Why the periodization of British of …
CBSE, JEE, NEET, CUET
Question Bank, Mock Tests, Exam Papers
NCERT Solutions, Sample Papers, Notes, Videos
Posted by Vaishnavi Dhadwal 3 years, 11 months ago
- 1 answers
Related Questions
Posted by Jenitha Christy 1 year, 9 months ago
- 2 answers
Posted by Sushant Caturwadi 1 year, 6 months ago
- 2 answers
Posted by Manan Soni 2 years ago
- 0 answers
Posted by Bodduluri Jathin 1 year, 9 months ago
- 2 answers
Posted by Urvi Upasana Swain 7 months ago
- 4 answers
Posted by Srishti Ranjan 1 year, 11 months ago
- 2 answers
Posted by Rohith R 7 months, 2 weeks ago
- 0 answers
Posted by Asmita Mahato 11 months, 4 weeks ago
- 1 answers
Posted by Mandalapu Uday Kiran 1 year, 4 months ago
- 1 answers
Posted by S R 1 year, 2 months ago
- 2 answers
myCBSEguide
Trusted by 1 Crore+ Students
Test Generator
Create papers online. It's FREE.
CUET Mock Tests
75,000+ questions to practice only on myCBSEguide app
Yogita Ingle 3 years, 11 months ago
In 1817, James Mill, a Scottish economist and a political philosopher, published A History of British India in three volumes. He divided Indian history into three periods—Hindu, Muslim and British. It has been argued by many historians that it is not correct to periodise Indian history on the basis of religion of the rulers. For example, when the Hindu kings ruled in ancient India, many religions existed peacefully. The same is also true for mediaeval India. It was not correct to periodise mediaeval India as Muslim History because people belonging to different faiths existed during this time. Such periodisation which was based on the religion of the rulers suggests that the lives, practices and culture of the other people do not matter.
2Thank You