State and Government in Ancient India c13.74

c13.74

It is clear that the constitutional machinery of small states like those of the Moriyas, the Koliyas and the Śākyas, which included hardly a few score villages in their jurisdiction, must have been different from that prevailing in big states like those of the Yaudheyas and the Mālavas, which covered extensive territories including dozens of cities and thousands of villages. It appears that in the small states of north-eastern India, most of the members of the Central Assembly lived in the capital where they used to meet frequently in the Assembly Hall (*santhāgāra*) to transact business of the state. Each member of the aristocratic order was known as a *rājā* and his son as an *uparājā*.¹ Probably the *rājā* held some zemindari land in the moffusil which he managed through his local agents. Besides the governing class, the population consisted of a large number of artisans farmers, servants and serfs. When a quarrel arose between the farmers and servants of the Koliyas and the Śākyas about the distribution of the water of the Rohiṇī, they reported it to the officer of their own state, who in turn appraised their *rājās* about it. It is the latter, who decided to go on war with the opposing state. This incident, therefore, shows that the commoners had not much voice in the momentous decisions of the central government on important topics like peace or war, which affected the whole population. There were, however, a number of small towns and villages in the Sākya state, which had their own Assemblies meeting in their Assembly Halls (*santhāgāras*).¹ It is very likely that in these village assemblies the non-privileged classes may have had an equal voice in local affairs.