Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c13: Chapter V: Republics in Panini

Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c13

Language
English

Chapter V: Republics in Panini

c13.2

§ 29. Pāṇini gives most valuable information about Hindu Republics of his time which I take to be about 500 B.C.¹ He gives several rules about the formation of words connected with Saṁghas. The large number of the rules impresses one with the importance which the contemporaries of Pāṇini attached to the existing republics. Like any other important, orthodox institution the Republics engaged the attention of the orthodox grammarians. Further, Pāṇini gives an indication as to the part of the country and area covered by the republics in his days.

c13.3

¹ This date is based on political data in Pāṇini which may be discussed in detail in a separate paper. Here, however, attention may be drawn to the fact that Pāṇini knew the Order of Makkhali Wanderers (=*Maskarin*, VI. 1. 154; M.V., p. 256, ‘*Maskarin*’; see the remark of Patañjali on the word). The Makkhalis merged into the Ājīvakas in the time of Makkhali Gosāla, contemporary of the Buddha, from whose time they acquired the latter designation. Aṅga had evidently ceased to be a separate kingdom, while Kosala was still independent (IV. 1. 170-175). Again, Pāṇini knew *Saṁgha*, as discussed above, only in the sense of a republic. The mention of the script of the *Yavanas* can now be easily explained, in view of their identification proposed here below with the Hellenic City State of Nysa, on the Kabul river, which had existed long before Alexander. See also Greek letters on Persian coins struck in India, Rapson, IC., pl. I.

c13.4

With Pāṇini, as we have seen above, the word Saṁgha is a technical term which denoted the *political Saṁgha*, or, as he calls it, the Gaṇa or Republic. He does not know the *religious Saṁgha*, which, as we shall presently see (§ 43), was a copy of the *political Saṁgha*. In the days of Pāṇini, Buddhist and Jaina Saṁghas either did not exist (and in that case Pāṇini's date would be about 600 B. C.), or they had not become important. It is to be noticed that Kātyāyana (cir. 400 B.C.)² found Saṃgha in the same technical sense as Pāṇini, for he gives no *vārttika* to Pāṇini, III 3.86, in dissent. K a u ṭ i l y a (cir. 300 BC.) too has the same use but with the difference that he employs it in a general sense as well (pp 36, 49, 407), *viz.*, that of a corporate association.

c13.5

² J. BORS., I., pp. 82, 116.

c13.6

§ 30. Pāṇini in V. 3. 114 to 117 gives *taddhita* rules with regard to the Saṃghas of the V ā h ī k a c o u n t r y. By those rules, the members of a particular S a m g h a, when mentioned, could be distinguished, whether they were Brahmins, Kshatriyas, or of castes other than those. For instance, take the well-known example of the M ā l a v a s, called Malloi by Alexander's historians.¹ A non-Brahmin and a non-Kshatriya of the M ā l a v a S a m g h a would be called M ā l a v y a ḥ; while a Kshatriya would be M ā l a v a ḥ, the plural in each case being M ā l a v ā ḥ.² This points to the stage of a developed, the familiar, Hindu society, as opposed to a tribal stage.

c13.7

¹ The credit of identifying the *Oxydrakai* and *Malloi* of the Greek writers with the *Kshudrakas* and *Mālavas* of the grammar belongs to Sir Rāmakrishna Gopāla Bhandarkar, who was the first to correct the mistaken identification put forward by scholars. They had taken the former to stand for *Sudras*. See *Ind Ant.*, Vol. I, p 23.

c13.8

² आयुधजीविंसंघाञ् ञ्यड्‌वाहीकेष्वब्राह्मणराजन्यात् ॥५।३।११४॥ Kāśikā…वाहीकेषु ये आयुधजीविसंघास्तद्वाचिनः प्रातिपदिकाद्ब्राह्मणराजन्यवर्जितात्स्वार्थे ञ्यङ्‌प्रत्ययो भवति। ब्राह्मणे तद्विशेषवचनम्। राजन्ये तु ‘तद्राजप्रत्ययमेव’…। क्षौद्रक्यः क्षौद्रक्यौ क्षुद्रकाः। मालव्यः। मालव्यौ। मालव्याः… pp. 455-456.

