Page 1 SIXTEEN Economic and Social Life under the Mughals ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS The Mughals empire reached its territorial zenith by the end of the seventeenth century. During the period it had to face many political and administrative problems, some of which we have already discussed. In the economic and social spheres, the period from the advent of Akbar to the end of the seventeenth century may be treated as one since there were no fundamental changes although there were important social and economic developments which we shall try to analyse. STANDARD OF LIVING: PATTERN OF VILLAGE LIFE AND THE MASSES During the period, many European traders and travellers came to India, and some of them have left accounts about the social and economic conditions of the country. In general, they have emphasized the wealth and prosperity of India and the ostentatious life-style of the ruling classes, on the one hand, and on the other the grinding poverty of the ordinary people—the peasants, the artisans and the labourers. Babur was struck by the scanty clothes worn by the ordinary people. He observed that ‘peasants and people of low standing go about naked.’ He then goes on to describe the langota or decency cloth worn by men, and the sari worn by women. His impression has been corroborated by later European travellers. Ralph Fitch, who came to India towards the end of the sixteenth century, says that at Banaras ‘the people go naked save a little cloth bound about their middle.’ De Laet wrote that the labourers had insufficient clothing to keep themselves warm and cozy during winter. However, Fitch observed, ‘In the winter which is our May, the men wear quilted gowns of cotton, and quilted caps.’ Page 2 SIXTEEN Economic and Social Life under the Mughals ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS The Mughals empire reached its territorial zenith by the end of the seventeenth century. During the period it had to face many political and administrative problems, some of which we have already discussed. In the economic and social spheres, the period from the advent of Akbar to the end of the seventeenth century may be treated as one since there were no fundamental changes although there were important social and economic developments which we shall try to analyse. STANDARD OF LIVING: PATTERN OF VILLAGE LIFE AND THE MASSES During the period, many European traders and travellers came to India, and some of them have left accounts about the social and economic conditions of the country. In general, they have emphasized the wealth and prosperity of India and the ostentatious life-style of the ruling classes, on the one hand, and on the other the grinding poverty of the ordinary people—the peasants, the artisans and the labourers. Babur was struck by the scanty clothes worn by the ordinary people. He observed that ‘peasants and people of low standing go about naked.’ He then goes on to describe the langota or decency cloth worn by men, and the sari worn by women. His impression has been corroborated by later European travellers. Ralph Fitch, who came to India towards the end of the sixteenth century, says that at Banaras ‘the people go naked save a little cloth bound about their middle.’ De Laet wrote that the labourers had insufficient clothing to keep themselves warm and cozy during winter. However, Fitch observed, ‘In the winter which is our May, the men wear quilted gowns of cotton, and quilted caps.’ Similar remarks have been made about the use of footwear. Nikitin observed that the people of the Deccan went bare-footed. A modern author, Moreland, says that he did not find a shoe mentioned anywhere north of the Narmada river, except Bengal, and ascribes it to the high cost of leather. As far as housing and furniture were concerned, little need be said. The mud houses in which the villagers lived were not different from those at present. They had hardly any furniture except cots and bamboo mats, and earthen utensils which were made by the village potter. Copper and bell-metal plates and utensils were expensive and were generally not used by the poor. Regarding food, rice, millet and pulses (what Pelsaert and De Laet called khicheri) formed the staple diet, along with fish in Bengal and the coasts, and meat in the southern peninsula. In north India, chapatis made of wheat or coarse grains, with pulses and green vegetables were common. The ordinary people, it is said, ate their main meal in the evening, and chewed pulse or other parched grain in the day. Ghee and oil were much cheaper than foodgrains then, and seem to have been a staple part of the poor man’s food. But salt and sugar were more expensive. Thus, while people had less clothes to wear and shoes were too costly, on balance they ate better. With more grazing land, they could keep more cattle, so more milk and milk products must have been available. The standard of living ultimately depended upon income and wages. It is difficult to determine the income of the large mass of the peasants in real terms, for money hardly entered into transactions in the villages. The village artisan were paid for their services by means of commodities which were fixed by custom. It is difficult to compute the average size of the holding of the peasant. The information available to us shows that there was a great deal of inequality in the villages. The peasant who did not have his own ploughs and bullocks often tilled the land of the zamindars or the upper castes, and