2. What is the problem with the periodization of Indian history that James Mill offers?
James mill periodized history into Hindu, Muslim and British, diving a period of history on the basis of faith is not appropriate, also since time immemorial the world, especially India has existed with many faiths simultaneously and dividing history into religions also disrespects the existence of others live, practices and faith. Mills also subjugated the Asian societies in front of the European ones, and suggested the British rule important for India, which reflects his biased opinion towards the European powers, and has ignored all the darkness faced by the people of India during the British rule and thus the Mills periodization is not accepted widely in history.
3. Why did the British preserve official documents?
British found the act of writing important, as they believed that only after writing them up the proper studies and debates can be carried out. The preservation also helped the British to maintain records of each of their plan, instruction, policy, decision and agreements which can be further used as proofs by them to preserve their posterity in the public during and even after the end of their ruling period.
4. How will the information historians get from old newspapers be different from that found in police reports?
Police reports were the part of government official records and hence were always favouring the government and have biased decisions. They were prepared to preserve the posterity of those in rule neglecting the real circumstances and experiences lived by the people. On the other hands’ newspapers at that time were written and published by leaders of the common people and reformers and hence they reflect the ground issues and realities and what the common people are facing, which can later be debated in the public.