[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) › c14 # Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c14: Chapter Nine Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c14 - **Language:** English ### Chapter Nine ### [c14.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.1) \*Name and Etymology\* ### [c14.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.2) The standard Pāli form of this people's name is Koliyas.¹ A varient spelling is Koḷiya.² Similar to the Mallas,³ there is virtual uniformity about the spelling of their name. It was believed to refer to their origin either from the \*kola\* tree or from the sage named Kola. The \*Kuṇāla Jātaka\* refers to the Koliyas in the words of the Sakyas as the "destitute and ill-conditioned fellows, who like brute beasts had their dwelling in a hollow jujube tree.''⁴ Here the Sakyas meant merely to insult their opponents by calling them derogatory names during their dispute over the waters of the river Rohiṇī. Malalasekera only reports this and makes no comment regarding the derivation of the word Koliya.⁵ Law also refers to this evidence but he does not attempt the etymology.⁶ So far as we know, no scholar except Law has given a general account of the Koliyas, and no historian of the Buddhist republics, ancient or modern, has suggested an etymology save that referred to in the preamble of the \*Jātaka\*. ### [c14.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.3) ¹ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165-7; \*Aṅguttara\*, ii, p. 558; \*Sum. Vil.\*, i, pp. 260-62; \*Jāt.\*, i, pp. 407-8; v, pp. 412-15, etc. ### [c14.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.4) ² \*Majjhima\*, i, p. 387. ### [c14.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.5) ³ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 171ff. ### [c14.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.6) ⁴ \*Jāt.\*, v, p. 413. ### [c14.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.7) ⁵ \*DPPN\*, i, pp. 689-90. ### [c14.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.8) ⁶ Law, \*KCBI\*, p. 203; \*SKTAI\*, pp. 207ff; \*TAI\*, pp. 290-92; Majumdar, \*et. al.\*, \*HCIP\*, ii, pp. 16-7. ### [c14.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.9) Significantly, however, most of the sources connect their name with the \*Kola\* (masculine) or \*Kolā\*, \*kolī\* (feminine), meaning the jujube tree. The word \*kola\* occurs in this sense independently in the \*Majjhima Nikāya\*⁷ and the \*Sujāta Jātaka\*.⁸ All the Sanskrit Pāli, and Ardhamāgadhī dictionaries give this word (\*kroḍa\*), the same meaning, "jujube tree," or Hindi \*ber\*.⁹ The \*Sujāta Jātaka\*¹⁰ makes it clear that the jujube fruit (\*kolaphala\*) was red in hue and as large as an egg,¹ thus distinguishing it from another variety of the jujube fruit which comes from thorny bushes and is much smaller than the fruit of the Pāli texts. Both kinds are found in India today and both are called \*ber\*. ### [c14.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.10) ⁷ \*Majjhima\*, i, p. 80. ### [c14.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.11) ⁸ \*Jāt.\*, iii, pp. 21-2. ### [c14.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.12) ⁹ Monier Williams, \*Skt. -Eng. Dic.\*, \*s.v. kroḍa\*; \*Pāli-Eng. Dic.\*, \*s.v. kola\*. ### [c14.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.13) ¹⁰ \*Jāt.\*, iii, pp. 21-2. ### [c14.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.14) ¹ However, it should be noted that the fruit is at first green then turns yellowish gold, and is finally red. ### [c14.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.15) The allusion of the \*Jātaka\* to the Koliyas once dwelling in a hollow jujube tree² cannot be accepted. But the unanimity of almost all the Pāli sources in relating them to the \*kola\* tree is strong evidence and cannot be dismissed. As there is no contradictory information, the emphasis on the relation of the Koliyas with the \*kola\* is great, and probably decisive. We suggest that the Koliyas dwelt in a region where \*kola\* trees grew in abundance, and this was the fact which impelled the Sakyas to call them dwellers in the hollow of \*kolas\*. Koliya may be a tribal name of totemic character, like the name of the Licchavis, which, if our suggestion is correct, is connected with \*ṛkṣa\*, “bear”.³ ### [c14.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.16) ² \*Jāt.\*, v, p. 413. ### [c14.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.17) ³ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 87ff. ### [c14.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.18) \*Origin and Early History\* ### [c14.