Defence Architecture in Early North Karnataka c15: Chapter - VI

Defence Architecture in Early North Karnataka c15

Language: English

c15.s1 The Fort in Basava Kalyāṇa — 35 parts
c15.s2 The Fort in Hāngal — 23 parts
c15.s3 1) Tarakesvara temple at Hāngal : — 51 parts

Chapter - VI

c15.1

(i) The forts in Basava Kalyāṇa and Hāngal - The Description and the critical analysis.

The Fort in Basava Kalyāṇa

About 1/4 of the kilometre, north of Basava Kalyāṇa, on a natural eminence is located the ancient fort. Kalyāṇa (Fig. 43) was the capital of the later Chālukyas from the last quarter of 10th century A.D., almost upto the end of 13th century A.D. (i.e. 975-1290 A.D.). It played politically important role in the history of medieval Deccan.

c15.s1.2

The area of Kalyāṇa, as a part of the Deccan region has a past history of many a ruling dynasty from the very early days, though it came to prominence only from the 10th century onwards. In the ancient past in the 3rd century B.C., this region along with other parts of the Deccan formed a part of the Mauryan empire, though there are no direct evidences to say so, but there is an important Asokan inscription at Maski in the District of Raichur further south of Bidar District, testifying to the area being virtually part of his empire. The region subsequently, appears to have come to lime light under the influence of Buddhism as indicated by the Buddhist remains at Sannati. Undoubtedly, further the area was a part of Sātavāhana kingdom political centre of which was Pratiṣṭhānpura (Paithan). To the north of Kalyāṇa, traditionally, this area of Kalyāṇa had contacts with the Kadambas of Banavāsi, and during the period of Chālukyas of Bādāmi, 5th to 8th century A.D., it came under their direct sway as the Chālukyan rule extended farther far beyond in the north upto the Narmada. Later, the Rāṣṭrakūṭas initially from Velāpur, Ellora in Mahārāṣṭra, and subsequently from Mānyakhēṭa, Malkhed in Gulbarga not very far off from Kalyāṇa, ruled practically the whole of the Deccan and naturally the Kalyāṇa area became the part of the core of the empire, during the 8th to 10th century. Now during the period of the rise of the later Chālukyas, with the establishment of their political power from the late 10th century upto the end of the 12th century, Kalyāṇa was made its capital. This period contributed original fort layout and major fortificational activity of Hindu order, while the subsequent period with external incursions witnessed a substantial alterations and modifications thereat, of Muslim style. Kalyāṇa remained as the capital of the Kalachūris also, upto 1283 A.D. Following the invasion of Malik-Kafur in 1308–1310 A.D., the fortune and political importance of Kalyāṇa went into the hands of Muslims, whose hub of the political activities became Devagiri and further with the passage of time it lost its importance and grandeur and thus sank into oblivion. It further, in the late medieval period remained as a small Headquarters of Muslim feudatories of the Tughluks, the Barīd Shāhs, the Mughals, the Marāthās and the Nizāms.

c15.s1.3

Although the fort (Illn. B.3) is located on an eminence actually, the fort is not visible from the ground level, from a distance of one and a half kilometres, away. Within a radius of about 3 to 5 kilometres from the fort, the ground level gradually depresses towards the fort. Thus, the area where the fort is located is at the lowest level in relation to the surrounding area. In consideration of this natural physical feature of the whole area the depression has been thoughtfully selected, for, it is not easily visible from a distance; secondly, in the depression, there is a distinct eminence suitable for construction of the fort, as it will not be affected from the inflow of the water towards the depression. Further, this natural facility could be used for getting water into the moat without much effort. Also, the fort cannot be readily sighted from a distance.

c15.s1.4

At present, the fort consists of three concentric irregular fort-walls, (Fig. 44 & Fig. 45) constructed in different periods. The middle one is the oldest and of the period of the Kalyāṇa Chālukya; the inner most was probably of the Sultanate-Mughal period; and the outermost was probably of the later or post Mughal period. Let us now study the Architecture in accordance with the chronological order of the construction of the fort walls.

