The Man Who Saved India

by Hindol Sengupta

Sardar Vallabhai Patel saved India. He illuminated Indian politics with pragmatic and sensible ideas of nation-building at a time when his contemporaries were unable or unwilling to shed the romantic lens. The very shape of India that we recognize today was stitched together by Patel, the Iron Man of India. The Man Who Saved India unravels the personality of one of the greatest men in Indian contemporary history.

Genres: History, Biography, India, Nonfiction, Politics, Autobiography

483 pages, Kindle Edition

First published August 31, 2018

About the author

Hindol Sengupta (born 1979) is an Indian journalist and entrepreneur, who is the award-winning author of eight books.
In 2017, he was selected as a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum. His three new upcoming books are a narrative non-fiction, a historical fiction and a history of the free markets in India to be published by Penguin and Simon & Schuster. Among his recent books is the bestselling Being Hindu: Old Faith, New World and You, The Modern Monk: What Vivekananda Means To Us Today, and The Sacred Sword: The Legend of Guru Gobind Singh. He is the youngest winner of the PSF prize for public service, an award won by, among others, the late Indian scientist and President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam.

Reviews

[Rosh]

Can’t take it anymore. DNF @ page 103.

I'm not a fan of biographies but this came highly recommended. I am so irritated at the way this turned out. This is one of the worst biographies I have ever attempted. No structure, no sense, no passion, just dead facts parroted out. It is books like these that kill whatever minimal interest people have in history.

💢 There’s nothing herein about Sardar the person, at least in the first hundred pages. The content is more bent towards generic history about the Indian freedom struggle (what happened and what the key people—Gandhi, Nehru, Tilak, Bose, etc.—did) and loads of extracts from Patel’s speeches and writings, other leaders’ writings, and newspaper articles. The research is there but its presentation is as interesting as watching paint dry.

💢 I prefer a linear and chronological revelation as far as possible in (auto)biographies. This one begins right bang in the middle of the action.

💢 It presupposes a lot of familiarity with Indian history, as if it assumes that only Indians, and that too with a historical bent of mind, will read this book. This is not at all layperson-friendly. And I am not even a layperson – I love history! And this still managed to kill at least a million of my brain cells. It takes for granted that you know everything about every historical leader involved in the Indian freedom movement. Well, if I knew everything, I wouldn't read the book, would I?

💢 There's a long introduction of 40+ pages that gives a somewhat haphazard background of the great man. I hence presumed that the main chapters would begin from his early years. But chapter one is equally jumpy, beginning from an anecdote in 2010 and going back to 1904, 1916, 1939, back to 1914, 1917,... There’s just no logical sense to the construction of the events.

💢 There are a multitude of footnotes in every chapter, sometimes crossing 100! The Footnotes section at the end is like an endlessly befuddling list, what with chapter number and then 80-100 footnote details.

💢 I don’t understand how the editors missed out two instances where the year is written as 2018 instead of 1918!!! It is such an obvious error! Patel wasn’t even alive in 2018.

In short, I am frustrated! And also befuddled at its high rating! Are we rating Sardar Patel or this book?!?!?

I am still interested in learning more about the ‘Iron Man of India’, but never ever touching this book again. Thank heavens I didn’t purchase this overpriced copy but got it on loan from a friend. A waste of resources is what it is.

Leaving it without a rating as I didn’t even reach the halfway mark. But based on the content I read, it is a 1 star for me.




———————————————
Connect with me through:
My Blog | The StoryGraph | Facebook | Twitter

[Sajith Kumar · Rating 4 out of 5]

