What do you think?
Rate this book
Punjab
For centuries, the fertile land of five rivers in the north of the Indian subcontinent was coveted by numerous empires and invaders. In this, the first major account of undivided Punjab, award-winning historian, biographer and scholar, Rajmohan Gandhi, traces its history during its most tumultuous phase from the death of Aurangzeb, in the early eighteenth century, to its brutal partition in 1947, coinciding with the departure of the British.
Relying on fresh sources as well as previous accounts provided from opposing perspectives, the author gives us a compelling narrative about the great events of the time in the region – the battles and tragedies that routinely disrupted the lives of ordinary Punjabis, the sacking of iconic cities like Lahore, Amritsar, Multan and Jalandhar by a succession of conquerors, the ravages wrought by invaders like Nadir Shah, the rise of the Sikhs culminating in the storied reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Britain’s successful wars against the Sikh kingdom, the Great Rebellion of 1857 and its effect on Punjab, imperialist machinations, the influence on the people by leaders of the independence movement like Mahatma Gandhi, Muhammad Ali Jinnah and LalaLajpatRai, as also key regional figures such as Fazl-i-Husain, Master Tara Singh, Sikander Hayat Khan and Khizr Hayat Tiwana, the devastation of Partition —and much else besides.
Believing that modern India and Pakistan cannot be understood without comprehending the Punjab that was, the author also delves into the idea of Punjabiyat — Punjabiness — the literature and poetry of creative giants like Bulleh Shah, Waris Shah, Iqbal, Amrita Pritam and SaadatHasanManto, the spiritual teachings of the Sikh Gurus and Sufi saints, and, above all, the testimonials and narratives of ordinary Punjabis, to create an unforgettable portrait of a place – undivided Punjab - that continues to fascinate us (even though it broke up more than six decades ago) and of its hard-tested and resilient people, Hindu, Muslim and Sikh.
Relying on fresh sources as well as previous accounts provided from opposing perspectives, the author gives us a compelling narrative about the great events of the time in the region – the battles and tragedies that routinely disrupted the lives of ordinary Punjabis, the sacking of iconic cities like Lahore, Amritsar, Multan and Jalandhar by a succession of conquerors, the ravages wrought by invaders like Nadir Shah, the rise of the Sikhs culminating in the storied reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Britain’s successful wars against the Sikh kingdom, the Great Rebellion of 1857 and its effect on Punjab, imperialist machinations, the influence on the people by leaders of the independence movement like Mahatma Gandhi, Muhammad Ali Jinnah and LalaLajpatRai, as also key regional figures such as Fazl-i-Husain, Master Tara Singh, Sikander Hayat Khan and Khizr Hayat Tiwana, the devastation of Partition —and much else besides.
Believing that modern India and Pakistan cannot be understood without comprehending the Punjab that was, the author also delves into the idea of Punjabiyat — Punjabiness — the literature and poetry of creative giants like Bulleh Shah, Waris Shah, Iqbal, Amrita Pritam and SaadatHasanManto, the spiritual teachings of the Sikh Gurus and Sufi saints, and, above all, the testimonials and narratives of ordinary Punjabis, to create an unforgettable portrait of a place – undivided Punjab - that continues to fascinate us (even though it broke up more than six decades ago) and of its hard-tested and resilient people, Hindu, Muslim and Sikh.
624 pages, Kindle Edition
First published July 1, 2013
About the author
Rajmohan Gandhi
49 books94 followersRajmohan Gandhi (born 1935)is a biographer and grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, and a research professor at the Center for South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Until end-December 2012 he taught political science and history at the University of Illinois and divided his time between India and the United States.
Until end-December 2012 he taught political science and history at the University of Illinois and divided his time between India and the United States.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
December 15, 2019
Quite a disappointing read. I was expecting so many things from this book. It had a good start but after some pages it was becoming dull. Book is like basically a collection of chosen sources and it was directionless. The author made his best effort to say that Muslims were at no fault and the conversions by Hindus was voluntary. There are some serious error. Book states that Ahmed Shah Abdali had captured Kohinoor diamond from the Mughals in Delhi. Well, actually Nadir Shah had captured the diamond from the Mughals in his 1739 invasion of India, and Abdali had taken the diamond from Nadir Shah's possession after the latter's death. I was even expecting great information on Patiala, Nabha, Jind, Narnaul and Pataudi .
All in all, It was a disappointing read specially coming from a well known historian. I have to look for other books which are authentic on Punjab.
All in all, It was a disappointing read specially coming from a well known historian. I have to look for other books which are authentic on Punjab.
July 22, 2015
The title is grand and eye catching, one has to admit that much. then the name of author (being grandson of Gandhi) has a certain appeal. So any history buff is bound to fall for this one in a bookstore.
But beyond all this glamour is a pretty average book. why? here are some reasons;
1. The name may be big but here's a Gujrati writing about history of Punjab!
2. Iniatial 3/4th of the book is nothing but reproduction of choosen sources. If you are into the history of Punjab this one has nothing new.
3. The period covered is from start of 18th century till partition in mid 20th century. For the sake of keeping it compact many events are glossed over in single liners.
4. Any insight one might be expecting, bearing in mind his lineage, is sadly lacking.
5. A writer of history can't produce a true flavour if he/she is prejudiced. and Mr Gandhi certainly is. which he evidently shows in his last chapter by keeping on one narrative.
Well if these aren't reasons enough, You gotta buy this one and find many more. Still for someone who's not at all familiar with Punjab aand it's times. this might prove a good starter if one keeps the prejudice out of it.
The initial chapter of the book is good so is the introduction. But if you have read Hari Ram Gupta's series ! You will just yawn as this one is a cut copy paste effort or in a civilized way I can say draws heavily from this work.
over all 2 stars at most.
But beyond all this glamour is a pretty average book. why? here are some reasons;
1. The name may be big but here's a Gujrati writing about history of Punjab!
2. Iniatial 3/4th of the book is nothing but reproduction of choosen sources. If you are into the history of Punjab this one has nothing new.
3. The period covered is from start of 18th century till partition in mid 20th century. For the sake of keeping it compact many events are glossed over in single liners.
4. Any insight one might be expecting, bearing in mind his lineage, is sadly lacking.
5. A writer of history can't produce a true flavour if he/she is prejudiced. and Mr Gandhi certainly is. which he evidently shows in his last chapter by keeping on one narrative.