c15.s1.5

The Middle Fort

c15.s1.6

The fort is almost symmetrically oval in plan, oriented north-south (Fig. 44). It measures interiorly 230 metres north-south, 200 m east-west. It has a very imposing intricate main entrance (Fig. 49) in the middle of the eastern side. There are twelve circular bastions at regular intervals almost. However, some bastions are at unequal distances (Fig. 44). The bastions are solid upto the ground level (Fig. 48). On the interior and from above the ground level, the bastions have only a parapet wall. The bastions generally are 15 to 20 metres in diameter. The wall on the inner side of the bastion is not curved but rectangular with two openings at the junction of the fort wall and the wall of the bastion on the both sides. In the centre of each bastion, there is another bastion smaller in diameter (4.00 m). The top of the bastion is accessible from a flight of steps attached to it, invariably on the inner side. The flight of steps is accessible from the openings on the inner side of the hollow bastion.

c15.s1.7

At the top of the bastion, (Height: 2.00 m and Diam. 6.00 m) is again a parapet wall systematically broken at regular intervals (1.50 mt high). At the centre is placed a metal gun on a pivot,which could be aimed through the openings, by moving the gun on the pivot to the extent of 30° each time; the gun thus ranges from 90° from one point to another (Illn. B4).

c15.s1.8

Now, the wall, on observation at the lower level to a height of 2 metres, consists of huge boulders, roughly cut and of varying sizes with mud mortar as binding material. The upper part of the wall is of ashlar masonry of well cut stones with lime mortar as cementing material, so constructed on the lower wall, leaving an offset on outside of about 2.25 m. wide. The width of the upper wall can alone be now known i.e. about 3 metres.

c15.s1.9

On the exterior side of the wall is a moat of about 30 m and 10 m deep (Fig. 45 & Illn. E3). The main gate-way is accessible by a cause-way, across the moat, which is oblique.

c15.s1.10

The cause-way to the main entrance is obviously made oblique in order to check the quick movement of the in-coming army (Fig. 48 & Illn. E1).

c15.s1.11

The main entrance (Figs. 48 and 49) now extant is from the above the level of the off-set of the fort wall. It has two circular bastions on the sides of ashlar masonry with lime mortar as binding material. The bastion has two horizontal off-sets almost at regular intervals. The entrance is 2.15 m wide and 5.00 m high, having wooden doors. The imposing wooden door, has horizontal rows of strong iron spikes from the bottom to the top. The top is semi-circular. There is also a small opening in the left door, with shutter for entrance for common people, since the main door usually remains closed.

c15.s1.12

The entrance (Fig. 48) leads to inner passage, 2.50 m wide, flanked by two guard-rooms on each side, (1.50 x 1.50 m each guard room). The passage leads to a barbican, which is rather narrow. On the other side of the guard-room, on the north side in the interior are three rooms for another set of watch and ward. The barbican leads to a narrow passage in between two circular bastions. At the top of the bastions are the loop-holes. Suppose, the enemy soldiers enter into barbican, their quick movement is checked by the narrow passage in between the two bastions. In the mean while, the soldiers from the top of the bastions, through the loop-holes, can effectively attack the enemy soldiers gathered in the barbican. From the narrow passage, the way is led to rather rectangular open space, that leads to another entrance looking north (Ent. IV & Illn. E2). Thus, the main entrance and the interior entrance are not in alignment. This entrance leads to another barbican, which is actually on the interior side of the fort wall, abutting southern bastion of the middle entrance IV (Fig. 48).

c15.s1.13

From the entrance IV (Fig. 50), the barbican leads to a flight of steps which in turn leads to a passage having guard rooms on the sides and finally to an open space in the interior. The entrance leading to the second barbican is flanked by two bastions. On the other side of the western bastion, is a magazine. Opposite to the passage from the flight of steps is a pillared hall commanding the view of the entrance V.

c15.s1.14

The access to the Bārūd Khānā (Magazine) is actually by a flight of steps located in the III barbican, and abutting the wall of the V entrance. Thus, the approach to the Bārūdkhānā has been very well safe guarded by the guard-rooms opposite to it and from the entrance No.V. Further, from the barbican III, is a passage by a flight of steps to another entrance i.e. No.VI. In between the barbican III and the entrance VI, there is a zig-zag wall connecting the guard rooms facing the entrance V and the entrance VI, near the flight of steps, from the Barbican III, is a war drum base (Fig. 50).

c15.s1.15

On either side of the zig-zag wall are the ruins of rectangular structures; they are described, as officers' quarters. Located near the main entrance, the whole area, with the Officers' quarters round the inner most fort, is more or less in the same level.