India is a peculiar place where even reputed national leaders are sometimes weighed on the balance of contemporary factional politics. A year ago, India unveiled a grand statue of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, veteran freedom fighter and the country's first home minister on the banks of the Narmada River. A huge wave of protest rose up from the opposition ostensibly at the cost incurred for this statue which was the world's tallest at 182 metres; almost double that of the Statue of Liberty. At around Rs. 3000 crores, the statue was definitely not cheap, but considering the direct revenue in tourist footfalls and the indirect benefits of development of that backward area, that amount was nothing to cringe for a rising economic power like India. What infuriated the opposition Congress party the most was that it was the first time in independent India that a leader other than from the Nehru family was being feted thus. This was ironic, as Patel belonged to their own party, which has since become a pocket borough or private fief of the Nehru dynasty. All mention of Patel is scrupulously wiped clean from public discourse and his memory is deliberately allowed to fade without a trace. This was the state of things when Prime Minister Modi decided to resuscitate Patel’s legacy as a counterpoise to that of Nehru, whose blunders still hang heavy on the nation's shoulders. India was a conglomeration of around 560 princely states at Independence, each of which was theoretically entitled to join India or Pakistan. It was Patel and his Deputy V P Menon who painstakingly ensured accession of these states to India through a carrot and stick policy. This smooth amalgamation so astonished Soviet leader Khrushchev who remarked it ‘a wonderful feat to liquidate the princely states without liquidating the princes’. This book is the story of Sardar Patel and his inspiring political career and a miraculous stint in the administration. Hindol Sengupta is an award-winning author and has written numerous books. He is a World Economic Forum Young Global Leader and a Knight Bagehot Fellow of Columbia University.

Nehru and Patel were the tallest pillars of India's freedom movement. So it is natural that a comparison of them inevitably takes place. Sengupta makes a comprehensive study of the different facets of these two great statesmen. ‘Many claim that Nehru was a weak leader and an escape-artist. He was a smooth talker with no real ability to handle tough political situations. His oratory is considered largely gaseous and full of romantic but not very useful ideals’ - as you can see, the author does not mince words where they are essentially needed to expose the tantrums created by Nehru. Patel was exasperated by Nehru's naivety and tried to protect India's strategic interests from his enthusiastic idealism and vacillations. Another bone of contention was Nehru’s allegiance to Marxist ideals that relegated capitalism to a mere stepping stone towards fascism and considered business as inherently exploitative and reactionary. On the other side of this ideological baggage, both Gandhi and Patel had a far more accommodating and tolerant attitude to Indian businesses and businessmen. They in turn supported the Congress with funds and in kind for years. Patel was clear that having taken consistent assistance from industrialists through the freedom struggle, it was the job of the Congress to ensure that the Indian business community thrived after independence which would bring the added and much-needed benefits of jobs and wealth creation in an impoverished country. Patel always arranged the money required for running the party. Nehru enjoyed the services offered by the party’s wealthy supporters, but when the time came, ditched Indian businesses to reach out for the public sector.

This book analyses the personal equations between the trinity – Gandhi, Nehru and Patel – and tries to find the reasons behind the patriarch’s open preference to Nehru, the youngest of the three. Only six years of age separated Gandhi and Patel and so the relationship can only be termed fraternal. However, Gandhi was twenty years older than Nehru which tilted the relationship to the filial. The amazing fact was that Patel continued to support Gandhi cheerfully even when it was clear that he was being side-lined. Sengupta justifies the need of the narrative by postulating that to give Patel credit is not to diminish the unifying power of Gandhi's message or even some of the modernist vision of Nehru. It is to fill a knowledge gap in what ought to be a natural trinity. This is especially mandated when most Indians know far more about Gandhi and Nehru, but few would give equal recognition to Patel. While Nehru's ideas came from his extensive reading about communism and socialism, Patel had lived the life of the Indian poor and understood why they chose to follow Gandhi. His perspective came directly from his lived experience and not through books as did Nehru's. Nehru understood India's problems well, but his solutions were not indigenous. They were derived from ideologies he had only read about and believed to be better. Once he suggested the Indian masses read Bertrand Russell's books to clear away is religious prejudices!

The career of Patel through the turbulent decade of the 1920s is described in detail. In response to Gandhi's call for civil disobedience and boycott of British products, thousands dropped their education and professional careers to become a foot soldier of the freedom movement. But, Gandhi's espousal of the Khilafat cause eventually derailed the agitation and plunged the country into massive communal violence. The incident at Chauri Chaura provided Gandhi with an escape route. When the agitating crowd killed 22 policemen there, he unconditionally withdrew the disobedience movement condemning the violence. This came at a time when the people were expecting concessions from a capitulating government by the end of that year. The people who followed Gandhi truthfully so far found themselves stranded in the middle of nowhere. The relevance of Congress party took a beating and the Swaraj Party split away from them advocating a path more conciliatory to legislative reforms. Patel gainfully used this period to grow grassroots support for the party in Gujarat. The Satyagraha against the protection levy in Borsad and the increase of land revenue tax in Bardoli were immensely successful. The levy was only Rs. 2.70 per person and the tax hike was a moderate 30% coming after thirty years since the tax was reassessed last. Both these movements were clearly designed to keep the cadres and machinery well-oiled and exercised rather than for indemnifying pecuniary losses.

