Interestingly, both India and Karnataka were not a reality in 1924, but there is a clear indication in this book that both are being forged simultaneously in the minds of people. There is a serious effort to convert a cultural idea into a political project. Observe the cautious footnote for the map: "The boundary of Karnataka, marked by thin straight lines, may only be taken as approximately marking the limits of the Kannada speaking people. It does not follow the Congress division. Suggestions for rendering it accurate will be thankfully received."
We know how a car gets manufactured or a computer gets made, but then how does a nation get built in stages like a rocket? You'll have to read this book to get an inkling. The book puts the project together with the help of seven different sections starting with geography, then history, history post-1799, a summary of recent developments, religious movements across centuries, contribution to fine arts, Kannada literature and finally appendices thatinclude demographic statistics and an introduction to prominent men of arts, letters and administration. In the geography section, the country in the making is imagined as "equal in area to England and Scotland put together or twicePortugal or Greece or five times Denmark or six times Holland or seven times Belgium." The sub-text however is that this grand size would be real only if one is able to piece together portions parcelled out among four different governments-- the Bombay Presidency, the Nizam's dominions, the parts under the Mysore Wodeyars and then the Madras Presidency. The most exhaustive and polemical section is the one on history, but the one that discusses themost recent developments is the section titled 'New Awakening.'
The section on history is a narrative of regrets, but it begins with a naive utterance: "A history of Karnataka, giving us a view of the rise and development of the Karnataka sub-nation as an integral unit, its social, religious culture, has not yet been attempted. But if this sub-nation, now so divided up and dull in life, is to take her share along with the sister provinces in the rejuvenation of Indian culture, such a history is absolutely necessary. We hope that some day such a history will be written." This is naive because there never was an 'integral unit' called Karnataka ever in history. What quickly follows in the narrative is ample proof: "Historians are of the opinion that ancient Maharashtra does not connote what the modern name does. However, even if Karnataka in its entirety was not called Maharashtra, there is no doubt some portion of it went by that name." Also, take a look at this assertion: "Karnataka was pre-eminently the field of this Aryan and Dravidian fusion... Karnataka is in South India what the Punjab is in the North."