The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c11.27

c11.27

In these oligarchies the executive was presided over by a chief called Râjan. There is nothing to show how he was elected or that he was elected at all in the strict sense of the term. The designation Râjan applied to him has monarchical associations. The accounts of the life of the Buddha seem to assume that he might have succeeded his father Śuddhodana in the headship of the Śâkiya clan. A passage, though late, in Kâtyâyana’s Kâśikâ is illuminating on this point. It speaks of “Râjanyas being leaders of families consecrated to leadership.”¹ The chief point of difference between the oligarchic and monarchical executive seems to be that the former was based partly on the idea of clan and had to take account of the assembly. For the rest, the line between the two is very faint, almost non-existent. Besides the Râja there was an Uparâja, a sort of vicegerent and a senâpati or military commander.² Other officers, too, might have been appointed. The Mahâvastu speaks of the Licchavis appointing a Mahattaka to be the envoy of the whole people.³ Mention is made of peons or police among the Koliyans and Mallas.⁴ If a passage in a later work, the Lalitavistara, can be relied on, the clan-executive sometimes found it difficult to carry out its will. “Amongst them (the Vaisâlians) the rule of having respect for the high, the middle ones, the oldest, the elders, is not observed; everyone considers himself to be the Râja; ‘I am the Râja, I am the Râja.’ No one becomes a follower of another.”⁵