Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c10.s7: Foreign Relations

Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c10.s7

Language
English

Foreign Relations

c10.s7.1

During the Brāhmaṇa period the Videhas had close relations with Magadha, Kāsī and Kosala, as has already been noticed.⁴ But at the time of the Buddha, after the seizure of their kingdom by the Licchavis, they had become members of the Vajjian Confederacy. The very fact of the replacement of their kingdom by a new form of government put them in a special relationship with the Licchavis. This may be the reason that they had a different status in the Confederacy from that of the neighbouring republics of the Mallas of Pāvā and Kusinārā. Their not claiming a part of the relics of the Buddha at Kusinārā, along with the Licchavis of Vesālī, the Mallas of Pāvā and Kusinārā, the Sakyas of Kapilavatthu, etc.,⁵ confirms the view that the Videhan republic had no sovereign rights. The others claimed shares of the relics and later built *stūpas* in their capital towns to enshrine them. The Mallas, though constituent members of the Confederation, did not loose their sovereign rights to the Licchavis, as the latter did not conquer the former.

c10.s7.2

⁴ Above, p. 137; *cf.* *Vedic Index*, ii, pp. 298ff; *DPPN*, ii, pp. 922ff.

c10.s7.3

⁵ *Dīgha*, ii, pp. 164ff.

c10.s7.4

Vesālī afforded political asylum for the victims of other states as Vassakāra, Khaṇḍa and Sakala successfully sought refuge as well as public offices there.¹ That Vesāli was also a centre of attraction to its neighbours is clearly manifested in the desire of Bandhula's wife to have a drink and bath in the Licchavian *Pokkharaṇī*.² A later tradition, preserved in the Tibetan *Dulva*, tells us that "Sakala (Dum-bu), a minister of king Virūḍhaka of Videha, had been obliged to flee from his country on account of the jealousy of the other ministers. So he went to Vaiśālī together with his two sons, Gopāla (Sa-Skyong) and Siṁha (Seng-ge). Sakala soon became a prominent citizen in Vaiśālī, and after awhile he was elected Nāyaka. His two sons married at Vaiśālī, and Siṁha had a daughter whom they called Vāsavi (Gos-chan). She was later to be the queen consort of Bimbisāra".³ This tradition wrongly makes Virūḍhaka (probably Viḍūḍabha of Kosala) the king of Videha, but the story unmistakably shows that Videhan politicians were moving to Vesāli, settling there, and obtaining high public posts.

c10.s7.5

¹ *Cf.* above, pp. 98ff.

c10.s7.6

² *Cf.* above, p. 121.

c10.s7.7

³ Rockhill, *op. cit.*, p. 63; *cp.* *Cīvaravastu*, pp. 5ff.

c10.s7.8

As a member of the Vajjian Confederacy, the Videhans also were threatened by the Magadhan king with ruin and annihilation.⁴ Hence they were on hostile terms with Magadha and fought against it along with the other Confederates of the Vajjian League. Though Ajātasattu's mother was a Videhan princess, this probably did not deter him from fighting against his mother's kinsmen who had espoused the cause of the confederacy.⁵ As the Mallas were also components of the Confederation, the Videhans should have been on good terms with them and our sources do not contradict this. The Buddhist sources relate that their relations with the Licchavis, Nāyas, Mallas, etc. were close, and similarly the Brāhmaṇic literature indicates the close relations of the older Videhan kingdom with Kāsi, Kosala and Magadha.

c10.s7.9

⁴ *Dīgha*, ii, pp. 72ff.

c10.s7.10

⁵ *Cf.* above, pp. 123ff.

c10.s7.11

We have no other evidence to show the details of their relationship even with the members of the League, but one would expect occasional disputes among them, as there were among the Licchavis and the Mallas, the Sakyas and Koliyas. The Jaina evidence does not make it clear whether the Videhans were represented in the Vajjian council, for it mentions only the nine Licchavis and nine Mallas.⁶ But it may be pointed out here that the Jaina texts were compiled mainly in western India and that the compilers had no accurate knowledge of northeastern Indian geography. They seem to have confused the names of the confederating republics. It appears that the Vajjian Council consisted of 18, yet we are not certain how many members came from each confederate, though it seems probable that the Licchavis contributed nine and the remaining nine came from the other confederates, the Mallas, the Videhas and the Nāyas. Even if the Videhan republic was represented at the Council of the Confederacy, however they did not have complete control over their own affairs but were jealously guarded and supervised from the Licchavian and Vajjian centre of Vesālī.

c10.s7.12

⁶ *Kalpa Sūtra*, i, p. 123; *Nirayāvalikā*, ed. Gopani and Chokshi, pp. 19ff.

