Custom Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/Ancient-Indian-Democracy 👈

1. Ancient Indian Democracy-
Studies, Research and Some Modern Myths
Dr. Sanjeev Kumar Sharma
Editor, Indian Journal of Political Science,
Department of Political Science
Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut-5 (U.P.) India
E-mail-sanjeevaji@yahoo.co.in
ijpseditor@yahoo.co.in
(Published in Indian Journal of Politics, AMU, Aligarh, Vol. XXXIX, No. 3, July-Sep. 2005,
pp.155-166)

2. Ancient Indian Democracy-
Studies, Research and Some Modern Myths
Democracy is the best available means of governance in the present world. We are made
to understand that as of now there is no alternative to democracy. Some of us may argue against
the myth of ‘of the people, by the people and for the people’ government and some may provide
unending list of socio-economic (and yes, political also) problems created by the democratic mode
of governance. Even then, the fact of the matter remains that throughout the world, we love
democracy, we want democracy, we cherish democracy, we demand democracy and we crave for
democracy. All other constructs and concepts of social sciences in general and political science in
particular which have gathered world wide respect, such as liberty, equality, justice, rule of law
etc. naturally come along with democracy. The institutionalization of democratic norms has,
therefore, been of much significance in every political community caring for democratic way of
government. Indian Society has since time immemorial been acquainted with democratic form of
governance. While some of our friends may argue strongly against this notion but there are
number of examples in ancient Indian texts to demonstrate the firm bases of democratic and
representative governance in Indian Society. In any case, the present form of Indian democracy
has gained so much attachment in the minds of the general populace only because of our
traditional sense of belongingness with democracy. The pace of institutionalization of democratic
governance has also been very fast in India as compared to other nations gaining freedom from the
clutches of the colonial powers largely at the same point of time after II
nd
World War. The
overwhelming Indian Constitution, the free press, the independent judiciary, the federal system,
the division and distribution of powers, the decentralization processes, free and fair regular
elections, universal adult franchise, constitutional supremacy, internal mechanisms of debate and
dialogue, vigilant and watchful electorate, etc. all have been strengthening Indian democracy to a
great extent. India by virtue of being the largest democracy has some unique distinctions in regard

3. of democratic tradition. But we have long been made to understand and believe that the history of
democracy can best be understood in the context of western tradition of political development
beginning with the Greeks. We have been blindly accepting the assumptions that the concepts of
democratic ideals, personal liberty, equality and justice have essentially originated from the
Western World and these concepts were simply alien and irrelevant in the non-western cultures.
At the outset these assumption require a sincere re-examination. The present paper would deal
with the examination of the theoretical edifice of democracy and the study and research of the
historical tradition of democracy in Indian ancient texts.
Democracy is not merely a form of government (though we find Lowell, Seeley, Lincoln,
Dicey, Bryce defining democracy as a form of government), but simply more than that. It is said
to be a type of state (Hearnshaw), an order of society (Eddy Asirvatham), a moral and religious
principle (Maxey). Democracy, thus, means faith in the common man. It is regarded as sensitive
to all its members. Democracy, in modern terms, understood as a means of specifying certain of
the conditions and characteristics of mechanism involved in reaching collective decisions.
1
The
political organization and structure of liberal democracy forms a well patterned whole. It
comprises popular sovereignty, popular elections, legislative assemblies, and the independence of
judiciary, civil liberties, and political parties, all of which are complementary to each other and
derive from the same fundamental principles.
2
The historical perspective of democracy may reveal
that for most of its long history democracy was comprehended as one of the worst types of
government and more or less synonymous with the rule of the mob. C.B. McPherson finds it
rather puzzling and paradoxical feature of the history of democracy. To him, democracy used to
be a bad word. Every body who as any body knew that democracy, in its original sense of rule by
the people or government in accordance with the will of the bulk of the people, would be a bad
thing fatal to individual freedom and to all the graces of civilized living. That was the position
taken by pretty nearly all men of intelligence from the earliest historical times down to a hundred