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.19) The Koliyas, unlike the Videhas—but like the Sakyas, Mallas, Licchavis, etc. do not figure in the Brāhmaṇical literature under this name. Possibly they were known by some other name during the pre-Buddhist period,⁴ but we have no specific statement to this effect. Further, unlike the Licchavis and the Mallas, but like the Nāyas and Sakyas, the Koliyas did not receive even a mere mention at the hands of secular writers such as Pāṇini and Kauṭilya. Neither the \*Vārtikakāra\* Kātyāyana nor the \*Bhāṣyakāra\* Patañjali alludes to these people. The Jainas also appear to have neglected them. Thus, the only known source for the reconstruction of the Koliyan political history and for the understanding of their system of government is the literature of the Buddhists. ### [c14.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.20) ⁴ \*Cp.\* Oldenberg, \*Buddha\*, pp. 401ff. ### [c14.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.21) The Koliyas lived under a republican form of government at the time when their neighbour, the Śākyamuni Gotama, preached his doctrine of the Middle Path.⁵ The centre of their power was at Rāmagāma,⁶ and according to some sources Devadaha also was one of the Koliyan centres.¹ The \*Aṅguttara Nikāya\*,² the \*Mahāvastu\*,³ the \*Apadāna\*,⁴ and Buddhaghosa’s commentary⁵ contain what appears to be a legendary account of the origin of the Koliyas. ### [c14.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.22) ⁵ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165-7; \*Jāt.\*, v, pp. 412-16; \*cf.\* \*DPPN\*, i, pp. 689-90; Rhys Davids, \*Buddhist India\*, p. 22, etc. ### [c14.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.23) ⁶ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff. ### [c14.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.24) ¹ \*Majjhima\*, ii, pp. 214ff; \*cf.\* \*DPPN\*, i, p. 689. ### [c14.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.25) ² \*Aṅguttara\*, ii, p. 558. ### [c14.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.26) ³ \*Mahāvastu\*, i, pp. 352-55. ### [c14.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.27) ⁴ \*Apadāna\*, i, p. 94. ### [c14.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.28) ⁵ \*Sum. Vil.\*, i, pp. 260ff. ### [c14.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.29) We are told⁶ that a king of Banaras, named Rāma, suffered from leprosy, and, being detested by the women of his court, entrusted the kingdom to his eldest son, and himself retired into the forest. There, living on woodland leaves and fruits, he soon recovered, and while wandering about, came across Piyā, the eldest of the five daughters of king Okkāka.⁷ She herself was afflicted with leprosy. Rāma cured her and married her. In due course they begot sixteen pairs of sons. With the help of the king of Banaras, they built a town in the forest, removing a big Kola tree in doing so. The city there upon came to be called Kolanagara, and because the site was discovered on a “tigertrack”, Vyagghapatha, it was also called Vyagghapajjā. The descendants of the king were known as the Koliyas. ### [c14.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.30) ⁶ \*Loc. cit.\* ### [c14.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.31) ⁷ \*Dīgha\*, i, p. 92; \*cf.\* Sakyas pp. 202ff; E. Müller, \*JPTS\*, 1888, p. 17. ### [c14.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.32) The \*Mahāvastu\* version⁸ varies from the above account. It reports that the daughter of a Sakyan noble was attacked by leprosy and physicians tried in vain to cure her; sores appeared all over her body, and people began to hate her. She was taken by her brothers, in a palanquin, to a spot in the Himālayas. They there dug out an underground room and left her with sufficient food and water. They blocked up the entrance with wooden planks, and put a large heap of earth in front of it. Then they returned to Kapilavatthu. After living in this stuffy room for some time, she resumed her former beauty, for the heat cured her of leprosy. Now, not far from her cave lived a royal sage named Kola. While wandering about in the vicinity of his hermitage, Kola came to the cave and saw a tiger scratching up the heap of dirt with its feet. His curiosity was aroused. He drove away the tiger, removed the planks and opened the door of the cave, revealing the Sakyan girl. Seeing her exquisite beauty, the sage fell in love with her and took her to his hermitage. Sixteen pairs of twins were born to the couple. They were trained in Sakyan style by their mother, who sent them to Kapilavatthu. These children impressed the Sakyas who were then in session in their assembly-hall. They were given Sakyan girls in marriage, held Sakyan appointments, cultivated their lands and established villages. As the princes were sons of the sage Kola, they were known as Koliyas. ### [c14.