Hindu Polity: A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times c9.26

c9.26

It is clear, as observed above, that the whole people were considered to be present in the Samiti. But when, for instance, Śvetaketu goes to the Samiti of the Pañchālas where philosophers and statesmen were sitting, it would be hardly probable that the whole nation, without any principle of representation, would be actually present. We already find in the Vedic period the principle of representation appreciated and variously acted upon: we have the Grāmaṇī or the 'leader' of the town or village, as a representative *persona* in the coronation ceremony;³ representatives of trade also are seen at the ceremony. From a passage in the 'Hymn to the Land' of the Atharva-Veda, where the Samitis (XII. 1.56, ये संग्रामा समितय: 'the assembled Samitis') of the whole land are referred to, it seems that those who were assembled (*saṃgrāmāḥ*) were the 'villages together' (*saṃgrāma*). The village, as a collective unit, is well known: Śaryāta Mānava 'wandered about with his *grāma* (Śatapatha, IV. 1, 5, 2, 7).⁴ In later times in in law-books, 'the village' fights out legal disputes; 'the village' is even fined. The Grāmaṇī was the key-stone of the village-constitution. The village even took to themselves the name of their leader (Grāmaṇī).¹ We have the 'village-together' meeting (*saṃgrāma*) 'desirous of agreement' in the Taittirīya Saṃhitā (संग्रामे संयत्ते समयकामः).² It seems that the village formed the basis of the constitution of the Samiti, if not originally, certainly, in later times.