**The Uprising of 1857 was described as the first Indian war of Independence by?**
Verified**Explanation:**
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, popularly known as Veer Savarkar, was the first person to describe the Uprising of 1857 as the "First Indian War of Independence." He presented this revolutionary perspective in his famous book titled "The Indian War of Independence 1857," which he wrote in 1909 while studying in London.
Before Savarkar's interpretation, the British historians and colonial administration had dismissed the 1857 uprising as merely a "sepoy mutiny" - suggesting it was just a rebellion by disgruntled Indian soldiers. However, Savarkar's groundbreaking analysis revealed that the events of 1857 were far more significant and widespread than what the British wanted the world to believe.
Savarkar argued that the 1857 uprising was not just a military revolt but a coordinated attempt by Indians from various walks of life to overthrow British rule. He highlighted how the rebellion involved not only sepoys but also civilians, peasants, landlords, and even some princely states. This made it a genuine war of independence rather than a simple mutiny.
The book faced severe opposition from the British government, who banned it immediately upon publication. The British authorities were so concerned about its potential impact that they prohibited its circulation in India and Britain. Despite the ban, the book was secretly distributed and became highly influential among Indian freedom fighters and revolutionaries.
Savarkar's reinterpretation of 1857 served multiple purposes. It helped restore pride among Indians about their history of resistance against colonial rule. It also provided inspiration to the freedom fighters of the early 20th century, showing them that Indians had previously attempted to fight for complete independence, not just reforms within the colonial system.
Today, historians continue to debate various aspects of the 1857 uprising, but Savarkar's contribution in reframing it as India's first war of independence remains significant. His work challenged the colonial narrative and helped Indians understand their own history from an Indian perspective rather than through the lens of British colonial historians.