could eke out a bare existence. The landless peasants and labourers often belonged to the class of people called ‘untouchables’ or kamin. Whenever there was a famine—and famines were frequent—it was this class of peasants and the village artisans who suffered the most. The peasants who owned the land they tilled were called khudkasht. They paid land revenue at customary rates. Some of them had many ploughs and bullocks which they let out: to Page 3 SIXTEEN Economic and Social Life under the Mughals ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS The Mughals empire reached its territorial zenith by the end of the seventeenth century. During the period it had to face many political and administrative problems, some of which we have already discussed. In the economic and social spheres, the period from the advent of Akbar to the end of the seventeenth century may be treated as one since there were no fundamental changes although there were important social and economic developments which we shall try to analyse. STANDARD OF LIVING: PATTERN OF VILLAGE LIFE AND THE MASSES During the period, many European traders and travellers came to India, and some of them have left accounts about the social and economic conditions of the country. In general, they have emphasized the wealth and prosperity of India and the ostentatious life-style of the ruling classes, on the one hand, and on the other the grinding poverty of the ordinary people—the peasants, the artisans and the labourers. Babur was struck by the scanty clothes worn by the ordinary people. He observed that ‘peasants and people of low standing go about naked.’ He then goes on to describe the langota or decency cloth worn by men, and the sari worn by women. His impression has been corroborated by later European travellers. Ralph Fitch, who came to India towards the end of the sixteenth century, says that at Banaras ‘the people go naked save a little cloth bound about their middle.’ De Laet wrote that the labourers had insufficient clothing to keep themselves warm and cozy during winter. However, Fitch observed, ‘In the winter which is our May, the men wear quilted gowns of cotton, and quilted caps.’ Similar remarks have been made about the use of footwear. Nikitin observed that the people of the Deccan went bare-footed. A modern author, Moreland, says that he did not find a shoe mentioned anywhere north of the Narmada river, except Bengal, and ascribes it to the high cost of leather. As far as housing and furniture were concerned, little need be said. The mud houses in which the villagers lived were not different from those at present. They had hardly any furniture except cots and bamboo mats, and earthen utensils which were made by the village potter. Copper and bell-metal plates and utensils were expensive and were generally not used by the poor. Regarding food, rice, millet and pulses (what Pelsaert and De Laet called khicheri) formed the staple diet, along with fish in Bengal and the coasts, and meat in the southern peninsula. In north India, chapatis made of wheat or coarse grains, with pulses and green vegetables were common. The ordinary people, it is said, ate their main meal in the evening, and chewed pulse or other parched grain in the day. Ghee and oil were much cheaper than foodgrains then, and seem to have been a staple part of the poor man’s food. But salt and sugar were more expensive. Thus, while people had less clothes to wear and shoes were too costly, on balance they ate better. With more grazing land, they could keep more cattle, so more milk and milk products must have been available. The standard of living ultimately depended upon income and wages. It is difficult to determine the income of the large mass of the peasants in real terms, for money hardly entered into transactions in the villages. The village artisan were paid for their services by means of commodities which were fixed by custom. It is difficult to compute the average size of the holding of the peasant. The information available to us shows that there was a great deal of inequality in the villages. The peasant who did not have his own ploughs and bullocks often tilled the land of the zamindars or the upper castes, and could eke out a bare existence. The landless peasants and labourers often belonged to the class of people called ‘untouchables’ or kamin. Whenever there was a famine—and famines were frequent—it was this class of peasants and the village artisans who suffered the most. The peasants who owned the land they tilled were called khudkasht. They paid land revenue at customary rates. Some of them had many ploughs and bullocks which they let out: to their poorer brethren, the tenants or muzarian who generally paid land revenue at a higher rate. These two groups were the largest section among the cultivators in the village. Thus, the village society was highly unequal. The khudkasht who claimed to be the original settlers of the village often belonged to a single dominant caste or castes. These castes not only dominated the village society, they exploited the other or weaker sections. In turn, they were often exploited by the zamindars. It has been estimated that the population of India at the beginning of the seventeenth century was about 125 million. Hence, there was plenty of cultivable land available, and it may be surmised that a peasant would cultivate as much land as his means and family circumstances would allow, subject to social restraints. Unlike many other countries in