Parts of this article
PART 1. click here (The main part)
PART 2. click here
PART 3. click here
PART 4. click here (The previous part)
PART 5 . click here (This part)
THE KINGDOM OF VIJAYANAGARA
By N. VENKATARAMANAYYA, A.A., Ph.D.
Assistant Editor, District Gazetteer, Andhra.
As soon as Krishnadevaraya returned to Vijayanagara after the capture of Raichur, an ambassador of Isma'il 'Adil Khan arrived at his court, protesting against the unprovoked attack, as he term- ed it, upon his master's kingdom and requesting that all that had been taken from him in the recent war, including the fort of Raichur, might be restored to him. Krishnaraya promised to comply with 'Adil Khan's request, provided that the latter would pay homage to him by kissing his feet. On being informed of this, the 'Adil Khan agreed to do so, and it was arranged that the ceremony should take place at Mudgal on the frontier between the two kingdoms. But when Krishnaraya reached Mudgal, he did not find Ismail 'Adil Khan there. Enraged at the slight put upon him, Krishnadeva crossed the frontier and advanced upon Bijapur to chastise him. 'Adil Khan fled from his capital in panic; and Krishnaraya entered his enemy's capital without opposition, and occupied the royal palace for several days. Though it was not Krishṇarāya's intention to sack Bijapur, the city was considerably damaged by his troops. The Bijäpuris, in desperation, drained the two tanks supplying water to the city; and owing to the scarcity of water, Krishṇarāya was obliged to retire from the city and return to his kingdom.
Isma'il 'Adil Khan made another attempt to come to an under-
standing with the Raya; but the treachery of Asad Khan Larī, the lord of Belgaum,
whom he had chosen as his ambassador, frustrated his attempt. Asad Khan, who
volunteered to go on the mission to secure the ruin of his rival Salabat Khan
who was in captivity at Vijayanagara, told the Raya that the failure of 'Adil
Khan to meet him at Mudgal, as arranged by the former ambassador, was due to
Salabat Khan's machinations. Krishnadevaraya, believing the treacherous
ambassador, ordered Salabat's execution. After accom- plishing his real object,
Asad Khan fled secretly from the Raya's camp, lest his treachery should be
discovered. Krishnarāya, in- censed at the conduct of 'Adil Khan's ambassador,
marched at the head of his army into the Bijapur kingdom, burning and
plundering the country-side as he proceeded. He captured Firūzābād and Hasanābād,
but, when he arrived at the city of Sagar, his way was blocked by a large army.
A great battle was fought, the Bijapuris suffered a crushing defeat, and a
terrific carnage ensued. Two other sanguinary battles were fought, one at
Shoräpur, and another at Kemba, both in the Gulbarga district, and the Bijapur
armies suffered defeat. At last Krishnadevaraya reached Gulbarga, and laid
siege to the ancient capital of the Bahamanis for the second time. The enemy
troops once again gathered strength and attacked the besiegers, but were again
defeated. The city was soon captured and, in the words of Nuniz, it was
destroyed and the fortress was razed to the ground.
Krishnaraya's victory over Isma'il 'Adil Khan was complete. He was
personally inclined to continue the war against 'Adil Khan, but, on the advice
of the Council of Ministers which he considered wise and prudent, he resolved
to give up hostilities and return to his kingdom. Before he started upon his
return march, he placed, on the ancestral throne, the eldest of the three sons
of Sultan Mahmud Shah II, whom 'Adil Khan had kept in confinement in the fort
of Gulbarga; and took the other two with him to Vijayanagara where he kept them
in safety, bestowing an annual pension of fifty thousand gold paradaos on each
of them. This step was prompt- ed by motives of policy. The continuance of the
Bahmani monarchy, even in a shadowy form, was a source of potential danger to
the stability of the new Deccani Muslim states; and if 'Adil Khan or any other
Muslim ruler of the Deccan imprisoned or made away with the prince whom he set
upon the throne, he held the other two in reserve to make use of them, as he
deemed fit, in any new situation that might arise in the future.