Well if these aren't reasons enough, You gotta buy this one and find many more. Still for someone who's not at all familiar with Punjab aand it's times. this might prove a good starter if one keeps the prejudice out of it.
The initial chapter of the book is good so is the introduction. But if you have read Hari Ram Gupta's series ! You will just yawn as this one is a cut copy paste effort or in a civilized way I can say draws heavily from this work.
over all 2 stars at most.
July 17, 2026
Rajmohan Gandhi’s Punjab refuses to treat the province as a simple corridor of conquest which is a popular historical narrative. Neither it is a passive stage on which empires perform through out the centuries. However, it is still a long, unsettling narrative of shifting loyalties and complex layers of exercising sovereign control. One can also read a recurring failure to build a durable political order. In the end, Punjab feels at once overdetermined by imperial forces while extremely local in its social texture.
Of course, it is a history of invasions, but also of villages, castes, land, shrines, roads, canals, and the fragility of coexistence. The latter survives even when the states collapse.
Hence, Rajmohan Gandhi spectacularly imparts a sort of double vision, which I find very persuasive as it keeps Punjab from being reduced to either heroic resistance or tragic victimhood.
However, Punjab is still a place where power repeatedly arrives from elsewhere, and while the phenomenon keep recurring, people continuously improvise various forms of survival.
And contrary to the common belief, they frequently retaliate.
The initial quick sweep take us through the antiquity and the medieval period. Gandhi seems to establish a pattern here which he masterfully deepens in later chapters. There are various narratives in this pattern.
Firstly, the authority in Punjab is rarely stable. When it does stabilize, it almost always — with the exception of Ranjit Singh’s five decades — operates through an external structure, that is, beyond the social majority of the province.
Secondly, there is an inherently nonlinearity in this progression of power, and its changing manifestations. The succession of Persians, Greeks, Buddhist rulers, Arab incursions, Ghaznavid attacks, Delhi Sultanate formations, and Mughal dominance creates a sense of historical accumulation. There is hardly any linear development here.
Is it a reminder that Punjab’s political identity was repeatedly interrupted before it could harden into something fully self-defining in socio-politically rooted?
Thirdly, while he concentrated on power dynamics, Gandhi doesn’t completely overlook the Sufi figures, poets, and saints alongside conquerors. In fact, there is running subtextual suggestion that cultural continuity almost always outlasts political rupture. Thus the memory of Ali Hujweri, Moinuddin Chishti, Farid, Nizamuddin Aulia, and later Waris Shah becomes a counter-history to the military chronicle.
Rulers come and go, but emotional and linguistic life is etched hard into the cultural memory.
However, this continuity was never innocent. I couldn’t help myself asking why Punjab’s Muslim majority did not translate demographic weight into political dominance after Mughal authority weakened?
Gandhi’s answer seems to be that this is not due to numerical weakness but fragmentation of interest, hierarchy, and strategy. Many Muslim elites appear to have been embedded in the Mughal order. They are rarely independent of it. Rural society remained tied to local and clan loyalties. It never tried to convert itself into a political capital and unify provincial imagination. By contrast, the Sikh rise was due to a more cohesive military and religious organization. However, interestingly, it was itself internally divided. This asymmetry is at the heart of the longest middle chapter of the book. Gandhi amply explains why the collapse of Mughal authority did not produce a Muslim-led successor state in Punjab. And why the Sikh misls could fill the vacuum. The treatment of this transition is Rajmohan Gandhi’s most insightful achievements. He is almost seen resisting the temptation to make demographic majority itself a guarantee of power.
The post-Aurangzeb collapse shows how quickly authority can evaporate once the center loses its grip (a phenomenon which is repeated after Ranjit Singh’s death). Banda Bahadur’s campaign, the execution of Sikh leadership, Abdali’s repeated invasions, and the rise of the misls together create a landscape of violence in which no single group can claim lasting supremacy.
Throughout the book, political devastation is placed beside cultural production. Rereading (at least to me) of Waris Shah’s Heer was remarkable. It is not a decorative literary aside but a witness to a society in turmoil.
Hence, while there are fractures everywhere, a common emotional vocabulary survives. The later emphasis on “Punjabiyat” thus book feels earned, a recognition that conflict can never erase shared cultural soul.
For Rajmohan Gandhi, Ranjit Singh’s kingdom is the highest point of indigenous state formation. He successfully unifies the misls, annexes strategic territories, and sets up a military apparatus. Hence, it is a rare moment when Punjab was not merely being ruled.
Is it romanticization?
To some extent, since Gandhi himself shows how Ranjit Singh’s state, while appearing energetic and pragmatic, is also structurally fragile.
One, there is complete absence of a constitutional framework. Two, this is just another form of authoritarian rule. Three, there is a posthumous descent into fratricidal violence.
So aren’t these same problems that haunted earlier regimes?
Power was institutionally weak. I think this is a sobering corrective to any simple nostalgia for Sikh rule. The kingdom’s brilliance was real, but so was its inability to outlive its founder.
The British period, not really the strongest part of the book, is still very insightful in how it unsettles. British imperialism comes out as completely modernistic in its designs. Its defining characteristics are coexistence of administrative rationality with coercion, social engineering, and long-term political distortion. The Board of Administration, canal colonies, roads, disarmament campaigns, and land policies all indicate a province being remade with extraordinary energy.
But this remaking was not neutral. It relied on class alliances and selective recruitment. There was also a large scale cultivation of loyalist rural elites. The martial races framework combined with land alienation measures, and the census classification of religion and caste, helped turn social categories into political weapons.
Raj did not merely govern Punjab. It reorganized a society’s imagination of itself.
Fluid local identities shifted toward hardened religious and communal categories, which was a major historical tragedy. People were first counted, then sorted in a politically consequential way. Subsequently, they began to think of themselves as fixed fractions. Finally, there was no sense of a shared imagination.
Then there is the paradox of British “modernization”. Punjab was modernized, but not emancipated. Infrastructure expanded. Agriculture was transformed. The province became central to imperial military power. However, the system that built infrastructure also deepened dependence. It monetized land and sharpened rural anxieties.
