State and Government in Ancient India c13.140

c13.140

The Nandsa inscriptions show that early in the 3rd century the leadership of the Mālavas had already begun to pass into hereditary families, which were claiming to be as respectable as the Ikshvāku race. The leaders of the Yaudheyas and the Sanakānīkas had assumed the titles of Mahārājas and Mahāsenāpatis in the 4th century. The same probably was the case with the Lichchhavi republic, for Kumāradevī was an heiress to their dominion. Varāhamihira of the 7th century refers to the king of the Yaudheyas (*Bṛihatsaṁhitā*, X. 1). When the leadership of republics thus passed into the hands of hereditary presidents, who were military leaders and claimed royal titles, they could no longer be distinguished from monarchies. Why the democratic traditions were allowed to be weakened, and why the republics permitted the new developments to take place is still an unsolved problem. The growing tendency to regard monarchy as divine may have induced the republics to accept the leadership of hereditary presidents, styled as Mahārājas. Probably it was felt that the unitary leadership facilitated by the kingship was a better protection against invasions than that offered by the group leadership possible in a republic.