> Regardless of what they were named, they were probably no better or worse than the Mughals or the Buddhist Ashokan empire. These were all absolute monarchies,

> Regardless of what they were named, they were probably no better or worse than the Mughals or the Buddhist Ashokan empire. These were all absolute monarchies, with all the terrible implications for individual rights and distribution of power, resources and rights, just like their contemporaries in other parts of the world. I am sorry this is just sweeping away their atrocities. > We'd do well not to overly romanticise any of these ancient political and social structures. We do better if we don't assert false generalizations contrary to empirical evidence.