(vi) Rebellion of Saluva Timma (Jr.)
With the close of the Gulbarga campaign, Krishnaraya's foreign
wars came to an end. He would have ruled in peace during the remaining years of
his reign, but for an untoward incident which led to the outbreak of a
rebellion in the eastern provinces of the empire. Krishnaraya had no male issue
for a long time. At last, Tirumaladevi, his chief queen, gave birth to a son
called Tirumala- deva-Mahārāya in A.D. 1518-19. After his return from Gulbarga,
Krishnaraya, who was already advanced in years, desirous of ensur- ing the
succession of his young son after his death, abdicated the throne, and having
crowned the young prince, assumed the office of the Prime Minister and carried
on the administration in the name of the prince. This young prince
unfortunately fell ill after a reign of eight months and died. After the death
of the prince, Krishnaraya learnt that the death of his son was due to poison
administered to him by Timma Danḍanayaka, son of his great minister Säluva
Timmarasa. In his anger, Krishnaraya believed that the report he heard about
the death of his son was true; he seized Timmarasa, his son Timma Daṇḍanayaka,
and his younger brother Saluva Guṇḍarāja, and immured them in prison where they
remained for three years. At the end of the period Timma Daṇḍanāyaka escaped
from prison and, having repaired to Cooty or Kondavidu where his cousins
Nandendla Appa and Gopa were ruling respec- tively as governors, set up the
standard of rebellion. Krishṇarāya could not easily suppress the rebellion. The
royal forces appear to have suffered some reverses. At last Rayasam Ayyaparasa,
one of the King's ministers who was sent against him with a large army,
defeated Timma Dandanayaka and carried him away to Vijaya- nagara as a
prisoner. Krishnaraya then ordered that Saluva Timma- rasa, and his son Timma
Danḍanāyaka should be blinded and sent back to their prison. The king's orders
were promptly carried out. Timma Dandanayaka died; and his father and younger
brother both languish- ed in prison.
(vii) Selection of Achyuta as Successor
The problem of succession seems to have engaged the attention of
Krishnadevaraya during the last years of his reign. Though he had a son,
eighteen months old, and a nephew, the son of his elder brother, Vira
Narasimha, he passed over both of them because he considered that neither was
fit to sit upon the throne. Of his two half-brothers, Ranga and Achyuta, the
former predeceased him, leaving behind a son called Sadasiva. He ignored
Sadasiva, and set free Achyuta from his prison at Chandragiri and selected him
as his successor. Krishnadevaraya seems to have fallen ill about the end of
A.D. 1529 and died soon after, deeply mourned by his sub- jects all over the
empire. He was, according to his wishes, succeed- ed by Achyuta, whose
coronation was celebrated early in the next year.
(viii) Krishnadevaraya and the Portuguese
Krishnadevaraya maintained friendly relation with the Portu-
guese. He found it advantageous to cultivate their friendship, be- cause it
enabled him to secure horses for his army without which he could not have waged
war successfully on the Bahmani king- dom. The Portuguese, having defeated the
Arab and the Persian merchants and destroyed the Egyptian navy, established
virtual monopoly over the trade in Arab and Persian horses on which de- pended
the strength of the medieval Indian armies.26 It was of utmost importance that
Krishnadevaraya should obtain their good- will and persuade them to sell him
all the horses which they im- ported from abroad. The Portuguese, on their
side, were equally anxious to secure Krishnaraya's favour so that they might
obtain facilities for trade in the numerous towns and cities of the empire.
With the accession, therefore, of Krishnadevaraya, there ensued a period of
intimate intercourse between Vijayanagara and Portugal, and large numbers of
Portuguese travellers, merchants and adven- turers flocked to the Hindu capital
and sought favours from the Raya and his courtiers. In spite of his desire to
cultivate the friendship of the Portuguese, Krishnadevaraya never lent support
to their poli- tical designs. Though he congratulated Affonso d'Albuquerque on
his conquest of the fort of Goa from the ruler of Bijapur, he de- clined to
enter into an alliance with them against the Zamorin of Calicut. When in A.D.