In the end, the question of whether British order improved life for the poor remains unresolved. I do not think there is a straightforward answer to this question. But we can easily argue that with connectivity and productivity, Punjab was more tightly managed, and with social ranking, it became more exposed to the socio-political engineering based on loyalty and reward.
The nationalist period reveals the limits all-India politics in Punjab. The Rowlatt protests briefly produced a remarkable Hindu-Muslim-Sikh solidarity. There are even images of communities exchanging headgear and drinking from the same cups.
Yet it was short lived, and the aftermath is devastating. Jallianwala Bagh and the martial law humiliations brutalized subconscious and poisoned political trust. Ultimately, communal identities become increasingly available for mobilization.
The Unionist Party is the most interesting response to this fragmentation. Its rural alliance across religious lines suggests that class and land could, for a time, outweigh sectarian identity.
Here was a promising possibility: a provincial politics grounded in agricultural interests rather than religious absolutism.
But this arrangement was also contigent. It depended on a balance among landowners, the Raj, and rural society. How could it survive the acceleration of imperial withdrawal?
Then there were structural problems. The rise of the Muslim League caused the marginalization of the Unionists. Urban politics and sheer ideology seemed unable to penetrate the agrarian social order until the very end.
Gandhi’s account of the 1940 Lahore Resolution and its consequences is particularly sharp. He asks how a demand for Muslim self-determination could coexist with a denial of equivalent claims to Hindu and Sikh majorities within Punjab and Bengal?
It helps explain why partition became so unstable and so violent. Once sovereignty is imagined in communal terms but applied unevenly across mixed regions, the logic of separation begins to generate its own contradictions.
[Gandhi stops short of overstating this point]
The final chapters are a well known painful story, which points towards a deep ethical void. Violence isn’t an abstract tragedy but as a collapse of ordinary moral life. Rajmohan Gandhi tries hard to let carnage have the last word. But here his narrative of insaniyat seems overfitted.
Of course, it is important to complicate the dominant memory of partition as pure frenzy. But still to what end?
Of course, it is a history of invasions, but also of villages, castes, land, shrines, roads, canals, and the fragility of coexistence. The latter survives even when the states collapse.
Hence, Rajmohan Gandhi spectacularly imparts a sort of double vision, which I find very persuasive as it keeps Punjab from being reduced to either heroic resistance or tragic victimhood.
However, Punjab is still a place where power repeatedly arrives from elsewhere, and while the phenomenon keep recurring, people continuously improvise various forms of survival.
And contrary to the common belief, they frequently retaliate.
The initial quick sweep take us through the antiquity and the medieval period. Gandhi seems to establish a pattern here which he masterfully deepens in later chapters. There are various narratives in this pattern.
Firstly, the authority in Punjab is rarely stable. When it does stabilize, it almost always — with the exception of Ranjit Singh’s five decades — operates through an external structure, that is, beyond the social majority of the province.
Secondly, there is an inherently nonlinearity in this progression of power, and its changing manifestations. The succession of Persians, Greeks, Buddhist rulers, Arab incursions, Ghaznavid attacks, Delhi Sultanate formations, and Mughal dominance creates a sense of historical accumulation. There is hardly any linear development here.
Is it a reminder that Punjab’s political identity was repeatedly interrupted before it could harden into something fully self-defining in socio-politically rooted?
Thirdly, while he concentrated on power dynamics, Gandhi doesn’t completely overlook the Sufi figures, poets, and saints alongside conquerors. In fact, there is running subtextual suggestion that cultural continuity almost always outlasts political rupture. Thus the memory of Ali Hujweri, Moinuddin Chishti, Farid, Nizamuddin Aulia, and later Waris Shah becomes a counter-history to the military chronicle.
Rulers come and go, but emotional and linguistic life is etched hard into the cultural memory.
However, this continuity was never innocent. I couldn’t help myself asking why Punjab’s Muslim majority did not translate demographic weight into political dominance after Mughal authority weakened?
Gandhi’s answer seems to be that this is not due to numerical weakness but fragmentation of interest, hierarchy, and strategy. Many Muslim elites appear to have been embedded in the Mughal order. They are rarely independent of it. Rural society remained tied to local and clan loyalties. It never tried to convert itself into a political capital and unify provincial imagination. By contrast, the Sikh rise was due to a more cohesive military and religious organization. However, interestingly, it was itself internally divided. This asymmetry is at the heart of the longest middle chapter of the book. Gandhi amply explains why the collapse of Mughal authority did not produce a Muslim-led successor state in Punjab. And why the Sikh misls could fill the vacuum. The treatment of this transition is Rajmohan Gandhi’s most insightful achievements. He is almost seen resisting the temptation to make demographic majority itself a guarantee of power.
The post-Aurangzeb collapse shows how quickly authority can evaporate once the center loses its grip (a phenomenon which is repeated after Ranjit Singh’s death). Banda Bahadur’s campaign, the execution of Sikh leadership, Abdali’s repeated invasions, and the rise of the misls together create a landscape of violence in which no single group can claim lasting supremacy.
Throughout the book, political devastation is placed beside cultural production. Rereading (at least to me) of Waris Shah’s Heer was remarkable. It is not a decorative literary aside but a witness to a society in turmoil.
Hence, while there are fractures everywhere, a common emotional vocabulary survives. The later emphasis on “Punjabiyat” thus book feels earned, a recognition that conflict can never erase shared cultural soul.
For Rajmohan Gandhi, Ranjit Singh’s kingdom is the highest point of indigenous state formation. He successfully unifies the misls, annexes strategic territories, and sets up a military apparatus. Hence, it is a rare moment when Punjab was not merely being ruled.
Is it romanticization?
To some extent, since Gandhi himself shows how Ranjit Singh’s state, while appearing energetic and pragmatic, is also structurally fragile.
One, there is complete absence of a constitutional framework. Two, this is just another form of authoritarian rule. Three, there is a posthumous descent into fratricidal violence.
So aren’t these same problems that haunted earlier regimes?
Power was institutionally weak. I think this is a sobering corrective to any simple nostalgia for Sikh rule. The kingdom’s brilliance was real, but so was its inability to outlive its founder.
The British period, not really the strongest part of the book, is still very insightful in how it unsettles. British imperialism comes out as completely modernistic in its designs. Its defining characteristics are coexistence of administrative rationality with coercion, social engineering, and long-term political distortion. The Board of Administration, canal colonies, roads, disarmament campaigns, and land policies all indicate a province being remade with extraordinary energy.