4. years ago. Then, within fifty years, democracy becomes a good thing.
3
To give an account of
democracy will be largely an exercise in description of current western realities coupled, perhaps,
with some account of how this happy state of affairs came about. Such an account will not have to
be either critical or challenging, although it may found to be so in societies where democracy has
yet to be realized
.4
The main problem in modern democratic government is to secure a proper
balance between the recognized value of democracy and the equally desirable principle of
efficiency.
5
Research is an activity which most of our university departments and academic
institutions are predominantly engaged with. The main objectives of research in any discipline
may be enumerated as- opening up of new vistas for academic excellence; endeavouring to find
ways and solutions to enduring and intriguing questions and queries hounding the minds of the
intellectuals; preparing working grounds for the newer and newer scholars; creating the body
literature for most of the parts of our syllabi; suggesting means of better understanding of the
subject; generating greater awareness about the problems amongst the academia; and making
coveted attempts in the direction of overall comprehensiveness of the subject at different levels.
6
Our efforts for making our subject scientific, understandable, wide, inter-disciplinary and modern,
have led us to test various strategies of research and attempt different methodologies for diverse
problems. From normative to empirical, numerous approaches have been tried and tested by our
scholars. The approaches and methodologies being followed have sometimes become the
characteristic feature of some of our university teaching departments and research institutions.
Some of them feel elated in describing their achievements besides identifying themselves with
particular brand of research methodology and approach. The methodological denominations are
mostly mechanical and deal with the technical aspect of the pursuit of greater knowledge. But the
differences in approaches being followed have greatly been converted into strict ideological
compartmentalization amongst the scholars of the discipline. Some of our great researchers have

5. been proudly propounding the exactness of some particular ideological approach in understanding
and solving the major problems of our socio-political set-up. Some of our renowned teachers have
been spreading the idea of one particular approach to be the sole repository to reach the truth. This
one-sidedness amongst the academia unfortunately gives way to sheer intolerance for the other
view and hampers the smooth, swift and easy growth of the dialogue between them. Thus, the
basic premise that the knowledge can best be increased by healthy debate gets demolished. This
type of academic intolerance is against the very edifice of intellectual upwardship. It also
generates groupism and factionalism among the intellectual quarters and inculcates unhealthy
practices in the affairs of the discipline.
This is also unfortunate to note that most of our academic quarters have been infested with
this contagious disease. The gravity of the situation can well be understood by the fact that the
research output of our university departments and research institutions can best be classified on
the basis of ideological orientations which most of the time are claimed to be the difference of
approaches but are mostly the difference of political inclinations. Therefore, the greater part of the
body of literature in our discipline (this may be true of some other disciplines also) suffers from
the lack of impartiality while confronting any serious question related to the practical aspects of
the subject. This bias in our studies gets manifested in our conclusions and suggestive remedies.
We, as a community, should address these questions sincerely and try to make serious efforts in
creating an environment of healthy and constructive debate in the discipline, as propounded by the
ancient Indian sages and saints: ‘Vade Vade Jayate Tattvabodhah’
Let me make some comments on the state of teaching and research in Political Science in
our colleges and universities. We have since long been made to understand that the study of
Political Science in systematic manner started from the Greeks. The centuries of British rule have
reinforced the myth of western origin of the study of politics. One wonders the over simplification
of the construct after confronting the widely accepted fact of Indian being the oldest civilization