Asia and Africa, India had a well diversified economy, with the cultivation of a large variety of crops such as wheat, rice, gram, barley, pulses, bajra, etc., as also crops which were used for manufacture and could be processed locally. These were cotton, indigo, chay (the red dye), sugarcane, oil-seeds, etc. These crops paid land revenue at a higher rate, and had to be paid for in cash. Hence, they are often called cash crops or superior crops. The peasant not only shifted his cultivation from one crop to the other depending on prices, but was also willing to adopt new crops, if he found it profitable to do so. Thus, during, the seventeenth century, two new crops were added—tobacco and maize. Silk and tusser cultivation became so widespread in Bengal during the period that there was no need to import silk from China. The adoption of potato and red chillies happened in the eighteenth century. Regarding efficiency of production, it should be noted that the countryside was able to feed a growing city population during the seventeenth century. India also exported food grains, especially rice and sugar to some of the neighbouring countries. It was also able to provide the raw materials needed for the expansion of manufactured goods during the period, especially the manufacture of textiles. The Mughal .state provided incentives and loans (taccavi) to the peasants for expansion and improvement of cultivation. But the expansion and growth would hardly have been possible without local efforts, initiative and investment. Page 4 SIXTEEN Economic and Social Life under the Mughals ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS The Mughals empire reached its territorial zenith by the end of the seventeenth century. During the period it had to face many political and administrative problems, some of which we have already discussed. In the economic and social spheres, the period from the advent of Akbar to the end of the seventeenth century may be treated as one since there were no fundamental changes although there were important social and economic developments which we shall try to analyse. STANDARD OF LIVING: PATTERN OF VILLAGE LIFE AND THE MASSES During the period, many European traders and travellers came to India, and some of them have left accounts about the social and economic conditions of the country. In general, they have emphasized the wealth and prosperity of India and the ostentatious life-style of the ruling classes, on the one hand, and on the other the grinding poverty of the ordinary people—the peasants, the artisans and the labourers. Babur was struck by the scanty clothes worn by the ordinary people. He observed that ‘peasants and people of low standing go about naked.’ He then goes on to describe the langota or decency cloth worn by men, and the sari worn by women. His impression has been corroborated by later European travellers. Ralph Fitch, who came to India towards the end of the sixteenth century, says that at Banaras ‘the people go naked save a little cloth bound about their middle.’ De Laet wrote that the labourers had insufficient clothing to keep themselves warm and cozy during winter. However, Fitch observed, ‘In the winter which is our May, the men wear quilted gowns of cotton, and quilted caps.’ Similar remarks have been made about the use of footwear. Nikitin observed that the people of the Deccan went bare-footed. A modern author, Moreland, says that he did not find a shoe mentioned anywhere north of the Narmada river, except Bengal, and ascribes it to the high cost of leather. As far as housing and furniture were concerned, little need be said. The mud houses in which the villagers lived were not different from those at present. They had hardly any furniture except cots and bamboo mats, and earthen utensils which were made by the village potter. Copper and bell-metal plates and utensils were expensive and were generally not used by the poor. Regarding food, rice, millet and pulses (what Pelsaert and De Laet called khicheri) formed the staple diet, along with fish in Bengal and the coasts, and meat in the southern peninsula. In north India, chapatis made of wheat or coarse grains, with pulses and green vegetables were common. The ordinary people, it is said, ate their main meal in the evening, and chewed pulse or other parched grain in the day. Ghee and oil were much cheaper than foodgrains then, and seem to have been a staple part of the poor man’s food. But salt and sugar were more expensive. Thus, while people had less clothes to wear and shoes were too costly, on balance they ate better. With more grazing land, they could keep more cattle, so more milk and milk products must have been available. The standard of living ultimately depended upon income and wages. It is difficult to determine the income of the large mass of the peasants in real terms, for money hardly entered into transactions in the villages. The village artisan were paid for their services by means of commodities which were fixed by custom. It is difficult to compute the average size of the holding of the peasant. The information available to us shows that there was a great deal of inequality in the villages. The peasant who did not have his own ploughs and bullocks often tilled the land of the zamindars or the upper castes, and could eke out a bare existence. The landless peasants and labourers often belonged to the class of people called ‘untouchables’ or kamin. Whenever there was a famine—and famines were frequent—it was this