MAHATMA ON THE PITCH

in sport.’4 The Maharaja of Patiala too welcomed ‘the move against communal cricket’ and declared that no Patiala player would be available for any match conducted on communal lines.5 In October 1941, the United Provinces Cricket Association (UPCA), at the instance of the Maharajkumar of Vizianagram, passed a resolution to stop communal cricket forever. The resolution stated: ‘It is felt on all hands that time has come when concerted action should be taken to rid the country of the canker of communal cricket as it tends to retard unity and good fellowship in the country. Is it not deplorable for Hindus to play against their Muslim brethren and vice versa?’6 The association formally urged the BCCI to ‘ban all players under them from participating in communal matches of any kind on pain of penal punishments’.7 According to Edward Docker, ‘the move to ban communalism in cricket was primarily political in motive’.8 Ronojoy Sen makes an interesting point when he tries to explain the princes’ opposition to the tournament not only because ‘they had their own teams playing in the Ranji Trophy’, but because ‘they probably did not want to rub Gandhi and the Congress the wrong way, with Indian independence a distinct possibility’.9 However, commoners in Bombay began to take strong exception to this move. As one Dr Kothare even questioned the credibility of Jamsaheb in doing so simply because the latter was a successor of Ranji! Kothare was sure ‘if a referendum is taken 95 per cent of the public will vote for the Pentangular Cricket Matches’10. The Bombay Cricket Association meanwhile at a meeting of its managing committee came up with a resolution in favour of the Pentangular. The resolution seemed to protect and promote the tournament vigorously: It is the considered opinion of this Committee that the Bombay Pentangular Tournament has fostered better communal feeling and is conducted and played in the best spirit of the game. The suggestion that it is breeding communal disharmony and is not conducive of improving the standard of Indian cricket is wishful thinking on the part of only a few individuals and does not represent the public opinion correctly. The Bombay public is overwhelmingly in favour of the Tournament and it looks

forward to this fixture as an annual fixture in which all communities take part.11 The Cricket Club of India, Bombay, welcomed the resolution in a formal meeting of its executive committee. Anthony de Mello, former BCCI secretary, also spoke out openly in favour the Pentangular in that context and appealed to the patrons of cricket and cricketers in India and the BCCI not to interfere with it. His views were grounded in a realistic appraisal of contemporary Indian cricket: There is nothing communal in the sense the word is used in this country— in the Bombay Pentangular. …The Ranji Trophy will certainly replace the Pentangular and be the national tournament and most sought after sports carnival in the country, but that time is a little distant yet. Much money is required for the development of cricket in this country. The Pentangular gives us money and very friendly competition. Let it, therefore, be played, and let it prosper for the sake of cricket in India, and let us cricketers with a firm conscience and strong heart decide now not to allow our Pontius Pilates to interfere with our cricket.12 On the other hand, vindications of the anti-Pentangular stance also came from other sections in Bombay. Ramnath Anandilal Poddar wrote to the editor of The Bombay Chronicle: ‘So far as Mahatma Gandhi is concerned nobody who has been following his line of action would have had any doubt as to what he would say this year on the same subject. He has once again endorsed what he said last year. Lock, stock and barrel, he has always been proclaiming that communalism must be ended in this country once and for all.’13 A section of students across the city also came forward in favour of the anti-Pentangular agitation. Under the banner of Bombay Students’ Union and the Fort Students’ Union, they declared to carry on a vigorous propaganda against communal cricket with the slogan ‘Pentangular must not be played under any circumstances’ and appealed to the public to boycott the tournament.14 Most of the Indian cricketers who used to play in the Bombay tournament, however, ‘raised their voice in support of “communal cricket” as the “great leveller”’.15 C.K. Nayudu argued that the abolition of the Pentangular would ‘mean the funeral of Indian

cricket!’16 As he argued: ‘The tournament has not encouraged any communal differences. It has on the other hand fostered a healthy rivalry and promoted communal unity. It has brought the communities together, and not divided them.’17 More importantly, he did not consider the Ranji Trophy to be a ‘substitute for the Pentangular’ and proposed ‘to have both and several others if possible’ for the betterment of Indian cricket.18 Mushtaq Ali expressed similar opinion: ‘When politics are introduced into sport’, which he adds, should never be the case, ‘bitter feelings are aroused. It is not the game played by persons belonging to different communities which gives rise to such feelings. As for the Pentangular it has always promoted a very healthy spirit of rivalry and inculcated sporting spirit among players and the public.’19 Criticisms of Gandhi’s opinion also came to hit the newspapers. Dorab Banaji wrote in the readers’ column of The Bombay Sentinel: Coming to Mahatma Gandhi, I really cannot understand why should some people interested in cricket run up to him to ask his opinion as to whether the Pentangular should be played or not. Why should the Sage of Sevagram be brought into such a controversy? What else did those who called on him expect? Mahatma’s sphere of life is politics and not sports. Mahatma should have told those who approached him that since he knew little or nothing of the game and its merit and he had no experience whatever of the Pentangular he should not, be asked for an opinion, for or against. But how can expect Mahatma to give any other reply save one flavoured with politics as those who approached him went with strong political notion about the game.20 ‘Tallin’ of The Bombay Sentinel noted ‘a terrific wave of popular feeling’ in favour of the Pentangular. Contrary to what Gandhi or the opponents of the Pentangular argued, ‘Tallin’ gave a telling justification of the continuance of the tournament: It is like a carnival, a popular festival to which people from all over India flock. They make a holiday of it. Offices give half-day, schools have morning hours. They get together. Hindu, Muslim, Parsi, Christian—you will find heaps of Hindus in the Islam enclosure—they get together, people of all communities, of all ages, from all parts. They sit together, they chat together, they discuss their chances together, they laugh together. For

thirteen days they fraternize like this. They forget their petty feuds, they forget their communal or political dissensions. They are one in their enjoyment and excitement of the game on the field. …. it is the tournament which far from causing any splits in the communal ranks, weaves it into a whole, soothes their seething feelings for a fortnight, keeps them compact at least for that short period. The Pentangular is indeed a boon in these times when communal relations are so strained. It is an arbitrator, not a peace-breaker. The peace-breakers are indeed those who, under the cloak of communal interest, camouflage the axe they want to grind. If they really did have the communal interest so much at heart why are they so much after the Bombay Cricket Pentangular ALONE? What about the Sind Pentangular, the C.P. Pentangular, Bombay Football Pentangular, Bombay Water-polo Quadrangular, communal football at Calcutta, Madras Presidency Match? What about all these and others?21 The movement to stop the Pentangular disturbed the Bombay Pentangular Cricket Committee so much that its honourary secretary H. Lees issued a press statement which made it absolutely clear that the communal blemish labelled on it and its perceived opposition to the Ranji Trophy were both misconstructions.22 The Committee favoured the continuation of both for the sake of Indian cricket. As against this, Chimanlal Setalvad, a prominent barrister of Bombay, vindicated Gandhi’s stand against the Pentangular for the best interests of the country.23 A.F.S. Talyarkhan, arguably the best radio commentator of Pentangular cricket, refuted the argument that ‘there was nothing wrong in the Pentangular as it had never lead to rioting or bloodshed.’ For him, ‘it was not necessary to wait for bloodshed before they could say if a thing is right or wrong. They could decide that question on moral lines and not on physical lines, were they going to wait for a bloody riot at the Brabourne Stadium before they gave up communal cricket?’24 The Maharajkumar of Vizianagram expressed a similar opinion: ‘If one were to visit the stands during the Pentangulars at which the Hindus and Muslims face each other, one could see for oneself with what vengeance each community wishes the others the worst and the language used is “down with the Mussalmans” or “down with the Hindus”. It is beyond one’s comprehension how any sane thinking man could give his blessings

to such a show.’25 He believed, ‘if the Hindus have refrained from playing in the Pentangulars last year, it was because of Mahatma Gandhi, not because of gentle persuasion by the right thinking public.’26 Prof. D.B. Deodhar, another cricket stalwart of the time, shunning Pentangular cricket for its communal taint, preferred regional cricket as an alternative.27 Finally, J.C. Maitra noted with anxiety the change in the temper of the Bombay cricket scene and therefore, urged the abolition of the Pentangular: There is not the least doubt that this competition generates high communal tension among the members of the various communities. Skirmishes and even minor bloodsheds—are not uncommon between the rival parties of supporters. It is no use blinking at facts. I know there are people who consider such incidents as of no consequence. A huge communal conflagration would alone convince them of its potential danger. But those who have the best interests of the country at heart would not wait for such a day. The signs of the time are enough to show them how the wind is blowing. The thing that may have been harmless some years ago is not so today, because the times have changed so differently.28 A public meeting was organized at Chowpatty, Bombay, on 30 November to condemn the continuation of the Pentangular tournament, and it appealed to the Pentangular Committee to revise the decision. Students attending the meeting declared to stage picketing to stop the Pentangular matches. S.A. Brelvi, the editor of The Bombay Chronicle, while presiding over the meeting, succinctly put the question: ‘If you support the Pentangular, how can you oppose separate electorates, or even Pakistan?’29 Talyarkhan, dubbing the Pentangular as a ‘commercial proposition’, lamented: ‘The Pentangular has outlived its usefulness. When the greatest living Indian has condemned communal sports, if we cannot keep away from the Pentangular for one fortnight we are fit for nothing.’30 Justifications in favour of Gandhi’s position on cricket did not lag behind as well. As Adi K. Munshi wrote in a readers’ column of The Bombay Sentinel:

An amazing argument is advanced that Mahatma Gandhi knows nothing of cricket, and therefore, is not entitled to give any opinion on the question of communalism in cricket. The argument is curious. Yes, the Mahatma does not know anything of cricket, and he has never claimed to be an authority on the technicality of the game or to give any opinion thereon. … But with regard to the Pentangular, Mahatma Gandhi has given an opinion as a student of the psychology of the Indian masses, after a close and careful study of the unfortunate domestic discord and communal discussions among various sections of the Indian communities.31 The repudiation of the Mahatma In the end, nothing, not even Gandhi’s verdict, could stop the Pentangular being played in 1941, nor could it prevent the Hindus, like the previous occasion, from taking part in it. As J.C. Maitra lamented: the ‘protagonists of communal sport have ranged themselves to make common cause against the Congress. They want the edict of Mahatma Gandhi to be thrown overboard and thereby make him the laughing-stock of the sporting world.’32 When the semi-final was played between the Hindus and the Muslims at the Brabourne Stadium, the spectators, disregarding the picketing of the Bombay Students’ Union protesters with placards displaying Gandhi’s views, ‘ducked past them’ and ‘packed into the ground’.33 There is no way we can have Gandhi’s reaction to such disrespect and rebuttal of him in public life. But that Gandhi misread the public sentiment in delivering his decision becomes evident at least in the short run. As the preparations were on full swing for the 1941 Pentangular, ‘Tallin’ noted an all-round enthusiasm for it: In spite of all their vehement protests, their battery of harangues, their wild histrionics, before a handful of schoolboys at Gowalla Tank Maidan, followed up by a more desperate effort on the sands of Chowpatty before a blank-minded crowd of hawkers and holiday-makers assembled on a Sunday evening—in spite of these ‘great hearted’ rear guard actions, Pentangular preparations proceed unperturbed. Tickets are selling as briskly as ever and I am particularly happy to hear that quite a good few are going into the student community and business much as usual will be the order.

