The Man Who Saved India by Hindol Sengupta (ISBN No: 9780670089901).

While the title clearly reads ‘Review’, this is more of an opinion with a lengthy rigmarole, some essential takeaways from the book from the perspective of yours truly. You’ve been warned.

Every year or so we as Indian citizens undergo an unwritten yet unfailing system of having topics of great recurrence and redundance. The subject matter of this system varies greatly from the mundane to the most significant. Will RCB ever win the IPL (LOL - sorry not sorry)? will we solve global warming and prevent or at least slow down the march of impending doom upon humanity?

I suspect this behaviour like many other things is governed by the pareto principle aka 80/20 rule where 80% of the items we discuss about are old and repetitive in comparison to the 20% that’s actually new. Fancy speech for implying that we keep flogging the dead horse perhaps with a different whip or at a different spot in hopes of getting it to gallop.

One such subject matter is that of the Indian education system. It comes up at specific periods like the 10th and 12th standard exam results announcement, when a humongous horde of students rake up top score to when yet another grim research indicates that our college graduates aren’t job ready (makes one question if this simple assertion required any ‘research’ in the first place). We immediately board the bandwagon with the proverbial pitchforks, torches and electron microscope to scrutinize mathematics and science curriculum till the discussion is shelved for the next year with subsequent activity in the list taking up the spot. And not the slightest itty-bitty teensy-weensy regard to the biggest loser named History.

From some of my faintest memories of school syllabus, I remember a particular question about who was called The Iron Man of Germany - Bismarck, an answer which almost everyone would get right. In case you wondered why or how, it was only because almost every kid would recall it for the weird spelling of having the odd ‘c’ in mark. The follow-up question of Iron Man of India would also elicit the right answer Sardar Patel. Another answer we would all get right was “Name the freedom fighter popularly known as Punjab Kesari”, not that we were all aware of Lala Lajpat Rai and his contributions towards the freedom struggle but rather because of the sweet named Kesari. This subject of rather very specific set of questions and answers was called “General Knowledge”, irony was probably bludgeoned to death when they named said subject.

Hindol Sengupta begins the book with a brief summary of approximately 10-15 bullet points that constituted what my school curriculum covered as History. He briefly hints at a much lesser known event namely the Indian navy mutiny before enumerating one of his teacher’s theory about how taller people managed to be the rulers citing Nehru and Jinnah, while the shorter ones did not. I felt an instant camaraderie at this point thanks to my own history teacher according to whom Gandhi was an agent rooting for the british who took credit of Netaji Subash Chandra Bose doing the heavy lifting towards achieving independence. She would also claim that Gandhi took a vow of silence and made no effort to commute the sentence of Shaheed Bhagat Singh inevitably damning him, which I learnt much later was not really accurate. I suspect many of her students and others with very similar teachers went on to become those who post half-baked history memes on facebook.

School history books converted history pretty much to statistical data points chopping away the dimensions from leaders making them bland, non-controversial caricatures of a poorly told story taking away all their human attributes, their flaws, quirks, belief system and behavior most of which defined their thought process and actions. English books not to be left behind on thism managed to do something even worse. We had lessons about letters exchanged between Sarojini Naidu and Jawaharlal Nehru and an unforgettable annoyance of a lesson about Mahatma Gandhi which was filled with ridiculous and superfluous metaphors. One such metaphor goes like this “he fed the masses with the elixir of truth and lionized the lambs, thus empowering and emancipating them to fight for their freedom”. The only way school kid me got to understand this was something like Asterix drinking the magic potions and thrashing the Roman soldiers.

School books left me with more questions than answers. If Lala Lajpat Rai would succumb from injuries he received from the british while fighting for independence, how did Gandhi not encounter a similar ordeal? How did the British let the Indians under leaders like Gandhi fight and simply not decimate everyone, after all they could match their smaller numbers with their weaponry. And even more importantly how does the principle of non-violence make sense against an aggressor.. though I have to admit while I’m better informed than my school kid self, I find myself repeating this question every now and then - Did simply asking colonial masters nicely prompt a change of heart and make them realize the folly of their ways and set them on the path of virtue?