1523, the Portuguese conquered the main- land near Goa, he sent a small force
under his minister Saluva Timma against them. The expedition was a failure, and
Säluva Timma, being repulsed, had to beat a hasty retreat. Krishnaraya was not
unaware of the fighting qualities of the Portuguese. Why he sent against them
only a small force, quite inadequate for the purpose, is far from clear.
Krishnaraya probably had no intention to wage war seriously on the Portuguese.
He seems to have des- patched the expedition not so much to effect any
territorial con- quest as to notify his protest against the Portuguese
aggressions on the mainland. The short interlude of war, however, was soon for-
gotten, and as soon as the war clouds lifted away, norinal relations of
friendship were resumed.
(ix) Krishnadevaraya as a warrior and general
Krishnadevaraya was famous both as a warrior and general. He
believed like most of his contemporaries, that the proper place of a monarch on
the battlefield was at the head of his forces. His prowess was well known; he
led his armies personally, fought in the front line of the battle, and won the
respect of his friends and foes alike. He was a great general, who knew how to
win victories under the most discouraging circumstances. He knew no defeat, Whenever
he took the command of his armies in person, he was uniformly victorious, and
he invariably swept away the forces arrayed against him on the battlefield. His
triumphant armies entered the capitals of his enemies, and planted the
boar-standard on the battlements of Cuttack, Bidar, Gulbarga and Bijapur. His
success must be ascribed to his capacity for organization and the extraordinary
skill which he displayed in leading his forces. He showed amazing
resourcefulness in overcoming obstacles besetting his path. He smashed rocks
and boulders for making a road for his soldiers to reach the fort of Udayagiri,
set up movable wooden platforms around Kondavidu to enable his men to fight on
an equal footing with the garrison defending the fort, cut canals to drain tho
waters of a river swollen with floods to sieze the stronghold of the rebel
chief of Chatuir, and put to the sword his own soldiers who turned their backs
on the enemy at Raichur, and converted a disaster into a brilliant victory. But
even more than his personal bravery or his skilful management of troops, what
enabled him to over- throw hostile forces was the devotion and attachment of
his soldiers to his person. Krishṇarāya was accustomed, after the conclusion of
every battle, to go about the battlefield, looking for the wounded; he would
pick them up and make arrangements to give them medi- cal help and other
conveniences needed for their recovery. Those that specially distinguished
themselves in the fight were placed directly under his supervision so that he
might bestow particular attention on them and help them to regain their health
as quickly as possible. The care with which Krishnadevaraya nourished the
wounded soldiers and warriors did not go unrewarded. It won him the affection
of the rank and file of his army. The soldiers as well as officers were
prepared to throw themselves into the jaws of death in executing his commands.
(x) Krishnadevaraya as an administrator
In spite of his incessant military activities, Krishnadevaraya
paid considerable attention to the civil administration of the empire. The
field of the executive authority in a Hindu State was, of course, limited by
the activities of the local and communal institutions. Nevertheless, the Raya
and his ministers had much to do by way of check and supervision. The
maladministration of the provincial governors and officials and the capacity of
the Amaranayakas de- manded considerable vigilance. To redress the grievances
of the ryots and punish the evil-doers, Krishnaraya, following the practice of
his predecessors, was in the habit of touring the empire of Vijayanagara every
year, when he came into personal contact with his subjects and listened to
their complaints and petitions. He took considerable interest in constructing
irrigation tanks and digging canals to provide water for agricultural
operations. He also abolish- ed some of the vexatious taxes such as the
marriage fee, and this gave immense relief to all classes of his subjects. He
ordered deforestation in many parts of the country, and augmented the revenue
of the State by bringing fresh land under cultivation.
