Question

Why british historians periodization of Indian history is not correct one?

Answer 1

Historians divide the past into large segments—periods—that possess shared characteristics. In the middle of the nineteenth century British historians divided the history of India into three periods: "Hindu", "Muslim" and "British". This division was based on the idea that the religion of rulers was the only important historical change, and that there were no other significant developments—in the economy, society or culture. Few historians follow this periodisation today.
Most look to economic and social factors to characterize the major elements of different moments of the past. Historians face many problems while dividing the past into periods. The reason is that there was a good amount of technological development in the medieval period which can be called modern in the contemporary context.
Despite that the period is not called modem but medieval. On the other hand, the modern past is followed by the medieval past.  

Answer 2

Answer:

• The British Historians perodized Indian history as Hindu India, Muslim India and British India.
• This periodization focused only on the religions of the ruler and rejected the rich diversity of the Indian subcontinent.
• It did not serve the very purpose of the periodization. That is to say, to capture the characteristics of each periods in the history.
• Apart from this, to study history from religious perspective is not a rational and scientific way.
• That is why Indian historians have shifted the periodization to non-religious periodization- Ancient, Medieval and Modern periods.