Patel initially opposed the creation of Pakistan, but gradually turned around to back the claim as the bloodbaths being organised by the Muslim League to snatch their homeland away from the Hindus were resulting in widespread murder, arson, rape and forced conversions all around. The reality of internal divisions among Muslims gave the demand for Pakistan a powerful resonance as it was a symbol of a united moral community. Patel was in direct charge of assimilating the 560-odd native states after independence. Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir were the nuts hard to crack. The first two were annexed through police action and Kashmir acceded to India when Pakistani soldiers in tribal attire attacked the state. Sengupta stops here to address the moral compulsions of Patel in annexing Kashmir whose population was predominantly Muslim, but with a Hindu king. The die was cast when Jinnah reneged on his claims for a Muslim homeland and tried to coax border states into joining Pakistan. He gave a blank, signed document of accession to the king of Bikaner as a bribe to merge with Pakistan. The king was allowed to write down any conditions he deemed fit. However, both Bikaner’s population and king was Hindu. Then again, Jinnah shamelessly accepted the accession of Junagadh in Gujarat whose population was overwhelmingly Hindu, but with a Muslim ruler. The same situation prevailed in Hyderabad and Jinnah was imploring the Nizam to join him. All these three cases took away the moral high ground of Pakistani claim that only Muslim majority states should go to them. Everybody was convinced by this time that Jinnah has no more allegiance to Pakistan than a cruel desire to scuttle the unity of India. Patel was ably assisted by V P Menon in this period. The practicality of Menon’s proposition for partition appealed to the realist in Patel.

Sengupta also addresses the issue whether Patel was given justice in the Congress Party and to his legacy after his demise in 1950. He has faithfully reproduced the underlying strain of rivalry and also affection between Nehru and Patel. Many a times, Patel offered to resign from Nehru's cabinet and at other times, Nehru suggested that Patel take over the reins. The discrimination against Patel was first observed in 1929 when Gandhi requested him to make way for Nehru as Congress President. In 1946, the issue came up for joining the interim ministry. 12 of the 15 provincial Congress committees nominated Patel as the party’s president and by corollary, as the interim Prime Minister. Then again, Gandhi asked Patel to step down in favour of Nehru. In a brilliant display of enviably stoic resignation, he obeyed his mentor on both occasions with little demur.

The book is a pleasure to read. Some little known incidents are narrated by the author. The dispute over the will and bequeathment of the property of Patel’s elder brother Vitthalbhai Patel is one such issue. The will was in favour of Subhas Chandra Bose and Vitthalbhai had died in Europe while travelling with Bose. Patel challenged the will and obtained a court ruling nullifying it. This incident turned Patel and Bose bitter enemies till the end. On the whole, the book is successful in filling up some of the gaps that were clearly visible in the national discourse on the struggle for independence and the making of a united India.

The book is highly recommended.

[Vipin Sharma · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hindol has done a great job in balancing this book between an academic work and a popular read.
After reading this book, I feel that intellectual discourse of our country is poorer for Patel's decision to not tell his own story.
Although Hindol, time and again, keeps stressing the close knit relationship between Nehru, Gandhi and Patel; one can't but feel exasperated by acts and omissions by Gandhi and Nehru at various key moments in course of reading this book.
Best part of the book definitely are the last two chapters, where Patel really comes into his own. His role in the framing of the Constitution, especially Fundamental Rights was a revelation to me.
My grouse about book is that in middle portion, it feels more of a narration of political history of the time rather than a biography.
Also, a large number of long direct quotes, especially in the begining, was quite irritating for me personally.