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.33) ⁸ \*Mahāvastu\*, i, pp. 352-55. ### [c14.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.34) Though the account is legendary, it contains some historical points relevant to a discussion of the Koliyas. The connection of the Koliyas with Rāma, the king of Banaras, and with the sage Kola is significant. The Licchavis were also connected with a queen of Banaras who, according to Buddhaghosa, threw the lump of flesh she bore into the currents of the Ganges. The twins born of that lump are said to have been the ancestors of the Licchavis.¹ The relation of the Sakyas with Banaras is also implied for Piyā, the daughter of Okkāka, whom the Sakyas claimed as their ancestor,² is reported to have married Rāma or Kola of the \*Mahāvastu\*. Hence, the Koliyas are not only said to be related to the royal family of Banaras, but also to the Sakyas. That the Koliyas and the Sakyas intermarried is evident from the fact that the Buddha’s mother is reported, in at least one source,³ to have been the daughter of a Koliyan prince. Buddhaghosa further supports the existence of matrimonial alliances between the two peoples whose territories were adjacent, only divided by the river Rohiṇi.⁴ ### [c14.35](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.35) ¹ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 85ff. ### [c14.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.36) ² \*Dīgha\*, i, pp. 92ff. ### [c14.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.37) ³ \*Sum. Vil.\*, i, p. 262. ### [c14.38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.38) ⁴ \*Ibid.\*, pp. 260-2; \*Jāt.\*, v, pp. 412-5. ### [c14.39](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.39) At this juncture we are unable to explain fully the attempt of the Buddhist commentator to connect these republican peoples with the royal house of Banaras. But it was evidently held a mark of honour, at least at the time when the commentaries and the \*Jātakas\* were written, to connect these tribes with the city which was looked on as the chief centre of power and culture in the north of ancient India. We know from the earlier sources that during the lifetime of the Buddha, the kingdom of Banaras was only a vassal territory, first under the suzereignty of Kosala,⁵ and afterwards under Magadhan kings. However, it is reported to have attained in earlier times a high glory and power, dominating even the kingdoms of the Assakas, Avanti, Magadha, and Aṅga.⁶ We further hear of a king of Banaras even laying seige to the city of Takkasilā in the Gandhāra country with a view to extending the borders of his dominion. In the end, however, he was unsuccessful.¹ The Koliyas may have had relations with Banaras, but we are only certain of their being related to their close western neighbours, the Sakyas. ### [c14.40](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.40) ⁵ \*Dīgha\*, i, p. 228; \*Mahāvagga\*, viii, 2. ### [c14.41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.41) ⁶ \*Jāt.\*, v, p. 317. ### [c14.42](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.42) ¹ \*Ibid.\*, ii, p. 217; cf. Gokuldas De, \*Significance and Importance of the Jātakas\*, p. 128. ### [c14.43](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.43) The allusion in the \*Kuṇāla Jātaka\*, in the words of the Sakyas, to the "Koliyas dwelling in the hollow of a \*kola tree\*," and the connection of the name with that of the \*kola\* is unanimously attested by all the Pāli sources which account for the origin of this ethnic group. If there is any truth in the connection of the Koliyas with the \*kola\* tree it may imply that sometime before they established themselves at Rāmagāma, they lived in a spot surrounded by \*kola\*-trees, or that they flourished around their capital. On the other hand, the Pāli texts contain so many obviously fantastic etymologies of this type that little reliance can be placed on the connection of Koliya and \*kola\*, especially as this is not mentioned in the \*Mahāvastu\* account. ### [c14.44](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.44) The capital of the Koliyas was at Rāmagāma² which was situated about six \*yojanas\* (42 miles) to the east of Kapilavatthu. In this position Cunningham found the village of Deokali with a mound of ruins.³ It was at this spot that the Koliyas erected a \*stūpa\* enshrining their portion of the relics of the Buddha claimed at Kusinārā.