The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c6.96

c6.96

That there was an assembly, Sabhâ or Samiti, is beyond doubt. But nothing can be gleaned about its composition. It might have been supposed to consist of all the free Âryas or of the higher classes alone. Nor are its functions any clearer. The king certainly attended it. But Zimmer’s view that he was elected by the assembly is untenable; at any rate, it finds no proof in the Ṛigveda. It is likely that, as Geldner argued, the king was merely accepted by the assembled tribesmen. For the rest, it is “ reasonable to assume that the business of the assembly was general deliberation on policy of all kinds, legislation so far as the Vedic Indian cared to legislate and judicial work.”³ Vidatha is another perplexing term which occurs several times in the Ṛigveda. It has been variously interpreted as an ‘order,’ a secular or religious assembly, a gathering for war, or even abstract ideas like knowledge, wisdom, priestly lore, sacrifice or spiritual authority. Bloomfield holds that it means primarily the ‘house’ and, secondarily, the sacrifice connected with the house. From the context in which the term occurs, it is not possible to glean anything about institutions.¹