c13.9

§ 31. K ā t y ā y a n a, commenting on Pāṇini, IV. 1. 168, says that the rule (of the *aṇ pratyaya*) in making a derivative from the national designation of a Kshatriya will hold good only if the Kshatriya is not a member of a S a m g h a, for the rule is limited to the case of a m o n a r c h y.³

c13.10

³ जनपदशब्दात्क्षत्रियादञ् ॥४।१।१६८॥ Kātyāyana :—क्षत्रियादेकराजात्संघप्रतिषेधार्थम्। [*Ekarāja* is a technical term for monarch in Hindu politics. The term is explained in coronation rituals in Vedic literature. Its interpretation as 'monarch' is now accepted (see Macdonell and Keith, *Vedic Index*, Vol. I, p. 119). Literally, it means the 'sole sovereign.' (See Arthaśāstra, Bk XI, Ch. I, p. 379).] Patañjali on the above says:—क्षत्रियादेकराज्यादिति वक्तव्यम्। किं प्रयोजनम्। संघप्रतिषेधार्थम्। संघाचा माभूत्। पञ्चालानामापत्यम् विदेहाना मपत्यमिति ॥ तत्तर्हि वक्तव्यम्। न वक्तव्यम्। न ह्यन्तरेण बह्वचो लुक् पञ्चाला इत्यादिभवति। तस्माद्यावद्रूते युवप्रत्ययः स स्यात्। युवप्रत्ययस्य शब्दं लुकाभिधायभू-भविष्यति ॥ इदं तर्हि क्षौद्रकानामपत्यम् मालवानामपत्यमिति। अत्रापि क्षौद्रकाः मालवा इति नैतत्तेषां दासे वा भवति कर्मकरे वा। किं तर्हि। तेषामेव कस्मिंश्चित्। यावता तेषामेव कस्मिंश्चित्समाद्युच्यते युवप्रत्ययः स स्यात्। युवप्रत्ययस्येत्येवा लुक्प्रत्याभ्यां समाविष्यति ॥ अथ क्षत्रियग्रहणं किमर्थम्। इह मा भूत्। विदेहो नाम ब्राह्मणस्तस्यापत्यं वैदेहः —Kielhorn, Vol. II, pp. 268-69.

c13.11

The results of the above discussion are that S a ṃ g h a is contrasted with m o n a r c h y, and that a Saṃgha or a Hindu republic had Brahmin members, Kshatriya members and other castes, *i.e.*, the personnel of the Saṃghas was not composed of one caste or tribe.

c13.12

§ 32. Pāṇini mentions the following Saṃghas or Republics by name:—

c13.13

1. the V ṛ i k a,¹
2. the D ā m a n i ('and others'),²
3. to 8. the T r i g a r t t a-S h a s h ṭ h a³ or the L e a g u e of the Six T r i g a r t t a s whose names are given in the Kāśikā on the authority of an ancient verse as follows:— (*a*) the K a u ṇ ḍ o p a r a t h a: (*b*) the D ā ṇ ḍ a k i: (*c*) the K a u s h ṭ a k i: (*d*) the J ā l a m ā n i: (*e*) the B r ā h m a g u p t a: (*f*) the J ā n a k i:
9. the Y a u d h e y a, 'and others,'⁴ and
10. the P a r ś v a, 'and others.'⁴

c13.14

¹ 'वृकात् ण्यङ्' V. 3. 115. The connection of this Sūtra is with the previous one, which is already quoted above.

c13.15

² दामन्यादि त्रिगर्तषष्ठाच्छः ॥ V. 3. 116.

c13.16

³ 'आयुधजीविसंघाञ् ञ्यड् बाह्लीकेष्वब्राह्मणराजन्यात्' कौण्डोपरथोदाण्डकीः कौष्टकिर्जालमानिः। ब्राह्मणगुप्तोऽथ जानकिः पाणिनेरुक्तः ।। p. 456

c13.17

⁴ 'यौधेयादिभ्योऽणञौ' V. 3. 117. The Kāśikā, after this Sūtra, says that with 117, the *āyudhajīvi-saṃgha* description ends. By iv. 1. 178 (to be read with Sūtra 168 *supra*) Pāṇini calls the Yaudheyas a *janapada*, a nation or country, *i.e.*, political community. The Parśvas of Pāṇini were in the, Vāhīka country (See § 34 *infra*), and there were Brahmins and Rājanyas amongst them. The Parśvas are mentioned in the Vedas also, VI., I, pp. 504-5.