c15.s1.16

Described above, the fort, with the moat around is the earliest, probably belonging to Kalyan Chalukyan period; and in the central part of the fort (Fig.45), there must have been important mansions, including possibly the palace complex, temples etc. but this fort was destroyed owing to Muslim invasions carried out by Malik-Kafur (C.1310 A.D.); immediately after the fall of the Kalyana Chalukyas and the fort fell in to ruins (Desai,P.B., ^et al. 1970 PP. 239-40 and Yazdani,G., 1960, pp. 3-4).

c15.s1.17

Later, when again the place was made the Head Quarters of Muslim chieftain (Mishra Nandan, (Ed), 1966, Re-print,P.147) during the period of Mohammad Bin Tughaluk, and later during the time of the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb¹, the fort was renovated.

c15.s1.18

¹ The persian inscription fixed into the wall of the masjid on the top of table land in the citadel refers to the construction of the masjid and renovation of the fort by Aurangzeb, in 1669 A.D. This information was gathered by me from Dr.Kulkarni,V.S. during exploration.

c15.s1.19

By way of renovations and additions, the bastions accessible by flight of steps, were strengthened by the provision of inner top bastions fitted with, gun pivot points. The ruined walls were raised by leaving an offset. The raised walls were of ashlar masonry.

c15.s1.20

The Entrances from II to VI, provision of guard rooms, round bastions with stately wooden doors armoured with iron spikes for the III entrance, the battlements at the top, crenellations, magazines, pillared-guard-rooms, all described above, were all gradually constructed in the course of renovation works.

c15.s1.21

The ruins of structures in the central part had formed a prominent mound and the central area was used during the Sultanate period, after making the above renovations.

c15.s1.22

Further, this elevated central part was again renovated by having citadel wall round the elevated part, and many structures within it were raised. Thus, the citadel is on the top most part of the fort; i.e. 10 metres from above the ground level.

c15.s1.23

The Citadel

c15.s1.24

From the open space, within the fort, behind the magazine and on the northern side of the wall, connecting the guard-rooms and the citadel, is a flight of steps leading to the barbican V, through a gate-way. On the inner side of the gate-way, to the left is a flight of steps leading to the top of the wall. From the barbican to the officers quarters, is a gate-way in southern part of the wall. Near this gateway and the entrance VI, are circular bastions. One of them, on the southern orientation is called "Khadak Bijli Burj". These bastions have parapet wall, provided with loop-holes at regular intervals, together with battlements. Thus, both the entrances are guarded well.

c15.s1.25

From the barbican, there is a flight of steps leading to the inner part of the citadel, through the gate-way VII, (Fig.51). The flight of steps is curved abutting the circular bastion i.e. Khaḍak Bijli Burj, which is opposite to the bastion, in front of the flight of steps to the gateway VI (Fig. 51).

c15.s1.26

The circular bastion is connected to the other circular bastion guarding the gateway to the officers' quarters, with a wall in between, provided with loop-holes at the top, at regular intervals.

c15.s1.27

The wall in between the two bastions, the bastions and the wall skirting the flight of steps from the bastion near the entrance VI (Fig.51) are provided with loop-holes at the top. Thus, the entrance VI, the entrance to the officers quarters, the barbican, the flight of steps and the entrance VII (Fig. 51) are all well protected.

c15.s1.28

Entrance VII is the main and only one entrance to the citadel (Encl.III). The citadel (i.e. inner most encl.III, Fig.44) which is irregularly oval in plan, is completely of ashlar masonry. It has in addition to the bastions referred to above, seven bastions at varying intervals. The bastions are circular in plan, and each of them has a smaller circular upper storey, provided with pivot points of guns. The central upper bastions have flight of steps leading to the pivot points. The citadel has a parapet wall at the top and battlements, alternately at irregular intervals. The entire screen walls and the bastions are uniformly of ashlar masonry, unlike the outer fort wall. On the screen wall, commanding the view of officers' quarters, and the screen wall looking north-west wards, are crenellations (Illn. E2).

c15.s1.29

The entrance VII, as mentioned above, leads to the interior of the citadel. Almost exactly facing to the entrance No.VII, is a temple of mortar masonry, with well carved stone-door-frame. The temple is in ruins (Fig.51).