…the vast majority of the student population, veritably worship the Tournament. It is their treat of the year. It is their fun fare. It is their thrill fare. It is their topic of speculation days, even months ahead. How can you expect to deprive them of their most favourite toy, how can you expect to rid them of their excited enthusiasm by just the ill-directed teachings of misguided people.34 Tallin’s cryptic statement attracted a quick retort from none other than J.C. Maitra who wrote: The case against communalism in sport is or should be clear to the meanest understanding. People like ‘Tallin’ interested in the perpetuation of our communal differences have tried to cloud the issue by confusing its basic principle. Let it be understood that the chief objection against the Pentangular is the composition of its teams on religious basis, like the Hindu, Muslim and Parsi sides with the cries of ‘Islam in danger’ and ‘Hindus in peril’ vitiating our political atmosphere, the less we parade our religious faiths the better for the country and the nation may I ask ‘Tallin’ to show us any country to the world where sporting teams are composed on religious basis? …What we should try to avoid is that the disputes of the cricket or sporting field do not rouse the religious fanaticism of the masses.35 Yet, the Pentangular went under way, and on the eve of its start, G.R. Manjeshwar, a reader of The Bombay Sentinel, pronounced an opinion which would have probably perturbed Gandhi as well: ‘My views of the Pentangular are that they are purely psychological. No amount of controversy or paper criticism can do an ounce of good unless there is a radical change. To change Pentangular cricket is not enough. To change the entire society is necessary. Though this takes time the Pentangulars will have nothing to do with it. The fact is, the Pentangular cricket is cricket and not Hindu-Muslim riots.’36 A final note of requiem came from Kothare in an open letter to Talyarkhan: Had it not been for this Pentangular could Deodhar a ‘pacca Brahmin’ have ever lunched or dined or taken tea on the same table with Vaziralli, a ‘pacca Mussalman’—call this nothing—call this no communal harmony? Could you have ever expected P. Vithal (untouchable now belonging to schedule classes) to move freely with so-called high caste Hindus, in the

team not only that but even lead them? May I draw your attention that this was merely due to the Parsi Gymkhana that suggested to Hindu Gymkhana then to try and include P. Vithal, P. Baloo and P. Shivram—call this communal disharmony? Do you not see Hindu families with ladies sitting freely in the Islam Gymkhana without the slightest fear of being assaulted by any Mahommedan there—call this what ‘Bobby’?37 What evaded Kothare’s notice was the fact that a regional, zonal or national tournament would have provided similar opportunities for assimilation to Indian cricketers as the Pentangular did. When the UPCA resolution was discussed in a stormy BCCI meeting in Bombay on 22 January 1942, the rift among its members was appalling. The Board appointed a sub-committee ‘to go into the question of all communal and other tournaments as at present played in the country, and to make recommendations to the Board as to the future of such tournaments.’38 The sub-committee produced an ‘unsurpassable’ report for ‘sheer inconsistency’, which, on the one hand, ‘deplored communal cricket as being “likely to lead to communal rivalry”, advocated its discontinuance, (and) suggested an All-India tournament for Bombay on zonal lines instead’, but on the other hand, ‘relaxed the principle in the case of Bombay and Sind and permitted them to hold communal tournaments provided they were confined to players in their respective areas.’39 The Board, however, played a safer game by deferring its consideration till the end of the War and allowing the Pentangular to go on as usual till that time.40 Notes 1 Majumdar, Boria, Twenty-Two Years to Freedom: A Social History of Indian Cricket, New Delhi: Penguin/Viking, 2004, p. 260. 2 M.K. Gandhi’s Letter to M.G. Bhave’, Sevagram, 9 September 1941, Pyarelal Papers, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (e-book) New Delhi: Publication Division, Government of India, 1999 (hereafter CWMGE), Vol. 81, p. 73-4. 3 The Bombay Sentinel, 29 October 1941, p. 3. 4 The Times of India, 1 November 1941, p. 11.

5 Ibid., p. 8 November 1941, p. 10. 6 Sarbadhikay, Berry, Indian Cricket Uncovered, Calcutta: Illustrated News, 1945, p. 71-2. 7 Ibid., p. 72. 8 Docker, Edward, History of Indian Cricket, Delhi: Macmillan, 1976, p. 143. 9 Sen, Ronojoy, Nation at Play: A History of Sport in India. New York: Columbia University Press, 2015, p. 118. 10 The Bombay Sentinel, 1 November 1941, p. 2. 11 The Times of India, 7 November 1941, p. 9. 12 Ibid., 8 November 1941, p. 10. 13 The Bombay Chronicle, 8 November 1941, p. 8. 14 Ibid., 8 November 1941, p. 8 and 17 November 1941, p. 6; 24 November 1941, p. 5. 15 Sarbadhikay, Indian Cricket Uncovered,, p. 63. 16 The Bombay Chronicle, 13 November 1941, p. 4; The Times of India, 14 November 1941, p. 11. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 19 Ibid. 20 The Bombay Sentinel, 19 November 1941, p. 2. 21 Ibid., 20 November 1941, p. 2. 22 The Times of India, 18 November 1941, p. 8. 23 Ibid., 20 November 1941, p. 6. 24 The Bombay Chronicle, 24 November 1941, p. 5. 25 Ibid., 27 November 1941, p. 6. 26 Ibid. 27 Ibid., 28 November 1941, p. 9. 28 The Bombay Sentinel, 25 November 1941, p. 2. 29 The Bombay Chronicle, 1 December 1941, pp. 7, 9. 30 Ibid., p. 9. 31 The Bombay Sentinel, 3 December 1941, p. 2. 32 The Bombay Chronicle, 12 December 1941; cited in Guha, Ramachandra, A Corner of a Foreign Field: The Indian History of a British Sport, Delhi: Picador, 2002, p. 287. 33 Guha, A Corner of a Foreign Field, p. 286. 34 The Bombay Chronicle, 4 December 1941, p. 2. 35 Ibid., 8 December 1941, p. 2. 36 Ibid., 9 December 1941, p. 2, emphasis added. 37 Ibid., 10 December 1941, p. 2. 38 Cited Sarbadhikary, Indian Cricket Uncovered, p. 72. 39 Ibid., p. 73. 40 Ibid.

8 POLITICS AT PLAY Last Rites of the Pentangular In August 1942, as Gandhi and a host of other Congress leaders were arrested by the British government following Gandhi’s call of ‘Quit India’, the political unrest rattled the whole of India. As a result, ‘the atmosphere was hardly conducive to cricket and the tournament was suspended for a year.’1 Yet when the issue of communal sport came up as a matter of debate, H.N. Contractor told the BCCI that ‘far from retarding unity and good fellowship, communal cricket ‘had cemented many a friendship between players of different communities’; that ‘thousands of spectators rubbed shoulders as there were no watertight compartments for the Hindus, Mahomedans, Parsis or Christians’; and that ‘no disturbances, to his knowledge or anybody’s knowledge, had ever occurred during the long history of the Bombay communal matches.’2 The Pentangular, therefore, was to flourish in full swing once the tide of the movement receded. Gandhi’s last voices

In 1942, a Hindu swimming pool was inaugurated in Bombay by none other than Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, an ardent Congress nationalist and a devoted follower of Gandhi. In the words of A.F.S. Talyarkhan, ‘it would afford to the whole of India yet another example of rank communalism which obtains in a certain part of this otherwise fair city, amongst a certain class of citizens, on a certain communal waterfront.’3 As Patel was heckled by some at the opening ceremony, he asked whether ‘one student or thousand were hired’. Referring to Gandhi’s straightforward opposition to ‘communalism in everything but much more so in sport’, Talyarkhan turned the table on Patel asking him: ‘Was Mahatma Gandhi hired, too?’4 Thus challenging the dubious position of Gandhi, Patel and their Congress followers, he argued that ‘you cannot preach one thing and practice another’ and therefore, Congressmen should not blame the Muslim League for the Pakistan idea while organizing a communal waterfront under its patronage.5 It went on to show that ‘politics and Indian sport are … closely allied’.6 As Gandhi’s position on communal cricket came to be challenged in terms of his contradictory stand on other spheres of life and culture, he had to come up with an explanation about this apparent dubiousness in distinguishing sport from other issues like education. The excerpts of his interview given on 13 April 1942 bear testimony to this: Q. You have expressed yourself against communalism in cricket. Are not communal universities also to be deplored? In colleges and hostels that are open to all, deep friendships spring up and religious tolerance becomes a natural thing, Would not well-endowed chairs in common centres of learning serve the purpose of advancing different cultures? A. You are right. If we can do without communal institutions, it would be good. But I am unable to say that there should be no Muslim or Hindu Universities as I am able to say positively that there should be no communal cricket. The communal universities, if their origin is not tainted, may conceivably serve a national purpose. Thus the Hindu University and the Muslim University may, as they ought to, be seats of communal concord. But communal sports seem to be a contradiction in terms. I wholly agree with you that there should be, as there are, non-communal

colleges and hostels. Unfortunately the virus has entered even these. Let us hope that it is a passing phase.7 Gandhi’s aversion to modern sports, however, seemed to have accompanied him even in the last years of his life. In September 1946, he listed ‘village sports, gymnastics and wrestling’ as things to be shown in the Village Industries Exhibition.8 In the next month, he hinted at sports as not too useful or rather trivial when he spoke on the issue of opening more Charkha Mandals: ‘There are so many clubs formed for sports. Why should we not have organizations for useful work?’9 After Independence, the only occasion when Gandhi spoke about sports, it was to emphasize the bond of unity it inculcates. At a prayer meeting on 19 January 1948, Gandhi’s comment was commensurate with the spirit of the new nation state: ‘Muslim girls and boys should be attracted to common schools, not communal. They should mix in sports.’10 The Pentangular growing stronger Between 1943 and 1945, while the movement to stop the Pentangular continued in earnest, the so-called communal elements did not succeed to hinder the tournaments held during these years. Neither had its popularity showed any signs of wane. This became evident from newspaper reports on the 1943 tournament. As The Times of India noted in 1943: There appears to be no doubt as to the popularity of this season’s cricket festival. Youthful picketers resumed their efforts to dissuade enthusiasts from entering the Brabourne stadium, but they were good humouredly ignored and an even bigger crowd than on the previous morning greeted the rival teams on the commencement of play, a crowd steadily increasing until it was somewhat in the vicinity of the twenty thousand mark during the afternoon.11 After the conclusion of the 1943 Pentangular, the Muslim League newspaper, The Dawn, felt that the Pentangular ‘has really nothing to do with Hindu-Muslim differences that await settlement in political terms if Hindus and Muslims wish to be free; but the trumpery protest

is foisted on the situation to divert attention from the main problem and let them feel the emotional satisfaction of being busy, doing good.’12 Again, after the Muslims defeated the Hindus in a nail-biting final match in 1944, the scenes were unprecedented in the words of Vasant Raiji, an eyewitness of the match: ‘Never before had the Brabourne Stadium witnessed a match so thrilling and exciting as this. Communalism was nowhere in evidence and everyone, including the Hindus, cheered the Muslim team at the end of the match. Merchant, the Hindu captain, went to the Muslim dressing room and hugged Mushtaq Ali warmly with the words, “Well played Muslims, you deserved to win. It would have been a sad day for cricket if you had lost”.’13 Homi Mody, in his presidential address at the annual general meeting of the Cricket Club of India took up the instance to give a strong retort to the anti-Pentangualr agitators: ‘The sporting public of Bombay has given a most convincing and resounding answer to their charge that the Pentangular breeds communalism and radical ill feeling. Never in the whole history of cricket in this country have such enormous and enthusiastic crowds been seen.’14 The final over: A vindication of Gandhian politics? In November 1945 a few months before the last Pentangular was played, S.K. Roy, in the foreword to his book Bombay Pentangular, wrote: ‘Whatever the merits or demerits of communal cricket, the time was when it was the main prop of Indian cricket; even today it provides the most attractive fortnight of cricket in the land and retains a wide popularity.’15 Berry Sarbadhikary, writing at the same time, gave a final call for its abolition: ‘a tournament, however useful at one time and however exciting even to-day is no good to India when it sows the seeds of disharmony and disunity which are to grow into poisonous foliage affecting the very growth of national cricket.’16 The last of the Pentangulars was played in February 1946, the year which witnessed worst communal riots in Indian history. In such a situation, any further prospect of the continuance of the