Krishnadevaraya was a great builder. Much of his building activity
was confined to Nagalapur, a new town founded by him near Vijayanagara, where
he built many beautiful mansions and temples. Besides some temples in the
capital, he was also responsi- ble for the construction of many new structures
in the provinces. The thousand-pillared mantapas and the rāya-gopurams, which
characterize the country-side in south India, were largely built during his
reign.
(x1) Krishnadevarāya as a patron of art and letters
Krishnadevaraya was a munificent patron of art and letters. All
the famous artists were in his employ to decorate his palaces and temples. His
fame as a patron of letters spread far and wide. He was known as the
Andhra-Bhoja, and, true to his name, he never failed to load with presents the
numerous scholars, poets, philosophers and theologians that flocked to his
court in search of patronage. Though Krishnaraya extended his patronage to the
writers in all languages, Sanskrit as well as the South Indian verna- culars,
he specially favoured Telugu, and contributed much to the development of its
literature. The Augustan age of Telugu litc- rature, which began with the
accession of Saluva Narasimha, burst forth in full splendour in the reign of
Krishnadevaraya, and his court became the centre of light and learning in the
country. Him- self a poet, the author of the Amukta-malyada, one of the
greatest poems in the language, he loved to surround himself with poets and men
of letters. His literary court was adorned by a group of eight emi- nent Telugu
poets called the Ashladıggajas or the clephants support- ing the eight cardinal
points of the literary world. Apart from his great encouragement to the Telugu
poets and men of letters of his day, Krishnadevaraya rendered an important
service to the cause of Telugu literature which had far-reaching consequences.
He creat- ed the ideal of a scholar-king, one of whose important duties was to
protect poets and men of letters and foster the growth of language and
literature. It was recognized ever since by all the Tolugu monarchs that one of
their principal duties as rulers was to patro- nize Telugu poets and learned
men and encourage the growth of literature. As a consequence, notwithstanding
the numerous poli- tical changes through which the country passed, learning
flourished without hindrance, and Telugu literature became what it is at pre-
sent, owing to the patronage of the generations of princes and chiefs who bore
sway over the land.
APPENDIX
Two problems in connection with the foundation of the king- dom of
Vijayanagara call for a detailed notice. The first pertains to the national
affiliations of the founders of the Vijayanagara empire. Scholars who had
hitherto worked on this subject may be divided into two groups sharply opposed
to each other. Some are of opinion that Harihara and Bukka, the founders of the
empire, were refugees from Tiling, who fled from the court of their sovereign,
Prataparudra of Warangal, when that monarch was taken prisoner by the armies of
the Sultan of Delhi. They established themselves at Anegondi on the banks of
the Tungabhadra, and with the help of a sage called Vidyaranya laid the
foundations of a new city, Vijayanagara or Vidyanagara, on the opposite bank of
the river. This view is based on tradition derived exclusively from Kannada
sources. Though unsupported by direct contemporary evidence, it is not
inconsistent and unworthy of credence. Others reject the tradition completely
and hold that the founders of Vijayanagara were Karṇāṭakas, subordinates of the
Hoysala monarch Ballála III, who were posted to the northern marches of his
kingdom to defend it against the attacks of Musulmans, a task which they are
said to have discharged to the satisfaction of their master, and stood forth as
the champions of the Hindu civilization. On the death of Ballala III and his
son Ballāla IV, they are supposed to have quietly ascended the vacant throne,
and ruled the erstwhile Hoysala dominions without opposition. Though espoused
with enthusiasm by some eminent South Indian epigraphists and historians, this
view seems to be based not on facts but on gratuitous assumptions and false
identifications which need not be discussed here.
The account given in the Vidyāraṇya-Kālajñāna and Vidyaranya-
Vrittänta may be summed up as follows: "Harihara and Bukka, who were in
the service of the Kakatiya monarch Prataparudra as the custodians of the royal
treasury, fled from Warangal to Kampili, when the army of the Sultan of Delhi
carried their master away to his capital as a prisoner of war, and took refuge
with Ramanatha, the heroic son of the Raya of Kampili. A few years later, when
Sultan Muhammad captured Kampili, putting to death the Raya and his son, they
were taken prisoners and carried away to Delhi. The Sultan, impressed by their
upright conduct, soon set them at liberty and, appointing them as rulers of
Karnataka, sent them over to the South with an army to suppress the rebel- lion
of Balläla and take possession of the country from him. They crossed the river
Krishna by means of boats, but suffered a defeat at the hands of Ballala whom
they encountered somewhere on the southern bank of the river. They wandered
southwards, and met the famous sage Vidyaranya at Hampi on the Tungabhadra.