But this remaking was not neutral. It relied on class alliances and selective recruitment. There was also a large scale cultivation of loyalist rural elites. The martial races framework combined with land alienation measures, and the census classification of religion and caste, helped turn social categories into political weapons.
Raj did not merely govern Punjab. It reorganized a society’s imagination of itself.
Fluid local identities shifted toward hardened religious and communal categories, which was a major historical tragedy. People were first counted, then sorted in a politically consequential way. Subsequently, they began to think of themselves as fixed fractions. Finally, there was no sense of a shared imagination.
Then there is the paradox of British “modernization”. Punjab was modernized, but not emancipated. Infrastructure expanded. Agriculture was transformed. The province became central to imperial military power. However, the system that built infrastructure also deepened dependence. It monetized land and sharpened rural anxieties.
In the end, the question of whether British order improved life for the poor remains unresolved. I do not think there is a straightforward answer to this question. But we can easily argue that with connectivity and productivity, Punjab was more tightly managed, and with social ranking, it became more exposed to the socio-political engineering based on loyalty and reward.
The nationalist period reveals the limits all-India politics in Punjab. The Rowlatt protests briefly produced a remarkable Hindu-Muslim-Sikh solidarity. There are even images of communities exchanging headgear and drinking from the same cups.
Yet it was short lived, and the aftermath is devastating. Jallianwala Bagh and the martial law humiliations brutalized subconscious and poisoned political trust. Ultimately, communal identities become increasingly available for mobilization.
The Unionist Party is the most interesting response to this fragmentation. Its rural alliance across religious lines suggests that class and land could, for a time, outweigh sectarian identity.
Here was a promising possibility: a provincial politics grounded in agricultural interests rather than religious absolutism.
But this arrangement was also contigent. It depended on a balance among landowners, the Raj, and rural society. How could it survive the acceleration of imperial withdrawal?
Then there were structural problems. The rise of the Muslim League caused the marginalization of the Unionists. Urban politics and sheer ideology seemed unable to penetrate the agrarian social order until the very end.
Gandhi’s account of the 1940 Lahore Resolution and its consequences is particularly sharp. He asks how a demand for Muslim self-determination could coexist with a denial of equivalent claims to Hindu and Sikh majorities within Punjab and Bengal?
It helps explain why partition became so unstable and so violent. Once sovereignty is imagined in communal terms but applied unevenly across mixed regions, the logic of separation begins to generate its own contradictions.
[Gandhi stops short of overstating this point]
The final chapters are a well known painful story, which points towards a deep ethical void. Violence isn’t an abstract tragedy but as a collapse of ordinary moral life. Rajmohan Gandhi tries hard to let carnage have the last word. But here his narrative of insaniyat seems overfitted.
Of course, it is important to complicate the dominant memory of partition as pure frenzy. But still to what end?
May 16, 2017
I was reading a book by William Dalrymple on the Afghan war which ignited my interest in this title. I read this book alongside Kohinoor and An Indian Summer which effectively chronicles the beginning and the end of this one. This made me lose interest in a plain vanilla narrative of Rajmohan Gandhi.
This begins solid but as the author begins to narrate events following the Great war of 1857, the text becomes rugged and directionless. The author then wants to cover one too many dimensions which repel the reader. To finish this book without being horribly repelled, I have given myself two and the author one star
This begins solid but as the author begins to narrate events following the Great war of 1857, the text becomes rugged and directionless. The author then wants to cover one too many dimensions which repel the reader. To finish this book without being horribly repelled, I have given myself two and the author one star
January 10, 2016
A very good account of 'the' Punjab - the undivided one, with some detailed reference points. But I also felt it could have been more coherent. A good read never the less.
July 18, 2026
A political history, that owing to its inherent limited scope, feels incomplete in providing a deeper understanding of the reasons leading to certain events. The chapters on Raj era politicas were well done, and the chapters on the interregnum between mughal control and the rise of the sikhs were illuminating.
The tragedy of Punjabi partition is that the major fault lies entirely on the common punjabi who nursed communcal differences and slights for centuries until they were enflamed and weaponized by the colonial british for control of the region and use against rebellious other indians. Later punjabi politicians and their political bases never saw beyond these communal divisions and decided to murder each other instead of compromising. The original sin of communalism and casteism today has led to the region in its separate nation states being basket cases. In conclusion, the subcontinent is in a dire need of a cultural revolution.
The tragedy of Punjabi partition is that the major fault lies entirely on the common punjabi who nursed communcal differences and slights for centuries until they were enflamed and weaponized by the colonial british for control of the region and use against rebellious other indians. Later punjabi politicians and their political bases never saw beyond these communal divisions and decided to murder each other instead of compromising. The original sin of communalism and casteism today has led to the region in its separate nation states being basket cases. In conclusion, the subcontinent is in a dire need of a cultural revolution.
March 4, 2019
Comprehensive in terms of the events and characters concerned. The questions explored in the beginning are much more interesting and insightful than the moral overtone of the tail end.
October 28, 2013
Punjab today accounts for about two to three percent of India's population and area. Its impact on India, however, is disproportionately large. There is a larger Punjab across the border in Pakistan where it is the largest, richest and politically the most powerful state. The partition of British India into today's India and Pakistan in 1947 divided Punjab in the west and Bengal in the east. Punjab, in particular, paid a very heavy price for partition in terms of transfer of population and bloodshed. The term ethnic cleansing hadn't become fashionable in 1947, but that is what happened in both parts of Punjab. Muslims moved from the India to Pakistan and a reverse migration of Hindus and Sikhs happened in the other direction.
Even before the bloodbath of 1947 Punjab had a tumultuous history. In 900 years it was ruled by a Punjabi dynasty for just about fifty years from the end of eighteenth century to the middle of the ninteenth. Situated on the traditional invasion route from Afghanistan to Delhi, it remained the battleground between the rulers of Delhi and invaders from the west.