c13.18

Pāṇini calls these Saṁghas *āyudhajīvinaḥ*. Kauṭilya has in its place *Śastropajīvinaḥ*. Now, what is the meaning of this? The first impression will be to interpret it as 'those who live by the profession of arms,' as I took it myself in my essay in the *Modern Review*. But this meaning is not maintainable for two reasons. The Artha Śāstra contrasts the Śastropajīvin Saṁghas with Rājaśabdopajīvin Saṁghas, which means, according to Kauṭilya's further discussion (p. 377)¹ the Saṁghas whose rulers assume the 'title' (*śabda*) of *rājan*. We know from inscriptions, coins and literature that elected or appointed rulers in some Indian republics did assume that title.² Now, here 'upajīvin' cannot mean 'living by,' as a republic cannot *live* by the title *rājā*. The meaning which would suit both classes of Kauṭilya's republics is the other known meaning of the verb *upajīv*, 'to observe' *e.g.*, in Manu, X. 74, where a Brahmin is asked to *upajīv* the six duties, which include making gifts.³ Upajīvin in that sense explains that the Saṁghas called 'Śastropajīvins' *observed* the practice of arms or military art, and that the Saṁghas called 'Rājaśabdopajīvins' *observed* the practice of assuming the title rājān. In other words, their respective constitutions enjoined on the members to be skilled in military art in the former, and on the rulers or every privileged member to bear the title in the latter (§ 59).

c13.19

¹ राजशब्दोभिरवरुद्धमवक्षिप्तं वा... AS. XIX, p. 377.

c13.20

² Cf. c. xviii. below; also § 51.

c13.21

³ ब्राह्मणा ब्रह्मयोनिस्या ये स्वकर्मण्यवस्थिताः । ते सम्यगुपजीवेयुः षट्कर्माणि यथाक्रमम् ॥ ७४ ॥ अध्यापनमध्ययनं यजनं याजनं तथा। दानं प्रतिग्रहश्चैव षट्कर्माप्यग्रजन्मनः ॥ ७५ ॥ Manu, X. Kullūka, सम्यग्जीवेयुः = अनुतिष्ठेयुः

c13.22

§ 33. The Macedonian writers¹ describe many of these republics, two of which are the grammarians' 'military' (āyudhajīvin or śastropajīvin) Saṁghas: the Kshudrakas and the Mālavas. Their territories and populations were large. Their states comprised several cities. They were very rich. Any idea of mercenary life is excluded by the Greek description. They were large sovereign states, with noted wealth, prosperity and civil organisation. Do these writers notice any characteristics which may correspond to the *āyudhajīvin*? They do; and their datum agrees with the interpretation which we have offered above. They say that these free communities were the most famous for their *military skill*.¹ The Greek writers further describe one constitution the law of which made the citizens devote only limited attention to military matters, implying thereby that others did the opposite.² Upajīv thus has a reference to their conventional or constitutional practice. The *āyudhajīvinaḥ* of Pāṇini are to be taken as denoting those republics which considered military art as the vital principle of their constitution. That was the chief feature of their constitution in the eyes of their contemporaries, as the chief feature in the other class of republics was the law which allowed the elected president (or every member of a ruling council) to be called *rājā* or 'king.'³

c13.23

¹ See below, Chapter viii, on Hindu Republics in Greek Writers.

c13.24

² See Strabo, xv. 34, on Mousikanos; § 51, below.

c13.25

³ I take this opportunity to correct the interpretation which I put on the expression *rājaśabdopajīvinaḥ* formerly. I thought that it referred to all the citizens of a republic being called *rājāns*. But now I find that no such constitution existed. The republics mentioned in Buddhist documents, which we shall discuss presently, allowed the title only to the elected president, although the citizens in general are alluded to as *rājans*, in the sense that they composed the sovereign body, and also that every one had the possibility of being elected *Rājan*.

