The Janapadas (lit. 'Foothold of the people') (pronounced [dʑɐnɐpɐdɐ]) (c. 1500–600 BCE) were the realms, republics (ganapada) and kingdoms (sāmarājya) of the Vedic period in the Indian subcontinent. The Vedic period reaches from the late Bronze Age into the Iron Age: from about 1500 BCE to the 6th century BCE. With the rise of sixteen Mahajanapadas ("great janapadas"), most of the states were annexed by more powerful neighbours, although some remained independent.^[1]

The Sanskrit term janapada is a tatpurusha compound term, composed of two words: janas and pada. Jana means "people" or "subject" (cf. Latin cognate genus, English cognate kin). The word pada means "foot" (cf. Latin cognate pedis);^[2][3] from its earliest attestation, the word has had a double meaning of "realm, territory" and "subject population" (cf. Hittite pedan, "place"). Linguist George Dunkel compares the Greek andrapodon "slave", to PIE *pédom "fetters" (i.e. "what is attached to the feet"). Sanskrit padám, usually taken to mean "footprint, trail", diverges in accent from the PIE reconstruction. For the sense of "population of the land", padasya janas, the inverted padajana would be expected. A primary meaning of "place of the people", janasya padam, would not explain why the compound is of masculine gender. An original dvandva "land and people" is conceivable, but a dual inflection would be expected.^[4]

Literary evidence suggests that the janapadas flourished between 1500 BCE and 500 BCE. The earliest mention of the term "janapada" occurs in the Aitareya (8.14.4) and Shatapatha (13.4.2.17) Brahmana texts.^[6]

In the Vedic samhitas, the term jana denotes a tribe, whose members believed in a shared ancestry.^[7] The janas were headed by a king (raja). The council (samiti) was a common assembly of the jana members, and had the power to elect or dethrone the king. The sabha was a smaller assembly of wise elders, who advised the king.^[8]

The janas were originally semi-nomadic pastoral communities, but gradually came to be associated with specific territories as they became less mobile. Various kulas (clans) developed within the jana, each with its own chief. Gradually, the necessities of defence and warfare prompted the janas to form military groupings headed by janapadins (Kshatriya warriors). This model ultimately evolved into the establishment of political units known as the janapadas.^[9]

While some of the janas evolved into their own janapadas, others appear to have mixed together to form a common Janapada. According to the political scientist Sudama Misra, the name of the Panchala janapada suggests that it was a fusion of five (pancha) janas.^[10] Some janas (such as Aja and Mutiba) mentioned in the earliest texts do not find a mention in the later texts. Misra theorizes that these smaller janas were conquered by and assimilated into the larger janas.^[10]

Janapadas were gradually dissolved around 500 BCE. Their disestablishment can be attributed to the rise of imperial powers (such as Magadha) in Northern India, as well as foreign invasions (such as those by the Persians and the Greeks) in the north-western South Asia.^[11]

The Janapada were highest political unit in Northern India during this period; these polities were usually monarchical (though some followed a form of republicanism) and succession was hereditary. The head of a kingdom was called a (rajan) or king. A chief priest (purohita) and a commander of the army (senani) who would assist the king. There were also two other political bodies: the (sabhā), thought to be a council of elders and the (samiti), a general assembly of the entire people.^[12]

The Janapadas had Kshatriya rulers.^[16] Based on literary references, historians have theorized that the Janapadas were administered by the following assemblies in addition to the king:

Sabha (Council)

An assembly more akin to a council of qualified members or elders (mostly men) who advised the king and performed judicial functions. In the ganas or republican Janapadas called Gana-Rajya with no kings, the council of elders also handled administration.^[1]

Paura Sabha (Executive Council)

The Paura Sabha was the assembly of the capital city (pura), and handled municipal administration.^[17]

Samiti (General Assembly)

A samiti generally consisted of all adults of the republic or the city-state. A samiti was congregated when a matter of importance had to be communicated to the entire city-state. A samiti was also held at the time of festivals to plan, raise revenue and conduct the celebrations.

Janapada

The Janapada assembly represented the rest of the Janapada, possibly the villages, which were administered by a Gramini.^[17]

Some historians have also theorized that there was a common assembly called the "Paura-Janapada", but others such as Ram Sharan Sharma disagree with this theory. The existence of Paura and Janapada itself is a controversial matter.^[18]

Indian nationalist historians such as K. P. Jayaswal have argued that the existence of such assemblies is evidence of prevalence of democracy in ancient India.^[19] V. B. Misra notes that the contemporary society was divided into the four varnas (besides the avarna or outcastes), and the Kshatriya ruling class had all the political rights.^[20] Not all the citizens in a janapada had political rights.^[1] Based on Gautama's Dharmasutra, Jayaswal theorized that the low-caste shudras could be members of the Paura assembly.^[18] According to A. S. Altekar, this theory is based on a misunderstanding of the text: the term "Paura" in the relevant portion of the Dharmasutra refers to a resident of the city, not a member of the city assembly.^[21] Jayaswal also argued that the members of the supposed Paura-Janapada assembly acted as counselors to the king, and made other important decisions such as imposing taxes in times of emergency. Once again, Altekar argued that these conclusions are based on misinterpretations of the literary evidence. For example, Jayaswal has wrongly translated the word "amantra" in a Ramayana verse as "to offer advice"; it actually means "to bid farewell" in proper context.^[21]

There was no border security for a kingdom and border disputes were very rare. One king might conduct a military campaign (often designated as Digvijaya meaning victory over all the directions) and defeat another king in a battle, lasting for a day.^[24] The defeated king would acknowledge the supremacy of the victorious king. The defeated king might sometimes be asked to give a tribute to the victorious king. Such tribute would be collected only once, not on a periodic basis. The defeated king, in most cases, would be free to rule his own kingdom, without maintaining any contact with the victorious king. There was no annexation of one kingdom by another. Often a military general (senapati) conducted these campaigns on behalf of his king. A military campaign and tribute collection was often associated with a great sacrifice (like Rajasuya or Ashvamedha) conducted in the kingdom of the campaigning king. The defeated king also was invited to attend these sacrifice ceremonies, as a friend and ally.^[25]

• Rigvedic tribes
• Bharata Khanda
• History of India
• Mahajanapadas
• Middle kingdoms of India
• Monarchy in ancient India
• Indo-Aryan peoples
• List of ancient Indo-Aryan peoples and tribes