The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c10.51

c10.51

On failure of sons, the crown seems to have gone to the eldest of the younger brothers of a king (I, 133; II, 367). In certain contingencies in the absence of direct heirs, the crown seems to go to the son-in-law of a king (II, 323). In no circumstances is the crown formally placed on the head of a woman. There is an incidental statement that "infamous . . . is the land which owns a woman's sway and rule; and infamous are the men who yield themselves to women's dominion" (I, 155). Women, however, did sometimes wield the actual sovereignty. In IV, 105, on Udaya's death no king was set up, the commands of his widow Udayabhaddâ were promulgated and the Mahâmattas administered the kingdom. In IV, 84, a brother gives his own share—one-tenth of a kingdom—to his sister but we are not told that the latter was duly crowned. In a few stories the crown is offered to whomsoever the people think fit (e.g., I, 399). Once on the tragic death of a king of Takkasilâ, the Bodhisatta who happened to be the youngest of the hundred sons of Brahmadatta of Benares, is elected king by the courtiers and citizens who admire his self-control. In another story a childless king and his Purohita vow that if either gets a son, he should succeed to the kingdom and to the wealth of both. Thanks to a deity, the Purohita got four sons. But in spite of all possible precautions, the four young men renounce their claims to the sceptre and turn ascetic one after another (IV, 473). It is, however, significant that this story recognises the validity of a king willing the crown out of the royal family.