class of peasants and the village artisans who suffered the most. The peasants who owned the land they tilled were called khudkasht. They paid land revenue at customary rates. Some of them had many ploughs and bullocks which they let out: to their poorer brethren, the tenants or muzarian who generally paid land revenue at a higher rate. These two groups were the largest section among the cultivators in the village. Thus, the village society was highly unequal. The khudkasht who claimed to be the original settlers of the village often belonged to a single dominant caste or castes. These castes not only dominated the village society, they exploited the other or weaker sections. In turn, they were often exploited by the zamindars. It has been estimated that the population of India at the beginning of the seventeenth century was about 125 million. Hence, there was plenty of cultivable land available, and it may be surmised that a peasant would cultivate as much land as his means and family circumstances would allow, subject to social restraints. Unlike many other countries in Asia and Africa, India had a well diversified economy, with the cultivation of a large variety of crops such as wheat, rice, gram, barley, pulses, bajra, etc., as also crops which were used for manufacture and could be processed locally. These were cotton, indigo, chay (the red dye), sugarcane, oil-seeds, etc. These crops paid land revenue at a higher rate, and had to be paid for in cash. Hence, they are often called cash crops or superior crops. The peasant not only shifted his cultivation from one crop to the other depending on prices, but was also willing to adopt new crops, if he found it profitable to do so. Thus, during, the seventeenth century, two new crops were added—tobacco and maize. Silk and tusser cultivation became so widespread in Bengal during the period that there was no need to import silk from China. The adoption of potato and red chillies happened in the eighteenth century. Regarding efficiency of production, it should be noted that the countryside was able to feed a growing city population during the seventeenth century. India also exported food grains, especially rice and sugar to some of the neighbouring countries. It was also able to provide the raw materials needed for the expansion of manufactured goods during the period, especially the manufacture of textiles. The Mughal .state provided incentives and loans (taccavi) to the peasants for expansion and improvement of cultivation. But the expansion and growth would hardly have been possible without local efforts, initiative and investment. Thus, the Indian cultivator was not as conservative and resistant to change as he has often been made out to be. Although no new agricultural techniques were introduced, Indian agriculture was, on balance, efficient and played a definite role in the growth of the manufacturing sector and trade during the period. In medieval times, a peasant was not dispossessed from his land as long as he paid the land revenue. He could also sell his land if he could find a buyer, and if the rest of the community raised no objections. His children inherited his land as a matter of right after his death. The state dues were heavy, sometimes amounting to nearly half of his produce so that the ordinary peasant was left only with barely enough to keep body and soul together, and was in no position to invest anything for the improvement of land or extension of cultivation. Although the life of the peasant was hard, he had enough to eat and to meet his simple requirements, i.e., production and reproduction. The pattern of his life was fixed partly by the seasons and partly by custom and tradition in which fairs, pilgrimages, ceremonies, etc., had their due place. The condition of the landless and a section of the artisans including the menials, must have been much harder. However, not all peasants lived at this low level. Resident cultivators (khudkasht) had generally larger lands to cultivate, and a small section among them had large areas of land, and many ploughs and oxen for cultivation. They could also let out a part of their lands to the ordinary cultivators (muzarian) on profitable terms. These sections and village zamindars could and did invest in the expansion and improvement of cultivation. As far as the cities were concerned, the largest section consisted of the poor —the artisans, the servants and slaves, the soldiers, manual workers, etc. The salary of the lowest grade of a servant, according to European travellers, was less than two rupees a month. The bulk of the workers and foot soldiers began at less than three rupees a month. It has been calculated that a man could feed his family on two rupees a month. Moreland, who wrote in the early part of the twentieth century, observed that during the period there was little change in the real wages of workers—they had a more balanced diet but clothes, sugar, etc., were more expensive. Moreland concluded from this that the conditions of the Indian people had not worsened under the British Page 5 SIXTEEN Economic and Social Life under the Mughals ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS The Mughals empire reached its territorial zenith by the end of the seventeenth century. During the period it had to face many political and administrative problems, some of which we have already discussed. In the economic and social spheres, the period from the advent of Akbar to the end of the seventeenth century may be treated as one since there were no fundamental changes although there were important social and economic developments which we shall try to analyse. STANDARD OF LIVING: PATTERN OF VILLAGE LIFE AND THE MASSES During the period, many European traders and travellers came to India, and some of them have left accounts about the social and economic conditions of the country. In general, they have emphasized the wealth and prosperity of India and the ostentatious life-style of the ruling classes, on the one hand, and on the other the grinding poverty of the ordinary people—the peasants, the artisans and the labourers. Babur was struck by the scanty clothes worn by the ordinary people. He observed that ‘peasants and people of low standing go about naked.’ He then goes on to describe the langota or decency cloth worn by men, and the sari worn by women. His impression has been corroborated by later European travellers. Ralph Fitch, who came to India towards the end of the sixteenth century, says that at Banaras ‘the people go naked save a little cloth bound about their middle.’ De Laet wrote that the labourers had insufficient clothing to keep themselves warm and cozy during winter. However, Fitch observed, ‘In the winter which is our May, the men wear quilted gowns of cotton, and quilted caps.’ Similar remarks have been made about the use of footwear. Nikitin observed that the people of the Deccan went bare-footed. A modern author, Moreland, says that he did not find a shoe mentioned anywhere north of the Narmada river, except Bengal, and ascribes it to the high cost of leather. As far as housing and furniture were concerned, little need be said. The mud houses in which the villagers lived were not different from those at present. They had hardly any furniture except cots and bamboo mats, and earthen utensils which were made by the village potter. Copper and bell-metal plates and utensils were expensive and were generally not used by the poor. Regarding food, rice, millet and pulses (what Pelsaert and De Laet called khicheri) formed the staple diet, along with fish in Bengal and the coasts, and meat in the southern peninsula. In north India, chapatis made of wheat or coarse grains, with pulses and green vegetables were common. The ordinary people, it is said, ate their main meal in the evening, and chewed pulse or other parched grain in the day. Ghee and oil were much cheaper than foodgrains then, and seem to have been a staple part of the poor man’s food. But salt and sugar were more expensive. Thus, while people had less clothes to wear and shoes were too costly, on balance they ate better. With more grazing land, they could keep more cattle, so more milk and milk products must have been available. The standard of living ultimately depended upon income and wages. It is difficult to determine the income of the large mass of the peasants in real terms, for money hardly entered into transactions in the villages. The village artisan were paid for their services by means of commodities which were fixed by custom. It is difficult to compute the average size of the holding of the peasant. The information available to us shows that there was a great deal of inequality in the villages. The peasant who did not have his own ploughs and bullocks often tilled the land of the zamindars or the upper castes, and could eke out a bare existence. The landless peasants and labourers often belonged to the class of people called ‘untouchables’ or kamin. Whenever there was a famine—and famines were frequent—it was this class of peasants and the village artisans who suffered the most. The peasants who owned the land they tilled were called khudkasht. They paid land revenue at customary rates. Some of them had many ploughs and bullocks which they let out: to their poorer brethren, the tenants or muzarian who generally paid land revenue at a higher rate. These two groups were the largest section among the cultivators in the village. Thus, the village society was highly unequal. The khudkasht who claimed to be the original settlers of the village often belonged to a single dominant caste or castes. These castes not only dominated the village society, they exploited the other or weaker sections. In turn, they were often exploited by the zamindars. It has been estimated that the population of India at the beginning of the seventeenth century was about 125 million. Hence, there was plenty of cultivable land available, and it may be surmised that a peasant would cultivate as much land as his means and family circumstances would allow, subject to social restraints. Unlike many other countries in Asia and Africa, India had a well diversified economy, with the cultivation of a large variety of crops such as wheat, rice, gram, barley, pulses, bajra, etc., as also crops which were used for manufacture and could be processed locally. These were cotton, indigo, chay (the red dye), sugarcane, oil-seeds, etc. These crops paid land revenue at a higher rate, and had to be paid for in cash. Hence, they are often called cash crops or superior crops. The peasant not only shifted his cultivation from one crop to the other depending on prices, but was also willing to adopt new crops, if he found it profitable to do so. Thus, during, the seventeenth century, two new crops were added—tobacco and maize. Silk and tusser cultivation became so widespread in Bengal during the period that there was no need to import silk from China. The adoption of potato and red chillies happened in the