[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968) › c13.s2.36 # Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c13.s2.36 Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c13.s2.36 - **Language:** English ### [c13.s2.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c13.s2.36) Thus there is little doubt that the Sakyan state was a non-monarchical political community, as Rhys Davids had suggested, and not a monarchical one ruled by a hereditary king, as D. R. Bhandarkar wrongly claimed. The instances quoted support the view of Majumdar, that the "Śākyas like the Licchavis had a \*number of rājas\*, who were probably members of the supreme assembly ruling over the state".¹⁰ Apart from the Sakyan kings the \*Kuṇāla Jātaka\* also refers to \*uparājās\*,¹¹ or viceroys who sallied forth against the Koliyas. This makes it probable that the Sakyan \*rājās’\* eldest sons were designated \*uparājās\* like the Licchavian \*rājās\* and took their seats in the assembly after the deaths of their fathers.¹ Thus the Sakyas appear to present striking similarities with the Licchavis of Vesālī.² - [Previous: c13.s2.35](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c13.s2.35) - [Next: c13.s2.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c13.s2.37) - [Up: c13.s2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c13.s2) ## Cites (1) - [Jātaka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.jataka) — Pāli --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c13.s2.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c13.s2.36) · Pramāṇa