c13.26

§ 34. Further, Pāṇini says that these republics were situated in the Vāhīka Country. Now, what was the Vāhīka Country? It has been already realized that the people Vāhīkas mentioned in the Mahā-Bhārata were in the Punjab.¹ But the significance of the word *Vāhīka* has not yet been considered. I think the word *Vāhīka* means 'the country of the rivers,'² and as such, the Vāhīka-land would comprise the Sind velley and the Punjab. These are exactly the limits given in the Mahā-Bhārata: ('the 'Vahīkas) that live in the valleys of the five rivers and in that 'of the Sindhu as the sixth.'³ From the known history of some of the Vāhīka republics of the grammar, we can say that the Vāhīka land did include Sind. For instance, the Kshudrakas and the Mālavas were partially in Sind.⁴ The Kāśikā puts them amongst the illustrations of the Vāhīka-Saṁghas.⁵ The Vāhīka country was 'away from the Himalayas,' *i.e.*, it did not include the mountain districts.⁶ [The Six Trigarttas were at the foot of the Himalayas in the Punjab, about Jammu or Kangra.]

c13.27

¹ See Sylvain Lévi, *Ind. Ant.*, vol. xxxv (1906), p. 18.

c13.28

² From the verb बह to *flow*, Cf. वाहिनी—a river.

c13.29

³ पञ्चानां सिन्धुषष्ठानां नदीनां येऽन्तराश्रिताः। Karṇa-Parvan, xliv. 7. Nāgeśa—Pradīpoddyota on Pāṇini, एकः प्राचां देशे, I. 1. 75,

c13.30

⁴ See also KarṇaParvan, M-Bh., Ch. xl. 41, where the Madras and Sindhu-Sauvīras are grouped together. Cf. V. Smith, J. R. A. S., 1903, 685.

c13.31

⁵ वाहीकेषु य आयुधजीविसंघस्तद्वाचिनं...क्षौद्रक्यः। मालव्यः। Kasika...pp 455-6

c13.32

⁶ The Mahā-Bhārata describes the Vāhīka country away from the Himalayas (K. P. xliv. 6). Pāṇini also treats the mountaineers as distinct (IV. 3. 91).

c13.33

"शतद्रु विपाशैरावती वितस्ता चन्द्रभागति पञ्चनद्यः सिन्धुः
षष्ठस्तन्मध्यदेशो वाहीक इति तद्व्याख्यातारः"।

c13.34

The whole of the Punjab, according to the Mahā-Bhārata, was under one ruler, who was at Śākala, and the people had become heterodox. This indicates the time of Menander and later.

c13.35

§ 35. Besides these martial republics, Pāṇini gives us the names of six other communities which from independent sources¹ are known to have been republican about that period. These are:—
(1) the M a d r a ;²
(2) the V ṛ i j i ;³
(3) the R ā j a n y a ;⁴
(4) the A n d h a k a - V ṛ i s h ṇ i ;⁵
(5) the M a h ā r ā j a ;⁶ and
(6) the B h a r g a :⁷

c13.36

¹ See subsequent chapters for the account of the republics named here.

c13.37

² मद्रहलोः कन् । ४ ॥ २ ॥ १३१ ॥

c13.38

³ राजन्यादिभ्यो वुञ् ॥ ४ ॥ २ ॥ ५३ ॥ See also the Gaṇapātha on this for names of some other communities which are known to be republican.

c13.39

⁴ राजन्यसञ्चत्रवण्द्वन्द्देऽन्धकवृष्णिषु ॥ ६ ॥ २ ॥ ३४ ॥

c13.40

⁵ महाराजाट्ठञ्_॥ ४ ॥ ३ ॥ ९७ ॥ See discussion below on the Mahārāja 'nation,' §§ 118, 126.

c13.41

⁶ [^cont]

c13.42

⁷ न प्राच्यभर्गादि-यौधेयादिभ्यः ॥ ४ ॥ १ ॥ १७८ ॥ The Bhargas are called here 'Easterners.' According to the Mahā-Bhārata (Sabhā-Parvan, xxx 10, 14), they were between the Vatsa territory and the Southern Mallas, who were not very far from the Videhas. Pāṇini finds them a political community like the Yaudheyas, with whom he groups them (IV. 1. 168-78). The Buddhist records mention the Bhargas in the republican groups extending from Kosala and Kausāmbī eastwards, and place the Bhargas next to the Vatsas (*Buddhist India*, p. 22; Jātaka, III, 157).

c13.43

Although Pāṇini had no occasion to call them *Saṃghas* yet the rules show that he knew them as republican. As we shall have opportunity to discuss these states in sequence, it is not necessary to go into details here.

