colonial rule. Whereas previously, family life had integrated political, economic, and “household” affairs, colonial policies attempted to extricate Indian families from political and economic entanglements. The goal was to separate private family interests from a more rational “public” domain.

A common thread that united the experiences of many Indian families was their burden to perpetuate their wealth and status according to new schemes of colonial governance. What factors determined whether a family would flourish or come apart under colonial rule? How would influential families secure relationships of trust between their own members and with colonial officials? Regarding such matters, perhaps no issue was more volatile than that of succession. Colonial policies defined the terms by which Indian families would designate an heir and secure their place under British sovereignty.