c10.s7.13

The Vajjian Confederation was organized after the fall of the royal house of Videha.¹ The political evolution of Videha thus closely resembles the developments in the ancient cities of Greece where the monarchies of the Heroic Age were also succeeded by aristocratic republics.² It is clear from the Buddhist and Jaina sources that the Videhans played no significant role in the political activities of the Vajjian Confederacy but were only a second rate power as compared to the Licchavis and the Mallas.

c10.s7.14

¹ *Par. Jot.*, i, pp. 158ff; *cf.* *PHAI*, pp. 83-4.

c10.s7.15

² *PHAI*, p. 121.

c10.s7.16

During the early years of Ajātasattu's reign, the Vajjians and the Magadhans seem to have been perpetually at war.³ The Vajjians included the Videhas.⁴ That their fate was the same as that of the Licchavis is obvious from the fact that all recollection of the confederation seems to have disappeared by the time of Kauṭilya.⁵ The Videhans were included in the Magadhan empire before the Mauryan period. They are not mentioned separately by Kauṭilya ⁶ and Pāṇini,⁷ but are included in the Vṛjis. They are frequently referred to in the *Jātakas* and we also find them mentioned in the Pāli commentaries.

c10.s7.17

³ *Dīgha*, ii, pp. 72ff; *Nirayāvalikā*, pp. 19ff; Basham, *Ajīvikas*, pp. 69ff.

c10.s7.18

⁴ See above, Vajjian Confederacy, pp. 81ff.

c10.s7.19

⁵ See above, p. 135.

c10.s7.20

⁶ *Arthaśāstra*, p. 378.

c10.s7.21

⁷ iv, 2, 131.

c10.s7.22

Following the old Brāhmaṇic tradition, Manu treats them contemptuously. According to the Lawgiver, a Vaiśya male and a Brāhmaṇa female produce a *Vaideha*,¹ whom he considers as base-born (*apa-sada*).² A secondary use of the word is shown in reference to their profession, "the service of women."³ According to Manu again, the *Vaidehakas* are the "lowest of mortals" along with the Sūtas, Cāṇḍālas and Māgadhas.⁴ The *Mahābhārata*⁵ and the *Rāmāyaṇa*⁶ refer to Videha and Mithilā, and the heroine of the latter epic is the Vaidehī Sītā. But the epics only record Videha as a kingdom and not as a republic. The tradition on which these stories are based evidently looks back to the pre-republican period.

c10.s7.23

¹ Manu, x, 11.

c10.s7.24

² *Ibid.*, x, 13, 17.

c10.s7.25

³ *Ibid.*, x, 47.

c10.s7.26

⁴ *Ibid.*, x, 26; also see x, 31, 33, 36-7, etc.

c10.s7.27

⁵ *Mbh. Sabhā P.*, 27, 12-3; *Śānti P.*, 312, 5-19, etc.

c10.s7.28

⁶ *Cf.* Y. Mishra, *op. cit.*, pp. 151ff.

c10.s7.29

In the Gupta period the regions around Mithilā and Vesāli were both called jointly Tirabhukti,⁷ the modern Tirhut. The *Purāṇas* preserve memories of the Videhas; the *Viṣṇu*,⁸ the *Bhāgavata*⁹ and the *Bhaviṣyat Purāṇas*¹⁰ give legendary accounts of Videha and Mithilā, their foundation and kings, etc.¹¹ After Grierson's work on Indian languages the older name Mithilā is becoming more and more popular.¹² The increasing importance of Maithili and the vigorous attitude of the Indians after independence in 1947 has greatly contributed to the revival of old traditions connected with Videha and Mithilā, along with India's past in general. Thus, it would seem that the descendants of Videgha Māthava of the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* continue living in the region under a different name. The strange mixture of the monarchical and republican traditions in the ancient texts, however, still forbids a clear and accurate account of their republican or quasi-republican institutions at the time of the Buddha.¹³

c10.s7.30

⁷ Fleet, *CII*, iii, pp. 8ff.

c10.s7.31

⁸ *Viṣṇu*, pp. 388ff.

c10.s7.32

⁹ *Bhāg.*, ix, 24, 64.

c10.s7.33

¹⁰ *Bhav.*, ix 13.

c10.s7.34

¹¹ *Cf.* Law, *TAI*, pp. 238ff.

c10.s7.35

¹² *Cf.* Y. Mishra, *op. cit.*, p. 151.

c10.s7.36

¹³ For a legendary account of Videha, see B.C. Law, *TAI*, pp. 235-42.

Linked texts (14)