Question

Question:

Why was James Mill criticised for his periodisation of Indian history?
➸Ch - How, When and Where

Note :-

➸ Don't copy the answer

➸ Spam = Report

➸Only who knows those only answer.

➸If possible brainy stars and moderators plz help.

Thank you!! ​​​​

Answer 1

Answer:

for a Multicultural , multilinguist , multi religion , multi ethnicity Country , it is inappropriate to divide History based on Religion. it's almost like saying Hindus we're ruling Before Muslims Beat Hindus and then Christians beat Muslims to Occupy the Throne.

Facts are India was a Single United peninsula in BC Era. Persian was western border and Vietnam eastern border.

the Real division should be how states evolved based on rulers and how internal and external boundary division evolved no matter who ruled which part.

his Utilitarian theory is kind of Happiness Moded , justifying kind of Actions that brought changes , even if it bordered on Coercion and forceful occupation.

Answer 2

Answer:

$\huge \mathbb{ \pink {★᭄ꦿ᭄A} \green{n}\purple{s} \red {w} \orange{e} \pink{r★᭄ꦿ᭄}}$

✶⊶⊷⊶⊷❍ ❥ ❍⊶⊷⊶⊷✶

James mill divided Indian history into Hinduism and Muslim and British periods. This periodisation is based on the religious line that there was a face for which the Hindu were the rulers and other work ruled. ... So , this is not a proper periodisation of Indian history.

✶⊶⊷⊶⊷❍ ❥ ❍⊶⊷⊶⊷✶

─━━━━━━⊱✿⊰━━━━━━─

hope it helps uh࿐

─━━━━━━⊱✿⊰━━━━━━─