On Kings and Leadership- Lessons from Sher Shah

The principal difference between Akbar and Sher Shah was that Akbar was born a prince, while Sher Shah was not. Farid Khan, a.k.a Sher Shah belonged to the Sur tribe, rumored to be descendants of a prince. His grandfather sold horses for a living and moved to Hindustan when Afghan king Lodhi was on the throne of Delhi, encouraging Afghan mass migration to Hindustan. Sher Shah was born in Bihar and for most of his life, his focus was on claiming his paternal inheritance. He loved Hindustan, lived and died in the land of his birth.

If Akbar's story was that of a prince who felt obliged to keep and expand his kingdom, Sher Shah's story is that of a man who in order to keep his inheritance was forced to fight all the way to the crown of Delhi. His is the tale of a man who despite modest ambitions, was forced to aim higher simply to live a life that he was passionate about.

# 7. A child's first glimpse of leadership- one's parents, often the father

Sher Shah never aimed to conquer Hindustan as a young man. All he wanted was his rightful inheritance as the oldest of his father's 8 sons. His father Hassan Khan had 4 wives with whom he had an equitable distribution of 2 sons each. That was the extent of Hassan Khan's fairness. Sher Shah got the short stick after his jealous and youngest stepmother manipulated his father into giving her incompetent son the province that was rightfully Sher Shah's.
He fell out with his father as a teenager and moved to Jaunpur where he acquired all the skills that served him well for the rest of his life.

Sher Shah particularly resented having to work under someone whom he did not respect. When a person who is capable has to kowtow to someone ill-qualified to do the same job, exasperation builds up. Whether Sher Shah, while working for Babur expressed frustration at their culture, and claimed that he would eliminate the Mughals from Hindustan is debated by historians.  Did Sher Shah's strong opposition to weak leadership stem from his discordant relation with his father who was clearly unfair to him?


# 8. Relying on good informers, not dumb ones

 When your enemy has bad spies, it can work to your advantage in the long run. This is not one that seems intuitive when dealing with day to day office politics. But the truth will out, and the person with the wrong information ends up looking ... well, you know what I mean.

The details of how Sher Shah outsmarted the much bigger Mughal army under Humayun include a close encounter between the rivals.

In 1539, the massive Mughal army decided to capture the wealthy city of Gaur within days of Sher Shah successfully overthrowing the king of Gaur. Sher Shah overtook the Mughal army by cutting across the jungles in Bihar, his home province which he knew well. In a city called Munger, he halted for the night with a small group of soldiers. The Mughal scouts (not trained spies) reported to the Mughal advance guard that Sher Shah was in the vicinity. He was vulnerable to capture, but they instead exaggerated the significance of his mere presence. This terrified the Mughal advance guard who in turn raced back to report that to Humayun. What did they achieve? Nothing. What did they lose because of the incompetent spies? A chance to capture Sher Shah. In retrospect, this was one hell of a wasted opportunity for the Mughals and a narrow escape for Sher Shah.



#9. True talent will invariably stir up jealousy- don't stop doing what is right

Sher Shah's stepbrother who coveted their father's jagir, was supported by another noble who belonged to the Sur tribe. This wealthier man had an obvious reason to support Sher Shah's imbecile stepbrother-- he was jealous of Sher Shah overtaking him as the most prominent man in their tribe.

How ironic now when a pandemic rages around the world to spell out a universal truth-- jealousy is more prevalent, interminable and more lethal than any microorganism that has killed mankind. This is the root cause of almost all problems. Classic gaslighting techniques used by those who are jealous include blaming the person they are jealous of as intimidating. Whether we rationalize mean, spiteful behavior by saying someone is insecure, has low self-esteem or does not feel appreciated, etc, ultimately a simplistic explanation is jealousy. Typical spices that accompany jealousy are victim mindset, incompetence or laziness. And unlike handwashing or wearing a face mask, this virulence is unassailable.


Eventually, after many years, Sher Shah defeated his rival. But it is a testament to Sher Shah's character that he forgave the man who for many years harmed him. He even returned this Sur noble's fief, demonstrating yet another quality of a leader. Generosity in a true leader, yes. Petulance, no.