c15.s1.30

In front of the temple, is a path across, one leading south-wards to the palace complex, known as 'Rāj-Mahal' and another, leading to northwards to 'Darbar Hall' (Fig.44 & Fig.51).

c15.s1.31

The important monuments in ruins round the temple are, a spacious structure abutting the inner side of the screen wall near the entrance, a mosque with minarets at the corners and the dome at the centre, on the other side of the entrance a dancing hall/known as 'Rangīn Mahal' attached to the palace complex, which faces the mosque, and a Darbar pillared Hall behind the palace (Fig. 44).

c15.s1.32

There is a water well in between Darbar Hall and the structure abutting the screen wall.

c15.s1.33

All these structures are of mortar masonry and architecturally Indo-Islamic. They were, therefore, raised when the citadel was renovated and used by the Muslim Chieftains. They were raised on the ruins obviously of the earlier structural remains belonging to the Kalyan chalukyan period.

c15.s1.34

It is, thus, noteworthy that there are no visible remains in the citadel part, of the earlier citadel of the Kalyāna Chālukyas.

The Enclosure wall to the fort

c15.s1.t1.1

During the period of Nizam's rule, this fort was brought under their control in the course of the wars between the Nizāms and Marathās headed by Bālāji Bājirāo, in 1740-1761 A.D. (Telang,K.T., 1961, pp. 54-56 and 59). Then thereafter, an enclosure wall was raised along the outer edge of the moat (Enclosure I of Figs. 44 and 45). It is oval in plan and rather irregularly polygonal in design, making 13 angles. It measures on its axis 300 metres North-south and 270 metres east-west. The moat, therefore, is enclosed by the wall and is not visible from outside.

c15.s1.t1.2

At the point where the oblique cause-way is provided across the moat, to the original fort, a gate-way (Fig. 47) is provided in the enclosure wall and the gate-way is enclosed on the outside by a barbican (Fig.44). The barbican has entrance gate (Fig.46) on the south (i.e. entrance I). Within the barbican, in between its entrance and the entrance of the enclosure (i.e. entrance II), there are two structures namely a pillared maṇḍapa and a masjid, (Fig.44).

c15.s1.t1.3

At the lintel level of the entrance I to the barbican, is a Persian inscription,¹ which mentions the date of the construction of the gate-way i.e. 1795 A.D. The interior of the area of the barbican is 50 metres north-south and 45 metres east-west. On the interior wall of the barbican is a row of Dalāns in ruins. All these are of ashlar masonry with lime mortar as binding material. The walls of the barbican are simple and plain.

c15.s1.t1.4

¹ In the course of exploration, the inscription in set in the wall above the gate, was personally read by my friend and the date pertains to the Nizam's Period.

c15.s1.t1.5

The enclosure wall (Fig. 44, Encl.I) has wall-walk at the top. There is a parapet wall along the edge of outer wall. At the parapet wall, at regular interval, are loop-holes. On the interior, at seven points close to the bends are flight of steps, leading to the moat, which is between 10-12 metres, below the level of the wall-walk (Fig.45). It may be noted here that there are no bastions at the angular points or gun-points (Fig. 44).

c15.s1.t1.6

The circumstance that led to the creation of an enclosure wall round the moat may be explained as follows:

c15.s1.t1.7

In the earlier days i.e. during the early Mughal period, the skin-boats for crossing moats were in use. Such skin-boats are easily portable. Enemies, therefore, could easily use such boats in those days for crossing moats. On the other hand, in the ancient period, usually elongated, fish like wooden boats were in use; such boats were not easy for transport. With the invention of the circular skin-boats, that could be taken easily from place to place (Illn.D.5) the effective check that a moat offered for the quick onward march of the enemies had been much weakened. Therefore, in order to avert the possible in-effective functioning of the moat, this enclosure wall was raised.

c15.s1.t1.8

Enemies, thus, could find their way with great difficulty, through the gate where there is the cause-way. It is suggested here that the cause way might have been replaced by a sturdy drop-gate. In times of danger, the drop-gate could be lifted up, so much so, the connection between the enclosure wall and the fort-wall could be severed. The inaccessible moat now cannot be crossed easily. But at present, no material evidences or literary references, to such devices, in response to the conjectural circumstances, are available.