⁴ Cunningham's location for Rāmagāma at the modern village of Deokali is just about 8-9 miles to the east of the river Rohiṇi, and about 80 miles to the north of the Ganges. But the \*Mahāvaṁsa\* states that the \*stūpa\* of Rāmagāma, which "stood on the bank of the Ganges, was destroyed by the action of the current."⁵ Cunningham is right to correct the writer of the text by saying that the "Ganges is a simple fabrication of the Ceylonese chronicler."⁶ All the Buddhist traditions agree in stating that the relics of the Buddha were divided into eight portions, of which one fell to the lot of the Koliyas of Rāmagāma.¹ According to the Ceylonese tradition, the relic casket was washed away by the currents of the Ganges, and was discovered by the Nāgas, or water-gods, and presented to the Nāga king. He built a \*stūpa\* for its reception. During the reign of Dutthagāmini of Ceylon (161-137 B.C.), the casket was miraculously obtained from the Nāga king by the holy monk Sonuttara, and enshrined in the Great \*stūpa\* in the land of Laṅkā.² ### [c14.45](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.45) ² \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff; though \*Kuṇāla Jāt.\*, v, pp. 412-5, calls it simply as \*Koliyanagara\*. ### [c14.46](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.46) ³ \*CAGIM\*, p. 486. ### [c14.47](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.47) ⁴ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165-7. ### [c14.48](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.48) ⁵ \*Mahāvaṁsa\*, chap. xxxi, verse 25. ### [c14.49](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.49) ⁶ \*CAGIM\*, p. 483. ### [c14.50](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.50) ¹ \*MPS\*, pp. 442ff; \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165ff; Rockhill, \*op. cit.\*, pp. 145ff. ### [c14.51](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.51) ² \*Mahāvaṁsa\*, chap. xxxi, verses 25ff. ### [c14.52](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.52) This story is completely at variance with the statements of Fahsien and Hsüan Tsang, both of whom visited Rāmagāma many centuries after the time of Dutthagāmini, and found the relic \*stūpa\* intact, but no river. Fa-hsien, in the beginning of the 5th century A.D. saw a tank beside the \*stūpa\* in which, according to local tradition, lived a dragon (i.e. Nāga) who continually watched over the tower.³ In the middle of the 7th century, Hsüan Tsang saw the same \*stūpa\* and the same tank of clear water inhabited by dragons (Nāgas), who daily transformed themselves into men and paid their adoration to the \*stūpa\*.⁴ Both pilgrims mention Aśoka's attempt, abandoned on the expostulation of the Nāga king, to remove these relics to his own capital. In the Chinese accounts, the argument which the Nāga king gave to Aśoka is the same as that which he gave to dissuade the holy Sonuttara from removing the relics to Ceylon.⁵ ### [c14.53](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.53) ³ S. Beal, \*Travels of Fah-Hian and Sung-Yun\*, chap. xxiii, p. 90. ### [c14.54](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.54) ⁴ Watters, \*On Yuan-Chwang\*, ii p. 20. ### [c14.55](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.55) ⁵ \*Mahāvaṁsa\*, chap. xxxi, verses 45ff. ### [c14.56](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.56) We therefore infer, with Cunningham, that the original "tank" of Rāmagāma was "adroitly changed into a river" by the Ceylonese author so that the relics which were in the charge of the Nāgas of the tank might be conveyed to the ocean-palace of the Nāga king. From there they could as readily be comveyed to Ceylon as to any other place.⁶ The river was thus necessary in the Ceylonese legend to transfer the relics from Rāmagāma to the ocean and to establish the authenticity of the remains enshrined in the Great \*stūpa\* of Anurādhapura. But the legend can have no weight against the united testimony of the two pilgrims who, independently and many centuries later, found the \*stūpa\* but saw no river. Hence, we reject the fabricated story of the river in preference to the one about the tank, reported by Fa-hsien and Hsüan Tsang. Apart from the evidence of this legend, the identification of Rāmagāma with Deokali is the most suitable one.¹ ### [c14.57](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.57) ⁶ \*CAGIM\*, p. 484. ### [c14.58](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.58) ¹ \*Ibid.