eighteenth century. Regarding efficiency of production, it should be noted that the countryside was able to feed a growing city population during the seventeenth century. India also exported food grains, especially rice and sugar to some of the neighbouring countries. It was also able to provide the raw materials needed for the expansion of manufactured goods during the period, especially the manufacture of textiles. The Mughal .state provided incentives and loans (taccavi) to the peasants for expansion and improvement of cultivation. But the expansion and growth would hardly have been possible without local efforts, initiative and investment. Thus, the Indian cultivator was not as conservative and resistant to change as he has often been made out to be. Although no new agricultural techniques were introduced, Indian agriculture was, on balance, efficient and played a definite role in the growth of the manufacturing sector and trade during the period. In medieval times, a peasant was not dispossessed from his land as long as he paid the land revenue. He could also sell his land if he could find a buyer, and if the rest of the community raised no objections. His children inherited his land as a matter of right after his death. The state dues were heavy, sometimes amounting to nearly half of his produce so that the ordinary peasant was left only with barely enough to keep body and soul together, and was in no position to invest anything for the improvement of land or extension of cultivation. Although the life of the peasant was hard, he had enough to eat and to meet his simple requirements, i.e., production and reproduction. The pattern of his life was fixed partly by the seasons and partly by custom and tradition in which fairs, pilgrimages, ceremonies, etc., had their due place. The condition of the landless and a section of the artisans including the menials, must have been much harder. However, not all peasants lived at this low level. Resident cultivators (khudkasht) had generally larger lands to cultivate, and a small section among them had large areas of land, and many ploughs and oxen for cultivation. They could also let out a part of their lands to the ordinary cultivators (muzarian) on profitable terms. These sections and village zamindars could and did invest in the expansion and improvement of cultivation. As far as the cities were concerned, the largest section consisted of the poor —the artisans, the servants and slaves, the soldiers, manual workers, etc. The salary of the lowest grade of a servant, according to European travellers, was less than two rupees a month. The bulk of the workers and foot soldiers began at less than three rupees a month. It has been calculated that a man could feed his family on two rupees a month. Moreland, who wrote in the early part of the twentieth century, observed that during the period there was little change in the real wages of workers—they had a more balanced diet but clothes, sugar, etc., were more expensive. Moreland concluded from this that the conditions of the Indian people had not worsened under the British rule. But the matter has to be seen in a wider context. While there was a vast increase in wealth and rise in real wages in Europe during the period, there was overall stagnation, if not decline, of living standards in India under the British rule. THE RULING CLASSES: THE NOBLES AND ZAMINDARS The nobility, along with the landed gentry, the zamindars, formed what may be called the ruling class in medieval India. Socially and economically, the Mughal nobility formed a privileged class. Theoretically, the doors of the Mughal nobility were open to everyone. In practice, persons belonging to aristocratic families, whether they were Indians or foreigners, had a decided advantage. To begin with, the bulk of the Mughal nobles were drawn from the homeland of the Mughals—Turan and from its neighbouring areas, Tajikistan, Khurasan, Iran, etc. Although Babur was a Turk, the Mughal rulers never followed a narrow racist policy. Babur tried to win the leading Afghan nobles to his side, but they proved to be restless and untrustworthy and soon defected. The tussle between the Mughals and the Afghans continued in Bihar and Bengal even under Akbar. But from the time of Jahangir, more Afghans began to be recruited in the nobility. Indian Muslims who were called Shaikhzadas or Hindustani were also given service. From the time of Akbar, Hindus also began to be inducted into the nobility on a regular basis. The largest section among them consisted of the Rajputs. At first, among the Rajputs, the Kachhwahas predominated. According to a modern calculation, the proportion of Hindus in the nobility under Akbar in 1594 was about 16 per cent only. But these figures do not give any adequate idea of the position and influence of the Hindus. Both Raja Man Singh and Raja Birbal were the personal friends and boon companions of Akbar, while in the spheres of revenue administration, Raja Todar Mai had a place of great influence and honour. The Rajputs who were recruited to the nobility were either hereditary rajas or belonged to aristocratic families related to or allied to the raja. Thus, their incorporation into the nobility strengthened its aristocratic character. Despite this, the nobility did provide an avenue of promotion and distinction to persons drawn from the lower section ofRead More
![]() |
Use Code STAYHOME200 and get INR 200 additional OFF
|
Use Coupon Code |
155 videos|512 docs|324 tests
|