[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.jayaswal-1924) › c19.95 # Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c19.95 Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c19.95 - **Language:** English ### [c19.95](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.jayaswal-1924.c19.95) The Jātakas, which go back in date to pre-Buddhan times, do not let any doubt linger as to the existence of the procedure of voting and its use in political matters before the birth of the Śākya Muni. In Jātaka I¹ (p. 399) the election of a king to the vacant throne of a city is described. All the ministers and the Nāgaras (the members of the capital assembly or the citizens of the capital) having agreed unanimously by a common voting (eka-chchhandā hutvā) elected their new king. This was a \*Referendum\* of the whole city, and not the city assembly only, as the word for the City assembly in Pāli is Negama (see ch. xxvii, below). Referendum (\*ºchhandaka) of the whole city (Sakala-nagara) was known to early Buddhist literature on which the author of the commentary on the Jātakas drew. Chhanda, according to the Pāli canon is \*voting\*, and the \*ºchhandaka of the whole city in a city-state would naturally mean a referendum. In any case, the reference to the election of king by a common voting is certainly pre-Buddhan in the text of the Jātaka. There is another passage in the Jātaka, Vol. II, pp. 352-3, which proves that the procedure of moving a resolution three times in political matters obtained before the time of the Buddha. The procedure is mentioned in a humourous fable; it, therefore, must have been well-known in actual life to be so mentioned. A bird is repeating a motion for the election of a rājā, evidently a republican rājā; he has done so twice and the motion was opposed by another member of the assembly: 'Wait please!' The opposer of the motion begged leave to make his speech which was granted on condition that the speaker should state his reasons on the principles of political science and law (\*artha\* and \*dharma\*). The speaker gave his reasons and he carried his opposition. The opposition was on the well-known republican ground: that the proposed king¹ had not a pleasant presence. Evidently, it is a mimicry of the republican principle of election on the ground (amongst others) of good looks and presence. But the procedure which comes out of the mimicry and ridicule establishes our thesis. It was republican first and became Buddhistic afterwards. - [Previous: c19.94](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.jayaswal-1924.c19.94) - [Next: c19.96](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.jayaswal-1924.c19.96) - [Up: c19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.jayaswal-1924.c19) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.jayaswal-1924.c19.95](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.jayaswal-1924.c19.95) · Pramāṇa