\*, p. 485. ### [c14.59](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.59) Besides Rāmagāma and Devadaha, some other townships of the Koliyas are mentioned in the Buddhist books; Uttara, the residence of headman Pāṭaliya,² Sajjanela,³ Sāpūga,⁴ Kakkurapatta,⁵ Haliddavasana,⁶ etc., but none of these places have yet been identified. ### [c14.60](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.60) ² \*Saṁyutta\*, iv, p. 340. ### [c14.61](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.61) ³ \*Aṅguttara\*, ii, p. 62. ### [c14.62](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.62) ⁴ \*Ibid.\*, ii, p. 194. ### [c14.63](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.63) ⁵ \*Ibid.\*, iv, p. 281. ### [c14.64](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.64) ⁶ \*Majjhima\*, i, p. 387; \*Saṁyutta\*, v, p. 115. ### [c14.65](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.65) The river Rohiṇī divided the Koliyan territory from that of the Sakyas in the north-west,⁷ and in the south-west it probably bordered the Kosalan kingdom.⁸ It is likely that the river Anomā, the modern Rāpti, divided them. To the east of the Koliyas was the territory occupied by the Moriyas of Pipphalivana; to the north-east of the Koliyas lived the Mallas of Kusinārā. To the north of the Koliyas lay the Himālayan hills.⁹ Thus, the Koliyan country was a thin strip of land from the river Sarayū (the modern Ghāgrā) in the south to the northern hills. Between the Rohiṇī on the west and Moriyas to the east the territory was only about 20 miles wide. On the map drawn by Cunningham, it appears that the region occupied by the Koliyas was no smaller than that occupied by the Sakyas.¹⁰ ### [c14.66](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.66) ⁷ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 194ff; \*Jāt.\*, v, pp. 412ff; \*Sum. Vil.\*, ii, p. 672; \*Dhammapadaṭṭhakathā\*, iii, pp. 254ff. ### [c14.67](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.67) ⁸ \*Cf.\* our map A. ### [c14.68](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.68) ⁹ \*Loc. cit.\* ### [c14.69](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.69) ¹⁰ \*CAGIM\*, map xi, pp. 444-5. ### [c14.70](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.70) \*Government and Organization\* ### [c14.71](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.71) The governing authority of the Koliyas was vested in a general assembly of the Kṣatriya chiefs (\*rājakulānaṁ\*) who are also referred to in the same source as \*khattiyas\*, \*rājās\*,¹¹ and \*mahārājās\*,¹² and whose sons are called \*Koliyakumāras\*.¹³ In the vast range of the Pāli literature there is no mention of a single Koliyan \*rājā\* by name. The sole reference to a king of the Koliyas (\*Koliyarājā\*)¹⁴ mentions him first as the father of a girl designated as \*Koliyarājadhītaraṁ\*, whereas on the following page of the same \*Jātaka\* she is alluded to simply as \*Koliyadhītā\*.¹ We differ from Cowell in not taking the phrase \*Koliyarājā\* as a proper name, but we believe that it designated a Koliyan king who was the chief or head of the Koliyan assembly. He was not outstanding enough for his name to be remembered. We find no objection to the view that the Koliya \*rājā\* of the \*Asātarūpa Jātaka\* was only one of many Koliyan kings, and at the same time may have been the president of the Koliyan assembly. According to Altekar's suggestion the assembly consisted of a "few hundred" members.² ### [c14.72](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.72) ¹¹ \*Jāt.\*, v, p. 412. ### [c14.73](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.73) ¹² \*Ibid.\*, pp. 413-4. ### [c14.74](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.74) ¹³ \*Ibid.\*, pp. 412-5. ### [c14.75](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.75) ¹⁴ \*Ibid.\*, i, p. 407. ### [c14.76](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.76) ¹ \*Ibid.\*, p. 408. ### [c14.77](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.77) ² Altekar, \*State and Government\*, p. 112. ### [c14.78](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.78) On the evidence of the \*Kuṇāla Jātaka\* all the members of the Koliyan assembly, like that of the Sakyan, were called \*rājās\* and sometimes even \*mahārājās\*. It may be that when the Buddha intervened in the feud which was imminent between the Koliyas and the Sakyas, and addressed them as \*mahārājās\*, he meant only the two chiefs of the Koliyas and the Sakyas who were then heads of their respective republics. When the Buddha arrived on the scene, all the kings (\*rājāno\*) greeted him, and when he started addressing them he questioned the \*mahārājās\*, probably implying the two chiefs. In the end, when the Buddha had settled the dispute by showing the futility of shedding precious blood, it was the \*rājāno\*, probably meaning the entire assembly members of both peoples, who were pleased with the compromise.