Sir Ivor Jennings delivered the Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Iyer Lectures at the University of Madras in March, 1952. He spoke on the Indian Constitution. Jennings saw the Constitution take shape from a distance; he had no influence or involvement. The Iyer Lectures lent him an opportunity to diagnose it: The Constitution was still in its early years and relatively in its original form. Over the course of three lectures, Sir Ivor Jennings shared his assessment. He focused on three aspects: The Constitution’s “rigidity” and its superfluous provisions; fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy; and finally, key aspects of India’s federalism. He kept himself to the bare text; an already large body of judicial precedents formed no part of his analytic arsenal. His slim resources in tow, Jennings handed down a mostly “unfavorable” verdict. India’s Constitution, he bemoaned, was “far too large and therefore far too rigid”, too caged by its history, and too unwieldy to be molded into something useful through judicious interpretations. Overall, his diagnosis was a caveat writ large: The Constitution would not endure. This chapter assess Jennings' claims in the light of Indian constitutional developments between 1950 and 2015.