A beautifully-written book about five Indian rajas/maharajas (connected by a single thread, their links to the great painter Raja Ravi Varma). The Nehruvian/Marxist narrative says that the princes of British India were universally lackeys of the British, and the latter themselves portrayed them as dissolute wastrels. So it takes some effort to retrieve their reputations.
The reality is that the 'princes' were treaty allies of the British -- not their vassals in a legal sense -- although most had very little real ability to assert their autonomy as British power grew. Some of the larger states (Baroda, Gwalior, Mysore) had substantial armies, which perforce gave them greater autonomy. Their most important contribution to Indian history was as patrons of India's cultural and religious heritage, which might otherwise have died -- but was instead preserved, and indeed flourished, under their patronage. India (Bharat) exists because these princes were never fully subdued by the British (and the Mughals and other Turkic marauders before them).
Manu Pillai retrieves the 19th and early-20th century history of five of these states quite brilliantly. The only slight problem with his writing is that it depends too much on British sources (and hence points of view). So Martanda Varma, the great military hero who defeated the Dutch (and hence expelled them from the Indian subcontinent, confining them instead to what became Indonesia) is mentioned only in passing when discussing the realm he established, Travancore. Its rulers are portrayed as being representatives of the deity at the Padmanabhaswamy temple (the true sovereign of Travancore, apparently because of Martanda's choice), but the founder is shown as a caste usurper rather than an authentic military hero. There, as elsewhere, it was the British who deployed clever subterfuge to have British troops stationed in the territory by 1806 (after Martanda's successor received some British support to fend off a possible attack from Tipu Sultan).
Once those troops arrived, the British Resident became a highly influential force (if not, as in Mysore, often the overbearing overlord) of the realm of a treaty ally. But Pillai shows how most rulers skilfully determined their own course, often in opposition to the British. The most successful of these False Allies was the brilliant Sayaji Rao Gaekwad, the Maratha ruler of Baroda (a kingdom mainly comprising Gujarati subjects), who funded the education of BR Ambedkar (main writer of India's constitution), employed and supported Aurobindo Ghose -- who became a leader of India's revolutionary struggle for freedom, and later a great spiritual savant -- and clandestinely funded sundry other revolutionaries and the Congress party. (That the Congress never acknowledged this post-independence goes unsaid in Pillai's book, but is surely a disgrace!). During the Swadeshi movement, Sayaji Rao also founded the Bank of Baroda, which became one of India's best (and most internationalised) banks until nationalised in an act of autocratic excess by Indira Gandhi in 1969. (Pillai misses mention of the bank, although his portrait of Sayaji Rao Gaekwad is brilliantly drawn).
Apart from Raja Ravi Varma, the artist and scion of one of the matrilineal lines of Kerala's royals, the other hero of the book is Madhava Rao, the brilliant administrator (born in the Maratha realm of Thanjavur that was founded by Shivaji's half-brother Vyankoji) who influenced Travancore (where he was diwan from 1857-72), Indore (briefly in 1873-75) and especially Baroda (1875-82). Sayaji Rao Gaekwad, however, proved to be much more independent of temper than Madhava Rao - who preferred to focus on administrative excellence, without challenging the British too much. Sayajirao's disloyalty to the British reached its pinnacle in 1911 when he behaved with pure contempt toward the British monarch at his Durbar in Delhi; thereafter, though, Baroda was forcibly brought into line, and Sayajirao's wings were steadily clipped by the British -- but not before he had played a vital (if understated in the book, and kept under wraps even then) role in the revolutionary upsurge of 1905-10 that set Bharat on the path to independence, including via the Swadeshi enterprises (including BoB) that were to be the basis of a viable state after 1947.
But Madhava Rao Tanjorkar (as he is sometimes called, otherwise Thanjavur M Rao) was also a patriot in his own way. Although professing loyalty to the British (and flourishing partly because of his mastery of the English language), Madhava Rao wanted to assert his Indian identity by demonstrating to the world that Indians were capable of good governance. And he did so with elan.
Bangalore is a beautiful and liveable city because the maharajas made it so. Chamarajendra and Krishnaraja Wodeyar IV get their due as pioneers of industrialisation in Mysore state, via their diwans Rangacharla and Visvesvaraya (although the latter is largely ignored in the book, which only focuses on his opposition to using caste as a basis for affirmative action over merit in appointments). Pillai asserts that the royals encouraged non-Brahmins, so the Brahmins became the votaries of nationalism (and hence anti-royal) in the 1920s and 1930s -- an interesting historic nugget, as the Congress effectively took on the anti-Brahmin cloak after 1969 (having been a Brahmin-led party for 4 decades until then).
Mewar's Fateh Singh is a very different case -- a ruler who resisted western modernity, which made him something of a favourite with the British (who liked such oddities, if only to enhance their own sense of legitimacy). But his resistance to modernity was his own form of nationalism (in his case focused on deepening the hold of tradition on governance structures), mixed in with reducing the power of his feudatories. Nuance is everything.
All this, and much else, makes Manu Pillai's book a narrative treat. Where it falls short is in making the key argument in the book's last sentence: "Their states were not old-fashioned islands where time stood still and society decayed: they had their own politics and internal dynamics, which are also part of this country's tale". This needed to be explicated more. Baroda and Travancore both introduced universal and compulsory primary education 115-120 years ago -- something that modern India did not formally adopt until 2001 (when AB Vajpayee was PM). That Kerala achieved near-universal literacy long before the rest of India is mainly attributable to the initiatives of the rajas of Travancore and Cochin four decades before independence. And that Gujarat is the hub of Indian commerce and trade is mainly attributable to the fact that almost all of it was ruled by a congeries of small-territory rajas (and some larger ones like Baroda), and wasn't subject to British law, which was anti-entrepreneur (unless the entrepreneur happened to be European) -- a legacy of tight state control that the Indian state is yet to fully shed.