³ There is no corroboratory evidence to strengthen our view, but this seems likely from a close analysis of the \*Jātaka\* text. ### [c14.79](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.79) ³ \*Jāt.\*, v, p. 414. ### [c14.80](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.80) The Koliyas, like the Sakyas, had a set of officers who appear to have been concerned with irrigation and agriculture, because during their feud the labourers went and reported the matters to the "officers appointed for that purpose".⁴ The Koliyas had servants (\*Koliya-kammakaras\* or \*sevakas\*) working on their farms.⁵ More relevant than the preceeding officers to the republican system of the Koliyas are groups of officers, called \*bhojakās\*, \*amaccās\* and \*uparājās\*. These we have discussed in connection with the Sakyas. The source of our knowledge of these officers is the same text which refers to the Sakyas. Therefore we find no reason to disbelieve that the power, position and function of these officials was the same in the Koliyan republic as it was in their Sakyan counterpart,¹ especially as peoples appear to have been of kindred stocks.² On the same analogy, the \*uparājās\* would have succeeded their fathers in the assembly and the \*amaccās\*, or councillors, would have formed a smaller council to assist the head of the republic in the administration of public business. ### [c14.81](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.81) ⁴ \*Ibid.\*, p. 413. ### [c14.82](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.82) ⁵ \*Ibid.\*, pp. 412ff. ### [c14.83](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.83) ¹ \*Cf.\* above, p. 195ff. ### [c14.84](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.84) ² \*Loc. cit.\* ### [c14.85](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.85) Possibly attached to the Koliyan general assembly was a special body of peons, presumably police, bearing a special form of headdress with a drooping crest. They had no equal for their bad conduct and violence.³ The text does not give us more information about them. Such officials might have been a regular feature of the Buddhist republics.⁴ ### [c14.86](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.86) ³ \*Saṁyutta\*, iv, pp. 341-2; \*cp.\* Jones, \*op. cit.\*, pp. 109ff. ### [c14.87](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.87) ⁴ \*Cf.\* \*CHI\*, i, p. 178; \*DPPN\*, i, p. 690. ### [c14.88](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.88) \*The Koliyas and the Sakyas\* ### [c14.89](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.89) Both the Koliyas and the Sakyas were Kṣatriyas. The former were khattiyas of the \*Vyagghapajja gotta\*,⁵ and they intermarried with the Sakyas. According to Buddhaghosa, the Buddha's mother was the daughter of a Koliyan noble,⁶ Suppavāsā Koliyadhītā was also married to a Sakyan noble,⁷ though the \*Apadāna\* says that the Licchavian Mahāli was her husband.⁸ Buddhaghosa reports that the Koliyan youths once carried away many Sakyan maidens while they were bathing, but the Sakyans, regarding the Koliyans as relations, took no action.⁹ ### [c14.90](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.90) ⁵ \*Aṅguttara\*, ii, 194-6; \*Sum. Vil.\*, i, pp. 262ff; \*Sutta comm.\*, i, p. 356; \*Mahāvastu\*, i, p. 355. ### [c14.91](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.91) ⁶ \*Sum. Vil.\*, i, p. 262. ### [c14.92](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.92) ⁷ \*Man. Pur.\*, (SHB) i, p. 244. ### [c14.93](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.93) ⁸ \*Apadāna\*, ii, p. 494, verse 28. ### [c14.94](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.94) ⁹ \*Sum. Vil.\*, i, p. 262. ### [c14.95](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.95) The famous story of the feud between the Sakyas and the Koliyas, which we have discussed in other connections,¹⁰ seems to be founded on fact. Despite the good relations referred to in other sources, it is very probable that the Koliyas and the Sakyas sometimes quarrelled over the distribution of the water of the river forming their boundary. ### [c14.96](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.96) ¹⁰ \*Jāt.\*, v, pp. 412-6; also alluded to in i, pp. 208, 327ff; iv, p. 207; \*cf.\* above, pp. 202ff. ### [c14.97](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.97) Serious disputes of this kind, on a local or even on a national scale, are not unknown in the Indian sub-continent today. It is said that after the Buddha concluded peace between them, the Koliyas and the Sakyas gave 250 of their princes each to the Buddhist \*saṅgha\*.