[Aditya Kulkarni · Rating 5 out of 5]

For someone whose roots are from Gulbarga which was located in Hyderabad State and is currently the Kalaburagi district in present day Karnataka, Sardar Patel is my most favourite leader among the first generation of leaders in modern India. The Operation Polo was largely due to his efforts and the tyrannical rule of Nizam ended thereby leading to the liberation of Hyderabad and incorporating it into India. "The Man Who Saved India" is an apt title for the one who achieved the impossible by incorporating more than 500 princely states into the Indian Union.

Hindol Sengupta through an engaging narrative built upon meticulous research describes the entire journey of how Vallabhbhai Patel became known as "Sardar" and tries to restore him to the highest pantheons of Indian history. I started reading this book on 30 October, the official birth date of the Sardar and incidentally on the day, the world's tallest statue, The Statue of Unity was inaugurated by Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi.

By the time you finish the book you'll realise that Sardar Patel was the best PM India never had and it is quite unfortunate that Mahatma Gandhi always preferred the younger of his two "sons", Jawaharlal Nehru over the elder Patel which ultimately led to Nehru being the first PM of India. Had Patel been the first PM instead of Nehru and had he lived longer than 1950, there is no doubt that India's path would have turned out to be better as Gurcharan Das has rightly described and his words appear on the cover of the book.

If only Patel had lived longer, India would have been spared the excesses of the License Raj and the Kashmir proble. This is one of the messages of this lively, highly readable book.

Mr Das is absolutely right and this book is indeed an excellent tribute to one of the makers of modern India.

[Abhinav · Rating 4 out of 5]

More of a scholarly work than I anticipated but could've been around 80-100 pages shorter if not for needless context given for seemingly unrelated events elsewhere.

As far as tributes to the Iron Man go, Hindol Sengupta's well-researched book does a great job. Honestly, this does more to recognise Sardar Patel's invaluable contribution to the nation than any statue ever could by all means.

Upwards of three and a half stars. Recommended.

[Nikhil · Rating 4 out of 5]

Indian history has been a keen focus for me in recent times and when one talks of the history of modern India, no discussion can be complete without reference to Sardar Patel.

Clearly recognised as one of the triumvirate who led the Congress and India to independence, Patel’s legacy has been quite overshadowed by the unending eulogies to Gandhi and Nehru, except in reference to his role in integrating the 500+ princely states into India.

Hindol Sengupta tries to address this significant gap by digging deep into the role played by the Sardar in building the independence movement from the grassroots and the keen reliance placed by Gandhi on Patel’s organisational capability and connect with local populace and sentiments, much of which was quite a revelation, given how Patel has been shortchanged in the teaching of Indian history in school. He brings out rather beautifully, Patel’s coming of age not just as a man with his own mind, but one willing to spell it out in his effort to remain true to his loyalty to India, which was even above his loyalty to Gandhi. Of particular interest is Patel’s extraordinary judgment of people - the common-man, the Congress leaders, Jinnah, the communists, and even the Chinese. Many of his fears have come true over the years and haunt India even today.

The author doesn’t mince words when highlighting the step-role adopted by Gandhi towards Patel not just when it came to a choice between Patel and Nehru, but even otherwise. Why Gandhi did it is a matter of conjecture. Maybe he took Patel too much for granted. Why Patel allowed it, is even more of a surprise. But maybe he was too deep-rooted in Indian tradition of loyalty and respect for the elder brother (in the triumvirate) to make public his disappointment. Yet, this is a rather striking theme which stands out in the book.

The book also highlights the major contradiction (as it is often seen) in Patel’s views of the Hindu-Muslim relationship and his alleged sympathies to the Hindu cause. While one may not be faulted to think that Patel has a softer corner for the Hindu sensibilities, it is also quite likely that his stance against appeasement of Muslims (more likely against Jinnah, for whom he had developed a vitriolic hatred by the end of it, and the Muslim League) have been interpreted in the context of Nehru’s strong opposition to any form of Hindu revivalism. Hence Patel probably didn’t feel it necessary to beat down the Hindu viewpoint (or be apologetic about it) in order to assuage the Muslim concerns.

A less highlighted fact, in this context, is that Patel was the Chairman of the Constituent Assembly’s Advisory Committee on Minorities and the key force behind Article 25 and others which gave specific constitutional guarantees to assuage the concerns of the minorities and safeguard their position in a majority Hindu country.

