Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c23.18

c23.18

Constitutions gave distinctive marks to individual political community and converted it, so to say, into artificial tribes. It, therefore, becomes very difficult to distinguish between real tribes and artificial tribes, the ethnic *gotra* and the political *gotra*. Probably the early Sātvats were originally a real tribe as the description of the Vṛishṇis and Andhakas in the Mahā-Bhārata would indicate. But the 'Country of Rājanya (Elected Ruler),' Rājanya-Janapada, was evidently a political tribe, a political community, a creation of constitution.† So was the 'Mahārāja-Janapada.' *Janapada* in such cases becomes a political unit, probably a city-state. The Rāshtrikas and Bhojas were, likewise, creations of constitution. The Kathas, on the other hand, might have been originally a tribe, [as Patañjali's' expression *Katha-jātīyaḥ* may denote. *Jāti*, however, may be a secondary character. *Birth* (*Jāti*) in a *gaṇa*-state was deemed to confer equality in citizenship on a free man. *Kaṭhā-jātīyas* and *Katha-deśīyas* may thus signify only 'men born in the Kaṭha country,' 'men of the Kaṭha-country,' and the Kaṭha-country and Kaṭha-state might have been called after one Kaṭha, the political founder. The other examples of Patañjali, go to support this view, *viz.* Karaka-jātīyas, Karaka-deśīyas, Sraughna-jātīyas, Sraughna-deśīyas. Srughna and Karaka were both place-names, not tribe names. Karaka was evidently derived from a river, *e.g.*, in Pāras-kara (trans-Kara district). *Jāti*, here and in Pāṇini, VI. 3. 41, very likely means 'birth', not caste or nation.] At the same time it is not incompatible with the advanced stage of constitution-making that a community which had been originally a tribal unit and still retained traces of its former organization, should adopt an advanced constitution. But to call all these republics tribal organizations, or 'tribal rebublics' would be unscientific. Every state in ancient Rome and Greece was 'tribal' in the last analysis, but no constitutional historian would think of calling the republics of Rome and Greece mere tribal organizations.