Pentangular became remote leading to its ultimate abandonment, simply because ‘the idea of different communities playing against each other on a cricket field was considered politically dangerous’.17 As ‘politics was dividing along religious lines’, argued Mihir Bose, ‘cricket could only perpetuate these divisions by having a team of Hindus playing against a team of Muslims.’18 The death of the Pentangular, thus, became inevitable in the changed context of communal politics that led to Partition in the mid-1940s. Even Sarbadhikary, one of the strongest supporters of the anti- Pentangular movement, clearly pointed to this political backdrop for the eventual discontinuance of the Pentangular from 1946: It is ironical that the Pentangular inevitably, as it were, died in 1945, after none other than Mahatma Gandhi had decried communalism, specially in sport, while Lord Harris, the then Governor of Bombay, in ‘presenting’ cricket to India at the turn of the century, had firmly expressed the hope that this noble game would dispel many antipathic influences at work which serve to keep apart the races of the ‘East and the West’, and, in sum, bid the communities together. And yet, to the general dismay of the participants (and supporters), overseas and Indians alike, over the decades, and despite the fact that there never was any major clash among the supporters of the various participating communities, and few among the rival players, the fast-changing political climate, leading not unoften to bitter and contagious communal frenzy among the masses, left no alternative but to sound the death knell of cricket’s communal Pentangular.19 Sarbadhikary, therefore, concluded: Yes, communal cricket has to go—the sooner, the better—having outlived its usefulness, having given scope for unhealthy rivalry in the filed of national cricket, having emphasized the communal elements in games, and having threatened to inoculate young cricketing minds with the communal virus for all time to come.20 The Pentangular, thus, fell prey to acute communal politics, precipitated by riots in Calcutta and Bombay, followed by those at Noakhali and Bihar in 1946. The deteriorating communal situation in the country came to convince even the best supporters of Pentangular cricket such as Anthony de Mello, the president of

BCCI, that it should be discontinued simply because ‘it was going to interfere with the tranquility of the country’.21 India’s provincial representatives shared de Mello’s views that ‘on no account should the Pentangular be continued, if it was not in the country’s interests’.22 Since India was passing through a turbulent time, it was added by a sports correspondent of The Times of India, ‘nothing should be done which might add to the communal chaos existing in the country or jeopardize the smooth working of India’s first National Government’.23 Although there were calls for its reinstatement later, it was deemed too risky to merit a restart. The most glorious chapter of cricket in colonial India thus came to an end. The Pentangular nostalgia could be found in Mihir Bose’s remark: ‘Yet, for many in Bombay, affection for this religious cricket remained undimmed. For them it was a proof that, on the cricket field, a team from one religion, or even a racial group, could play another in perfect harmony. The idea may seem absurd today, but its supporters remained convinced that, in Indian cricket at that time, it worked and benefited the game.’24 Even Sir Donald Bradman lamented on the occasion: ‘I am not at all knowledgeable about the various religions and cults in India—for instance, I have no idea what differences divide Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, etc., but as far as I can make out they are all united in their love of cricket. What a pity the same cannot be said for all their beliefs.’25 While it is true that the tournament ‘though played on communal lines far from dividing the communities brought them together’26, its death was ensured by the virus of communal politics. The abolition might have vindicated Gandhi’s denunciation of the tournament. Yet, the partition of India could not be avoided; as Ramachandra Guha commented: ‘Neither cricket nor Gandhi could stop it.’27 Notes 1 Raiji, Vasant and Anandji Dossa, CCI and the Brabourne Stadium, 1937–87, Bombay: The CCI, 1987, p. 30. 2 Sarbadhikay, Berry, Indian Cricket Uncovered, Calcutta: Illustrated News, 1945, pp. 66-7.

3 Talyarkhan, A.F.S., On With the Game! Bombay: Hindu Kitabs, 1945, p. 35. 4 Ibid., p. 36-7. 5 Ibid., pp. 35, 37. 6 Ibid., p. 37. 7 ‘Questions Box: Why Not in Universities?’, Harijan, 19 April 1942, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (e-book) New Delhi: Publication Division, Government of India, 1999 (hereafter CWMGE), Vol. 82, p. 192. 8 Gandhi, M.K., ‘Village Industries Exhibition: What It Should be Like?’, Hindustan, 2 September 1946, CWMGE, Vol. 92, p. 97. 9 Gandhi, ‘Charkha Mandal’, Harijan Sevak, 18 October 1946, CWMGE, Vol. 92, p. 355. 10 ‘Speech at Prayer Meeting’, New Delhi, 19 January 1948, Harijan, 25 January 1948 and The Hindustan Times, 20 January 1948, CWMGE, Vol. 98, p. 271. Sushila Nayyar read out his speech to the audience since it was his silent day. 11 The Times of India, 23 November 1943; cited in Majumdar, Boria, Twenty- Two Yards to Freedom: A Social History of Indian Cricket, New Delhi: Penguin/Viking, 2004, p. 253. 12 ‘Cricket and Unity’, The Dawn, 16 December 1943; cited in Guha, Ramachandra, A Corner of a Foreign Field: The Indian History of a British Sport, Delhi: Picador, 2002, p. 291. 13 Raiji, Mohandas Menon, The Story of the Bombay Tournament: From Presidency to Pentangular, Mumbai: Ernest Publications, 2000, p. 93; cited in Majumdar, Twenty-Two Yards to Freedom, p. 230. 14 The Bombay Chronicle, 2 December 1944; cited in Majumdar, Twenty-Two Yards to Freedom, p. 253. 15 Roy, S.K., ed. Bombay Pentangular, Calcutta: Illustrated News, 1945 16 Sarbadhikary, Indian Cricket Uncovered, p. 74. 17 Bose, Mihir, A History of Indian Cricket, London: Andre Deutsch Ltd., 1990, p. 33. 18 Ibid., p. 158. 19 Sarbadhikary, ‘India’s Cricket Set-up’, in Bhattcharya, Rakhal, ed. Cricket: The Indian Way, Calcutta: Rupa Publications, 1976, p. 74. 20 Sarbadhikary, Indian Cricket Uncovered, p. 74. 21 The Times of India, 23 September 1946, p. 10. 22 Ibid. 23 Ibid. 24 Bose, The Spirit of the Game: How Modern Sport Made the Modern World, London: Constable, 2012, p. 85. 25 Excerpts from Bradman’s letter to CCI; cited in Raiji and Dossa, CCI and the Brabourne Stadium, p. 42. 26 Ibid. 27 Guha, ‘Gandhi and Cricket’. The Hindu, 30 September 2001.

9 POSTSCRIPT Cricket and Gandhi Since Independence Independence came to India on 15 August 1947 with the bitter truth of Partition—which Gandhi so earnestly opposed and fought against, but, ultimately, succumbed to. The British were gone, and for millions of Indians, there was no monolithic enemy to unite against anymore. The only savoury unity seemed to have come from the new Indian constitution declaring India as a ‘sovereign democratic republic’, to be later amended as a ‘sovereign socialist secular democratic republic’. In India, after Gandhi, while democracy became the new umbrella for subsuming the diversities of the nation, politics provided the field for playing out the game of ‘diversity in unity’. In course of 70 years of journey, democratic politics in India with all its greatness and largeness is now firmly rooted in the twin pillars of crime and corruption, thereby rendering Gandhian non-violence hardly workable as a political or social strategy, particularly in the context of growing incidences of terrorism across the country in the last 25 years or so. Politics has never been India’s unitary strength since ancient times, and independent India has proved the historical truth again and again barring on occasions of India’s wars against Pakistan and China. Rather, as Rabindranath Tagore argued, the

real strength of the Indian nation and the Indian state could be found in its society. But India is no less divisive in the social sphere than in polity, thanks to differences in class, caste, colour, religion, language, ethnicity, region, and so on. Hence, sources of unity had to be found elsewhere in independent India—the sphere inevitably is the cultural domain—where Partha Chatterjee skillfully detected a ‘sovereign Indian nation’ even before India freed herself from the British yoke.1 Cricket is arguably the strongest representative of this cultural domain in twenty-first-century India. Gandhi would certainly have been appalled by the material commerce it spins off or the excessive passion it generates, but might also have been overwhelmed by the unity it evokes in the everyday life of the nation. To Gandhi’s heart warming, cricket is after all a non-violent combat! Gandhi’s memorialization and Indian cricket Of all Indian personalities, Gandhi is by far the most memorialized. Alas! The person who abhorred materialism so profusely is inscribed on all Indian currency notes! The man who advised people not to go to courts unless as the last resort is to be found in most courtrooms across India! His birthday is celebrated in every nook and corner of the country and even outside India. You go anywhere in India from Kashmir to Kanyakumari or Manipur to Mumbai, you will find ones to hundreds of places, roads, buildings, gardens, institutions, trusts, or stadiums named after Gandhi, not to speak of the many government- sponsored memorials and programmes since his death. The great man’s busts and statues abound all over the world, postage stamps dedicated to his memory have been released, and awards and prizes instituted in his name. Thousands of books have been written on him, plays performed, and documentaries and films made while he remains a subject of study for millions across the world. Gandhi’s name and images have been used in the electronic media to convey diverse meanings and messages.2 The Gandhi cap (Gandhi topi) too is still popular among politicians and old people of India. While his ideas and messages have mostly been conveniently forgotten in a developing modern Indian society, economy and politics, the imagery