¹ We have no other account which reflects on the relations of the Koliyas with the Sakyas,² the other republics of the neighbourhood, or the Kosalan kingdom. ### [c14.98](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.98) ¹ \*Ibid.\*, p. 415. ### [c14.99](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.99) ² This dispute is also alluded to in some of the \*Jātakas\* preached at this occasion. \*Jāt.\*, i, pp. 208, 327; iv, p. 207; details in \*Kuṇāla Jāt.\* ### [c14.100](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.100) We have no definite chronological data to show that the Koliyan-Sakyan feud preceded the defeat of the Sakyas by Viḍūḍabha, but it seems most unlikely that the latter event preceded the former. We have noticed that after Viḍūḍabha's victory the Sakyas virtually vanished from the Indian scene, not only as a political power, but also as an ethnic group. Only a few individual families remained, which dispersed and settled elsewhere.³ This makes it highly probable that the Koliya-Sakyan feud occurred before the war between the Sakyas and the Kosalas. We cannot say definitely how many years before the decease of the Buddha the Koliya-Sakyan quarrel took place. The Koliyas also claimed a share in the relics of the Buddha and got an eighth portion which they enshrined at their chief town, Rāmagāma.⁴ ### [c14.101](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.101) ³ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 204ff. ### [c14.102](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.102) ⁴ \*Dīgha\*, ii, pp. 165-7; \*MPS\*, pp. 442ff; Rockhill, \*op. cit.\*, pp. 145ff. ### [c14.103](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.103) After this we hear nothing of the Koliyas. The Nāga connection of the Koliyas of Rāmagāma has been made much of by D. D. Kosambi,⁵ but this is irrelevant for our purpose at this point. There is no mention of the Koliyas siding with the Sakyas during their fatal fight with Viḍūḍabha. It is not impossible that they acted as did the Confederates of the Vajjian League against the Magadhan king Ajātasattu, since the Sakyans were their blood relations and shared with the Koliyas the principles of republican government. It is very probable that the Koliyas were finally absorbed by the Kosalans, though the possibility that they fell directly to Ajātasattu after his conquest of the Licchavis must not be overlooked. ### [c14.104](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.104) ⁵ \*Introduction to the Study of Indian History\*, pp. 122ff. ### [c14.105](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.105) Probably the loss of life and property amongst the Koliyas was not much less than that of their relatives. Their united territory may thus have formed a part of the Kosalan kingdom during the lifetime of king Viḍūḍabha. Afterwards the Koliyan land became a part of the Magadhan empire. This happened sometime between the Sakyan war against Viḍūḍabha and the reign of Candragupta, the first Mauryan king. Since we hear of no successors of Viḍūḍabha, it is probable that soon after his defeat and destruction of the Sakyas and Koliyas, the Magadhan king Ajātasattu attacked, defeated, and probably killed him.¹ The Koliyas, as a republic and a tribe, disappeared from the Indian political map, not long after the passing away of the Buddha.² ### [c14.106](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.106) ¹ \*Cf.\* above, pp. 205ff. ### [c14.107](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14.107) ² \*Cp.\* Law, \*TAI\*, pp. 205ff. ## Linked texts (13) - [Ambaṭṭhasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.digha.3.1.14.1) — Pāli - [Upālisutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.majjhima.56.30.1) — Pāli - [Mahāsīhanādasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.majjhima.12.52.1) — Pāli - [Apadāna](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.apadana) — Pāli - [Jātaka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.jataka) — Pāli - [Mahāvagga](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.vp.khandhaka.mahavagga) — Pāli - [Mahāvastu](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.avadana.mahavastu) — Sanskrit - [Mahāparinibbānasutta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.digha.16) — Pāli - [Dīghanikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.digha) — Pāli - [Mahāvaṃsa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada_postcanon.vamsa.mahavamsa) — Pāli - [Majjhimanikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.majjhima) — Pāli - [Saṃyuttanikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.samyutta) — Pāli - [Aṅguttaranikāya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.anguttara) — Pāli --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c14) · Pramāṇa