Follow ing the advice of the sage they gathered together a force and, having
defeated Ballala in battle, they established themselves at Anegondi and began
to rule the kingdom of Karnataka." An important detail left out in these
two works is furnished by Keladinṛipavijayam, according to which Harihara and
Bukka, during their sojourn at the court of Kampiliraya, contracted marriage
alliances with the Kurubas, the tribe to which the Raya himself belonged.
So much about tradition. The contemporary Muslim historians
Ziya-ud-din Barani and 'Isāmī briefly allude to what happened at Kampili after
its annexation by Muhammad bin Tughluq. tion of the Raya of Kampili, whom the
Sultan appointed the governor of the province, rose up in rebellion at the time
of Kanya (Kāpaya) Nayaka's attack on Warangal, and having apostatized from
Islam, declared his independence; he then set out on an expedition of conquest
and reduced the whole of Karnataka from Gooti to Ma'bar to subjection. This
apostate, according to Firishta, was originally converted to Islam from
Hinduism by Sultan Muhammad himself. Inscriptions of the period also throw
considerable light on the sub- ject. The earliest record, which demands notice
here, is an epi- graph dated A.D. 1314 from Gozalaviḍu in the Nellore district
in the south of the Andhra coastal country, in which Bukka, one of the founders
of Vijayanagara, is referred to as the ruler of the locality. Though this
record does not mention any superior to whom he was subordinate, the date and
the locality where it is found clearly indicate that he must have been a
subject of the Kakatiya Prataparudra whose sway extended all over the east
coast down to Kanchi in the Tondaimandalam. The inscriptions of Harihara's
reign show that he was ruling the territory comprising south-eastern Telugu
country and the northern Karṇāṭaka as an independent monarch from A.D. 1336,
and that his brother and co-regent, Bukka, defeated Ballala IV within a few
months of the death of his father, Ballala III, in A.D. 1344, and annexed the
Hoysala dominions to his new kingdom.
Now, taking into consideration the evidence of tradition, the
Muslim historians, and the inscriptions, it may be stated that the founders of
Vijayanagara were at first in the service of Pratāpa- rudra of Warangal, and
that when that monarch was defeated by Muhammad bin Tughluq and taken prisoner,
they fled to Kampili and took refuge in the court of Kampilideva. They were,
however, captured by the Sultan after the sack of Kampili in A.D. 1326, and
were carried away to Delhi where they were forcibly converted to Islam. On the
outbreak of a rebellion in Kampili and the collapse of the provincial
government, they were released by the Sultan from prison and sent with an army
to Kampili to reconquer it from the rebels and rule the province as his deputies.
This they successfully accomplished; but they did not long remain loyal to the
Sultan. They came under the influence of Vidyaranya who persuaded them to
renounce Islam, and throw in their lot with the Andhra nationa- lists who had
just then succeeded, under the leadership of Käpaya, in expelling the Musulmans
and re-establishing their national in- dependence. Harihara and Bukka then
reverted to their ancient faith and, having declared their independence,
assumed the leader- ship of the Hindus of Kampilī in their fight against the
Musulmans.