The good thing about books on history and historical figures is that one can trample around with absolutely no regard for spoilers. I bought this book with the expectations of reading an in-depth account of Sardar Patel’s efforts on uniting India by bringing the princely states and especially shed light about the much regarded Operation Polo. Instead I was pleasantly surprised about the depth of subjects and length of chronological events of the freedom struggle leading to independence, dense in content while not being completely overwhelmed by details. The early chapter details the events of Patel’s early life from sacrificing his opportunity to let his elder brother Vithalbhai finish his studies, then taking turn graduating as a Middle temple barrister. His ascension from the chairman of sanitary committee where he would take on the ICS officer John Shillidy and get the better of him to that of becoming Gandhi’s right hand man is brilliantly elucidated. His understanding of people, government and the functioning of the government machinery provides a much needed clarity of how and why he would become the executor of Gandhi’s will. Every often we hear about ‘grassroots movement’ but the details of Patel fighting initially against spread of natural calamities like plague, floods and later against those created by our imperial masters towards the cause of indigo farmers of Champaran, land revenue issues in Kheda, dealing with dacoits problem of Borsad and the land tax issue in Bardouli - the last one would establish his arrival as a force to be reckoned with. Gandhi would congratulate him calling his younger brother and credit the victory to its people and their “Sardar”.

Hindol does a brilliant job in clearly detailing the social, political and economic aspects of erstwhile state of affairs. This much needed and greatly missed context was refreshing. Ever wondered what happens if there was a wedding planned when the rest of the folks were fully immersed towards the greater cause? Or how the freedom struggle was financed and how events of great significance happened in places where they happened, often not by mere coincidence but by happenstance or clear intent? How was a leader influenced by his upbringing and values imparted by his community and environment which ended up shaping their decisions? How such leaders of irreconcilable differences work towards a common goal. How did the younger generation of freedom fighters see their senior’s methods and ideals? This book does a stellar job of bringing out such nuanced details. Along the way, this book also shattered some of my naive assumptions about leaders and organizations. Never could I image a Mahatma Gandhi say that having the Charaka in the national flag would as he had conceived of the flag first. Nor would he be uncharacteristically rude towards Sir Stafford Cripps calling his offer of providing a dominion status a ‘post-dated cheque’ and suggesting him to take the next flight home. Neither of these feel so mahatma-like do they? But in reality it does make sense that he too was human and this human side makes far more sense than the measly descriptions from history and english books in school.



Of the Sardar’s many areas of proficiency lied the critical ability to collect funds to ensure that a financial crunch would be the least of the Congress’ struggles. There are so many facets of practical difficulties that would have been faced from a financial perspective yet seldom do we hear about them. Sarojini Naidu’s quip that it took a fortune to keep Gandhiji in poverty would graze the tip of that proverbial iceberg. The Many established businessmen of then and their successors now namely the Birlas, Tatas played their part in ensuring there wasn’t a financial drought towards the freedom movement. While Gandhiji, ever the altruist, would hope that the Sardar rather not receive funds, the Sardar ever the pragmatist, would have no qualms doing so iterating that he wasn’t the mahatma of the two. Multiple instances such as the shrewd evaluation( including cost of all saplings planted) of the Birla Bhavan - the place of Gandhiji’s assassination, before handing it over to the govenment to now become Gandhi Smrithi. A brief note of the british officers evaluation of the Indian businessmen and industrialists with their characteristic backhanded remarks about them - namely Birlas, Dalmia, Singhania, Ispahanis (who funded the muslim league) save for Tata who was appreciated as very capable, well-read (and dislikes the Birla group) was a refreshing insight. There’s also the aspect of the leaders choosing their battles and the respective battlefields, Ahmedabad being the Manchester of India serving home to mills primarily owned and operated by Indians. The significance of land tax since the days of kings as to how it contributed to the then royal and later british government coffers is another revelation to me. How an organized movement in Bardouli against unjustly calculated tax and apathetic response towards the concern of public would later put the British officials in severe unrest causing them to finally backtrack and withdraw it is something that should have figured into school history.