His own words best describe his views on the topic and his exasperation with events and emotions in the run-up to the partition - “We have just heard people shouting that Muslims should be removed from India. Those who do so have gone mad with anger... I am a frank man. I say bitter things to Hindus and Muslims alike. At the same time, I maintain, as I have said a number of times, that I am a friend of Muslims. If Muslims do not accept me as such, they also act as mad men.”

His exasperation with his Hindu brethren is also visible when he berates them for being responsible for conversions by enforcing evils like untouchability.

For Patel supporters (or Nehru baiters, as often the two terms are synonymous), India could have been a rather different country of Patel had been the first PM or even if he was alive for some more time.

As for me, I don’t believe in “what-ifs” and neither does the author. Even while highlighting Patel’s sense of pragmatism and his prescience with regard to various threats to the Indian Independence movement and then Modern India, he refrains from any serious scenario building in this regard.

Where I think the book lacks is in its cursory insight into the conflicts between Patel, Nehru and Gandhi. It also doesn’t doesn’t bring out the Patel-Nehru relationship in as much detail (till it comes to the post independence period) but rather hides behind Gandhi’s treatment of Patel in matters involving a compromise between Nehru and Patel.

The book ends on a rather sensational note by making certain allegations (about Nehru’s actions post Patel’s death) which make Nehru appear really small and petty and enhance Patel’s stature as the Iron Man of India. But that’s a point one needs to validate further before taking a stance on it.

In summary, the author does a pretty good job in bringing out little known facets of Patel’s life as a freedom fighter and the man behind many of Gandhi and Congress’ programs in Pre-independence India and puts forth his perspective on diverse issues. Probably a bit biased account of Patel but a fascinating read nevertheless for Indian history enthusiasts.

[Shitiz Srivastava · Rating 1 out of 5]

One of the worst biographies I have ever read.
The book is like 20% about Patel, 60% about Indian History and the rest 20% is long quotes and excerpts from speeches and books.
I finished it because I had to finish it but it was so boring with abstract repeated information and with excessive use of pronouns which confuses what is happening and who is doing what.
This is like the worst biography I have ever read. It took me a month to finish it because it was that boring.
I think there have to be better booked on Patel's life than this one because this one is a total disappointment.
I think the author had got an assigned to finish the book in some word limit and he stretched that word limit with his limited content with the excessive use of long excerpts.
This book really needs some good editing and more content on Patel.
This book is about everything, except Patel.

[Chittajit Mitra · Rating 5 out of 5]

The story obviously revolves around Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the Iron Man of India. The book is divided into 11 chapters, each chapter depicting a different aspect of Sardar’s life. The chapters are preceded by an introduction where the author sets up the tone for the book. Unfortunately in India we don’t get to know about our freedom fighters a lot, except some prominent names like Gandhi, Nehru, Bose, etc & precisely for that same reason this book is indeed a necessary addition to the Indian literature.

Read the full review on Just Another Bookaholic

[Ajay · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book on such a great man. We need more men and women like him in politics.
Naman to Sardar Patel.

[Dhrumil Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

One can read this as a cross-reference, but this book does not serve as the source or guide for the actual events.

- Patel was never belittled nor ignored by Gandhi and Nehru.

- No mention of 30 years of great friendship between Nehru and Patel even though they had some different viewpoints (They had मतभेद but not मनभेद). Nehru was very worried about Maniben and Dahyabhai Patel after Patel's death in 1950.

- No mention of Maniben's (she was head of the Gujarat Congress Pradesh Samiti) and Dahyabhai Patel's LS and RS seat because of Nehru. The same Nehru who didn't allow a single ticket of Congress for his daughter rather kept her as an assistant of his. Indira was made popular in 1962 by other Congress leaders but not by Nehru. Indira was selected as the president of Indian national congress in 1959 but then in 1960, Neelam Sanjiva Reddy took over as the president of the party till '62. After the death of Nehru in 1964 INC sent Indira to RS so she became "Saansad sabhya" after her father's death.

- Patel was very afraid of Sangh and shocked when they distributed sweets after Gandhi's murder. Throughout his life he never supported RSS. He never regretted once not being the first Prime Minister of independent India.

