This article challenges the assumption that the early modern engineer acted as a reliable agent for colonial authorities. Far from acting as trusted mediators between colony and metropole, experts could exacerbate tensions. The English East India Company knew this, and avoided engineers throughout its early history. This article considers the interplay between authorities in London and their subordinates in Bombay. The company's directors saw engineers as untrustworthy agents who increased expenditure and disrupted the company's system of consultative governance. For much of its early modern history, the company's fortifications and built environments relied on a knowledge network of informal expertise. Examining these experts-in-context reveals how expertise was managed and built environments maintained in colonial settings. When the company did turn to experts in the mid-eighteenth century, it struggled to utilise and incorporate them. This demonstrates that in some colonial contexts experts could be profoundly disruptive.

本文挑战了早期现代工程师是殖民当局可靠代理人的假设。专家们远非充当殖民地和大都市之间值得信赖的调解人，反而可能加剧紧张局势。英国东印度公司知道这一点，并且在其早期历史上一直回避工程师。本文考虑了伦敦当局与其在孟买的下属之间的相互作用。公司董事认为工程师是不值得信赖的代理人，他们增加了开支并破坏了公司的协商治理体系。在其早期现代历史的大部分时间里，该公司的防御工事和建筑环境依赖于非正式专业知识的知识网络。检查这些专家背景揭示了在殖民环境中如何管理专业知识和构建环境。当公司在 18 世纪中叶确实求助于专家时，它很难利用和整合他们。这表明，在某些殖民环境中，专家可能具有极大的破坏性。