# 10. On strategy- when to let go and when to fight back

A frequent criticism by Sher Shah's detractors, especially those who wrote in the Mughals' favor, is that Sher Shah was not forthright. That he used deception. Perhaps those people are unfamiliar with the adage All is fair in love and war.
If there is one take away from Sher Shah's early life ( before he became king), it is that he knew when to compromise and make peace and when to attack. Sher Shah made peace with the Mughals several times, both Babur and his son Humayun when he knew he did not have the might to take on the Mughals. His direct confrontation with Humayun and eventual victory was the result of Humayun violating the peace treaty they had agreed upon years earlier. This left Sher Shah no choice but to fight and defeat Humayun. He had a right to fight for his survival and he proved that he was the better of the two men.

The story of how Humayun set out from Delhi to capture Sher Shah's land and how the end result was the expulsion of Humayun ( and the Mughals) from Hindustan for 15 years is fascinating if one were to read the strategy Sher Shah employed to shock the Mughals into defeat. It was not because he was deceptive. Once Humayun declared war, Sher Shah was justified in doing so for his survival.

There it is.... leadership from the man who was born a prince and the man who reluctantly became king. Whatever their differences, they are both known as great kings because they cared. Cared about people, cared about justice and cared about doing what was right. They fought and defeated their enemies, and showed generosity and forgiveness when appropriate.
These qualities are prescient today and will be forever.

What writing about kings has taught me about conflict resolution and leadership

My debut novel, The Final Puzzle, dealt with the politics in Akbar's court. The rivalries between the influential Muslim clergy, businessmen and the Hindus at court shaped Akbar's Hindustan( India and some surrounding countries). His rule lasted 50 years and he was known as Akbar the Great.

Here are the top lessons I learned that help me in my daily life ( not always to solve problems, but to put things in perspective):

* He is used in a gender-neutral way and implies he/she. Not to be politically correct, but to make sure I am including females in leadership roles, both the good and bad ones.

Lesson #1: There will always be rivalries between people, for as long as people exist. 

Whether peace and happiness prevail, depends entirely on the character of the leader.

Just as with great kings, a true leader comes around only once in a while. The proportion of real leaders to autocrats and despots must be one in ten thousand or smaller. A good time to quote the U.S president. Sad!

Lesson# 2: This is a modification of the maxim " A person is judged by the company he keeps".

Akbar had character flaws, but the smartest thing he did was to surround himself with really good people--his "nine gems" who included men of genius like Raja Birbal and Raja Todar Mal. 

A great leader recognizes and inspires talented and good people to work for him. He inspires such people to go above and beyond. Show a bad leader talented people and he immediately feels threatened. He chooses a protective human shield of yes-people and flatterers who exploit these insecurities.

Even if you are lucky to have a true leader as your boss, what about the deputies? This is where the leader's inability to choose his "gems" in modern-day life can hamper a great leader. This is particularly true in government or other bulky institutions where seniority and unions determine who climbs the ladder. In olden times, they mounted a good fashioned military rebellion, now they threaten to resign or do so.

Lesson #3: Morality- then and now. Does it matter?

A leader with 5000 women in his harem who genuinely cares about the people who depend on him ( or her) is much better than an uncaring monogamous zealot. 

A (former) female colleague referred to Akbar as "gross" because of the number of women he kept. 

In the #metoo era, a man in consensual polyamorous relations is less dangerous to a woman's career than the female co-worker who is willing to sleep with whomever to get promoted. The latter is the more common problem that no one wants to talk about. Education has provided women the choice to work to put food on their table, but some women still want to combine it with centuries-old ways to boost their careers.

 I think I would have liked to work for Akbar. Hence the inspiration for Radha's character. Hint: She was not in the harem.

Lesson# 4: Curiosity and a desire to seek the truth. 

Which in turn is synonymous with humility. Because asking the right questions to find the truth says that you accept you do not know what happened. Most folks know that there are many sides to a story. Leaders are open-minded and seek to hear all sides. They have empathy. 

Those who are arrogant think they know it all. 