Gandhiji, I felt best described by K M Munshi as a ‘practical mystic’ having a personality like an avalanche overwhelming any resistance. He would come to India by invitation of Gopala Krishna Gokhalae to join the Congress and after the latter’s untimely demise would soon lead it. The Jallianwalah Bhag massacre would be the watershed moment when he would relinquish his Kaiser-e-Hind and Boer war medal and turn from asking for justice to freedom. Despite the saint-like attributes including the one he had and the ones that were ‘bestowed’ upon him, my opinion of him was that of a shrewd leader who ran a tight ship. He would choose Motilal Nehru to presidency despite the latter suggesting Patel for his successful campaigns and follow up choosing his son. Rajmohan Gandhi would call it as setting the precedent of handing over the reins from father to son in the Congress. He would ensure that Subash Chandra Bose would not serve a second term as the congress president by making everyone turn against him causing him to resign and get Rajendra Prasad as the President. He would also play gambits of great stakes such as supporting the Khilafat movement, which B R Ambedkar would commend for gaining moslem support but also wearily note the rising of Maulanas among their leadership and colluding with Afghanistan. Ambedkar in another instance, when Gandhi would announce fast unto death to prevent the possibility of minority states tell Gandhiji that he was being unfair towards them. Gandhiji would acknowledge the same and comment that he was to look unfair. Not all his manoeuvre would bear fruition such as when he would completely misjudge the british predicting they would revert negotiations in two weeks when they were fighting the second world war for their survival. From adopting Tilak’s ‘Swaraj is my birthright and I shall have it’ to performing the Dandi salt march and terming Quit India’s movement slogan ‘Do or Die’ he would keep his followers on their toes My opinion of Gandhiji after reading this book is only that it would be a futile exercise to judge him based on a single action or a set of incidents. His statements on Mussolini’s annexation of Abyssinia and Czech or about the formation of the nation of Israel (ref: Nilamellam Raththam by Pa. Raghavan a brilliant book regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict from the origin of Abhrahamic faith till present day) feel excruciatingly painful and blatantly ridiculous to consider practical in any form. After all is said and done he is irrefutably a Mahatma for his principles. Non-violence was the first article of his faith and the last article of his creed.

Jawaharlal, another Inner temple lawyer was the self-proclaimed socialist, republican and non-believer of Kings and princes. The scion of the Nehru family who would inherit wealth, atheist inclination and fierce temper from his father and goodwill from his mentor. The British government would request to accommodate the Prince of Wales for his Indian visit in the Nehru family mansion Anand Bhavan - first in the state to have an electricity connection, which would be promptly rejected by the Nehrus. Younger by a couple of decades compared to his mentor who was also a his benefactor in terms of affection. Another polarizing figure in history along with his mentor, Hindol does him justice in not completely sacrificing him as fodder for the protagonist of this book and providing context of his beliefs. Nehru would warm up to the socialist conditions of then Britain and Soviet Union and believe large scale industrialization run by the government would be the way forward. Unlike his mentor who would have no qualms with reciting religious prayers before his meetings he would be more aligned with the Marxist quote “Religion is the opiate of the masses” and stay away from it. He would also express disdain at “Hindu revivalism” when it would be decided that the Somnath temple would be rebuilt. It would also be alleged that he would try to gag Rajendra Prasad from attending it. Gandhi would designate him the face of the Congress appealing to the socialists, moderates and youth all at the same time. Nehru would trump both the Sardar and Rajaji whom Gandhi would term as the keeper of his conscience as his successor. When he was unsurprisingly chosen as the Prime ministerial candidate, Gandhi would state that it was because he was the only englishman among his fold.