of the man in loincloth with a stick in his hand and spectacles in his eyes continues to remain integral to making and projecting India’s image as a great nation. It is here—on the plane of making India globally visible, acceptable and venerable—where Indian cricket converges with Gandhi, thereby, both becoming India’s global brands. To make the point differently, Gandhi and cricket are two of India’s most enduring attractions—India’s soft powers in a globalized world.3 A genealogical memorialization of Gandhi’s apparently remote cricket connection found an opposite in the cricket fad of Gandhi’s own blood connection, viz. Devdas, his youngest son. Devdas, an avid cricket fan, while serving as the managing editor of the Hindustan Times, ‘gave abundant coverage to sport, especially cricket’ and persuaded his paper to sponsor the scoreboard at the Feroz Shah Kotla stadium in Delhi.4 After India’s Independence, in a bid to watch his cricket idol Don Bradman play, Devdas went to London as a board member to attend a Reuter’s meeting. Having procured the complimentary ticket for one day of the Trent Bridge Test between Australia and England, Devdas, finding no hotel rooms in Nottingham, stayed in the quarters of a local jail warden and fulfilled his dream of watching Bradman mauling India’s erstwhile colonial masters on the cricket pitch.5 In India, after Gandhi, cricket’s direct connection with him was primarily through memorialization. A few sports stadiums in India have been named after Gandhi.6 Interestingly, there have been occasions, attitudes and acts which invoked Gandhi as a point of reference in Indian cricket since Independence. The most humorous example of such an analogy was with reference to Rameshchandra Gangaram Nadkarni alias ‘Bapu’ Nadkarni. Nadkarni was given the nickname ‘Bapu’, meaning ‘father’—the name Gandhi is also famously known across India. This, however, had nothing to do with his cricketing ability. The honoured prefix ‘Bapu’, for Nadkarni, referred to his Gandhian dress code of wearing typically Indian underwear. As Mihir Bose vividly narrates, ‘Like Gandhi, he did not wear conventional western-style underwear but a “longoit”, a long kite-shaped piece of cloth with a prominent V at the back which has

to be draped round the body every time it is worn. Whenever, in the dressing-room, Nadkarni changed, the Indian players used to stop whatever they were doing to watch him draping the cloth around him.’7 Post Independence, cricket’s increasing patronage and popularity had something to do with what Gandhi argued time and again with regard to the good and the evil of colonialism. Mihir Bose sums it up nicely: ‘The Congress Raj had effectively taken over from the British Raj, and cricket was now part of the Indian scene. If anything, it was more important. This was partly due to the Gandhian philosophy which sought to discriminate between the evil of imperialism and the good that the Raj wrought, but also because Pandit Nehru was more aware of cricket than Gandhi.’8 Bose also gives a unique analogy of Indian cricket of the 1950s with that of Gandhi’s recreation of ‘Ram Rajya’. He refers to the Hindu belief in the circular concept of time in which the golden age called the Ram Rajya—an ‘age of bliss, happiness, peace, prosperity’, truth, perfect governance, and so on as a result of Lord Rama’s arrival onto Earth —is followed by a series of poorer ages culminating in the Kaliyuga, the present age—‘an age of sin, debauchery, destruction and lies’, which is said to last 5,000 million years. This cycle ends with the end of the Kaliyuga and the re-emergence of Ram Rajya, which Gandhi sought to recreate.9 Bose’s analogy between this Hindu mythology and Indian cricket in the 1950s merits reproduction here: In the 1950s, Indian cricket went through something similar. It began with India’s first Test victory—after twenty-five Tests—but then came such ruin and destruction that for a time it was seriously suggested that India should lose its Test status—Pakistan and New Zealand were also to be demoted —only for the dark ages to pass and Indian cricket to re-emerge stronger and more vibrant than ever. The decade ended as it had begun with a victory. At the end of the decade, Indian beat Australia for the first time, at the beginning India beat England for the first time. Nobody in India believed that the victory over England on 10 February 1952 in Madras marked the start of a Ram Rajya in cricket.10 One of the critical features of Indian cricket since Independence was the lack of fast bowlers. The inability to produce fast bowlers was

attributed to some intriguing factors—loss of tall sturdy fast bowling geniuses from western Punjab to Pakistan as a result of Partition, poor diet along with the Hindus being averse to drinking wine and eating beef, or the age-old British logic of a hot and humid weather of the country shaping the physical constitution and mental attitude of its people, and so on. In such a context, it was quite natural, as Bose further argues, ‘Indians were largely vegetarian and mockingly referred to their attack as “non-violent cricket”.’11 Similarly, he considers the influence of Gandhi’s non-violence movement to be one of the factors for the Indians’ appalling deficiency in fast bowling.12 Gandhian metaphors on and off the pitch The transformed nature of Indian cricket since the 1980s was a result of cricket’s successful commercialization in the subcontinent which went hand in hand with the forces unleashed by globalization. The onset of satellite television and electronic media revolutionized the ways and means by which cricket across the globe came to be diffused and consumed. India was to gain most from this not only because of its success on the cricket field or its domination of the global cricket market, but because of the growth of a new fan culture identified with the assertion of an Indian identity, expression of cultural nationalism and a feeling of emotional commonality, ranging from on-the-pitch, in-stadium or post-match activities to an everyday culture of cricket, hardly discernible in European nations. The new Indian cricket fans have been visible globally, thanks to the patronage of the Indian game by the Indian diaspora. You can see the ‘Bharat Army’ (Official Indian Cricket Supporters Group Worldwide), formed by NRI cricket fans, at India’s matches everywhere outside South Asia, with painted faces, tricolour shirts and sometimes Gandhi caps, waving India’s flags and chanting the names of cricketing icons like Sachin Tendulkar, M.S. Dhoni or Virat Kohli. This new pattern of cricket fandom, which at times appropriates ‘Gandhi’ as a marker of their Indianness, has

substantially altered cricket’s traditional status as a gentleman’s game and created a new games ethic, off the pitch. The hint of Gandhian metaphor came to find an eloquent expression in the Bollywood film Lagaan, released in 2001.13 Set in the last decade of the nineteenth century, the film portrayed the stubborn fight and victory of a group of village folk in a north Indian village called Champaner on the unusual field of cricket against the British government for the waiver of land tax (lagaan) in a rainless season. The leader of the villagers in this fictional match, Bhuvan, was the protagonist of the assertion of a subaltern Indian identity against the imperial arrogance of the sadistic and ruthless British officer, Captain Russell. Beneath this apparent binary of imperialism vs nationalism, lay attempts at reforming Indian society, relieving it of its degrading barriers of caste and religion for the sake of ‘Indian’ unity.14 As the story unfolds with the overcoming of a nearly impossible task of beating the master at their own game through a series of amusing events and tense moments, barriers of caste, religion or community were broken to ensure an unlikely Indian win against the British cantonment team, signifying the demolition of the invincibility of the Raj. As Robert Cross maintains, ‘The film Lagaan clearly wishes to demonstrate that if a group of diverse Indians can put aside their communal differences, unite behind a ‘Gandhi- Tendulkar’ leader, and beat the British at their own iconic game, then they can also prevail in the anti-colonial struggle to create an independent India.’15 More importantly, Bhuvan’s team, apart from having seven caste Hindus in its rank, comprised Ismail, a Muslim; Kachra, an untouchable; and Deva, a Sikh from outside the village. The inclusion of Kachra in the team even offers a semblance to the story of Palwankar Baloo who became an untouchable hero of the Hindus in the Quadrangulars of the 1910s. The kind of inter- communal and inter-caste unity achieved in the film definitely reminds one of the Gandhian vision of Indian unity that informed both the nationalist struggle against imperialism and the establishment of a secular democratic independent India. Bhuvan, the hero of the film, thus seems to have played the role of a cricketing Gandhi to fulfil the key Gandhian ideals: fight against

imperialism, communalism and untouchability through the non- violent weapon of cricket. In an age when cricket’s erstwhile status as a gentleman’s game has been supplanted by the everyday culture of a commercialized mass spectator sport, any example of gentlemanly code or sportsman spirit on or off the field is cited as an expression of the much-cherished honest spirit of the game, sometimes inviting comparison with the Gandhian spirit of truth and honesty. In July 2011, during a Test match between England and India at Trent Bridge, English batsman Ian Bell was declared run out by the umpire after a successful appeal by the Indian fielders as Bell unwittingly left the crease assuming that the post-lunch session was over and the tea break was called thereby giving Indian fielders the opportunity to dislodge the bails. But immediately, Indian captain M.S. Dhoni revoked the umpire’s decision and brought back Bell onto the field to show respect to the game’s moral spirit. ‘It was to prove a dramatic decision as England went on to thrash India’, writes Mihir Bose.16 While many hailed Dhoni for ‘acting as a cricketing equivalent of Mahatma Gandhi’17, others criticized his act. Rekindling Gandhi’s South African connection The memorialization of Gandhi in Indian cricket cannot be complete without a reference to South Africa. When South Africa came back to the fold of international cricket in 1991, India played an instrumental role in facilitating the same. South Africa’s first visit to India in November 1991, therefore, became a memorable event arousing emotions of a Gandhian historical link among Indians who gave a passionate ovation to the South African contingent everywhere they played. As Geoff Dakin, president of the United Cricket Board of South Africa, recalled later: ‘We were in Calcutta on a goodwill visit when Jagmohan Dalmiya proposed this tour. We were, to put it mildly, thrilled. It was a long-cherished dream to tour the country of Mahatma Gandhi. We will never forget the reception we were accorded in Calcutta and at the Eden Gardens. It was special.’18 India’s return visit to South Africa in 1992 generated equally

reciprocal goodwill and emotion. R. Mohan provided a vivid account of the reception of the Indian team: From the moment they set foot on South African soil, to be precise at the Jan Smuts international airport in Johannesburg on a November day, the Indians were carried away on a tide of sentiment. The reception, even if not overwhelmingly euphoric such as the one which the South Africans experienced in Calcutta, was filled with spontaneous warmth that is all too rare in the increasingly complex world of human relations. …The friendship aspect of the tour was given such a priority that the Indian cricketers were ambassadors first and sportsmen later. The heavy flow of champagne and wit was in contrast to the abject state of neglect of the Phoenix Farm outside Johannesburg that serves as a mysterious bond between India and South Africa for decades after Mahatma Gandhi had lived there in his commune long before momentous events were to overtake his life and that of his mother nation. The meeting with Mr Nelson Mandela, with his own claim of being a ‘Gandhi’ in his fight for equality, was clearly the most memorable part of the process by which Indians were introduced into South Africa.19 In 2014, in ‘a fitting tribute to commemorating 20 years of India- South Africa relations, 20 years of South African Freedom and Democracy, and 100 years of return of Gandhiji to India from South Africa’, the Ministry of Culture in South Africa in collaboration with the National Council of Science Museums, Ministry of Culture, Government of India organized an exhibition, ‘Cricket Connects’, as a part of the Festival of India cultural events.20 The exhibition, drawing on a range of sources and images—documentary, visual and audio, highlighted the unique value of sport in illuminating the longstanding relationship between India and South Africa. The exhibition had three core themes: ‘First, it points to the long history of cricketing relations between India and South Africa, dating back to the late nineteenth century. Second, it focuses on India’s vital role in South Africa’s reintegration within the international sporting world in the early 1990s, following the end of Apartheid. Finally, the exhibition also showcases some thrilling episodes in Indo-South Africa cricket history.’21 The exhibition displayed one photograph, which showed ‘Gandhi seated with players and officials of the Greyville Cricket Club

