Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c10.s2: Early History and Status

Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c10.s2

Language
English

Early History and Status

c10.s2.1

Some knowledge of the Videhan background is prerequisite to the study of their republican institutions at the time of the Buddha. They were a monarchy during the Brāhmaṇa period¹ and became a republic just before the birth of Buddhism.² The first mention of the Videhas is found in the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* which preserves the memory of a time when the sacrificial system, as it flourished on the Sarasvatī, was still a stranger to the land of the Videhas. The same text introduces us to Videgha Māthava, the national hero of the Videhas, who goes eastwards across the Sadānīrā and there establishes their rule. "But Agni Vaiśvānara, who comes from the Sarasvatī, does not accompany him; he cannot burn beyond the Sadānīrā. Hence, in earlier ages no Brāhmaṇas went across the river to the east, for it was a bad land, whereof Agni Vaiśvānara had not tasted. However, eastward of that river many Brāhmaṇas now dwell; ... now it is indeed, a desirable place, for the Brāhmaṇas have made it enjoyable through offerings to the gods".³

c10.s2.2

¹ *Sat. Br.*, i, 4, 1, 10ff; Eggeling, *SBE*, xii, p. xli, fn. 4; *Vedic Index*, ii, p. 298.

c10.s2.3

² *Aṅguttara*, i, p. 213, iv, pp. 252, 256, 260; *Vinaya*, ii, p. 146; *cf.* *DPPN*, ii, pp. 79, 80; *PHAI*, p. 83.

c10.s2.4

³ *Sat. Br.*, i, 4, 1, 10ff; *cf.* Oldenberg, *Buddha*, pp. 398ff.

c10.s2.5

The difference between the ancient Vedic land of culture in the west and the east, where there was Aryan land but not yet a long established home of Vaiśvānara, can scarcely be more significantly expressed.⁴ Certainly the boundary between the two tracts here appears to have been already pushed forward a stage farther towards the east. The Kosalas had entered into the community of Vedo-Brāhmaṇic culture earlier than the Videhas.⁵ Quite in accordance with this is the fact that among the names of the stocks not held in full esteem, as though being non-Aryans and at the same time applied as the designation of mixed castes, Vaideha occurs as well as Māgadha.⁶ In Weber's opinion, the Aryan immigrants themselves were not wholly Brāhmaṇized, i.e., not wholly permeated by the culture of the Kuru-Pāñcālas.⁷ The *Kauśītaka Āraṇyaka* states that the residence of the Brāhmaṇas in the Magadhan territory was considered something unusual and that such Brāhmaṇas were not respectable.¹

c10.s2.6

⁴ *Cf.* Weber, *Indische Studien*, ii, pp. 309ff.

c10.s2.7

⁵ *Cf.* *Vedic Index*, ii, p. 298.

c10.s2.8

⁶ *Manu*, x, 11; *Gautama*, iv, 17; *cf.* Oldenberg, *Buddha*, p. 399 fn.

c10.s2.9

⁷ A. Weber, *His. Ind. Lit.*, p. 305.; *cf* Oldenberg, *Buddha*, p. 400fn.

c10.s2.10

¹ *Kauś. Ār.*, 7, 14.

c10.s2.11

The entire Brāhmaṇic literature emphasizes and attributes sacredness to the Kuru-Pāñcāla region. Although Janaka and his Purohita Yājñavalkya provided intellectual and spiritual leadership for all the paṇḍits of northern India at the time, the *Brāhmaṇas* are intent on stressing the debt of Yājñavalkya to his *guru* Ilaka Āruṇi of Kuru-Pāñcāla. In this connection Oldenberg makes a valid comparison of the Indian situation with that of the Greeks. He states that considering the wide spread of the Aryan territory and Aryan peoples in India, it is probable that even in the Vedic age a community of culture no longer prevailed throughout this vast tract. Analogies with kindred nations (Aetolians and Ionians; Umbrians, Latins and Oscanns) show this development of separate cultures. Similarly there is a difference between the western stocks of India with their Vedic culture and the eastern peoples who developed themselves more slowly; between the Kuru-Pāñcālas on the one side and the peoples of Kosala, Videha and Magadha on the other. This distinction must be recognized, according to Oldenberg, although the contrast is not so sharp as between the different Greek stocks.²

c10.s2.12

² Oldenberg, *Buddha*, p. 392.

c10.s2.13

These remarks bring home the point that it was not only because of the Buddha and his doctrine that the easterners were so different from the westerners. Even during the Brāhmaṇa period the Videhas and others had shown a new development which is obvious from a review of the data. The story of Videgha Māthava shows that Videhan culture came from the Brāhmaṇas of the west and that the territory was Aryanized after Kosala. The Videhas, however, later derived some fame and reputation because of the culture of their king, Janaka, who figures in the *Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad*.³ Here he is presented as one of the leading patrons of the new doctrine of *Brahman*. In the *Kauśītaka Upaniṣad* the Videhas are referred to with the Kāśīs as a joint people.⁴ In the list of peoples in the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*, as we have seen, the Videhas are passed over, probably because they were included with Kośala and Kāśi in the term *prācyas*, or "easterners".¹

c10.s2.14

³ *Bṛ. Up.*, iii, 8, 2; iv, 2, 6; 9, 30; *cf. Śat. Br.*, xi, 3, 1, 2, 6; *Tait. Br.*, iii, 10, 9, 9, etc.

c10.s2.15

⁴ *Kauś. Up.*, iv, 1.

c10.s2.16

¹ *Ait. Br.*, 8, 14.

c10.s2.17

The *Yājñavalkya Smṛti* is careful to point out that the path of *Dharma* was revealed by Yājñavalkya, the sage of Mithilā, in that country where the black antelope roams.² This has been explained by the fact that Mithilā (Videha) was not included among the four ancient holy lands of Bhāratavarṣa, it nonetheless acquired sanctity because it was approved of as a pure land by the earlier Dharmaśāstra literature.³ Again, in the *Śāṅkhāyana Śrauta Sūtra* it is recorded that the Kāsi, Kosala and Videha kingdoms had each the same Purohita, Jala Jātūkarṇya.⁴ In another passage of the same text, the relation between the Kosalan king Hiraṇyanābha and the Videhan king Para Āṭnāra is referred to,⁵ while the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* speaks of Para Āṭnāra as a Kosalan King and descendant of Hiraṇyanābha.⁶ All these references make it highly probable that close relations existed between Videhas, Kāsis and Kosalans at an early period.

c10.s2.18

² *Yājñavalkya Smṛti*, i, 2.

c10.s2.19

³ *Cf.* Kane, *op. cit.*, ii, pt. i, p. 14; J. K. Mishra, *A History of Maithilī Literature*, i, p. 3.

c10.s2.20

⁴ *Śāṅkh. Śt. Sūtra*, xvi, 29, 5.

c10.s2.21

⁵ *Ibid.*, xvi, 9, 11-3.

c10.s2.22

⁶ *Śat. Br.*, xiii, 5, 4, 4.

c10.s2.23

The *Pañcaviṁśa Brāhmaṇa* refers to yet another king of Videha, Nami Sāpya.⁷ In the *Taittirīya Saṁhitā* of the *Yajur Veda*⁸ and the *Kāṭhaka Saṁhitā*,⁹ "cows of Videha" seem to be alluded to.¹⁰ The Videhas also appear in the *Baudhāyana Śrauta Sūtra* in the *Brāhmaṇa*-like passages of that text.¹¹

c10.s2.24

⁷ *Pañcav. Br.*, xxv, 10, 17.

c10.s2.25

⁸ *Tait. Saṁ.*, ii, 1, 4, 5.

c10.s2.26

⁹ *Kāṭh. Saṁ.*, xiv, 5.

c10.s2.27

¹⁰ Though the commentator merely takes the adjective *vaidehī* as "having a splendid body" (*viśiṣṭhadeha sambandhinī*), the point of a place name in the expression is not very obvious (*Vedic Index*, ii, p. 298).

c10.s2.28

¹¹ *Baud. Śt. Sūtra*, ii, 5; xxi, 13; *cf. Vedic Index*, ii, p. 298.

c10.s2.29

The Buddhist texts reveal something about the early history of the Videhas as well. According to the *Mahāgovinda Sutta*, it was king Reṇu who, with the help of Mahāgovinda Jotipāla, founded the Videhan kingdom.¹² The commentator Buddhaghosa also informs us that Videha was colonized by settlers who were brought from *Pubba*-Videha by king Mandhātā.¹ In this term we must assume that *pubba* implies "former" (*prācīna*) rather than "eastern." This is an unmistakable preservation of the Brāhmaṇic tradition, but the foundation of the kingdom is accredited to the kings usually idealized in the Buddhist texts. The commentator, if we can trust his statement, presupposes an older Videha. The sources are not at variance with regard to the fact that the Videhas were not the indigenous people of Videha. The Buddhist tradition in no way contradicts the *Brāhmaṇa*, that they came from the west, *Madhyadeśa*, and were of the same stock as the Kurus and Pāñcālas. Like the Kosalas, Kāsīs, Magadhans, Aṅgas and Licchavis, etc., they had moved eastwards beyond what was then considered the "home of genuine Brāhmanism."² In this connection one should also take into account the influence of earlier non-Aryan inhabitants of the region on the customs of the Aryans, with whom they no doubt intermarried.³

c10.s2.30

¹² *Dīgha*, ii, pp. 230ff; *cf. DPPN*, ii, p. 880.

c10.s2.31

¹ *Sum. Vil.*, ii, p. 482; *Pap. Sūd.*, i, p. 184.

c10.s2.32

² Oldenberg, *Buddha*, p. 411.

c10.s2.33

³ Cf. Basham, *Ājīvikas*, pp. 4-5.

Linked texts (20)