Jinnah was the other guy. Tall, rake-thin, finicky about cleanliness and a well-dressed barrister who wouldn’t settle for second place to be the sole representative of muslim populace. He would find a kindred spirit in eminent poet Allama Iqbal and join forces with him moving on from a demand to muslim minority states to the latter’s clearly envisioned idea of an Islamic country with its own borders and territories. The book shines in exploring the notion put forth by Iqbal for a state based on a supposed cultural homogeneity of Moslems and the fallacy of the very idea. Salman Rushdie’s remark of Pakistan being ‘insufficiently imagined’ would be an apt description of the end result. Lord Mountbatten would remark Jinnah to be a megalomaniac and psychopathic case, yet he would find help among the British for his grand plans for what would then become Pakistan. After initial feud with Congress and multiple setbacks on trying to undermine the Congress as the sole representative of muslims, he would slowly gain footing and strike at an opportune moment. Again, the gradual rise of Jinnah and the bifurcation of the Indian populace’s choosing between Congress and the Muslim league is emphasised meticulously. He would become a notorious pioneer of sorts in setting up the events of Deliverance day, the tragic Direct Action Day and causing communal clash by throwing aspersions on the Congress and its leaders with help from many princely states along the way. Mountbatten after his exit from India would be chastised by the former Prime Minister and the famous racist war-hero Sir Winston Churchill that he did grave injustice to their friends the moslems and the princes in a party. In the end Jinnah would get what he would call a ‘moth-eaten Pakistan’ after his attempts to woo the princely states would be thwarted on all fronts by the Sardar and his able deputy Menon. Unfavourable Balkanization, a failed second marriage later his obsession with smoking Craven A cigarettes and tobacco pipes would put him out of his misery.

The Sardar would get his single turn in Presidency at the Karachi Session of Congress but otherwise would get a raw deal from his mentor. Sacrifice would be an integral and recurrent part of his life. A pragmatist among the mentor and peer idealist duo, he was a son of the soil in the truest sense. Gandhiji would say that he realized that he needed to secure the help of this serious looking person for his ability to convert words to deeds. In the words of his daughter Maniben, actions appealed to him most and he would term people with empty words as weeds. He would chastise the socialists of that day saying there were 84 castes of brahmins but 85 castes of socialists all of whom could not even come to terms with one another on what socialism meant. He would also ask them to take constructive actions rather than stopping with words.

His ability to clearly understand mankind’s innate affinity and fallibility to power would make him realize that socialism or communism would not be a be all end all remedy to the problems in society and that they would be no better than a monarchy or oligarchy. While aligned with Gandhiji’s ideal of non-violence, he would not subscribe to any form of lofty idealistic views of the world and instead call things as he would see it. His stoic expression and blunt speak approach combined with dry humor would make him one of Gandhiji’s acolytes. He would clearly demarcate himself from Gandhi’s ideas of the world like not wanting to have an army guarding the nation’s border, his vision saw it saw it for what it was rather than the idealist’s utopia from the proverbial rose tinted lenses of his master. Unlike Nehru he would focus on the plethora of challenges at the ground level back home while keeping an eye out for potential threats. Much to the relief of Lord Mountbatten, he would take up the task of merging the princely states in the Indian union as the former felt that he was the most pragmatic of the lot. He would find an able deputy in Vappala Pangunni Menon who much similar to the Sardar would build his life and reputation from the ground up and begin the process of putting India on the world map. The Sardar would come to realization that if not for partition there would be no sight of peace and development with growing unrest and uncontrollable cycles of violence.

The latter half of this book chronicles a race against time between Patel and the princely states towards the unification of India. Sardar would set out to achieve the impossible that was liquefaction of the princely states without that of the princes. He would travel the country meeting the princes, survive assasination attemps, thwart schemes of the princes and the muslim league and prevent outbreaks of violence and massacre often caused by rumours propogated by them. He would do it all at the expense of his dwindling health yet achieve it nonetheless. The Raja of Jodhpur would threaten V P Menon at gunpoint who would put on a brave face and point that pulling the trigger would make the situation no better. The Raja of Udaipur would join the Indian union which would bring down the rest of Rajasthani princes of Jodhpur and Jabalpur. The Nawabh of Bhopal and Diwan of Travancore would accede as well. Patel would temporarily find solace after bringing the Kathiawar belt, birthplace of Bapu into the Indian Union. Nehru’s association with the founder of Muslim Conference later National Conference Sheik Abdullah and ill-will with the Raja of Kashmir would irk Patel and make matters more difficult. Then Law Minister B.R Ambedkar would refuse drafting of Article 370 and decline doing it calling it treacherous against India. The Sardar would act to prevent further incursion expediting the process of improving connectivity by laying roads and sending troops. He would rue Nehru’s decision to take up the dispute to the United Nations Security Council which in his opinion was an ‘Insecurity council’ but nevertheless defend the actions of his Prime Minister in public.