6. on earth. The ideological faith in the western origin of the concept of democracy is not at all an
impartial judgment. Indian tradition of republics dates back to centuries before Christ. The
analysis and the discussion on ancient Indian democratic tradition must be preceded by some
simple and widely accepted characteristics of democracy in modern as well as ancient western
world.
The study of political thought in modern India is basically western oriented. The
departments of Political Science in most of the Indian universities firmly believe that Political
Science begins with the Greeks. The easy acceptability of the general belief about the western
origin of political thought is often accentuated by the simple ignorance of and continuous aversion
to any comprehension of Indian idea patterns and theoretical edifice. Normally our political
scientists, researchers and university teachers seem to (or endeavour to) be acknowledged experts
of western political ideas, concepts, books constructs and theories. Therefore, their contexts,
explanations, theses, analysis and evaluations are often, obviously, based and dependent on the
western reading material.
There reflects a calculated west-dependence in preparation of books, reading material,
researches and analytical explorations of our Political Science fraternity. This trend gets reflected
in abundance in our research journals also. The natural and imminent corollary of this trend can be
seen in the language, lexicon, idioms, presentations, analysis and vocabulary of our Indian
political scientists. Having said that, it must also be kept in mind that this obedient and benevolent
following of western idea patterns has not been able to provide any enviable recognition or
acceptance to any great number of Indian political scientists at international level in the discipline
of Political Science. Some of the noteworthy experts in this field belong to the community of
persons of Indian origin either employed or placed in western universities. The overwhelming
predominance of non-Indian writers and analysts in the field of analytical study of Political
Science at international level makes us ponder upon some intriguing questions about the scenario

7. of Indian political thinking. How it is that the most ancient civilization of the world could not
produce any thinker, philosopher, theory, and concept or book in the field of political thinking in
more than five thousand years of its inception, which could be placed among the social scientists
or political philosophers of the world? What would have been the reasons of classical neglect of
political and administrative aspects of nation building by a country claiming (and widely
understood) to be providing the world the way of ethical, universal and transcendental upliftment
of the world community? Whether the tradition of Rishis, Ashrams, Gurukuls etc. which exhibited
magical and extraordinary talent in the fields of ethics, art, culture, music, religion, moral
philosophy, medical science, etc. could not attempt to discuss the issues of state, administration,
leadership, authority and so on? Should we presume that Indian intellect did not at all have any
caliber to produce any ideology, system, administrative set-up or organizational structure of
politics to be presented before world academia? It is really pity that sincere attempts to find
answers to these perturbing questions are also rare in our intellectual exercises.
The results of the overall westernization of Indian studies in Political Science have been evidently
disturbing and disappointing. The scholars of Political Science in India have found the western
political thinking intense, systematic, fundamental and thereby incomprehensible for ordinary
people and therefore better. Various political concepts, constructs and theories, which seem to
have essentially originated from the internal dichotomies and contextual political and social
compulsions of the western world have unnecessarily been incorporated in the syllabi of our
teaching departments howsoever irrelevant those could be in Indian situations. Hence, the students
of Political Science are usually unaware of the references and contexts of most of the theoretical
frameworks presented before them and therefore, find the concepts alien and un-understandable.
There is a certain degree of apprehension about the universal application and utility of these west-
oriented study materials in our own socio-political conditions. This has resulted into an obvious
acceptance of the myth amongst the scholars of Political Science that the position of India in the

8. development-journey of political thought is generally insignificant and negligible. Some
exceptionally talented works on ancient Indian political thinking and institutions have compelled
some of our university teachers and the departments to recognize the political-study-value of only
the public administration aspect of the outstanding academic treatise by Kautilya. Apart from
Kautilya, nothing relevant and none significant, has been considered to be the part of the course of
the students of Political Science. These trends have resulted in an incipient inferiority complex
among Indian political scientists and because of the fear this complex being exposed the
community of the scholars of Political Science in India is tempted to establish the superiority of
western talent of creating original ideas. This fact gets immensely and overtly reflected and
manifested in the seminars, symposia, conventions and research journals of the subject.
In fact, some rigorous analytical attempts and in-depth study would indicate that writers,
philosophers, thinkers, poets, historians, rishis and others in ancient India had delved into minute
and logical examination of the issues related to the overall development and growth of individual,
society and state. Thus, the logic of unavailability of separate treatises on politics in ancient India
seems to be unfounded. The early Indian logic was essentially approving the fact that politics was
an inevitable ingredient of the universal Dharma, which used to govern and regulate all the
functioning of individual, society and state. Therefore, the core aspect of analysis and presentation
of most of the ancient Indian treatises is mainly Dharma. All other aspects and elements are
though not primary, but not at all negligible and secondary because Dharma is no entity in
vacuum, rather it is accumulated whole of the overall moral, ethical and functional dimensions of
individual, society and state. That is why we find Indian writers producing comprehensive
expressions of most of the aspects of human life in almost every treatise of Vedic, Aupnisadik and
Epic period while continuously exploring the epistemological and logical dimensions of Dharma.
The procurement of the highly acclaimed treatise of Kautilya, the Arthsastra, in the early years of
twentieth century must have necessarily been a witness to the explosion of myth of non-

