Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c9.s4.157

c9.s4.157

There was no place for women in the Licchavian Assembly as in the Vedic *sabhā* and the *samiti*. The Athenian *ecclesia* and the Roman Senate had no women members either. The *Aṅguttara Nikāya* provides evidence for this in a dialogue between the Buddha and Ānanda, the great champion of the Bhikkhuṇīs. The disciple solicits his master to allow women to join the *saṅgha* and asks, "Why is it, sire, that women do not sit in public assemblies or embark on business?”¹ Apart from this we have no other Buddhist or Jaina text to enlighten us on this point. But we know of no source that contradicts our conclusion that women did not participate in the political assemblies. Thus the Licchavis were more backward in this respect than the militant Spartans and Germans. In Sparta “women enjoyed a position of more equality with men, and greater independence and authority than at Athens. The wife at Sparta was not merely a housekeeper, but an active member of the state, expected to interest herself in the welfare of her country”.² Likewise, the Germans also “conceived a certain uncanny and prophetic sense in women. They neither scorned to consult them nor slighted their answers”.³ We do hear of some great women in Indian monarchies, but the sources say nothing as to the actual role and position of women in Licchavian politics. However, we can say with some certainty that they had no citizenship rights at Vesāli. They were mainly housewives, after the Indian custom, though Ambapālī might give a different impression. But it is not certain whether or not a wealthy and independent courtesan such as she did influence some assembly members in political matters. Women did play a considerable part in social life, but we have no evidence that they openly did so in politics.