Hyderabad, a condition with exact opposite scenario of Kashmir with a Muslim ruler and majority hindu populace would prove another difficult. The Nawabh of Hyderabad, ‘His Exalted Highness’ and the richest man in the world would stop export of valuable stones to India and provide funds to Pakistan. The fanatic Razvi and his Razzakars would call plebiscite by the sword. Jinnah’s death and Operation Polo would ensure what the Sardar would call removal of tumor from India’s stomach. There’s an interesting episode on the Nawabh of Junagadh who would accede to Pakistan but end up fleeing to Pakistan when one of his wives would forget to bring her child. She would be asked to regroup later. A plebiscite would establish that an overwhelming majority of Junagadh decided to stay with the Indian Union.

The British Balkanization of India would be done with the malicious intent of leaving us behind in ruins and if not for the able leadership it would have been exactly that. Such is the innate and involuntary ability of the British to Balkanize colonies leaving them for worse. Perhaps Brexit is merely karma acting out. While the partition of India is a great tragedy, the work done by the forgotten heroes prevented it from being a greater devastation. The Sardar would receive the Bharat Ratna posthumously along with late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi while Nehru would bestow the honor upon himself while being alive. Eminent historian Rajmohan Gandhi would state that the Sardar along with Rajiv Gandhi was the first to receive the award posthumously, perhaps he felt it unnecessary to state the obvious that his legacy has been consciously left to be forgotten by the Congress. Being snubbed time and again would also constitute an unfortunate part of his legacy. Yet he would unrelentingly march on towards the greater cause of the nation while being dogged by Jinnah’s attempts to steal away from the Indian union and the occasional clashes with his peer Nehru. Gandhiji’s assassination would bring a momentary truce between them but their differences in ideologies and modus operandi would lead them to lock horns frequently. In his characteristic fashion, he would write some of the greatest pages of Indian history and leave without signing his name in the end.

While Rajmohan Gandhi would reflect on the popular opinion that the Sardar was too old to become the Prime Minister and Nehru was more a popular figure known internationally, Hindol carefully deconstructs the folly of such arguments laying bare the facts for everyone to witness and decide. Rajaji would lament that had Sardar been the Prime Minister the independent India would be much different and far better, Rajmohan Gandhi notes that this remark was made at a much later time under different circumstances. The Sardar would succumb to a heart attack after delivering his promise to his motherland. Nehru would be left alone without his mentor’s guidance and peer’s ruthless efficiency. The Congress would soon be filled with sycophants, alleged loyalists of the Nehru family and descend it what would later become what would be known as the ‘License Raj’.



If you have reached this point into the review I’d like to congratulate you for the perseverance. If you decided to scroll to the end.. well that’s ok too, I understand. In summary this book is a brilliant read, packed with tremendous details that contribute to the narration without getting overwhelming or distracting. The linear narration of chronological events have been presented with elaborate yet precise level of depth, though the linearity gets broken every now and then with compelling anecdotes for foreshadowing and effectively rooting the narration. It takes a second read to appreciate the way this book has been carefully crafted. It shines in delving into understanding and unfurling the subtle rhyme and reasons which are usually left in the dark behind determinant factors that take the spotlight. It could have easily devolved into a hagiography considering the accomplishments of the book’s subject, but thankfully it has been treated with great care and respect to present a fair representation. The publishers of this book have announced a cinematic adaptation to follow up in the near future, hopefully it should follow suit. Now that would be a spectacle to watch. Whether the movie lives up to expectations or not, this book is a must read.