[Yathansh Joshi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Most Fantastic!
For the first time, I have come across an author who is well researched and willing to represent Indian Independence history as it is, and the much forgotten role of Sardar in it, without any attempt to save Nehru or Gandhi's falsified positive reputation...

Unlike other biographies of Sardar, here he narrates the story of Indian Independence movement with Sardar embedded in it's timeline, and does him the much owed justice by illuminating his solid and determinate character which brought India it's independence, and could have prevented many of misfortunes India faces today had he not been prevented from working his way..

Excellent Book! Must Read for anyone who considers himself a child of Mother India!
Jai Hind.

[Varun Moka · Rating 5 out of 5]

Indian History is my favourite Genre when it comes to reading. And this Book was an absolute treat for me. Undoubtedly one of the best books i have read after 'India After Gandhi' .
This is not just a biography book but also a great insight into the India's struggle and the events occurred during the freedom movement.
I really liked the way the author has written the book, he consistently portraits abstracts from his references and logically deducts conclusions from them which relatively makes it less biased.
I had a great time reading this, looking forward to explore more of the author's work in future. All in all, What a great book this was!

[Manjeet Das · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book presented facts and thereby played a very important part in presenting Sardar as a one manned army in Indian's push towards attainment of self governances.

[Narayan Adhikari · Rating 4 out of 5]

***About Book***

THE MAN WHO SAVED INDIA -SARDAR PATEL AND HIS IDEA OF INDIA is a biography of Sardar Patel by Hindol Sengupta. There are few books on Sardar Patel which brings his ideas and life in general public. And I wonder Why?
This book starts with early life of Vallabhbhai Patel. Author devoted around two chapter to his early years as a lawyer. There is no detailed discussion of his childhood. Then we see his role in Ahmedabad, Kheda, Bardoli, Congress and so on. Author many times digressed to other contemporary incidents, Which I didn't like. Writing is good.

There are many conflicts of ideas between Nehru, Gandhi, Maulana, Bose. Author clearly presented them and good thing is that he didn't make any unnecessary remarks against anyone eg. Nehru or Gandhi or Maulana Azad.
He avoided from casting Patel to any particular Ideology. His attempt to give things more humane outlook is also commendable.


***About Vallabhbhai Patel***

There are few things which you can always see in Patel throughout his life- Courage, Conviction, Pragmatism, Plain speaking and Sacrifice.

In his early years he sacrificed his chance of becoming a barrister for his brothers(later Patel also became Barrister). In his last years he take back his candidature for Congress president. In his early days he successfully mobilize people in Bardoli, in his last days he unites the country through his courage, conviction and pragmatism.

Some Quotes from Book

p.p. 14 - ‘Action appealed to him as nothing else. He believed that a man of words and not of deeds is a garden full of weeds.’

p.p. 242 - "It is the sacred duty of every young man to protect the people from danger, to defend the city and to defend the country [. . .] One who has taken a pledge to protect the people cannot leave the city even when a single man is there."

p.p. 168 - ‘I cannot purchase my liberty at the sacrifice of my honour and self-respect even on an occasion when my presence outside is highly necessary,’

p.p. 144 - "Talk does not count. It is service and it is action which makes a men respected"

[Akshay Bhaiya · Rating 5 out of 5]

India's freedom struggle has been often covered more from Gandhi and Nehru's lens - what these men did and the impact they had on both struggle for independence and an India post that. With the resurgence in interest in looking at other perspectives, it was about time someone wrote about Patel, and with the depth and acknowledgment, he deserved.

Hindol Sengupta's book is a great attempt at explaining Patel, his worldview and his significant contribution on the history of modern India. Equally, it is a good attempt at understanding the relationship between the three most important political figures of the time - Gandhi, Nehru and Patel.

Patel's pragmatism, will and vision were the crucial architects of both the freedom struggle and the shape of the modern Indian republic. His farsighted vision on Hindu-Muslim relations, India-Pakistan, Kashmir, China, Communists, Capitalism etc. are often the most balanced views and also the perfect counterfoil to Nehru's and also Gandhi's.

For students of Indian history, and if i can add, India's future, it is a must read, to understand what we often don't - that it was the leadership of 'Sardar' that was instrumental in shaping India, as it is, more than many other more celebrated factors.