Rajmohan Gandhi's history covers the period from Aurangzeb, who ruled India for half a century into the first decade of the eighteenth century; to Mountbatten who was the last Viceroy of the British Crown in India and became independent India's first Governor General in 1947. The history divides itself into clear periods - the flourishing of Punjab as one of the most important provinces of Mughal India under the great Mughals ending with Aurangzeb; the period of anarchy following the collapse of Mughal authority after Aurangzeb; the establishment of Sikh rule in Punjab by Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1799; the conquest of Punjab by the Britsh as Ranjit Singh's successors failed to measure up to him; another period of peace and prosperity under the efficient British administration; and finally, the growth of the movement for independence culminating in the partition of 1947.
Gandhi's surname is not a coincidence; he is a grandson of Mahatma Gandhi. His scholarly credentials are beyond reproach. The book is meticulously researched and well written.
Many histories of Punjab exist. Rajmohan Gandhi does not dig up any new facts. What he does is to present familiar facts of history, poses a few questions and tries to find answers to them. The first question is about the post Aurangzeb Punjab. Muslims were in majority in Punjab followed by Hindus, while Sikhs were a very small minority. However it was the Sikhs who emerged as the rulers at the end of the confusion surrounding the waning of the Mughal power. Why didn't the Muslims of Punjab rise to the occasion? The second question or observation is about the inability of the Punjabis to find solutions to their own problems without intervention from outside. There were problems between Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus of Punjab, but despite these problems the three communities lived in peace and harmony most of the time. As the time for independence approached, however, the leaders of the three communities displayed a remarkable lack of ability and wilingness to sit together and hammer out a solution to the problem of partition. They kept looking to outsiders like national leaders and the British administrators to solve their problems for them. Many of them would have preferred the British to stay on as impartial arbiters as they had little faith in their ability to sort out the differences themselves.
Raising questions is easy, finding answers a lot more difficult. Questions of this nature usually don't have clear answers. Rajmohan Gandhi does not provide any clear answers. He draws attention to them, underlines their importance and leaves the readers to find their own answers. Will the Punjabis be able to learn from history and do a better job of running their affairs in the future?
Even before the bloodbath of 1947 Punjab had a tumultuous history. In 900 years it was ruled by a Punjabi dynasty for just about fifty years from the end of eighteenth century to the middle of the ninteenth. Situated on the traditional invasion route from Afghanistan to Delhi, it remained the battleground between the rulers of Delhi and invaders from the west.
Rajmohan Gandhi's history covers the period from Aurangzeb, who ruled India for half a century into the first decade of the eighteenth century; to Mountbatten who was the last Viceroy of the British Crown in India and became independent India's first Governor General in 1947. The history divides itself into clear periods - the flourishing of Punjab as one of the most important provinces of Mughal India under the great Mughals ending with Aurangzeb; the period of anarchy following the collapse of Mughal authority after Aurangzeb; the establishment of Sikh rule in Punjab by Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1799; the conquest of Punjab by the Britsh as Ranjit Singh's successors failed to measure up to him; another period of peace and prosperity under the efficient British administration; and finally, the growth of the movement for independence culminating in the partition of 1947.
Gandhi's surname is not a coincidence; he is a grandson of Mahatma Gandhi. His scholarly credentials are beyond reproach. The book is meticulously researched and well written.
Many histories of Punjab exist. Rajmohan Gandhi does not dig up any new facts. What he does is to present familiar facts of history, poses a few questions and tries to find answers to them. The first question is about the post Aurangzeb Punjab. Muslims were in majority in Punjab followed by Hindus, while Sikhs were a very small minority. However it was the Sikhs who emerged as the rulers at the end of the confusion surrounding the waning of the Mughal power. Why didn't the Muslims of Punjab rise to the occasion? The second question or observation is about the inability of the Punjabis to find solutions to their own problems without intervention from outside. There were problems between Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus of Punjab, but despite these problems the three communities lived in peace and harmony most of the time. As the time for independence approached, however, the leaders of the three communities displayed a remarkable lack of ability and wilingness to sit together and hammer out a solution to the problem of partition. They kept looking to outsiders like national leaders and the British administrators to solve their problems for them. Many of them would have preferred the British to stay on as impartial arbiters as they had little faith in their ability to sort out the differences themselves.
Raising questions is easy, finding answers a lot more difficult. Questions of this nature usually don't have clear answers. Rajmohan Gandhi does not provide any clear answers. He draws attention to them, underlines their importance and leaves the readers to find their own answers. Will the Punjabis be able to learn from history and do a better job of running their affairs in the future?
April 14, 2020
Book 12, Punjab by RajMohan Gandhi. As the title suggest , this is story of undivided Punjab through 1100s to 1947. This is a literary marvel sometimes on the verge of being a textbook due to Punjab’s myriad political canvas. Infact, to get a hang of it , I virtually was forced to take notes in order to keep track of the various persona throughout the years depicted in the book. A mammoth read of 440 pages , first 200 odd pages are dedicated to Punjab as ruled through the times from 1100s delhi sultanate to 1857 Bahadur shah Zafar. It talks about Maharajah Ranjit Singh and his creation of mighty sikh empire and there on towards the end of book , glances towards the British admisnistration of so called British Punjab leading upto partition. A great deal of effort has been made in detailing each and every major milestone in the regions history. Its Like reading Mughal , Maratha , Sikh and British history in one book. I agree that due to inherent nature of such books, it becomes quite a drag , for me especially during British era which I find particularly boring. Otherwise this is one of the book you want to read if you want to understand Punjab and India history in bit more detail.
October 12, 2020
This book tells the remarkable history of Punjab in an interesting way. This region is now divided between the 2 countries of India and Pakistan. It is one of the most culturally rich places, was birth place of the Sikh religion, many great sufi saints came from here and has been a lot of bloodshed. This book tells the history from the time of Mughals till 90s. Its an extremely rich and interesting history. Things we know happened but wouldn’t think to be connected. Eg. After Nepolean lost, many of the generals of his great army ended up in indian subcontinent working for indian kings. It shaped military tactics but also many things culturally.
Overall, highly recommended for anyone who likes reading about history. The writing keeps u interested through all the phases.
Overall, highly recommended for anyone who likes reading about history. The writing keeps u interested through all the phases.