c13.44

§ 36. Pāṇini's A n d h a k a - V ṛ i s h ṇ i s have to be noted separately. They, in the Purāṇas, are identical with the Sātvats. The Sātvats, according to the Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, had the *Bhaujya* Constitution, and their rulers were called *Bhojas*.⁸ In the Mahā-Bhārata, the Andhaka rulers are called *Bhojas*, and a subdivision of the Yādavas itself is latterly called Bhojas.¹ The fact that the Vṛishṇis had no rājans in their constitution, is expressed in folklore and legend in that they had been cursed not to be crowned as kings. The Mahā-Bhārata, in Sabhā-Parvan (xxxvii. 5), says that the Daśārṇas (Vṛishṇis) were 'kingless.' That they were a Saṁgha, is attested by Kauṭilya who mentions the Vṛishṇi Saṁgha as having come to grief by offending Dvaipāyana in olden days.² The Mahā-Bhārata gives an 'ancient' discourse on the Andhaka-Vṛishṇi Saṁgha.³ That they had no republican 'rājan,' is proved by their coin which, in the scripts of the first century B.C., is struck in the name of their *Gaṇa*.⁴

c13.45

⁸ Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, Bk. viii, 14.

c13.46

¹ *Sabhāparvan*, Ch. xiv; *S'āntiparvan*, Ch. lxxxi.

c13.47

² *AS.*, 1.6, 3, p 11.

c13.48

³ See Appendix A, where the whole discourse has been translated.

c13.49

⁴ Cunningham, *Coins of Ancient India*, p. 70, pl. IV; *J.R.A.S.*, 1900, pp. 416, 420; 424 (Rapson).

c13.50

§ 37. The Vṛishṇi coin has a peculiarity which distinguishes it from the coins of other republics. Coins of republics where there was no 'king'-consul, were struck in the name of the Gaṇa,⁵ *e.g.*, "Victory to the Gaṇa of the Ārjunāyanas," "Of the Mālava-Gaṇa," "Victory of the Yaudheya-Gaṇa." There is one exception to this in the case of one type of the Yaudheya coins which is struck both in the name of the Executive Council (*Mantra-dharas*) and the Gāṇa.⁶ The Vṛishṇi coin resembles none of these varieties. It is struck in the name of the *Rājanya* and *Gaṇa*⁷ of the Vṛishṇis: "*Vṛishṇi-rājaññā-gaṇasya.*" The constitutional significance of the word, *Rājanya*, has to be ascertained. There is evidence to hold that in the case of the Vrishṇis it had a definite constitutional meaning. Let us examine it.

c13.51

⁵ Cunningham, *Ibid.*, pp. 77, 89, pl. VI, VII; V. Smith, *Catalogue of Coins in the Indian Museum*, Calcutta, Vol. I, pp. 166, 170.

c13.52

⁶ Hoernle, *Proc. A. S. B.*, 1884, pp. 138-40. On *mantra-dharas*, consult discussion below on ministers, under Monarchy, § 302.

c13.53

⁷ Read *ññ* instead of *jñ*; cf. Kharoshṭhī *rājanna* (*J.R.A.S.*, 1900, p. 416.)

c13.54

§ 38 We gather from Pāṇini that there were two Rājanyas amongst the Andhaka-Vrishṇis.¹ He gives a special rule how to mention them (VI. 2. 34). The Kāśikā,² commenting on that says that the rule does not apply to the members of the Andhakas and Vrishṇis as such, but to their Rājanyas only, the 'Rājanyas being leaders of families consecrated to rulership.' The names of several of these 'dual' groups of Rulers are preserved in literature: the Rājanyas of the groups of Śini and Vāsudeva, Śvāphalka and Chaitraka are cited in the Kāśikā,³ the Party (*varga*) of Akrūra and the Party of Vāsudeva are alluded to by Kātyāyana,⁴ Vāsudeva and Ugrasena-Babhrū are mentioned as leading their parties, in the Māhā-Bhārata (§ 197).

c13.55

¹ राजम्यबहुवचन-द्वन्द्वेऽन्धकवृष्णिषु ॥ ६ ॥ २ ॥ ३४ ॥

c13.56

² Kāśikā, राजन्यावाचिनां बहुवचनान्तानां यौ द्वन्द्वोऽन्धकवृष्णिषु वर्तते तत्र पूर्वपदं प्रकृतिस्वरं भवति । वाफलकचैत्रकाः (after Dīkshita), शिनि-वासुदेवाः ।...अन्धकद्वयस्य एते न तु राजन्याः । राजन्यशब्दश्च-भिजातिविकलंस्तानां क्षत्रियाणां सङ्घवाचकम् । एते च नामिषिक्तवंश्याः ।......बहुवचनग्रहणम् किम् । संकर्षण-वासुदेवौ ।..." pp. 546-7.