[Pallavi Kamat · Rating 5 out of 5]

I will admit I picked up this book purely basis the interest it generated on Twitter – I had no clue that Sardar Patel was responsible for integrating 500+ princely states into the Indian Union at the time of Independence; I am not sure if it was taught in history at school. Soviet premier Nikolai Bulganin considered the feat bigger than Bismarck’s unification of Germany.

Hindol Sengupta must be commended for writing this book and enlightening people who do not know about Sardar Patel. The book is an ode to Mr. Patel – the stellar role he played in the Congress leading up to Independence, the various negotiations he undertook during the same and the sacrifices [both personal and professional] that he made in this journey.

Each of the chapter titles is a statement made by Sardar Patel, ranging from “Gandhi is a Mahatma. I am not.” to “My life’s work is about to be over…do not spoil it.”

The book brings out so many qualities of the Iron Man of India – his pragmatism, his leadership, diplomatic and political skills, his statesmanship, his indomitable spirit, his tenacity and his absolute lack of ego.

Sardar Patel understood better than anyone else that democracy isn’t so much an everyday plebiscite but a daily judgment – the interplay of incessant retribution and reward.

The book brings out the contrast between Patel and Nehru beautifully – the former always had to give up the Congress President position in favour of the latter courtesy Mahatma Gandhi. Lord Mountbatten said, “Patel had his feet on the ground while Nehru had his in the clouds.”
Nehru was a product of the benefits of class and wealth; Patel maintained a frugal lifestyle. Nehru believed that the ideals and virtues of socialism could be used in India to bring about a revolution; Patel was critical of the socialists. He wrote, “It is very easy to organize processions of mill workers flying red flags, but I would like to ask them what purpose is served by such hustle and bustle.” Nehru had to be sent to the villages of India to understand peasant life; Patel came from that real India and did not have to go or be sent anywhere to comprehend it. [Doesn’t it seem familiar to the current political scenario in India?]

As the plague broke out in Ahmedabad in 1917, Patel [who was then the Ahmedabad municipality president] worked almost round the clock with his volunteers to help the victims and their families. He advocated the use of India’s long coast [which is finally being done now, courtesy Nitin Gadkari]. Patel announced the Government would rebuild the Somnath Temple in Gujarat.

It’s a little painful to read how Nehru decided, against Patel’s wishes, to take the Kashmir issue to the United Nations Organization, based on Mountbatten’s advice. It begs to ask what if Nehru had adhered to Patel’s wishes. Or what if, Patel had become the first Prime Minister of India.

Along with Sardar Patel, the book gives a good glimpse into some other important figures of the Indian Independence movement, including Maulana Azad, Subhash Chandra Bose, Iqbal and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. It makes me now read a bit more about Jinnah [hoping Hindol will do the needful!] The book also gives a good overall view of history and geography during the entire period of time.

It’s only fitting that our current Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi inaugurated the Patel statue on 31-Oct-2018, as a tribute to the Iron Man of India for creating history. After all, hadn’t Mr. Patel himself said, “Why not create history rather than waste time writing it?”

The book is a must-read; I learned so many fascinating tidbits and aspects [cannot possibly post all these as part of the review!]. It will be a book I will definitely keep going back to in the future.

[E.T. · Rating 3 out of 5]