Do you know anyone who is arrogant, abrasive, condescending and is simultaneously a good leader? I don't.

The Final Puzzle starts with Akbar roaming in disguise among his people to find the truth, in turn revealing that he cared about the facts. He went above and beyond what most monarchs do. 5000 women in the harem or not, he was motivated by a greater good to work hard.  He did not remain in the comforts of his palace and believe everything his secret service ( or office snitches in modern-day parlance) relayed.

Lesson #5: Impartiality in a leader

A biased leader's days at the top are numbered. This circles back to lesson #2 about the people who surround a leader. Not to say a leader cannot like some people more than others. But every person who works for a good leader should feel that he will not be swayed easily by the first person who gets their (sob) story across. That everyone will get a chance to speak their truth. That the habitual whiners, complainers, and lazy flatterers do not set the tone and gain an upper hand to start a demoralizing downward slide for the rest. Because when everyone leaves, there is no one to lead.

One of Akbar's traits that has not received as much attention is the fact that he did not reveal what he actually thought about people. He got rid of the intolerable ones, and the rest he kept close.

Badaoni and Zain Khan are good examples. Why else would Akbar ask Badaoni, a Muslim scholar to translate Sanskrit Hindu religious texts, knowing what a hardcore religious bigot he was?

Bad leaders are reactive and aim to be punitive immediately. This is the reason that the clergy fell out of favor with Akbar. They used their position and knowledge in ways that did not serve humanity and interfered with peace in his kingdom. They meted harsher punishments to those they deemed inferior and used religion as a pretext to determine who suffered more. The rebellion in 1577 following the execution of a Mathura Brahmin by Mathura's Qazi had a domino effect on the land for years following a single incident. Smart people think before they act. The Qazi of Mathura does not appear so to posterity. And Akbar took over as the final arbitrator in matters of Justice depriving the clergy of its power.

Lesson# 6: What is your motivation? The greater good or personal glory? Or merely survival?

Self-awareness is a quintessential quality in a leader.

Whether a leader is aware of his motives or not, others will quickly recognize it. Only the person who works for the greater good, has a vision and the strength of character to inspire, will earn respect. Those who seek power for personal glory are like the Emperor with no clothes. Everyone can see their true intentions, birthmarks, paunches, and cellulite. Yikes!

Those in survival mode need help. Bad kings like Humayun, kind as he was, resorted to opium and women. Nowadays, there is such a thing as counseling. But only a self-aware person in a leadership role will seek help.

Aside from roaming incognito to find out the problems his subjects faced, Akbar married many Hindu princesses. It is hard to believe that he did this merely to enjoy the company of women. Or to have an heir. Non-fiction books indicate that later in life, Akbar regretted having so many wives. But we forgive him. He wanted peace between Hindus and Muslims. Marriages were called alliances for a reason. 

I am writing my second novel, set in early 16th century India. It deals with the conflict between the second Mughal Emperor Humayun and his principal foe, Sher Shah Suri.

Sher Shah died in an accident when Akbar was only three years old. But the two men, one who ruled Hindustan for five years and the other for five decades, had a lot in common.

What I learned from Sher Shah will be in a subsequent post.

Please share your comments.

A few of my favorite kings

Hindustan's story is the story of kings, emperors and wannabe rulers.

How often do we actually think about those kings? What do they teach us?

I am writing the first draft of my second book now.
(My debut novel, dealing with Akbar and Birbal is available in the market and online The Final Puzzle: An untold Akbar Birbal story

And I thought this was an opportune moment to write about my favorite kings.

My knowledge of history is limited to 10th grade. I did not study much of local Kerala history.

I had two favorite kings until 3 years ago. Now Akbar has joined the list.

My two favorite kings

My 2 favorite kings are Chandragupta Vikramaditya of the Gupta dynasty and Sher Shah Suri, the only Afghan king of India who unlike other Afghans loved his birthplace. 

I have mentioned Chandragupta in my first novel The Final Puzzle.

Why Sher Shah?

In high school, my favorite Indian king was Sher Shah. He lived and ruled like a true Hindustani, not merely an invader. That is why he, unlike other Afghan rulers, is held in great esteem.