November 13, 2025
Rajmohan Gandhi's Punjab is a book that is unique for the period under consideration, viz. Aurangzeb and his fall till the last Viceroy of India, Mountbatten. The temporality of work isn't really collected in any other single volume, according to the author. Other episodes covered in the volume are the downfall of the Mughals, catalysed by the brutal invasions of Nadir Shah and Ahmed Shah Abdali, the consolidation of the Sikh Empire under Ranjit Singh, the Afghanistan adventures & misadventures as a result of the Great Game, the British Colonial Rule, Partition and the trauma caused by it. The timeline, though linear is suffused with a text that fluctuates in its density with a rich diversity of characterization that often lends the book a highly concentrated effort.
While the book cannot be faulted on its historical accuracy (though, some episodes are confounding), it packs these narratives tight without actually invoking the role of the rivers in Punjab's history of the said period. This is not to say that waters didn't flow in them, or by way of mentions in the texts, rather, it wasn't voluminous enough, and that's the downer, albeit negotiable. But, what certainly isn't negotiable is a bare treatment of the princely states of Patiala, Jind, Nabha and Dujana, to name a few. The geography of Punjab is concentrated on the Lahore-Multan Belt on the other side, and Amritsar, Jalandhar, kangra and Ambala belt on the Indian side. This is where the crux of the historical narrative is set. But there is a moral high ground on record here, which, though, towards the end (decades after the bloody partition) does show a semblance of resilience, it nevertheless is responsible for a parochial treatment of an area and demography subject to reductionism that is redundant. This moral high ground is 'Punjabiyat', loosely translated as 'Punjabiness'. This trait continued through the sensitive times Punjab was faced with, according to Rajmohan Gandhi. Such a take calibrates the historical study of Punjab in a conservatively constricted sense, showing scant respect to religious and cultural diversity of the clannish state, the land of the five rivers is known for. And where does this ground stem from? From the echoes of Waris Shah, Amrita Pritam, Manto and Faiz. Undoubtedly, important figures on either side of the Partition, the affinity of the bias is the affliction of the prejudice hold true here most of the time.
Leaping over the Sikh Empire (we will touch that shortly) and the colonial rule immediately after 1857 to the end days of the Raj, the author's indulgence is very academic making it a challenging read. It nonetheless exposes nuances that are generally eclipsed in works that trend to be popular in nature, which is an upside. The upside is severely dented by a skimpy take on Linlithgow and Wavell, the two Viceroys before Mountbatten. Even Radcliffe's role is meagrely presented as the boundary commissioner, and the only secular and non-political attribution comes from Jinnah, ironically. Interestingly, VP Menon gets a paltry mention in what is the most inexcusable omission (or as good as) in the book. Mahatma Gandhi moves along the perimeter, but for brief centripetal movements, though his involvement far outscores Vallabhbhai Patel's. The trauma of the Partition is a chillingly captured section and at times even disturbingly moving. This shows Rajmohan Gandhi's astute observations and sensitivity to deal with the darkest chapter in India's 20th century history.
Leaping back to the Sikh Empire - even if I'd prefer Khushwant Singh on the topic, Rajmohan Gandhi has much to say about the complex scenarios that elevated Ranjit Singh to three throne of Lahore and the personality cult that developed around him in his living days and every since. Rajmohan Gandhi views Maharaja Ranjit Singh as a symbol of a unified, multicultural Punjab that existed before partition, characterized by secular values, justice, and meritocracy. In his book, Punjab: A History from Aurangzeb to Mountbatten, Gandhi highlights how Ranjit Singh's rule fostered social harmony, religious tolerance, and effective governance, contrasting it with the later communal discord. He sees Ranjit Singh as a "son of the soil" who built a strong, progressive state through his vision and compassion, even abolishing the death penalty for certain crimes, which is unusual for a monarch. Much of the modern historiography, pursuing Indian nationalistic goals, has not only distorted the pre-British history but also attempted to rob the Sikhs of their icon, their long history of struggle and a distinct culture and way of living. Referring to the plural, composite and complacent Punjabi society, eminent historian Rajmohan Gandhi makes a terse remark that when Punjab’s Muslims and Hindus forming a majority of the population were not opposing the Delhi rulers and their viceroys, what motivated the Sikhs to continue their fight for ‘Self-Rule’ for a hundred years? Surely, it was the Sikh ethos and the Khalsa way of life that had made them restive and freedom seeker. How much of it is true can be discovered by going through these viscous pages.
Overall, the book is not intended for general readership, but rather for those that have immersed or at least taken a deep dive in the history of the region earlier. The book tends to dock towards a particular bank, and when it successfully done so, it realizes the folly (for lack of a better word), and thus its coming back is on muddy waters.
While the book cannot be faulted on its historical accuracy (though, some episodes are confounding), it packs these narratives tight without actually invoking the role of the rivers in Punjab's history of the said period. This is not to say that waters didn't flow in them, or by way of mentions in the texts, rather, it wasn't voluminous enough, and that's the downer, albeit negotiable. But, what certainly isn't negotiable is a bare treatment of the princely states of Patiala, Jind, Nabha and Dujana, to name a few. The geography of Punjab is concentrated on the Lahore-Multan Belt on the other side, and Amritsar, Jalandhar, kangra and Ambala belt on the Indian side. This is where the crux of the historical narrative is set. But there is a moral high ground on record here, which, though, towards the end (decades after the bloody partition) does show a semblance of resilience, it nevertheless is responsible for a parochial treatment of an area and demography subject to reductionism that is redundant. This moral high ground is 'Punjabiyat', loosely translated as 'Punjabiness'. This trait continued through the sensitive times Punjab was faced with, according to Rajmohan Gandhi. Such a take calibrates the historical study of Punjab in a conservatively constricted sense, showing scant respect to religious and cultural diversity of the clannish state, the land of the five rivers is known for. And where does this ground stem from? From the echoes of Waris Shah, Amrita Pritam, Manto and Faiz. Undoubtedly, important figures on either side of the Partition, the affinity of the bias is the affliction of the prejudice hold true here most of the time.
