The periodisation that James Mill offered divided the Indian history into Hindi, Muslim and British period which was not a correct . So later the Indian history into Ancient, Medieval and Modern period.

- Imposition of Eurocentric Framework: James Mill's periodisation of Indian history was heavily influenced by a Eurocentric perspective, leading to a biased and distorted view of Indian history.
- Dividing Indian History into Hindu, Muslim, and British Periods: Mill divided Indian history into Hindu, Muslim, and British periods, simplifying the complex and multifaceted history of India into arbitrary categories based on religious identities.
- Neglect of Regional and Cultural Diversity: By focusing solely on religious divisions, Mill overlooked the rich cultural and regional diversity of India, failing to acknowledge the contributions of various communities and regions to the country's history.
- Devaluation of Indigenous Institutions and Knowledge: Mill's periodisation marginalized indigenous institutions and knowledge systems, portraying them as inferior to Western ideologies and institutions, thereby undermining the achievements and advancements of Indian civilization.
- Lack of Nuance and Context: Mill's periodisation lacked nuance and context, oversimplifying the complexities of Indian history and failing to capture the intricate socio-political dynamics that shaped the country's past.
- Colonialist Agenda: Mill's periodisation served a colonialist agenda, justifying British colonial rule in India by presenting it as a progressive force that brought civilization and development to a supposedly backward and stagnant society.
- Ignorance of Indigenous Perspectives: By disregarding indigenous perspectives and narratives, Mill's periodisation perpetuated a one-sided and biased view of Indian history, silencing alternative voices and interpretations.
In conclusion, James Mill's periodisation of Indian history was flawed and problematic due to its Eurocentric bias, oversimplification of complex historical processes, neglect of regional and cultural diversity, devaluation of indigenous institutions, and colonialist agenda. It is essential to critically evaluate and challenge such frameworks to gain a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of India's rich and diverse history.