in 1913, the same year he organized a major workers’ strike in Natal’.22 In August 2015, the cricket boards of India and South Africa—the BCCI and Cricket South Africa (CSA)—announced their decision to call all future India-South Africa bilateral series as Mahatma Gandhi- Nelson Mandela Trophy. Anurag Thakur, the BCCI president, stated on that occasion: ‘BCCI, on behalf of every citizen of our country, is able to pay tribute to these great leaders by naming the series after them, and appeals to each and every citizen of our country to imbibe their ideals and follow the path advised by them.’23 Similarly, the CSA chief executive, Haroon Lorgat, argued that naming the series after Gandhi and Mandela was ‘eternal news for our people and cricketers’. Paying tribute to Gandhi and Mandela, he said: ‘For the people of both our countries there is no greater duty than to uphold the ideals of both Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. As cricket- loving people, we must fight hard to win on the field of play but never forget to do battle in the spirit of these two great men.’24 The naming of the series that started on 2 October 2015, i.e. Gandhi’s birthday, assumed ‘an iconic, traditional status’, to use the words of Dave Richardson, the then International Cricket Council (ICC) chief executive. For cricket historian and Gandhi scholar, Ramachandra Guha, this name of the trophy looked ‘inapt’ and ‘perhaps also inept’, because ‘Mohandas Gandhi had little interest in sport, and on occasion actively disparaged it. … So far, as I can tell, Gandhi did not spontaneously or voluntarily play or watch sports after he left school.’25 Using Bombay politician and lawyer, K.F. Nariman’s reference to Gandhi as ‘the least sportive saint’, he went on to argue that unlike many other Indian national leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru or C. Rajagopalachari,26 Gandhi was ‘so sceptical of the values and uses of the modern sports of cricket, hockey and football.’27 He, therefore, concluded: It is hardly likely that the mandarins of the BCCI know either of Mandela’s interest in sport or of Gandhi’s supreme disregard of sport. They just wanted to have some of the glow of those hallowed names rub off on them. … It should really have been named the Kallis-Tendulkar Trophy, to

honour two sublimely gifted players, who have inspired and enthralled cricket fans in India, South Africa, and beyond.28 I beg to differ from Guha on two counts. First, Gandhi was a major inspiration behind Nelson Mandela’s struggle against apartheid in South Africa. Mandela himself admitted Gandhi’s influence with reference to the national movement in South Africa whenever he visited India. Second, India’s role in bringing back South Africa to the folds of mainstream cricket too was pivotal. Hence, it was in the fitness of things that a strong historical connection was formalized through the cultural memorialization of naming the trophy after their names. The IPL and Gandhi’s dilemma Had Gandhi been alive, would he approve of the Indian Premier League (IPL)? The answer could be both no and yes. Let us examine first why it could be a no. As Mario Rodrigues argued, ‘Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy of austerity, social justice and abstinence may be anathema to today’s post-liberalized generation of Indians and its ideologues. He would have surely disapproved of the crass materialism of the Indian Premier League.’29 Big money, Bollywood and cheerleaders would certainly be agents of impurity for an avidly ascetic Gandhi, diluting, or rather, destroying the spirit of the game. Gandhi would also certainly disapprove strongly of the IPL’s decision to ban Pakistani players and commentators from the tournament since 2008 after the alleged ‘Pakistan-sponsored’ terrorist attack on Mumbai on 26 November 2008. As some elements from Pakistan come to India with cricket bats and balls while others visit with AK47 and bombs, Gandhi would have emphasized on the good intention of the former. But, make no mistake about it—his brand of non-violence would have encouraged the latter to multiply their action to disturb the tranquility of the Indian nation! Interestingly, the IPL provides the perfect platform for promoting international amity through non-violent cricket. In the first edition of the IPL, the same violent Kolkatans who had made a villain of Pakistan’s Shoaib Akhtar for his ‘duplicitous’ involvement in Sachin

Tendulkar’s run out in an Indo-Pakistan Asia Test Championship match held at the Eden Gardens, Kolkata, in early 1999, cheered for him when he played for the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) at the same venue in 2008—an intriguing example of how hatred and aggression are overcome by love and passion for the game. Gandhi would have loved to see such transformation on the cricket field. In fact, Gandhi would have been in deep strife given the choice of favouring or stopping the IPL. It was a much better choice for him in 1940 to declare the Bombay Pentangular unwelcome. But in the twenty-first century when hatred and violence have generated so much aggression and terrorism across the world, it would have been difficult for Gandhi to denounce the IPL straightaway, simply because it provides an ideal space for transnational brotherhood where not only cricketers of otherwise opposing nations rub shoulders for a common cause, but fans, commentators and people of diverse nationalities come together to support the imagery of an Indian city or regions like Kolkata, Delhi, Punjab, or Gujarat. Gandhi might have been overwhelmed by such unifying spirit of cricket. Last word Gandhi is arguably the most globalized icon of India, as is cricket among Indian sports. Yet, given his distinctive life, religion, ideas and actions, the Gandhian world is far removed from the world of Indian cricket which has come to imply commerce, politics, religion and life to more than a billion Indians, albeit in a completely different sense. The divine image of Gandhi has almost had a replication in the deification of Sachin Tendulkar as a cricketing God. Whatever be the connections between the Mahatma and the game during his lifetime or after, both are integral to reimagining the Indian nation in the new century. Had Gandhi been alive, he might have been the happiest person on this planet to see cricket’s becoming of a great unifier of hearts in independent India, irrespective of class, caste, religion, language, ethnicity or region, albeit with an Indian revolution fundamentally transforming the world of cricket in the new century. Gandhi and cricket, thus, remain globally, two of India’s most

enduring images, phenomena and legacies that bind the nation strongly. And they are here to stay for years to come. Notes 1 Chatterjee, Partha, The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories, Calcutta: Oxford University Press, 1995, Chapter 1: ‘Whose Imagined Community?’ 2 A very interesting study in this regard is: Kumar, Shanti, Gandhi Meets Prime Time: Globalization and Nationalism in Indian Television, Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2006. It interrogates the various roles that Mahatma Gandhi plays in the articulation of nationalism to electronic capitalism. 3 The idea of soft power has been in vogue in the discourses of international politics and relations since Harvard University’s professor Joseph S. Nye Jr first coined the term and then popularized it in a number of influential writings with reference to America’s foreign relations in the post-Cold War era. For details on this, see Nye Jr, Joseph S., Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power, New York: Basic Books, 1990; The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Super Power Can’t Go It Alone, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002; Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, New York: Public Affairs, 2004; ‘Public Diplomacy and Soft Power’, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 616, Public Diplomacy in a Changing World (March 2008): 94-109. Also see Hayden, Craig, The Rhetoric of Soft Power: Public Diplomacy in Global Contexts, Lanham: Lexington Books, 2012; Melissen, Jan, ed. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. In the context of India, the idea of soft power has gained currency in the twenty-first century, thanks to the speeches and writings of some politicians and scholars. At present, it is an integral part of India’s public diplomacy in a globalized world order. For details, see Tharoor, Shashi, ‘India as a Soft Power’, India International Centre Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Summer 2008), pp. 32-45; Wagner, Christian, ‘India’s Soft Power: Prospects and Limitations’, India Quarterly, Vol. 66, No. 4 (2010), pp. 333- 342; Gupta, Amit Kumar, ‘Commentary on India’s Soft Power and Diaspora’, International Journal on World Peace, Vol. 25, No. 3 (September 2008), pp. 61-68; Hall, Ian, ‘India’s New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power and the Limits of Government Action’, Asian Survey, Vol. 52, No. 6 (November/December 2012) pp. 1089-1110; Kugiel, Patryk, ‘India’s Soft Power in South Asia’, International Studies, Vol. 49, Nos. 3-4 (2012), pp. 351-76

4 Guha, Ramachandra, ‘Gandhi: Did He Spin More Than Khadi?’ Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack 2008, http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/377985.html (Accessed 29 October 2016); Kumar, Ram, ‘Remembering Mahatma Gandhi’s Tryst with Cricket’, 2 October 2015, http://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/remembering-mahatma-gandhis-tryst- with-cricket (Accessed 29 October 2016). 5 I came across this story first in Ramachandra Guha’s Spin and Other Turns: Indian Cricket’s Coming of Age (New Delhi: Penguin Books, 1994, p. 5). Also see Guha, ‘Gandhi: Did He Spin More Than Khadi?; Kumar, ‘Remembering Mahatma Gandhi’s Tryst with Cricket’; and Mukherjee, Abhishek, ‘Gandhi Jayanti: Mahatma Gandhi’s Cricket Connections and an XI’, 2 October 2014, http://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/gandhi-jayanti-mahatma-gandhis- cricket-connections-and-an-xi-194452 (Accessed 29 October 2016). 6 I recall three stadiums in this regard: Mahatma Gandhi Stadium in Salem in Tamil Nadu; Gandhi Stadium (also known as Burlton Park or B.S. Bedi Stadium) in Jalandhar, Punjab; and Ajjarakadu Mahatma Gandhi District Stadium at Udipi, Karnataka. 7 Bose, Mihir, A History of Indian Cricket, New Delhi: Rupa Publications, 1990, pp. 224-25. Also see Mukherjee, ‘Gandhi Jayanti’. 8 Bose, A History of Indian Cricket, p. 165. 9 I have followed Mihir Bose’s imagery about this Hindu mythology because of his unique way of making the analogy between mythology and cricket work so effectively. 10 Bose, A History of Indian Cricket, p. 177. 11 Ibid., p. 206. 12 Ibid. 13 The film was directed by Ashutosh Gowariker and starred by Aamir Khan and Gracy Singh. 14 For various layers of interpretation on Lagaan, see Majumdar, Boria, ‘Politics of Leisure in Colonial India: “Lagaan”: Invocation of a Lost History’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36, No. 35 (1 September 2011), pp. 3399-3404; Mannathukkaren, Nissim, ‘Subalterns, Cricket and the “Nation”’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 36, No. 49 (8 December 2001), pp. 4580-88; Chakraborty, Chandrima, ‘Subaltern Studies, Bollywood and Lagaan’, Economic and Political Weekly, 10 May 2003, pp. 1879-84; Anand, S., ed. Brahmans & Cricket: Lagaan’s Millennial Purana and Other Myths, Pondicherry: Navayana, 2003; Gooptu, Sharmistha, ‘Cricket or Cricket Spectacle? Looking beyond Cricket to Understand Lagaan’, The International Journal of the History of Sport, Vol. 21, Nos. 3-4 (2004), pp. 531-48; Farred, Grant, ‘The Double Temporality of Lagaan: Cultural Struggle and Postcolonialism’, Journal of Sport and Social Issues, Vol. 28 (May 2004), pp. 93-114; Stradtler, Florian, ‘“Lagaan” and Its Audience Responses’, Third

World Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 3, Connecting Cultures (2005), pp. 517-24; Lichtner, Giacomo and Sekhar Bandyopadhyay, ‘Indian Cinema and the Presentist Use of History: Conceptions of “Nationhood” in Earth and Lagaan’, Asian Survey, Vol. xlviii, No. 3 (May-June 2008), pp. 431-52; Cross, Robert, ‘Brotherly Hands Across the Cricket Pitch: Lagaan as Gandhian Post- Colonial “India”’, Doshisha Studies in Language and Culture, Vol. 11, No. 4 (2009), pp. 493-514. 15 Cross, ‘Brotherly Hands across the Cricket Pitch’, p. 502. 16 Bose, Mihir, The Spirit of the Game: How Modern Sport Made the Modern World, London: Constable, 2012, p. 75. 17 Ibid. 18 Cited in Majumdar, Twenty-Two Years to Freedom: A Social History of Indian Cricket, New Delhi: Penguin/Viking, 2004, p. 410. 19 Mohan, R., ‘An Enchanting Journey into Africa’, Indian Cricket, 1993, p. 43. 20 Cricket Connects: Indo-South African Cricket Relations, Festival of India in South Africa 2014, Ministry of Culture, Government of India, 2014, p. 1. 21 Ibid., p. 2. 22 Ibid., p. 22. 23 ‘India, South Africa to play Gandhi-Mandela series’, 31 August 2015, http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-south-africa-2015- 16/content/story/915937.html (Accessed 13 February 2017) 24 Ibid. 25 Guha, Ramachandra, ‘Why Gandhi would have been appalled by the “Gandhi-Mandela Trophy”’, The Telegraph, 31 October 2015 and ESPNCricinfo, 31 October 2015. http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/935051.html (Accessed 13 February 2017) 26 For discussions on the relations of Nehru and Gopalachari with cricket, see Ratnam, K.V. Gopala, ‘Nehru: The Allrounder’, Sport and Pastime, Vol. XVI, No. 46 (17 November 1962), p. 5; and ‘The Non-Playing Cricketer’, Sport and Pastime, Vol. XVI, No. 42 (20 October 1962), pp. 14-15. 27 Guha, ‘Why Gandhi would have been appalled by the “Gandhi-Mandela Trophy”’. 28 Ibid. 29 Rodrigues, Mario, ‘When Bapu kicked the ball’. Livemint, 4 June 2010. http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/jQeJWmFWK8GWnrw5yNpaeL/WhenBapuk ickedtheball.html (Accessed 13 February 2017).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It came to me as a pleasant surprise when Rudra Sharma of the Rupa Publications approached me via his colleague and my old friend Shambhu Sahu for writing this book. This was because I am neither a specialist on Gandhi nor am I a cricket historian per se. Although I have developed a different sense of appreciation for both over time. The idea of the book was entirely Rudra’s, and it was so intriguing that I could not but agree despite a pressing deadline. Yet, the timing of the proposal was perfect, as I was then working on the complex interplay between community, communalism and cricket in colonial India as part of setting the wider background of my ongoing venture to study the history of India-Pakistan cricket. However, I soon found my studies on Gandhi and cricket, till that date, inadequate to pull off what I thought I intended to write. Hence collecting, reading and rereading new and old sources began at a hectic pace, and my quirky and scattered ideas about a strange rendezvous between Gandhi and cricket, ultimately, took shape in the form of this book. My thanks to all who have encouraged, supported, appreciated and criticized my research over the years. I am grateful to the late Dhruba Gupta for presenting an otherwise unknown Gandhi before me during my university years, and to Boria Majumdar for giving me access to his personal collections over the years. I thank Jayanta Kumar Ray, Arun Bandopadhyay, Muntassir Mamoon, Sreemoyee Tarafder, Souvik Naha, Satyajit Ash, Urvi Mukhopadhyay, Arun Hota, Sipra Mukherjee, Arunabha Adhikari, Soma Sur, Subhamita Chaudhury, Shamee Bhattacharya, Debaprasad Mandal, Aatrayee

Mukherjee, Anita Bagchi, Anirban Mukherjee, Umakanta Roy, Maitrayee Sarkar, Manikarnika Dutta and Sayantan Bose for their constant inspiration and support. I must also thank the staff of the National Library and the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture Library (Kolkata), West Bengal State University Central Library (Barasat), Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (New Delhi) and H.D. Kanga Memorial Sports Library (Mumbai). Of course, it has been a nice experience to work with the Rupa team. My parents have been a constant source of sustenance all through. The support I have enjoyed from Mingki, Kumaresh, Papui, Mama, Kaku, Kakima, Jhuma and Sudarshan has been most precious. The bitterness with which my son Mono treats me inspires me to write more to express myself. However, without love and care from Tania, this book could never be written.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Newspapers and Periodicals Amrita Bazar Patrika Harijan Indian Opinion Navajivan The Bombay Chronicle The Bombay Sentinel The Times of India Young India Magazines Indian Cricket Indian Cricket Almanack Sport and Pastime Writings of M.K. Gandhi 1999. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi (e-book). New Delhi: Publication Division, Government of India. (CWMGE). Vols. 1-98. 1925. An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with Truth. Trans. in English by Mahadev Desai (e-book). Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House. 1938. Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule (e-book). Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House. Memoirs and Autobiographies Ali, Syed Mishtaq. 1967. Cricket Delightful. Delhi: Rupa Publications.

Kardar, A.H. 1987. Memoirs of an Alrounder. Lahore: Progressive Publishers. Talyarkhan. A.F.S. 1945. On With the Game! Bombay: Hindu Kitabs. Books Ali, Shanti Sadiq, ed. 1994. Gandhi and South Africa. New Delhi: Hind Pocket Books. Alter, Joseph. 2000. Gandhi’s Body: Sex, Diet and the Politics of Nationalism. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Anand, S., ed. 2003. Brahmans & Cricket: Lagaan’s Millennial Purana and Other Myths. Pondicherry: Navayana. Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Rev. edn, New York: Verso. Andrews, C.F. 1929. Mahatma Gandhi’s Ideas Including Selections from His Writings. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd. Ashton, S.R. 1982. British Policy towards the Indian States, 1905–39. London: Curzon Press. Bakshi, S.R. 1988. Gandhi and Indians in South Africa. New Delhi: Antique Publishers. Bandopadhyayay, Anu. 1964. Bahuroopee Gandhi. e-book. Basham, A.L. and Arun Bhattacharya. 1988. The Father of the Nation: Life and Message of Mahatma Gandhi. New Delhi: Ashish Publishing House. Bateman, Anthony and Jeffrey Hill, eds. 2011. The Cambridge Companion to Cricket. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bhana, Surendra and Golam H. Vahed. 2005. The Making of a Political Reformer: Gandhi in South Africa. Delhi: Manohar. Bhattacharya, Rakhal, ed. 1976. Cricket: The Indian Way. Calcutta: Rupa & Co. Bhattacharya, Sabyasachi, ed. 1997. The Mahatma and the Poet: Letters and Debates between Gandhi and Tagore. New Delhi: National Book Trust. Bose, Mihir. 1990. A History of Indian Cricket. London: Andre Deutsch Ltd. _________. 2012. The Spirit of the Game: How Modern Sport Made the Modern World. London: Constable. _________. 2006. The Magic of Indian Cricket. London: Routledge. Bose, Nirmal Kumar. 1953. My Days with Gandhi. Calcutta: Nishana. Britton, Burnett. 2000. Gandhi Arrives in South Africa. Texas: Greenleaf Books. Bromber, Katria, Birgit Krawietz and Joseph Maguire, eds. 2013. Sport across Asia: Politics, Cultures and Indentities. London: Routledge. Brown, Judith. 1990. Gandhi: Prisoner of Hope. Delhi: Oxford University Press. ____________. 1972. Gandhi’s Rise to Power: Indian Politics, 1915–22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ____________. 1977. Gandhi and Civil Disobedience: The Mahatma in Indian Politics, 1928–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, Judith M. and Martin Prozesky, eds. 1996. Gandhi and South Africa: Principles and Politics, Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press. Brown, Rebecca M. 2010. Gandhi’s Spinning Wheel and the Making of India. London: Routledge. Cashman, Richard. 1979. Patrons, Players and the Crowd: The Phenomenon of Indian Cricket. Calcutta: Orient Longman. Chakrabarty, Bidyut, ed. 2003. Communal Identity in India: Its Construction and Articulation in the Twentieth Century. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. ___________. 2007. Mahatma Gandhi: A Historical Biography. New Delhi: Roli Books. Chakraborty, Gargi. 1987. Gandhi: A Challenge to Communalism: A Study of Gandhi and Hindu-Muslim Problem, 1919–1929. New Delhi: Eastern Books. Chandra, Bipan, et al. 1989. India’s Struggle for Independence, 1857–1947. New Delhi: Penguin Books. Chatterjee, Partha. 1995. The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Calcutta: Oxford University Press. Chattopadhyay, Haraprasad. 1970. Indians in Africa. Calcutta: Bookland Pvt. Ltd. 2014. Cricket Connects: Indo-South African Cricket Relations. Festival of India in South Africa 2014. Ministry of Culture, Government of India. Dalton, Dennis. 1993. Nonviolence in Action: Gandhi’s Power. New York: Columbia University Press. Darukhanawala, H.D. 1935. Parsis and Sports and Other Kindred Subjects. Bombay: Author. DeJong, Constance and Philip Glass. 1983. Satyagraha: M.K. Gandhi in South Africa: 1893–1914: The Historical Material and Libretto Comprising the Opera’s Book. New York: Tanam Press. De Mello, Anthony. 1959. Portrait of Indian Sport. Delhi: Macmillan. Deodhar, D.B. 1948 March of Indian Cricket. Calcutta: Illustrated News. Desai, Ashwin and Goolem Vahed. 2015. The South African Gandhi: Stretcher- Bearer of Empire. California: Stanford University Press. Docker, Edward. 1976. History of Indian Cricket. Delhi: Macmillan. Doke, Joseph J. 2006. M.K. Gandhi: An Indian Patriot in South Africa. Obscure Press. Eskari. 1945. C.K. Nayadu: A Cricketer of Charm. Calcutta: Illustrated News. Fischer, Louis. 1951. Mahatma Gandhi: His Life and Times. London: Jonathan Cape. ___________, ed. 1962. The Essential Gandhi: An Anthology. New York: Random House. Framjee, J.M. 1905. Stray Thoughts on Indian Cricket. Bombay: Times Press. Gandhi, Rajmohan. 2006. Mohandas: A True Story of a Man, His People and an Empire. New Delhi: Penguin/Viking. Ganguly, Debjani and John Docker, eds. 2007. Rethinking Gandhi and Nonviolent Relationality. London: Routledge.

Ghose, Prafulla Chandra. 1970. Mahatma Gandhi: As I Saw Him. Delhi: S. Chand & Co. Gonsalves, Peter. 2012. Khadi: Gandhi’s Mega Symbol of Subversion. New Delhi: Sage Publications. Guha, Ramachandra. 2001. An Anthropologist among the Marxists and Other Essays. Delhi: Permanent Black. ___________. 2002. A Corner of a Foreign Field: The Indian History of a British Sport. Delhi: Picador. ___________. 2013. Gandhi before India. New Delhi: Allen Lane. ___________. 1994. Spin and Other Turns: Indian Cricket’s Coming of Age. New Delhi: Penguin Books. ___________, ed. 2010. Makers of Modern India. New Delhi: Viking. Guha, Ramachandra and T.G. Vaidyanathan, eds. 1994. An Indian Cricket Omnibus. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Guttmann, Allen. 1994. Games and Empires: Modern Sports and Cultural Imperialism. New York: Columbia University Press. Hayden, Craig. 2012. The Rhetoric of Soft Power: Public Diplomacy in Global Contexts. Lanham: Lexington Books. Holt, Richard. 1989. Sport and the British: A Modern History. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Hunt, James D. 1986. Gandhi and the Nonconformists: Encounters in South Africa. Columbia: South Asia Books. Hutchins, Francis. 1967. Illusion of Permanence: British Imperialism in India. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Huttenback, Robert A. 1971. Gandhi in South Africa. New York: Cornell University Press. Jeffrey, Robin, ed. 1978. People, Princes and Paramount Power: Society and Politics in the Indian Princely States. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Johari, Pushkar. 1999. Cricket Vignettes, Old Masters, Memories. New Delhi: Minerva Press. Jones, E. Stanley. 1948. Mahatma Gandhi: An Interpretation. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Joshi, P.S. 1980. Mahatma Gandhi in South Africa. P.S. Joshi. Kapoor, Pramod. 2016. Gandhi: An Illustrated Biography. New Delhi: Roli Books. Karunakaran, K.P. 1969. New Perspectives on Gandhi. Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study. ____________. 1985. Gandhi: Interpretations. New Delhi: Gitanjali Publishing House. Kincaid, Charles A. 1931. The Land of ‘Ranji’ and ‘Duleep’. Edinburgh & London: William Blackwood & Sons Ltd. Kovalsky, Susan Joan. 1971. Mahatma Gandhi and His Political Influence in South Africa, 1893–1914; A Selective Bibliography. Johannesburg: University of Witwatersrand.