Leaping over the Sikh Empire (we will touch that shortly) and the colonial rule immediately after 1857 to the end days of the Raj, the author's indulgence is very academic making it a challenging read. It nonetheless exposes nuances that are generally eclipsed in works that trend to be popular in nature, which is an upside. The upside is severely dented by a skimpy take on Linlithgow and Wavell, the two Viceroys before Mountbatten. Even Radcliffe's role is meagrely presented as the boundary commissioner, and the only secular and non-political attribution comes from Jinnah, ironically. Interestingly, VP Menon gets a paltry mention in what is the most inexcusable omission (or as good as) in the book. Mahatma Gandhi moves along the perimeter, but for brief centripetal movements, though his involvement far outscores Vallabhbhai Patel's. The trauma of the Partition is a chillingly captured section and at times even disturbingly moving. This shows Rajmohan Gandhi's astute observations and sensitivity to deal with the darkest chapter in India's 20th century history.
Leaping back to the Sikh Empire - even if I'd prefer Khushwant Singh on the topic, Rajmohan Gandhi has much to say about the complex scenarios that elevated Ranjit Singh to three throne of Lahore and the personality cult that developed around him in his living days and every since. Rajmohan Gandhi views Maharaja Ranjit Singh as a symbol of a unified, multicultural Punjab that existed before partition, characterized by secular values, justice, and meritocracy. In his book, Punjab: A History from Aurangzeb to Mountbatten, Gandhi highlights how Ranjit Singh's rule fostered social harmony, religious tolerance, and effective governance, contrasting it with the later communal discord. He sees Ranjit Singh as a "son of the soil" who built a strong, progressive state through his vision and compassion, even abolishing the death penalty for certain crimes, which is unusual for a monarch. Much of the modern historiography, pursuing Indian nationalistic goals, has not only distorted the pre-British history but also attempted to rob the Sikhs of their icon, their long history of struggle and a distinct culture and way of living. Referring to the plural, composite and complacent Punjabi society, eminent historian Rajmohan Gandhi makes a terse remark that when Punjab’s Muslims and Hindus forming a majority of the population were not opposing the Delhi rulers and their viceroys, what motivated the Sikhs to continue their fight for ‘Self-Rule’ for a hundred years? Surely, it was the Sikh ethos and the Khalsa way of life that had made them restive and freedom seeker. How much of it is true can be discovered by going through these viscous pages.
Overall, the book is not intended for general readership, but rather for those that have immersed or at least taken a deep dive in the history of the region earlier. The book tends to dock towards a particular bank, and when it successfully done so, it realizes the folly (for lack of a better word), and thus its coming back is on muddy waters.
March 14, 2019
I am married to a Panjabi, and am a novice with regard to the history of Panjab. I found this book to be very difficult to read, and had to force myself to finish it. There are lots of names, lots of details, and it was hard to keep track of the over-arching thread of history and its importance. The last chapter helped to summarize what I had read. I would only recommend this to someone who already has a background in the history of this area, and then only as a reference book.
October 12, 2023
While this is a very good history of undivided Punjab, the aim of Rajmohan Gandhi is much more subtle than simple narration of history. Let me use my unsurpassed ability to synthesise and try to tell you in a nutshel what his point is. Ok it is this: "Oi! Pakistan, India, come on guys why the hell are you fithing?! That makes no sense are you out of your mind. Come on stop it!"
And how does the author reaches his aim you ask? Well, through the whole narrative he points out that there is a strong and rich common history that links “Indian” and “Pakistani” Punjab, and that the bitter enmity that accompanied the partition of 1947 was sheer, unjustified folly. He describes the century-long divide and conquer tactic, that the British empire used to avoid the creation of a unified anti-Raj front. This prolonged strategy played a major role, according to the author, in setting the scene for the massacres of 1947. The arguments that he brings are so strong that it is hard to object this.
Brilliant in making Gandhi’s point is the last chapter collecting some testimonies of mutual aid during the violence of the partition. Indeed people risked their life to help their neighbours and friends (or even sometimes strangers!) of the different religion. Kind of reminded me of histories of solidarity during the Shoah in Europe, just a few years before the book’s culminating events.
Yes there are times that the book becomes a bit difficult to read (the detailed description of political facts that led to the partition could be a bit tedious), but overall the book is well written and easy to follow. The only real negative point is that it is printed in really small characters. This is a 400-pages book that could have been easily split in 2 volumes of say 300 pages, with a slightly bigger font.
Overall highly recommended. I would read it vis-à-vis Khushwant Singh’s A History of the Sikhs, to get two rather different points of view on the history of the same region.
And how does the author reaches his aim you ask? Well, through the whole narrative he points out that there is a strong and rich common history that links “Indian” and “Pakistani” Punjab, and that the bitter enmity that accompanied the partition of 1947 was sheer, unjustified folly. He describes the century-long divide and conquer tactic, that the British empire used to avoid the creation of a unified anti-Raj front. This prolonged strategy played a major role, according to the author, in setting the scene for the massacres of 1947. The arguments that he brings are so strong that it is hard to object this.
Brilliant in making Gandhi’s point is the last chapter collecting some testimonies of mutual aid during the violence of the partition. Indeed people risked their life to help their neighbours and friends (or even sometimes strangers!) of the different religion. Kind of reminded me of histories of solidarity during the Shoah in Europe, just a few years before the book’s culminating events.
Yes there are times that the book becomes a bit difficult to read (the detailed description of political facts that led to the partition could be a bit tedious), but overall the book is well written and easy to follow. The only real negative point is that it is printed in really small characters. This is a 400-pages book that could have been easily split in 2 volumes of say 300 pages, with a slightly bigger font.
Overall highly recommended. I would read it vis-à-vis Khushwant Singh’s A History of the Sikhs, to get two rather different points of view on the history of the same region.
December 10, 2017
Punjab, being a gateway to India, was part of great invasions, conquests and defiances. Punjab, a home to eminent historic figures such as Sikhs Gurus, Banda Bahadur, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, has always been an interesting political and military theater from Mughal era to the days of Raj. Dr. Rajmohan Gandhi, grandson of Gandhi ji and an eminent historian at center for south asian and middle eastern studies, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has impressively covered it all from Jasrat Ghakar to Khizr Tiwana, last ruler (Chief minister of United Punjab) in this extensively researched text. People interested in partition of British India may also find it worth reading as Dr. Gandhi has addressed partition era political discourse nicely.
Though Dr. Gandhi has written history of Punjab as if ‘Punjab’ itself narrating its life and times but fiction readers may find it boring at times. I recommend this book to every Punjabi living on either side of International border, drawn in heart of Punjab to divide a single race into two different sects.