The second problem concerns the origin of the city of Vijaya-
nagara. The evidence on the subject is divergent. Tradition, embodied in the
Vidyaranya-Kālajñāna and works of this descrip- tion, attributes the foundation
of the city to Vidyaranya, and Vidya- nagara, the alternative name by which the
city was known, lends colour to the tradition. The inscriptions of Harihara I
and his successors, which narrate the circumstances in which the city was
founded, do not at all mention Vidyaranya in this connection. They refer either
to Harihara I or Bukka I as the builder of the city of victory.27 The
conflicting character of the evidence has, no doubt, given rise to much
speculation; and several theories have been put forward to explain the
circumstances under which the city was founded. Tradition has been, as usual,
rejected as utterly untrust- worthy, and Vidyaranya is treated as a person of
no consequence. All the inscriptions which refer to the city as Vidyanagara are
de- clared to be spurious, being forged by the wily monks of the Advaita- matha
at Sringeri. The part played by Harihara I in the construc- tion of the new
city is also discounted; and the credit of building it is exclusively given to
Bukka I. Such a theory ignores the fol- lowing facts, clearly established by a
careful examination of the contemporary records:
(1) Vijayanagara was functioning as the capital of the new kingdom from at least A.D. 1344, some ten years before the death of Harihara I; (2) Bukka I was associated with his brother in the administration of the kingdom as his co-regent at least from A.D. 1344; and (3) Vidyaranya was the adviser, in spiritual as well as temporal affairs, of the first three kings of Vijayanagara, namely, Harihara I, Bukka I and Harihara II. It is highly improbable that Vidyaranya, Harihara I, and Bukka, who were responsible for the foundation and the government of the kingdom of Vijayanagara, should have built the new capital without consulting one another. On the whole the following seems to be the most logical inference from facts known so far on reliable authority:
The idea that a new city should be built around the Hemakūta hill
had originated in the mind of Vidyaranya. He commanded his royal disciples,
Harihara and Bukka, to give material shape to the idea. They obeyed his
command. Harihara entrusted to his brother the task of constructing the city.
Accepting the orders of his guru and his sovereign, Bukka erected the new city.
The testimony of tradition and inscriptions is not only not contradictory but
comple- mentary. Vidyaranya supplied the idea; Harihara gave the neces- sary
sanction; and Bukka carried it into execution. The city of Vidyanagara was thus
built by all the three, Vidyaranya, Harihara and Bukka.28
1. See above pp. 75-77.
la. See appendix at the end of this chapter,
1b. The name is also spelt as Kampaņa.
lc. See above, p. 234.
1d. Though nothing is known of Ballala IV, subsequent to his
coronation, from the epigraphic sources, the contemporary Deccan Muslim
historian, 'Isâmï, refers to a Balal who was living at Pattan on the west coast
at the time of 'Alä- ud-din Hasan Gangu's invasion in A.D. 1348. 'Balāl'
mentioned in the couplet must have been identical with Ballala IV, as there was
no other person bearing that name at that time.
2. 115 of 1901, SII. VII. 303.
3. N. Venkataramanayya, 'Muslim Historians on Muhammad Shah
Bahmani I's
war with Vijayanagara'. ABORI, XXVIII, 1-13.
3a. For the date and details of the campaign against Madură cf. pp.
235-6. 4. The Alampundi grant of Virupaksha refers to his reconquest of
Tundira, Chola, and Pandya countries (ARE. 1899, Para. 55, EI. III, pp.
224-30). In the prologue to his two Sanskrit plays, the Nārāyaṇīvilāsam and
Unmatta- ragharam, he calls himself the lord of Karnāța, Tundīra, Chola and
Pandya monarchs, and the planter of victory in Simhala (Sources, p. 35).
5. The Viragal set up at Goa on Wednesday, 29 August, 1380, by
Mudda Nayaka, a servant of Mahāpradhāna Mallappa Vodya, the governor of Haive"
(Jr. Mythic. Soc. XIX, pp. 27-28) shows clearly that Goa must have been con-
quered by Vijayanagai a some time before that date.
6. No other king of Vijayanagara is known to have conquered
Sapta-Konkanas. This is corroborated by the evidence of Nuniz who states that
Ajarao (ie. Harihara II) 'was always at war with the Moors; and he took Goa,
and Chaul, and Dabull, and Ceillao, and all the country of Charamamdell'
(Sewell Forgotten Empire, p. 301).
7. Nellore District Inscriptions, Copper plate, No. 1.
7a. Chapter XIII, E.
8. EI. XXVI. p. 14 ff.
9. Firishta, no doubt, states that Fürüz Shāh's brother,
Khän-i-Khānān, expelled, after repeated battles, Vijayanagara army from the
dominions of the Sultan (Briggs, Ferishta, II, 391). This is, however, highly
improbable; for in the first place, this fact is not mentioned by other Muslim
historians; and secondly, the ill-will that existed between the brothers since
the arrival of Gīsū Darāz, and the Khan-i-Khānān's designs upon the throne must
have prevented him from lending a helping hand to the Sultān.
10. Gopinatha Row believes that Vijaya ruled for a period of six
months (EI. XV. p. 14), and Venkoba Rao agrees with him (ARE. 1921, Part II,
para 48). Sewell assigns to him a very short reign of a few months (List.
"Ins. p. 214). Hayavadana Row is more liberal; he increases the period of
his rule to two years. What is more interesting still is that he cites the evi-
dence of a record of the reign of Devaraya II, dated S. 1325 (A.D. 1403-4) to
prove that Vijaya died in that year (MYS. Gaz. New Edition, Vol. II, pt. iii,
p. 1560). The record in question (EC, VIII. TL. 163) however has no bearing on
the subject. The donor of the grant registered therein was not Devaraya II but
Vitthappa Danṇāyaka, one of his officers, who grants a village to Brahmans for
the attainment to Śivaloka of his father.
11. TA, III (Eng. Tr.), p. 44. This is in agreement with
Firishta's account (Briggs II, 400). Tabataba places the invasion before Khalf
Hasan's conquests in Konkan and the Sultan's expedition to Kherla to help
Narsing Raya (IA, XXVIII, 211). 12. According to the Burhan-i-Ma'asir (BK, 51),
Ahmad Shah transferred the capital of his kingdom from Gulbarga to Bidar,
"in the month of Rajab in the second year of his reign (June, 1423)";
but Firishta states that Sultan Ahmad Shah laid the foundations of his new
capital while returning from his Kherla expedition in 830 AH. (A.D. 1426)
(Briggs II, 411). In the Tazki- rät-ul-Muluk of Rafi-ud-din Shirāzī, it is said
that Ahmad Shah, who as- cended the throne in 830 A.H., founded in the very
same year his new capi- tal of Muhammadābād-Bidar (IA, XXVIII, 218). As Ahmad
Shah's acce- ssion took place in 825 A.H. (A.D. 1422), he must have shifted his
capital from Gulbarga in that year. The latest date for the foundation of the
new Bah- mani capital is furnished by Nizam-ud-din Ahmad. Though he agrees with
Firishta that Sultan Ahmad Shah built his capital while returning from his
Kherla expedition, he assigns its foundation to 832 A.H. (A.D. 1428-29) (TA,
Eng. Tr. III, 51-53). The evidence is thus conflicting. However as the dates
furnished by the Burhan-i-Ma'äsir are more reliable than those of Firishta, I
am inclined to accept A.D. 1423 as the correct date for the foundation of the
new capital.
13. SII. VII. 202,
14. Further Sources, I, p. 107.
15. 26-29 of 1937-38.
16. In the Gañgādāsa-pratāpa-vilāsam (Sources, 25), it is said
that on the acce- ssion of young Mallikarjuna after the death of his father
Pratapadevaraya II, the Dakshina Suratrana and the Gajapati, both of whom were
defeated on a former occasion by the latter, came together and invested the
city of Vijayanagara. Now, the Gajapati who came with the Dakshina Suratrāno to
invest Vijayanagara was Kapilendra. The defeat which he sustained at the hands
of Devaraya I was inflicted during Mallappa Udaiyar's expedition in A.D.
1443-44. The presence of the Vijayanagara armies in the Godavarï delta is
indicated by an epigraph at Draksharamam dated A.D. 1444, and as the record
registers a gift for the merit of Mallappa Udaiyar made by a Vira Balañja
merchant guild at the instance of Allaya Vema and his brother Virabhadra, it is
certain that he came there to help them (SII. IV. 1375, Mac. Mss. 15-4-4, p.
164).
17. 23 of 1905, 476 of 1921, 161 of 1906; EC, III, i, Srirang 107,
all dated in A D. 1446-47 refer themselves to the reign of Vijaya II. He is
also mentioned in the inscriptions of the time of Devaraya II. In A.D. 1441 he
was holding some position of responsibility in the Kondaviḍurājya (ARE. 420 of
1915). Earlier he was ruling in the Rayadurga-rajya from his capital Penugonda.
According to a copper-plate grant dated A.D. 1435, registering the gift of a
village made by him to a Vaishnava scholar named Lakshmidhararya, he was a
younger brother of Devaraya II and was known also as Devaraya, and his capital
was the city of Ghanasaila (Penugonda). From the fact that the village granted
was renamed as Pratapadevarayapuram after him, it is certain that Vijaya II was
also known as Pratapadevaraya (MAR, 1921, Para 62). It is interesting to note
that, according to the Srisailam plates of Virupaksha II, his father,
Pratapadevaraya, who was also a younger bro- ther of Devaraya II, obtained from
his elder brother i.e. Devaraya II, the Ghandrirajya (Sources, No. 26). From
this it appears that Pratapadevaraya alias Vijaya, and Pratapadevaraya, the
father of Virupaksha, are identical. 18. Further Sources, II, No. 68.
19. This was probably due to the fact that his great-grandfather
Devaraya I had the title Praudha prefixed to his name in some of his
inscriptions.
20. See Ch. XIII, B, Orissa, note 8a, for a different view. 20a.
It is generally held that the Gajapati king Kapilendra died in A.D. 1467 when
his son Purushottama ascended the throne (cf. Ch. XIII B). Dr. Ven-
kataramanayya, the author of this Chapter, who has discussed this question at
some length ́in PAIOC, VIII. 585-99,
holds the view that Kapilendra ruled jointly with his son Purushottama till
A.D. 1470 when he died. (Ed.). 21. See Further Sources, I, 189-196, and JOR,
Vol. X, pp. 158 ff., for a discussion
of the date and detailed description of the incidents of the war.
22. See Further Sources, I, 204 note.
23. Scholars differ in their opinion as to whether Krishnadevaraya
conquered Cuttack or not. For discussion of this problem see Further Sources,
I, 209- 211, and P. Mukherjee, Gajapati Kings, 93-95. (Ed.),
24. A different account of this war is given in the
Tarikh-i-Muhammad Quli Qutb Shah, which was written some time after the death
of the monarch in A.D. 1611. This work is utterly unreliable, as it is
contradicted by the ins- criptions of Krishnadevaraya and other indubitable
contemporary records. Some of the incidents mentioned in the Tārikh-i-Muhammad
Quli Qutb Shah might have been based on facts; but the chronology is false. The
con- temporary evidence of Nuniz has greater claim on our credence than the
later chronicle.
25. Further Sources, I, 211-13.
26. See Ch. XIII, E.
27. One school of Vijayanagara historians, taking their stand on
the statement of Firishta that Ballala III built the city, Bijangar, called
after his son Bejan Ray, near his northern frontier on the way of the armies of
Delhi, contend that Ballāla III was the real founder of Vijayanagara. But,
Firishta wrote his history in the beginning of the 17th century A.D. His
account of Vijayanagara is not authentic and incorporates into it much of the
gossip which he heard in the bazars of Bijapur. As he relates two stories
totally opposed to each other about the origin of Vijayanagara, his evidence
need not be taken into consideration in the present context.
28. K. A. N. Sastri and N. Venkataramanayya: Further Sources, 1,
58.
PART 1. click here (The main part)
PART 2. click here
PART 3. click here
PART 4. click here (The previous part)
PART 5 . click here (This part)
Post a Comment