c13.57

³ Kāśikā, p. 546. *Chaitraka-radhaka* was probably the full name. The Kāśikā treats it as such ; Dīkshita omits *radhaka* as does the Kāśikā later on.

c13.58

⁴ On Pāṇini, IV. 2.104— अक्रूरवर्गः । अक्रूरवर्गीयाः । वासुदेववर्गीयाः ।

c13.59

§ 39. Apparently, the Vrishṇi-Andhaka league had a joint federal constitution where executive power was vested in two *rājanyas*, with their respective *vargas*, representing each division; and this was probably the Rājanyaka of Amara.⁵ Kātyāyana mentioning 'the Party (Varga) of Akrūra' and the 'Party of Vāsudeva,' undoubtedly draws on old literature. Akrūra was an Andhaka leader; and it seems that at one time he was one of the two presidents of the Federal Council. This explains Kṛishṇa's saying in the Mahā-Bhārata¹ that he holds authority or *Aiśvarya* to the extent of one half only (*ardhabhoktā*). In the tradition quoted in the Mahā-Bhārata, the party of Akrūra is bitterly complained against by Kṛishṇa. Probably it is to a constitution like that of the Andhaka-Vṛishṇis that the Jaina Sūtra refers as the rule of opposing parties.²

c13.60

⁵ On the word वर्ग, see discussion below, under JANAPADA, § 258. It really means an assembly or council. Brihaspati (Vivāda-Ratnākara, p. 569) calls gaṇa, pūga (guild) and similar bodies '*vargas*.' Mitramiśra explains a *vargia* body as a gaṇa (Vīramitrodaya, p. 12); see also Nīlakaṇṭha, Mayūkha, L. on *varga* as a corporate body, and Pāṇini (V. 1. 60), in the sense of assembly whose members were counted. A Senate or Council (gaṇa) of Kshatriyas is called Rājanyaka, and a council of 'Kings,' Rājaka, by Amara (II 8.4 ), § 25 above. See also below on Arājaka, § 101.

c13.61

¹ See Appendix A, § 197.

c13.62

² Āchārāṅga Sūtra, II. 3. 10: *Viruddha-rājya*.

c13.63

§ 40. Changing dual groups—Vāsudeva and Ugrasena, Akrūra and Vāsudeva, Śini and Vāsudeva—suggest that the Andhaka Rājanya and the Vṛishṇi Rājanya were elected rulers. The coins were struck in the name of the Rājanya and in the name of the Gaṇa, jointly. Other coins struck in the name of Rājanyas without the mention of the name of the states, have been found.∗ In view of our interpretation of the term Rājanya, in all probability, they are republican coins.

c13.64

∗ E.g., See Cunningham, *Coins of Ancient India*, p. 89, pl. IV.

c13.65

§ 41. Pāṇini implies by his rule IV. 3. 127 that a *Saṅgha* had its aṅka and lakshaṇa.† Aṅka means a mark, and lakshaṇa also has a similar significance. I propose to identify this 'lakshaṇa' of Pāṇini with the 'lāñchhana' or heraldic crest of later Sanskrit. The lakshaṇa was the permanent heraldic mark of a Saṅgha-state which they employed on their seals, and probably also on their coins and standards. The Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya (II. 12, p. 84), in laying down rules for the manufacture of silver and copper coins, calls the Mint-Master 'Lakshaṇa-adhyaksha' or the 'Director of Lakshaṇas.' The Mint-Master appears to have acquired this official designation on account of the lakshaṇa he stamped on the coins. Evidently this refers to a coinage when no name, far less the figure, of the ruler was struck. The lakshaṇa, therefore, in Kauṭilya, is the 'royal' or 'state' mark. The aṅka, it seems to me, refers to symbols adopted by changing governments. An elected ruler or body of rulers adopted their own special aṅka which was given up when those officers went out of office. In Hindu-Law books we get hastāṅka for signature.¹ Kālidāsa uses the term gotrāṅka in connection with a song, that is a signed song.² The verb aṅk is used from the time of Kauṭilya³ (and evidently earlier) up to Kālidāsa,⁴ and even later, in the sense of 'marking with letters or figures.' We have the term Rājāṅka, in Kauṭilya, with which the bulls of the royal stable were marked or branded. Aṅka thus signifies an individual mark. It may mean even the legend or the motto adopted by a ruler. Reference may be made to the legends Mānāṅka and Guṇāṅka (*aṅka* of King Māna, *aṅka* of King Guṇa) of Nepal coins, 425—450 A.C.⁵ This interpretation would explain the permanent and the changing symbols and legends on republican coins. In the case of earlier punchmarked coins without legends, a Saṅgha probably employed its special aṅka in initial letter-marks and otherwise, and its *lakshaṇa* in the figure of an animal or river, town or the like. The animal most likely is the lakshaṇa, and the legend, aṅka. The constitutional point is that the corporate

