________________
CHECKS ON ROYAL AUTHORITY 177 the people of one kingdom killed the minister, deposed the king, made him an outcaste and anointed a prince as king. The ex-king was not allowed to enter into the capital city. Fick points out that in the Telapatta Jātaka a king of Takshasilā says that he has no power over the subjects of his kingdom. This is in striking contrast with the utterance of Janaka quoted above. 2 Evidently the royal power had declined appreciably, at least in some of the north-western Janapadas, since the days of Janaka.3
1 The Social Organisation in North-East-India, trans. by Dr. S. K. Maitra, pp. 113-114. Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar follows him in Carmichael Lectures, 1918, 134f.
2 P. 172, "Bhagavate Videhān dadāmi".
3 Note the references to elected Kings (e. g. amongst the Kathaioi) and autonomous folks by the historians of Alexander in the fourth century B.C. The Ambashthas had a strong monarchy in the Brāhmaṇa period (Ait. Br. viii 21.) In the days of Alexander (Inv. Alex. 252) the constitution was democratic. O, P. 90–23.