I personally find ‘The Legend of Banda Bahadur’ quite interesting.
Though Dr. Gandhi has written history of Punjab as if ‘Punjab’ itself narrating its life and times but fiction readers may find it boring at times. I recommend this book to every Punjabi living on either side of International border, drawn in heart of Punjab to divide a single race into two different sects.
I personally find ‘The Legend of Banda Bahadur’ quite interesting.
June 7, 2025
"In punjab lies the soul of the sub continent", I cannot agree more with rajmohan gandhi on this one. Punjab has for long been the centre of conflict and culture, stretching from the fertile tracts of rawalpindi to the large fields of ambala, consisting of hilly regions of himachal, punjab has it all. Drained by the great rives. Rajmohan gandhi has yet again proved his mantle and written a magnum opus for studying the modern history of United Punjab. The decline of mughal rule in Punjab to the establishment of the mighty syncretic empire of Maharaja Ranjit singh. The story of punjab is one of culture, violence, hate and more importantly love. The eventual division of punjab into two parts is tragic reality which deprived the world of a powerful United province. It will forever be a blout on all of humanity for what happened in punjab during partition the land of Waris shah became so engulfed in hate that knew no bounds. But still Punjabiyat lives on as a symbol of defiance against hate and violence.
I yearn to visit a punjab I was never born to, to see it in all its glory with phulkaris, jhootis, eid and Baisakhi.
I yearn to visit a punjab I was never born to, to see it in all its glory with phulkaris, jhootis, eid and Baisakhi.
April 23, 2019
The book is a journey cutting across religions, cultures, castes and other facets. It provides an unbiased view of a state which has been at the forefront of action. The state which has always been a frontier for India and has seen multiple wars, bloodsheds and uprootings by external invaders, has not only withstood them but absorbed them as well.
It might be injustice to portray a history, that phenomenal, in few pages but the author has done his best to compress it in a logical manner and still retain the essence. Highlights of important conversations of bygone era places you in the shoes of the speakers.
Gladly, the closing chapter was aptly written which portrays the ambitions of 'Punjabis' for posterity. When I put the book down, it made me ecstatic and uneasy at the same time as Punjab, its leaders and people need redemption for the wrongs done over the last century.
The thing I loved about the book was, it kindled my thoughts and emotions. Also, it made me aware of the state that I am residing in is far from being inanimate.
It might be injustice to portray a history, that phenomenal, in few pages but the author has done his best to compress it in a logical manner and still retain the essence. Highlights of important conversations of bygone era places you in the shoes of the speakers.
Gladly, the closing chapter was aptly written which portrays the ambitions of 'Punjabis' for posterity. When I put the book down, it made me ecstatic and uneasy at the same time as Punjab, its leaders and people need redemption for the wrongs done over the last century.
The thing I loved about the book was, it kindled my thoughts and emotions. Also, it made me aware of the state that I am residing in is far from being inanimate.
July 18, 2019
This is an excellent book. Rajmohan Gandhi does an exceedingly good job of putting together a story of Punjab in one volume.
There is much to commend this book. Early history is not always easy and often seems confusing when seen from the perspective of the modern-day world. However, he has done admirably and presents the sweep of history with a deft hand.
We get an idea of some of the early conflicts and realise how they have been aggrandised by later day political leaders.
I would have liked some more detail on some of the recent events in Punjab, especially the Khalistani movement, but that may be in the scope of the next edition.
There is much to commend this book. Early history is not always easy and often seems confusing when seen from the perspective of the modern-day world. However, he has done admirably and presents the sweep of history with a deft hand.
We get an idea of some of the early conflicts and realise how they have been aggrandised by later day political leaders.
I would have liked some more detail on some of the recent events in Punjab, especially the Khalistani movement, but that may be in the scope of the next edition.
February 12, 2021
For a long time, I'd been looking for a history of Punjab that isn't told almost exclusively through the lens of Sikh history, and this book does the trick (though I'm guessing I'm going to need to find other such resources).
Lots of fascinating nuggets of information here which would perhaps surprise (some if not most?) Punjabis today, especially after having grown up with a (possibly) slanted - whether rightly or wrongly - recent history of the land (I know I did).
This book was recommended to me and I strongly recommend it too if you would like to dig a little deeper into this region.
Lots of fascinating nuggets of information here which would perhaps surprise (some if not most?) Punjabis today, especially after having grown up with a (possibly) slanted - whether rightly or wrongly - recent history of the land (I know I did).
This book was recommended to me and I strongly recommend it too if you would like to dig a little deeper into this region.
September 24, 2019
Its a very good book for people interested in political history of Punjab. Number of political aspects have been covered and every political incident has been commented. After reading this book we come across so many personalities who had ever take part in shaping history of Punjab.
Author has relied mostly on research work of other people and has not been able to formulate an independent opinion. Sometimes, sentence structuring also seems awkward.
Its a must read for every one who wants to understand the politics of Punjab.
Author has relied mostly on research work of other people and has not been able to formulate an independent opinion. Sometimes, sentence structuring also seems awkward.
Its a must read for every one who wants to understand the politics of Punjab.
April 21, 2020
I felt and it left me thinking; could have been different scenario today if Punjab was undivided. I strongly feel for those who sacrificed for united India. Power hungry politicians took away punjabiyat from united India.
Recommended book.
Recommended book.
December 9, 2017
A comprehensive book that draws from a lot of sources, telling all sides of the story.
February 3, 2019
Very informative, well researched but I personally took a lot of time to complete because it used to get boring a lot of times. The way it's written is like some history book.
June 9, 2019
An excellent and detailed book focusing on Punjab. A must read for all Indian history lovers.
March 30, 2020
Simply amazing! The best book on Punjabs complex and fascinating history.
Read
May 15, 20201707-1947
January 21, 2021
Excellent piece
March 27, 2021
Since my mother was born in Lahore, and her ancestors hailed from the city, reading this excellent, deeply researched book was a very personal journey for me. Thoroughly enjoyed every page.
June 13, 2022
Unnecessarily complex written style that doesn't impress a regular and excited reader who's interested in reading the long history of the Punjab.
June 15, 2023
Rajmohan gandhi Reviewed the history of Punjab in short,,I like it
September 14, 2023
No better than school history textbook. Sheer Boredom. Disappointed.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews