Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c11.75

c11.75

This seems probable from the fact that the Nāya-Khattiyas did not claim a share in the relics of the Buddha as did the neighbouring independent republics of the Licchavis, Mallas, Koliyas and Sakyas, along with the Magadhan king.¹ The passages in question seem to indicate the existence of sovereign rights of particular states, which claimed their share on the ground that the Buddha was a Kṣatriya and so were they. Thus why should the Nāyas not have made their claim if they were independent? The fact that the Nāyas of Kuṇḍapura, like the Videhas of Mithilā, made no such claim suggests that they played second fiddle to the more powerful Licchavis. Their status appears similar to that of some of the provinces of Italy which were subject to the Roman Republic.