Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c7.75

c7.75

Before discussing Jayaswal's view on the election of early Indian kings, let us consider two other points which he raises in connection with the origin of monarchy, its relation to other forms of constitution, and the significance of the derivation of the term *rājan*. "The word *rājan* and its original *rāṭ* literally mean a ruler. They are connected with the Latin *rex*. But Hindu political theorists have given them a philosophic derivation. King is called *rājā* because his duty is 'to please' (*rañj*) the people by maintaining good government. . . . Both orthodox and heterodox branches of the race had adopted it. It was a national interpretation and a national theory of Constitution."⁴ We agree with Jayaswal in equating the Sanskrit *rājan* with the Latin *rex*, and derive it from the root *rāj* ((*rājati, te*), "to rule" or "to shine."⁵ But the "philosophic" and "national interpretation" given to the term, deriving *rājan* from the root *rañj*, "to please", is of later origin and hence cannot be accepted as relevant to the period.