Kripalini, Krishna. 1965. Gandhi: A Life. New Delhi: National Book Trust. Kripalini, J.B. 1970. Gandhi: His Life and Thought. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Kumar, Shanti. 2006. Gandhi Meets Prime Time: Globalization and Nationalism in Indian Television. Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Lelyveld, Joseph. 2011. Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle with India. New Delhi: HarperCollins. Maitra, J.C. 1965. Indian Sports Flashback. Bombay: The Author. Majumdar, Boria. 2006. An Illustrated History of Indian Cricket. New Delhi: Roli Books. ___________. 2005. ed. Indian Cricket Through the Ages: A Reader. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. ___________. 2004. Once Upon a Furore: Lost Pages of Indian Cricket. New Delhi: Yoda Press. ___________. 2004. Twenty-Two Years to Freedom: A Social History of Indian Cricket. New Delhi: Penguin/Viking. ____________, ed. 2013. The Times of India Sporting Times: The 175 Years of Journey of Indian Sports. New Delhi: Bennett & Coleman Ltd. Malik, Malti et al. 2016. CBSE 9: Saraswati Social Science Second Term. Rev. edn. New Delhi: New Saraswati House. Mangan, J.A. 2000. Athleticism in Victorian and Edwardian Public School: The Emergence and Consolidation of an Educational Ideology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981 and London: Frank Cass (with a new introduction). ___________, ed. 1992. The Cultural Bond: Sport, Empire, Society. London: Frank Cass. ___________. 1998. The Games Ethic and Imperialism: Aspects of the Diffusion of an Ideal. London: Frank Cass. Mangan, J.A. and Fan Hong, eds. 2003. Sport in Asian Society: Past and Present, London: Frank Cass. Mani, P. 1989. The Secret of Mahatma Gandhi: The Harmonic Counterpoint. Bangalore: Arnold Publishers. Maqsood, M.H. 1940. Who’s Who in Indian Cricket. Delhi: The Author. Markovits, Claude. 2004. The Un-Gandhian Gandhi: The Life and Afterlife of the Mahatma. Delhi: Permanent Black. Mazumdar, Bharati, ed. 2003. Gandhi’s Non-Violence in Theory and Practice. Mumbai: Mani Bhavan Gandhi Sangrahalaya. Mehta, Nalin, ed. 2008. Television in India: Satellites, Politics and Cultural Change. London: Routledge. Melissen, Jan, ed. 2005. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Metcalf, Thomas R. 1964. The Aftermath of Revolt: India 1857–1870. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Mukherjee, Sujit. 2002. An Indian Cricket Century: Selected Writings, ed. Ramachandra Guha. Hyderabad: Orient Longman. Mukherji, Raju. 2005. Cricket in India: Origin and Heroes. New Delhi: UBSPD. Nanda, B.R. 1958. Mahatma Gandhi: A Biography. Delhi: Oxford University Press. __________. 1985. Gandhi and His Critics, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nandy, Ashis. 1989. The Tao of Cricket: On Games of Destiny and the Destiny of Games. London: Viking. __________. 1980. At the Edge of Psychology: Essays in Politics and Culture. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Narain, Iqbal. 1962. The Politics of Racialism: A Study of the Indian Minority in South Africa Down to the Gandhi-Smuts Agreement. Agra: Shiva Lal Agarwala. Nayadu, Chandra. 1995. C.K. Nayadu: A Daughter Remembers. Calcutta: Rupa Publications. Nehru, Jawaharlal. 1949. Mahatma Gandhi. Calcutta: Signet Press. Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 1990. Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. New York: Basic Books. ___________. 2004. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs. ___________. 2011. The Future of Power. New York: Public Affairs. ___________. 2002. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pachai, Bridglal. 1969. Mahatma Gandhi in South Africa, Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations. Pandey, Gyanendra. 1990. The Construction of Communalism in Colonial North India. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Paranjape, Makarand R. 2014. The Death and Afterlife of Mahatma Gandhi. London: Routledge. Partab Ramchand. 1977. Great Moments in Indian Cricket. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House. ___________. 2004. India’s Captians: From Nayadu to Ganguly. New Delhi: Penguin. Patel, J.M. Framjee. 1905. Stray Thoughts on Indian Cricket. Bombay: Times Press. Patil, V.T. 1988. Mahatma Gandhi and the Civil Disobedience Movement. Delhi: Renaissance Publishing House. Pavri, M.E. 1901. Parsi Cricket. Bombay: J.B. Marzan & Co. Polak, Milie Graham. 1931. Mr. Gandhi: The Man. Compiled by C.F. Andrews. London: George Allen & Unwin. Prabhu, R.K. 1954. This Was Bapu: One Hundred and Fifty Anecdotes Relating to Mahatma Gandhi. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House. Puri, Bindu. ed. 2001. Mahatma Gandhi and His Contemporaries. Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study.

Pyarelal. 1965. Mahatma Gandhi. Vol. 1. The Early Phase. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House. Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli, ed. 1956. Mahatma Gandhi: Essays and Reflections on His Life and Work. Bombay: Jaico Publishing House. Raghuramaraju, A. ed. 2006. Debating Gandhi: A Reader. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Raiji, Vasant and Anandji Dossa. 1987. CCI and the Brabourne Stadium, 1937– 87. Bombay: The CCI. Raiji, Vasant and Mohandas Menon. 2000. The Story of the Bombay Tournament: From Presidency to Pentangular. Mumbai: Ernest Publications. Raiji, Vasant. 1989. B.K. Nayadu: The Shahenshah of Indian Cricket. Bombay: Marine Sports. Raleigh, Sir Thomas. 1906. Lord Curzon in India: Being a selection from his speeches as Viceroy and Governor General. 1898–1905. London: Macmillan. Ramachandran, G. and T.K. Mahadevan, eds. 1967. Gandhi—His Relevance for Our Times. New Delhi: Gandhi Peace Foundation. Ramagundam, Rahul. 2008. Gandhi’s Khadi: A History of Connection and Conciliation. Delhi: Orient Longman. Ramaswami, N.S. 1976. Indian Cricket: A Complete History. New Delhi: Abhinav Publications. RB. 1957. Indian Cricket Cavalcade. Calcutta: Eastlight Book House. Reddy, E.S. 1995. Gandhiji’s Vision of a Free South Africa. New Delhi: Sanchar Publishing House. Rodrigues, Mario. 2003. Batting for the Empire: A Political Biography of Ranjitsinhji. New Delhi: Penguin. Ross, Alan. 1983. Ranji: Prince of Cricketers. London: Collins. Rostow, W.W. 1960. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Roy, S.K. ed. 1945. Bombay Pentangular. Calcutta: Illustrated News. Sanyal, Saradindu. 1972. 40 Years of Test Cricket: India-England (1932–1971). New Delhi: Thomson Press. Sarkar, Sumit. 1983. Modern India, 1885–1947. Delhi: Macmillan. Sarbadhikary, Berry, ed. 1946. Presenting Indian Cricket. Calcutta: A. Mukherjee. __________. 1945. Indian Cricket Uncovered. Calcutta: Illustrated News. Sen, Ronojoy. 2015. Nation at Play: A History of Sport in India. New York: Columbia University Press. Shah, Ghanshyam, ed. 2013. Re-reading Hind Swaraj: Modernity and Subalterns. New Delhi: Routledge. Shah, Gunvant. 1982. Gandhi for the New Generation. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House. Singh, Mubarak. 1944. Mahatma Gandhi’s Confessions. Lahore: Hero Publications.

Sorabjee, Shapoorje. 1897. A Chronicle of Cricket among Parsees and the Struggle: Europen Polo versus Native Cricket. Bombay: Author. Srivastava, Ravi Kant. 1992. The Director Special Book of Cricketing Controversies. Calcutta: Ritam Communications. Swan, Maureen. 1985. Gandhi: The South African Experience. Johannesburg: Ravan Press. Tandon, Vishwanath. n.d. Is Gandhi Out of Date? Mumbai: Mumbai Sarvodaya Mandal, Gandhi Book Centre. Tendulkar, D.G. 1951–54. Mahatma: Life of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Vols. 1-8. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Terchek, Ronald. 1998. Gandhi: Struggle for Autonomy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. Thompson, Edward. 1978. The Making of the Indian Princes. London: Curzon Press. Thomson, Mark. 1993. Gandhi and His Ashrams. Mumbai: Popular Prakashan. Upadhyaya, J.M., ed. 1965. Mahatma Gandhi As a Student. New Delhi: The Director, Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Uppal, J.N. 1995. Gandhi, Ordained in South Africa. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India. Valles, Carlos G. 2012. Gandhi: The Alternative to Violence. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House. Varma, Ravindra. 2001. Gandhi in Anecdotes. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House. Verma, Rajesh. 2010. Gandhian Non-violence and Satyagraha. Jaipur: ABD Publishers, 2010. Wagg, Stephen, ed. 2005. Cricket and National Identity in the Postcolonial Age. London: Routledge. Weber, Thomas. 2007. Gandhi as Disciple and Mentor. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press. Wolpert, Stanley. 2001. Gandhi’s Passion: The Life and Legacy of Mahatma Gandhi. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Articles Ahmed, Nizar. 2001. ‘A Note on Gandhi, Nation and Modernity’. Social Scientist Vol. 34, Nos. 5/6 (May-June): 50-69. Alter, Joseph S. 1993. ‘The Body of One Color: Indian Wrestling, the Indian State and Utopian Somatics’. Cultural Anthropology Vol. 8, No. 1: 49-72. __________. 1996. ‘Gandhi’s Body, Gandhi’s Truth: Nonviolence and the Biomoral Imperative of Public Health’. The Journal of Asian Studies Vol. 55,

