James Mill, a political philosopher and economist of Scottish origin, divided Indian history into three periods - Hindu, Muslim, and British - based on the religion of the rulers of the times. This periodization is problematic for the following reasons:

• James Mills periodization is based on the assumption that the pre-British period of Indian history was uncivilized and full of social evils, which is an ignorant assumption.

• Mills periodization suggests that British rule could civilize India, and only the British could make India a civilized country. He believed that India was a place of darkness, taboos, superstitions, religious intolerance, and ignorance before British rule.

• Mills periodization is unfair as there were many other religions present at that time, and not all rulers of the time had the same faith. A variety of faiths existed simultaneously in these periods.

• Mills periodization is completely wrong as it is not correct to periodize Indian history on the basis of religion of the rulers. For example, many different religions coexisted peacefully when the country was ruled by Hindu kings.

• Mills periodization shows the superiority of British over Hindu and Muslim, claiming that it was necessary to introduce European manners, arts, institutions, and laws in India. This view is problematic as it ignores the rich cultural heritage of India and the contributions made by Indian rulers to the countrys development.

In conclusion, James Mills periodization of Indian history is problematic as it is based on an ignorant assumption, unfair, and shows the superiority of British over Hindu and Muslim. It is not correct to periodize Indian history on the basis of religion of the rulers, and it ignores the rich cultural heritage of India.