From the book :-
Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev exclaimed in 1956: ‘You Indians are remarkable people. How did you manage to liquidate the Princely States without liquidating the Princes?'
Indeed ! And its worth remembering that not just the number of princely states was huge (550+), the circumstances were super-tough. Only an iron-man who can continue arguing a court-case even after receiving the news of a loved one (wife) could have handled this with sanity. This ofcourse remains his greatest achievement and do watch the movie "Sardar" by Ketan Mehta which is infotainment at its best and covers the post WW2 years.
On the PM Issue :-
Recently (2018), there has been a lot of Nehru-bashing by BJP (and counter-bashing by others). I think the bashing to Nehru (and even Modi) comes from 2 strands -
a) the people who dislike him ideologically. To them Nehru can do no good ever and they would question his patriotism.
b) From ppl like me who see him as a dreamy idealist who also failed in choosing many policies. He was a patriot nonetheless for us, and some of his policies/actions also laid a strong foundation for India. In short, objective criticism and not bashing.
The author has rightly questioned Mahatma Gandhi's intervention in choosing Nehru over Patel as India's PM despite the overwhelming backing of the state Cong committees. And as events around 1947 show, he was much better suited to the job than Nehru and understood the hard realities of politics and governance much better than him. While it is true that Nehru was more popular among the masses, Gandhi never clarified and Patel stoically withdrew his name. I wish some1 really learned would write an alternate history novel in which Gandhi, Patel and Jinnah live thru the 1950s and with Patel as India's PM.
Coming to the book itself, ironically the book is not structured coherently and some of the 11 chapters seem to lack a theme. And nor are they perfectly chronological. Also, a lot of the book seems to have been prepared from the famous Patel biographies by Rajmohan Gandhi and Balraj Krishna among others. There is hardly any primary research it seems. Also, things like Lucknow Pact etc have been discussed without providing details of what they were. I felt difficulty in reading it sometimes and understanding nuances despite having read 50 books on India's independence. Who is the target audience, dear author ?
Comparing with Patel: A Life , Rajmohan Gandhi's book was much more satisfying - it covered events comprehensively and chronologically. Also, a crucial aspect of Patel's life is that he was a Gandhi-"Bhakt" till 1945 (WW2) and came to his own after it. That came out very well in Rajmohan Gandhi's book. Only problem is that his or Balraj Krishna's style may seem slightly old-fashioned.
Why did I pick it up then ? I respect Hindol Sengupta and wanted to know his views on the subject. This was my 6th book by him.

[Anmol Garg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Superb book. Very well researched. High time we read a book on arguably one of the most important person in Indian history, probably the most important in Modern history. Book explores the personality of Sardar Patel and how it influenced the relationship between him, Gandhi and Nehru. Must read book for history and politics
aficionados.

[Vinay · Rating 5 out of 5]

Indeed he did saved India, wished it was sardar I stead of Gandhi family that ruled India. Things would have been way too different.
Every damn liberal and secular who accuses right wing, should read this book to know how deeply wrong they are

[Varun Chauhan · Rating 5 out of 5]

A real page turner. The author has well researched the book and at last a great insight to the contributions of the Sardar.

[S Sadagopan · Rating 5 out of 5]

An eye opener at least for me. A man who did so much but who got so little recognition in free India!

[G V Sandeep · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's a shame that my History textbooks didn't speak enough about him. Modern India owes a lot to this legend.

[Kumar Jayant · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kings are made not of deeds but by the grand schemes and narration of historians who are conflicted between loyalty to the highness and truthfulness to the peoples and the generations yet to arrive!

Great Patel was no highness and had no historians at his beck and call to compose paens. He was in true sense a doer, relentless at execution - I wonder how the modern corporate philosophy of ‘Culture eats strategy for breakfast’ silo him.

I wonder what kept Hindol Sengupta going in his pursuit of Patel, Patel with thin folklore, dwindling fan base at best could be a challenger brand to the tall stature of Gandhi and Nehru. A perfect 10 for Hindol’s effort and research.

Recommended must read!

[Deepu George · Rating 3 out of 5]

Been though different books that examined the various aspect of indian independence struggle. None of the books have ever examined the life of Sardar Patel as this one. But although this is a book supposedly of Patel, this one examines his life in relation to the greater struggle, than from his point of view. After reading this although i got a little more clarity of the person Sardar is in relation to freedom struggle.... I still i am not sure of the person who Sardar is in a standalone point.

[Ritesh Mozumdar · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very unbiased account of India's freedom movement. Must read for anyone interested in the actual events India's freedom struggle, How Sardar Patel stirred things in India's Favour, where he failed, his frustrations, His relation with Nehru and Gandhi.

Great research done by Hindol and wonderfully narrated the facts.

[Rubal]

does this book go into all the problematic stuff sardar patel did/said??? or is that too much to ask for from a RW/Sanghi author with some awful views (as seen from his twitter) ??!

[Aiyaz Shazid]

“My duty was to serve, not to shine.”
S.V Patel

[Akshika Bansal · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book contributes to the legacy of a man who as rightly explained by the author is THE man who saved India. A must read for any Indian who is thankful for his/her freedom.

[Vikas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great work by the author to bring forth the contributions and hard work of Sardar Patel in building India.