No. 2 (May): 301-322. __________. 2004. ‘Indian Clubs and Colonialism: Hindu Masculinity and Muscular Christianity’. Comparative Studies in History and Society Vol. 46, No. 3: 497-534. __________. 1994. ‘Somatic Nationalism: Indian Wrestling and militant Hinduism’. Modern Asian Studies Vol. 28, No. 3: 557-588. Amin, Shahid. 1985. ‘Gandhi as Mahatma: Gorakhpur District, Eastern UP, 1921- 2’. In Ranajit Guha, ed. Subaltern Studies III: Writings on South Asian History and Society, 1-63. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Balaram, Singanapalli. 2003. ‘Gandhi’s Retrieval of Indigenous Culture’. India International Centre Quarterly Vol. 29, Nos. ¾ (Winter 2002-Spring 2003): 14-24. Bandyopadhyay, Kausik. 2008. ‘“Coolie Indians”, “Black Kaffirs” and A Young Indian Barrister: A Nuanced Look at Gandhi’s Politics in South Africa’. Karotoya (Journal of the Department of History, North Bengal University) Vol. II (March): 62-71. Becker, Carol. 2006. ‘Gandhi’s Body and Further Representations of War and Peace’. Art Journal Vol. 65, No. 4: 78-95. Chakraborty, Chandrima. 2003. ‘Subaltern Studies, Bollywood and Lagaan’. Economic and Political Weekly (10 May): 1879-84. Chimni, B.S. 2012. ‘The Self, Modern Civilization and International Law: Learning from Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj or Home Rule’. The European Journal of International Law Vol. 23, No. 4: 1159-73. Cross, Robert. 2009. ‘Brotherly Hands Across the Cricket Pitch: Lagaan as Gandhian Post-Colonial “India”’. Doshisha Studies in Language and Culture Vol. 11, No. 4: 493-514. Dalton, Dennis. 1969. ‘Gandhi: Ideology and Authority’. Modern Asian Studies Vol. 3, No. 4: 377-393. Dhupelia-Mesthrie, Uma. 2007. ‘Gandhi’s South African Family’. India International Centre Quarterly Vol. 34, No. 2: 34-45. Deb Barman, Priyanka. 2016. ‘Marx in, Indian history out of school books in Left- ruled Tripura’. Hindustan Times E-paper. (24 May). http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/marxinindianhistoryoutofschoolbooksinl eftruledtripura/story2rfODG2whnE9FYnTCPrINP.Html (Accessed 8 February 2017). 2016. ‘Do you know Mahatma Gandhi’s views on cricket? Read Tripura school textbook’. Z News. (24 May) http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/do-you- know-mahatma-gandhis-views-on-cricket-read-tripura-school-text- book_1888457.html (Accessed 29 October 2016). Farred, Grant. 2004. ‘The Double Temporality of Lagaan: Cultural Struggle and Postcolonialism’. Journal of Sport and Social Issues Vol. 28 (May): 93-114. 2010. Fifa.com. ‘Mahatma Gandhi, football legend’. (22 October) http://www.fifa.com/news/y=2010/m=10/news=mahatma-gandhi-football-

legend-1322010.html (Accessed 15 June 2017) Foottheball.com. ‘Mahatma Gandhi and Football: Experiments with Sport in South Africa’. n.d. https://www.foottheball.com/featured/mahatma-gandhi-south- africa-football-passive-resisters/186449 (Accessed 15 June 2017) 2016. ‘Gandhi erased from Tripura textbook’. The Times of India, (26 May). http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/GandhierasedfromTripuratextbook/art icleshowprint/52440549.cms?null (Accessed 8 February 2017). Ganguly, Arghya. 2010. ‘The link between cricket and Mahatma Gandhi’. The Times of India (30 January). Gannesi, Namrata R. 2013. ‘The Debate on “Revival” and the Physical Culture Movement in Western India (1900-1950)’. In Katria Bromber, Birgit Krawietz and Joseph Maguire, eds. Sport Across Asia: Politics, Cultures and Identities. 121-43. London: Routledge. Gavaskar, Mahesh. 2009. ‘Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj: Retrieving the Sacred in the Time of Modernity’. Economic and Political Weekly Vol. 44, No. 37 (5-11 Sepember): 14-18. Gooptu, Sharmistha. ‘Cricket or Cricket Specatacle? Looking beyond Cricket to Understand Lagaan’. The International Journal of the History of Sport, Vol. 21, Nos. 3-4 (2004): 531-48. Guha, Ramachandra. ‘Cricket and Politics in Colonial India’. Past and Present, No. 161, November 1998): 155-190. __________. 2001. ‘Gandhi and Cricket’. The Hindu (30 September). __________. ‘Gandhi: Did He Spin More Than Khadi?’ Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack 2008. http://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/377985.html (Accessed 29 October 2016). ___________. 2015. ‘Why Gandhi would have been appalled by the “Gandhi- Mandela Trophy”’. The Telegraph (31 October) & ESPNCricinfo (31 October) http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/935051.html (Accessed 13 February 2017). Gupta, Amit Kumar. 2008. ‘Commentary on India’s Soft Power and Diaspora’. International Journal on World Peace Vol. 25, No. 3 (September): 61-68. Gupta, Dhruba. 1992. ‘Imagining Africa’. Anushtup (Sharadiya). Hall, Ian. 2012. ‘India’s New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power and the Limits of Government Action’. Asian Survey Vol. 52, No. 6 (November/December), pp. 1089-1110. Hay, Stephen. 1969. ‘Between Two Worlds: Gandhi’s First Impressions of British Culture’. Modern Asian Studies Vol. 3, No. 4: 305-319. Heredia, Rudolf C. 1999. ‘Interpreting Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj’. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 34, No. 24 (12-18 June): 1497-1502. 2015. ‘India, South Africa to play Gandhi-Mandela series’. (31 August). http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-south-africa-2015- 16/content/story/915937.html (Accessed 13 February 2017).

2016. ‘Indian history gives way to Marx, Adolf Hitler in Tripura Textbooks’. DNA (27 May). http://www.dnaindia.com/india/reportindianhistorygiveswaytomarxadolfhitlerintripur atextbooks2217191 (Accessed 8 February 2017). Kugiel, Patryk. ‘India’s Soft Power in South Asia.’ International Studies, Vol. 49, Nos. 3-4 (2012): 351-76. Kumar, Ram. 2015. ‘Remembering Mahatma Gandhi’s Tryst with Cricket’. (2 October). http://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/remembering-mahatma- gandhis-tryst-with-cricket (Accessed 29 October 2016). Lal, Vinay. 2009. ‘Gandhi’s West, the West’s Gandhi’. New Literary History. Vol. 40, No. 2: 281-313. __________. 2010. ‘The Gandhi Everyone Loves to Hate’. Economic and Political Weekly Vol. 43, No. 40 (4-10 October): 55-64. Lichtner, Giacomo and Sekhar Bandyopadhyay. 2008. ‘Indian Cinema and the Presentist Use of History: Conceptions of “Nationhood” in Earth and Lagaan’. Asian Survey Vol. xlviii, No. 3 (May-June): 431-52. Jeffrey, Robin. 2008. ‘The Mahatma did not like the movies and why it matters: Indian broadcasting policy, 1920s-1990s’. In Nalin Mehta, ed. Television in India: Satellites, Politics and Cultural Change, 13-31. London: Routledge. Majumdar, Boria. 2003. ‘Communalism to Commercialism: Study of Anti- Pentangular Movement’. Economic and Political Weekly 15 February: 656- 664. __________. 2011. ‘Politics of Leisure in Colonial India: “Lagaan”: Invocation of a Lost History’. Economic and Political Weekly Vol. 36, No. 35 (1 September): 3399-3404. Mannathukkaren, Nissim. 2001. ‘Subalterns, Cricket and the “Nation”’. Economic and Political Weekly Vol. 36, No. 49 (8 December): 4580-88. Mishra, Aniket. 2015. ‘Gandhi and Football: The Mahatma’s Experiments with the Beautiful game’. (2 October). https://www.sportskeeda.com/football/gandhi- and-football-the-mahatmas-experiments-with-the-beautiful-game (Accessed 15 June 2017) Mukherjee, Abhishek. 2014. ‘Gandhi Jayanti: Mahatma Gandhi’s cricket connections and an XI’. (2 October). http://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/gandhi-jayanti-mahatma-gandhis- cricket-connections-and-an-xi-194452 (Accessed 29 October 2016) Muralidharan, Sukumar. 2006. ‘Religion, Nationalism and the State: Gandhi and India’s Engagement with Political Modernity’. Social Scientist Vol. 34. Nos. ¾ (March-April): 3-36. Nigam, Aditya. 2009. ‘Gandhi—“The Angel of History’: Reading “Hind Swaraj” Today’. Economic and Political Weekly Vol. 44, No. 11 14-20 March: 41-47. Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 2008. ‘Public Diplomacy and Soft Power’. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Vol. 616, Public Diplomacy in a Changing World (March): 94-109.

Ratnam, K.V. Gopala. 1962. ‘Gandhiji, the Cricketer’. Sport and Pastime Vol. xvi, No. 27 (7 July): 5. ___________. 1962. ‘Nehru: The All-rounder’. Sport and Pastime Vol. XVI, No. 46 (17 November): 5. ___________. 1962. ‘The Non-Playing Cricketer’. Sport and Pastime Vol. XVI, No. 42 (20 October): 14-15. Rodrigues, Mario. 2010. ‘When Bapu kicked the ball’. Livemint, (4 June). http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/jQeJWmFWK8GWnrw5yNpaeL/WhenBapuk ickedtheball.html (Accessed 13 February 2017). Rudolph, Susanne Hoeber. 1965-1966. ‘Self Control and Political Potency: Gandhi’s Asceticism’. The American Scholar Vol. 35, No. 1 (Winter): 79-97. Srivastava, Ayush. 2016. ‘Mahatma Gandhi and His Experiments with Football’. (2 October). http://www.goal.com/en- india/news/136/india/2016/10/02/3420124/mahatma-gandhi-and-his- experiments-with-football (Accessed 15 June 2017). Stradtler, Florian. 2005. ‘“Lagaan” and Its Audience Responses’. Third World Quarterly Vol. 26, No. 3, Connecting Cultures : 517-24. Sudipta. ‘5 memorabilia that prove Mahatma Gandhi was never interested in cricket and other sports’. http://sportzwiki.com/cricket/5-memorabilia-that- proved-mahatma-gandhi-was-never-interested-cricket-and-other-sports/ (Accessed 29 October 2016). TBI Team, The Better India. ‘Meet Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi—The Football Aficionado’. n.d. http://www.thebetterindia.com/35523/gandhi-football/ (Accessed 15 June 2017) Tharoor, Shashi. 2008. ‘India as a Soft Power’. India International Centre Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Summer): 32-45. 2016. ‘Tripura government brainwashing students with communism: Chennithala’. The Indian Express (1 June). http://indianexpress.com/article/india/indianewsindia/tripuragovtbrainwashing studentswithcommunismchennithala2829437/ (Accessed 8 February 2017). 2016. ‘Tripura textbook slashes national icons, features Gandhi’s views on cricket’. Indiatoday.in, (25 May). http://indiatoday.intoday.in/education/story/tripurahistorybookflaws/1/677111. html (Accessed 13 February 2017) Wagner, Christian. 2010. ‘India’s Soft Power: Prospects and Limitations’. India Quarterly Vol. 66, No. 4: 333-342. Online Resources South Asia Archive (http://www.southasiaarchive.com) UGC Inflibnet (http://inflibnet.ac.in/econ/eresource.php) Internet Archive (http://www.archive.org)

West Bengal Public Library Network (http://dspace.wbpublibnet.gov.in/) The Endangered Archives Programme of the British Library (http://eap.bl.uk/) CrossAsia Digital Collection of the University of Heidelberg (http://www.ub.uniheidelberg.de/) The Complete Site on Mahatma Gandhi (http://www.mkgandhi.org/) Gandhi Sevagram Ashram Online (http://www.gandhiashramsevagram.org/) GandhiServe Foundation Online (http://www.gandhiserve.org/)