9. availability and non-existence of any book worth mentioning specifically on politics, Rajdharma
or Dandaniti in ancient India. This is also interesting to note that some of the literary works of
early Indian poets, though being completely the literary ones and being based entirely on love
stories, present political institutions, functioning, theorizations in such emphatic and enduring
manner that they bear a testimony to the vibrant and rich tradition of socio political thinking in
ancient India.
It is very unfortunate to note that most of the early Indian writings including the Vedas,
Ramayana, Mahabharata etc. have generally been looked upon as either literary or religious works
of early Hindu society. And, therefore, serious attempts to look into these grand old treatises for
tracing the links of modern issues have largely been ridiculed as parochial, fundamental or
otherwise. Some noteworthy works have, nonetheless, been able to put forward the basic ideas of
ancient Indian society before the academic world. Eventually, even most of these works are the
academic exercises by western writers with an intention to peep into the socio-political life styles
of early Indians and are based on an alien viewpoint. This shortcoming can mainly be attributed to
the fact that they were simply unaware of the socio-cultural complexities of Indian society in
general. Again, one of the main shortfalls of these works is to trying to locate the present days
concepts and institutions in their raw form and shape in the early Indian society. This is applicable
to the most of Indian writings also. But it must be safely suggested that the huge time gap between
these comparisons often leads us to misunderstanding of the myths, beliefs, value-patterns, role
models and functional dimensions of those societies in the light of modern yardsticks being
applied for. The legacy of colonial rule, acceptance of modern democratic system, growing
problems of national integration, the compulsions of multi-religious and multi-cultural secular set
up, increasing allurement of westernized models of life, decline of vernacular languages and the
rise of English based academia, etc. are some of the main reasons behind our general apathy
towards our cultural past. To our instant dismay contemporary pressures of real politick have

10. produced a substantial section of Indian intelligentsia which has, under the impressions of
academic hegemony of the English speaking and writing West, inculcated in themselves sense of
sheer disregard, indifference, disbelief, apathy, hostility and criticism for anything that can be
associated with ancient India.
The scenario is comfortable for those who find it hard to go through ancient Indian
writings because they are written in Sanskrit, a language that has a very strict scientific grammar
and has less elasticity as compared to English. In addition to that the adoption of the model of
industrialization by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, as the only way of
the upliftment of Indian society and the adoption of globalization-liberalization model of
development by Rajiv Gandhi in 1990s the then Prime Minister of India and eventually the
grandson of J.L. Nehru, and of course, by the succeeding governments have also led Indian
academia to believe that any endeavour to look into our ancient past is purely futile. Leaving apart
the political aspects of this attitude of Indian academia, the greatest loss incurred to because of
this has been in the field of serious research studies in social sciences. Though it cannot be argued
that the ancient Indian writings possess emphatic solutions to all the present day conflicts, yet it
can be stated forthwith that serious studies of ancient Indian literature with social science view
point would definitely pave the way of better understanding of the Indian mindset and thereby
prove immensely helpful in shaping our socio-political values and institutions in an indigenous
manner. Strangely enough, our scholars appear to reject the ideas of ancient Indian texts with a
viewpoint of Indian Vedas and Puranas containing many fanciful and unscientific ideas and
therefore, not taking them seriously. But they fail to note that all ancient texts contain their mythic
and legendary elements, and it is not the practice to so completely reject them. It may well be
argued that a close study of the texts of ancient India is essentially required to understand their
comprehensive views on state, politics, sovereignty, rights and duties and yes-public
administration beside the overwhelmingly amazing idea of welfare state. It is astonishing to note