c13.66

† *संघाङ्कलक्षणेष्वञञञिञामण्* ४ । ३ । १२७ । See Kāsikā, p. 350, यार्के संघः । नार्मटैः । मालो लक्षणम् ।

c13.67

¹ 'प्राङ्‌विवाकादि-हस्ताङ्कं मुद्रितं राजमुद्रया। Vṛiddha-Vasishṭha quoted in the Vīramitrodaya, p. 295 (ed. Jīvānanda).

c13.68

² > उत्सङ्गे वा मलिनवसने सौम्य निक्षिप्य वीणां

c13.69

³ Arthasāstra, II. 29, p. 129.

c13.70

⁴ नामाङ्कितं (*Sākuntalā*).

c13.71

⁵ Lévi cited by Walsh, J.R.A.S. 1908, pp. 678-79; Rapson, C.I., 32. The Kāśikā (p. 304) gives nānā as an example of aṅka. We know that some of the Kushān coins bore the lenged NANA. The Kāśikā is evidently referring to that legend.

c13.72

मद्गोत्राङ्कं विरचितपदं गेयमुद्गातुकामा।
—Meghadūta, II. 85.

c13.73

character of the *Saṃgha* is emphasised by the corporate crest and symbols.¹

c13.74

¹ Kātyāyana points out that Pāṇini's IV 3. 127. will apply to township called Ghosha also, घोषग्रह्णमपि कर्तव्यम्. (Bhattoji Dīkshita). This leads us to the inference that townships or municipalities also had their corporate symbols or arms. Such arms have been recognised, *e.g.*, in the Sohgaura plate. Fleet, J.R.A.S., 1907, p. 526. Now their technical name, lakshaṇa, is disclosed by the grammar.

c13.75

Again by Sūtra III. 3. 42, Pāṇini indicates a division of republics into two classes: (1) Where no 'upper-and-lower condition' exists, and (2) where the condition does exist.² By the first we may understand a one-chamber constitution and by the second a double-chamber constitution. The word used by Pāṇini for (1) is "anauttarādharya," and he lays down the rule that a *Saṃgha* to which this characteristic attached, was designated Kāya or Nikāya, meaning one 'body.'³ In Pāli, Nikāya has got the same primary meaning, a 'fraternity' (Childers). The Buddhist fraternity was composed of only one house Apparently the term was borrowed by the Buddhists from political phraseology. Three political Nikāyas are named in grammatical literature: Śāpiṇḍi-Nikāya, Mauṇḍi-Nikāya and Chikkali-Nikāya.⁴

c13.76

² संघे चानौत्तराधर्ये ॥ ३ ॥ ३ ॥ ४२ ॥ With this S. III, 3.8 6 should be read. The latter refers to Saṃgha as Pāṇini understood and defined it, a political saṃgha, a gaṇa.

c13.77

³ See the previous Sūtra III. 3. 41: निवासचितिशरीरोपसमाधानेष्वादेश्च कः ॥

c13.78

⁴ Kāsikā on Pāṇini, VI. 2. 94 (p. 559). Pāṇini's rule is about the proper names of Nikāyas, संघाधौ गिरिनिकाययोः ।

c13.79

As we shall see now (§ 43), Nikāya was not the only constitutional designation for the community borrowed by Buddhism. *Saṃgha* itself was borrowed.

Linked texts (12)