Indebtedness has been the operational device of labour bondage in India both past and present. This apparent continuity should, however, be unpicked to drive home my main point: dispossession leading to attachment in debt dependency can be framed in a variety of contexts, and this study is focused on its role in the restructuring from a pre-capitalist to a capitalist setting. The erstwhile hali system has been shown to operate in a subsistence-oriented peasant order that endeavoured to maximize profit in non-economic terms. Patrons satisfied their desire to increase their social status and political power by attaching a dependent clientele to their households. The inequality the patrons aimed for was made manifest in the assumed acceptance of servility by the dispossessed who were rewarded for their deference and allegiance with the provision of a livelihood allowance. Agricultural production was mainly geared to satisfy local demand, exchanged for other goods and services but also shared with the attached clients who sought to be assured, not always successfully, of minimal means for their social reproduction. Payment made in kind did not bear the character of cost. Rather than being viewed as an expense that lowered income, it was administered as an investment in further accumulation, an outlay required to raise the standing and leverage of the ‘benefactor’. The surplus value extracted from bonded servants was not measured in their capacity to increase production and make agriculture more profitable but in the extent to which the size of the master’s entourage met his prime objective – to demonstrate power and prestige. Crucial for the size of his retinue was not how many halis he needed but how many he could afford to maintain.