11. that some of your universities have not even bothered to include the study of ancient Indian
Political thought in their syllabic. This is an area of great concern for all of us and requires sincere
attempts from all in this direction. Amartya Sen argues that the enthusiasm for ancient India has
often come from the Hindutva movement-the promoters of a narrowly Hindu view of Indian
civilization. The ‘integrationists’, according to Sen, tend to see Vedas and the Ramayana as
unwelcome intrusions of Hindu beliefs into the contemporary life of secular India. Although he
accepts the enormous influence these old books and narratives have on Indian culture, literature
and thought.
7
Ancient India is claimed to be the repository of the highest form of democracy. We find
the people (vishah) participating in urban councils with the power to instruct and direct the king
according to their will. The multitude of ethnicities and people provided for the autonomy and
self-determination of the villages, city-states, republics and constitutional kingdoms through the
observance of Dharma. The villages ruled by their elected representatives and were, therefore,
autonomous and self-governing administrative units having the power to manage their
educational, economic social, administrative and other requirements. Their own assemblies and
committees also governed townships. There were Republics in ancient India prior to Greek and
Athenian democracy, which were established by people dissenting against monarchy. These
republics were expression of the idea of government through an assembly representing the people.
Despite inconsistencies and attacks republics continued to survive till the 4
th
Century A.D.
The earliest sources of information about ancient Indian political tradition, Vedas, provide
enormous information about the theory and practice of government in that period. Mahabharat
presents the views on polity in a systematic, comprehensive and authentic manner, besides
presenting the views on sphere of state activity and government as chief instrument for the welfare
of the society. Mahabharat declares that in politics are realized all forms of renunciation, in
politics are united all the sacraments, in politics are combined all knowledge, in politics are

12. centered the entire world.
8
Muhlberger has argued that the largest and most influential Indian
literary tradition, the Brahman cal, has democratic traditions that are more important than they are
usually understood to be. A large number of sources have demonstrated the existence of many
sovereign republics in ancient India besides identifying numerous sanghas and ganas with more or
less powers. It remarkable to note that during the near millennium between 500 B.C. and 400 A.D.
we find republics almost everywhere in India. Kingship had a central place in the political life of
ancient India. The social order based on Varna system provided the functional basis to the
political decision making which had to observe the strict adherence to Dharma. Kautilya’s
Arthshastra, Manu-Smiriti, Buddhist and Pali literature and Jain treatises confirm the picture of
widespread republicanism and popular elements in village life in early India. These works were
debated and discussed in the nineteenth century by a number of foreign and Indian scholars, e.g.
Rhys Davids, K. P. Jaiswal, Dr. Bhandarkar, R.C. Majumdar, etc. This debate largely
concentrated on goals and methods of imperial policy, the analysis of village government, and the
future of India as a self-governing country in the context of the British rule in India. But later
generations of Indian academicians were not enthusiastic about the early republicanism of ancient
India. These include AS Altekar, JP Sharma, UN Ghoshal, etc. It has been observed that, “the
work of twentieth century scholars has made possible a much different view of ancient political
life in India. It has shown us a landscape with kings a plenty, a culture where the terminology of
rule is in the majority of sources relentlessly monarchical but where, at the same time, the realities
of politics are so complex that simply to call them monarchical is a grave distortion. Indeed, in
ancient India, monarchial thinking was constantly battling with another vision of self-rule by
members of a guild, a village, or extended kin-groups, in other words, any group of equals with a
common set of interests. This vision of cooperative self-government often produced republcanism
and even democracy comparable to classical Greek democracy”.
9
The gramsabha of ancient India
used to control adequate resources for managing their jurisdictions. The Gramsabha was supreme

