Anshul Singh

François Bernier, in his writings on Mughal India, presented an oversimplified view of landownership. He compared the Mughal system with European feudalism and argued that the Mughal emperor owned all the land, leading to what he saw as a lack of private property rights. However, his perspective overlooked the complexities of land tenure in India, such as the role of zamindars (landholders), jagirdars (revenue collectors), and local village communities in managing land. His Eurocentric viewpoint failed to fully capture the diversity and intricacies of landownership in Mughal India.

Buddhists rejected the rigid Brahmanical caste system and proposed an alternative perspective on social inequalities. They emphasized ethical conduct, merit, and karma rather than birth-based hierarchy. Buddhist teachings promoted the idea that a person's status should be determined by their actions rather than their caste, which challenged the prevailing Brahmanical social order.

The Manusmriti, an ancient Hindu legal text, laid down the duties and social rules for various castes, including the Chandalas, who were considered outcasts or untouchables in the Varna system. It prescribed strict regulations for their lives, including their occupations, places of residence, and interactions with other castes. The text played a significant role in shaping the caste system in ancient India.

The 6th century BCE marks the rise of the Mahajanapadas, urban centers, and extensive use of iron tools and weapons. Iron replaced copper and bronze for agricultural tools, allowing large-scale farming and deforestation, which contributed to the growth of cities and states.

Megasthenes, in his work Indica, described the military administration of the Mauryan empire. He mentioned six subcommittees handling different aspects of the army. The third subcommittee was responsible for the infantry (foot soldiers).