Explanation:

James Mill was a British historian who wrote the book "The History of British India" in 1817. In this book, he proposed a periodisation of Indian history that divided it into three periods - Hindu, Muslim, and British. However, this periodisation was not accepted by everyone in India.

Reasons for rejection:

1. Biased view: James Mill's periodisation was criticised for being biased towards British rule in India. He saw British rule as a civilising force that rescued India from the backwardness of the Hindu and Muslim periods. This view was not accepted by many Indians who saw British rule as a form of colonisation.

2. Ignored regional diversity: Mill's periodisation also ignored the regional diversity of Indian history. India has a rich and diverse history that cannot be easily divided into three broad categories. Each region has its own unique history and culture that cannot be ignored.

3. Hindu-Muslim divide: Mill's periodisation also perpetuated the Hindu-Muslim divide in Indian history. By dividing Indian history into Hindu and Muslim periods, he reinforced the idea that India had a history of religious conflict. This view was not accepted by many Indians who saw India's history as one of cultural and religious diversity.

4. Lack of Indian perspective: Mill's periodisation was also criticised for lacking an Indian perspective. He wrote about Indian history from a British perspective and did not take into account the views and opinions of Indians themselves.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, James Mill's periodisation of Indian history was not accepted by many Indians because of its biased view, ignorance of regional diversity, perpetuation of the Hindu-Muslim divide, and lack of an Indian perspective. Today, historians use a more nuanced and inclusive approach to studying Indian history that takes into account the diverse perspectives and experiences of the Indian people.

The british carried out detailed surveys by the ealy 19 th century in order to map the entiry country True and false