What I remembered about Sher Shah was that he built the Grand Trunk Road, National Highway 1.

Turns out that is not exactly true. What he did was renovate it. He built inns and traveler facilities every 4 miles. These, in turn, served as post offices and horse exchanges.
Safety of the vulnerable-- women, peasants, and gentry was a top priority for him.
He standardized currency and came up with the Rupee/ Rupaiya.
Sher Shah rebuilt entire cities in his short stint of 5 yr ( a lesson for modern-day politicians).

Here is an informative article about Sher Shah:

Achievements of Sher Shah

My favorite Sher Shah quotes:

" The most excellent religious rite is the deliverance of justice"

"It behooves the great to always be active"

Sher Shah versus Akbar

Their background:
Sher Shah had boundless energy. He was raring to go. He did not waste time. Think about how much he achieved in 5 years. Akbar is known as Akbar the Great, but destiny gave him 50 years on the throne. And of course, a head start. When Sher Shah ascended the throne of Delhi, he was 54 yr. Akbar was 14 yr. 

Sher Shah's arch-rival was Akbar's father Humayun. Sher Shah's grandfather was a horse trader from Kabul, although he migrated to Hindustan before Sher Shah's birth. Akbar's grandfather Babur rests in Kabul. Incidentally, Sher Shah worked for Babur and when he ascended the throne of Delhi, he allowed Babur's remains to be respectfully moved from Delhi to Kabul where he wished to finally rest. Sher Shah rests in the land he loved Bihar.  He had his mausoleum constructed during his lifetime.

The Mughals came from central Asia- Turkey and neighboring lands including Mongolia and Iran.

There was no love lost between the Afghans and the Mughals. Although the Afghans were a warrior race, the reason the Mughals left a greater impression was because they invested in the land. They invested in infrastructure and left beautiful buildings. They contributed to the land, unlike the Afghans. Except of course the most famous and beloved Afghan, Sher Shah.

What they had in common:

A love of the land
Kindness towards the weak and vulnerable
Tireless energy that they utilized for the good of the land

A personality trait that was different:

When it came to women, Akbar liked them-- a lot. He had 5000 women in his harem. Numerous wives and others. He may have come to regret it later in life.

When it came to Sher Shah, very little is known about his wives. He obviously had a wife who bore him at least 3 sons. Adil Shah, Jalal Khan ( Islam Shah) and Qutub Khan. He married 2 other women, both seemed to be borne out of their need for protection from widowhood and his need for their money. There are no real romantic stories associated with Sher Shah. He does not appear to have been thus inclined. Yet, he was known as a chivalrous and noble man. The story that exemplifies this is his capture of his enemy's wife.

On genes that determine leadership

Although Sher Shah's son followed him as ruler of Hindustan, the Sur dynasty did not last.

Which proves the point that leadership qualities are random, and not transmitted genetically. A great leader is born once in a while, what most people often have to contend with is an average human being on whom destiny has shone the spotlight. For someone incompetent with no leadership qualities, there is no greater curse than having the spotlight on your glaring defects. An insecure, angry person who was muttering and whining in a corner will find himself (or herself these days) doing exactly the same much more openly. They will counter their insecurity by a protective human shield of flatterers and yes-men/women. It is only a matter of time before such people are removed, but they can leave lasting damage.

Sher Shah wanted his son Adil Shah to follow him. But his younger son Jalal Khan, a brave soldier, not altogether deficient in good qualities succeeded him. But Humayun returned to end the Sur dynasty and pave the way for Akbar. Humayun was back in India after 15 years of exile, but he died a  year later.

Going back from 1570

How did Akbar's reign mirror Sher Shah's almost as if the Afghan king was the father Akbar emulated?

Who are the two people who knew Sher Shah who could have influenced Akbar?

One is Todar Mal, who we know served under Sher Shah and then Akbar.

The other person who knew Sher Shah... who was that?

What was the name of the building where Humayun met his death? Who built it?

Fascinated by these questions, I have embarked upon my next novel. It will be much more concise than The Final Puzzle.

I hope to release it before the end of the year.