13. in managing villages in ancient India. It used to elect Sarpanch for not more than one or two years
by secret ballot with power to remove than any time for misconduct. All decisions were taken and
programmes and expenditure reviewed in assembly.
Kohli argues that a close study of ancient Indian texts (Kautilya’s Arthshastra, Bhagvad
Gita, Shanti Parva in Mahabharat) is required to understand the very concept of the welfare state.
These Indian texts are so comprehensive in devising such a view of welfare state that it is amazing
to note that although we try to find the roots of such an ideology in the west yet its roots always
lay in India.
10
Shankhadhar goes to the extent of claiming that in fact, Kautilya over-reached the
modern concept in that his yogakshena aims at an all-round development, material as well as
spiritual, of the society as well as of the individual. It involves the well being of the poorest of the
poor. The Kautilyan state… ensured freedom, happiness, prosperity and full-fledged development
of human personality. Yogokshema demanded a higher moral consciousness both at the elities’
and common people’s levels.
11
It has been rightly observed that the Indian ethos is reflected in the
teachings of our great thinkers like Vivekenand, Rabindra Nath Tagore and Aurobindo Ghosh.
Gandhiji, the father of the nation developed his ideology and concepts of democracy on Indian
traditions. Indian ethos always recognized spiritual energies generated through empowerment of
the people as the main force behind human activity. We need to deliberate how far these values
are relevant today and, if they are, then how they can be woven into our governance practices.
12
We may find the argument well conceived that Ancient India considered individuals not as
social, but as spiritual beings undergoing an evolutionary process. This is the key to that dharma-
based society, for which its unique form of democracy streamed from the high planes of the
intuitive mind. The polity and society, art and philosophy, science and mathematics, surgery and
astronomy, economics and the military rule, all fields of knowledge and investigation, all
activities and aspects of life revolved around the dharma or law of ideal living-embracing yet
going beyond all religions. The rishis translated the sacrosanct dharma into shastras-authoritative

14. codes encompassing the whole of life, determining both the highest order of life and particulars
with the same care. The rishis and the gods thus sanctioned the law and custom of society.
Belonging to any of the varnas, the rishi or Vedic seer was often the advisor and preceptor of the
king. The monarch and emperor, the people, the larger and lesser polities were all bound to
maintain the dharma, preserving both the right law of human existence and the universal one. The
aim of life was the pursuit of perfection, intellectual and physical, ethical and aesthetic, empirical
and spiritual, social and political. The broad lines were universal but each human conglomerate as
well as each individual was considered to have a nature and a law, a svabhava and a svadharma of
its own, to which corresponded detailed rules, as outlined in the shastras, leading to perfection via
the various disciplines.
13
The main purpose of the expositions in this part of the paper has been to propose further
in-depth studies in the direction of exploring the traces of the tradition of democracy and
democratic institutions in ancient Indian texts and society with a certain view of understanding
those references and contexts in an unbiased and objective manner and commitment to advance
and encourage in the study of ancient India amongst our teaching and research community of
Political Science.
References
1. Barry Hindess- Parliamentary Democracy and Socialist Politics, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London,
1983, p. 48.
2. Maurice Duverger – Modern Democraties: Economics Power versus Political Power, The Dryden
Press, Illinois, 1974, p. 50
3. C.B. Macpherson, the Real World of Democracy, Oxford, Clardendon Press, 1966, chapters 2 and 3.
4. Anthony Arblaster- Democracy, World View, New Delhi, 1997, p.2
5. R.G. Gettell – Political Science, World Press, Calcutta, 1950, p. 204

15. 6. I must acknowledge here that the bulk of this paper is borrowed from and dependent on some of my
comments in the issues of the Indian Journal of Political Science as the Editor of IJPS. I have
thought it prudent to start a debate by compiling these stray ides in a well-knit presentation.
7. Amartya Sen-India: Large and Small-www.planningcommission.nic.in/news/profsen.pdf
8. Mahabharat, Shantiparvam-63 (28-29
9. Democracy in Ancient India- Sterve Muhlbeger (World History of Democracy site).
10. Ritu Kohli, op cit., p.9
11. MM Shankhdhar- forward in Ritu Kohli- Kautilya’s Political Theory, Yogakshema- The Concepts of
Welfare State, Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi, 1995, p, viii
12. S.K. Sharma and Ashok Khosla, Whither True People’s Democracy?, August 1997,
http://www.dainet.org/livelihoods/0897sk.htm
13. Paulette, Sri Aurobindo on the Nature of True Democracy, Auroville Today, August 2004,
http://www.auroville.org/journals&media/avtoday/august_04/aurodemocracy.htm