c15.s1.t1.9

The soldiers, protecting the fort, can cross the moet reaching flight of steps at different points and get on to the wall-walk to be at assigned spots. And from wall-walk, through the slits in the parapet, the guns can keep enemies at a distance. This is a new device, any way, that we notice only in this fort, and it is really commendable. It speaks of the intelligence of the military engineers in a simple but effective way.

c15.s1.t1.10

SCALE 0 60 120 Kms MAHĀRĀṢṬRA BHĪMĀ KĀGINĀ FORT OF KALYĀṆA KRISHNĀ VARADĀ TUNGA BHADRĀ KĀVĒRI GOA ARABIAN SEA KĒRAḶĀ ANDHRA PRADĒSH TAMIL NĀDU Karnāṭaka — LOCATION OF THE FORT OF KALYĀṆA.

c15.s1.t1.11

[Figure: PARAPET WALL WALK M O A T SCALE 0 10 20 30 40 m DARBAR HALL TEMPLE RUINS PALACE ENCL III ENCL II ENCL I 30 TO 35 m WELL 30 TO 35 M MOSQUE V VI MAGAZINE RUINS OF OFFICERS' QRTS IV III II I M O A T N S kalyānafort (DIST BIDAR)

c15.s1.t1.12

| | NS EW | W | H |
| encl I | 300 x 270 m | 3 | x 10 m |
| encl II | 250 x 200 m | 3 | x 20 m |
| encl III | 150 x 100 m | 3 | x 20 m |

c15.s1.t1.13

srj]

c15.s1.t1.14

An accurate transcription requires rotating the image 90 degrees clockwise to align with the text orientation:

c15.s1.t1.15

- Top-left label: "FIG. 45" (written in the margin)
- Left: "SOUTH"
- Right: "NORTH"
- Below South: "ENCL·I", "ENCL·II"
- Center-top: "ENCL·III"
- Architectural labels: "ENT·VB", "ENT·III", "HOLLOW BASTIONS", "MOAT" (twice), "G.L." (ground level, twice)
- Dimensions: "10·00", "20·00", "30 TO 35 m", "10·00", "300 m", "150·00 m", "230·00 m", "300·00 m", "10·00", "30-35 m", "3·00"
- Main Title at bottom: "KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST"
- Signature mark at bottom-right: "SKJ"

c15.s1.t1.16

Let's format according to the rules:
- Page furniture:

c15.s1.t1.17

The diagram itself is an architectural sectional elevation drawing with integrated labels and dimensions, plus its caption:

c15.s1.t1.18

KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST

c15.s1.t1.19

Wait, what about the text inside the figure? Figures, plates, maps and drawings: "a line "[Figure: caption as printed]" where the figure stands (only the printed caption or label; empty brackets "[Figure:]" if it has none). Do not describe images."

c15.s1.t1.20

So the caption is: `KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST`

c15.s1.t1.21

Is "FIG. 45" a figure label/caption or page furniture? Usually "FIG. 45" is part of the caption or figure reference, but here it's handwritten/stamped/printed at the top margin: "FIG. 45". Wait, let's look at the instruction: "- Page furniture — running head, page number, chapter mark in the margin, printer's signature marks ("B 2", "12*"), library stamps, catchwords — each on its own line starting with "@H "." "SKJ" is the draftsman's initials at the bottom right. That might be a signature mark or part of the plate/figure. Wait, if it's an entire page consisting of a figure: `@H FIG. 45`

c15.s1.t1.22

`[Figure: KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST]`

c15.s1.t1.23

`@H SKJ`

c15.s1.t1.24

Let's check if "FIG. 45" is caption: Sometimes books have:

c15.s1.t1.25

FIG. 45 KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST

c15.s1.t1.26

Wait, "FIG. 45" is at the top left corner, clearly outside the main frame/area, or it's a figure number. In many Indian archaeological books, "FIG. 45" at the top indicates figure number. Wait, if it is the figure caption/label, usually it goes inside `[Figure: ...]`: `[Figure: FIG. 45 KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST]` or separate? Wait, the caption at the bottom says: `KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST` And at the top margin: `FIG. 45`

c15.s1.t1.27

Let's put `@H FIG. 45` or inside the figure caption? "a line "[Figure: caption as printed]" where the figure stands (only the printed caption or label; empty brackets "[Figure:]" if it has none). Do not describe images."

c15.s1.t1.28

If "FIG. 45" is page furniture (like a running figure number at the top of a plate page): `@H FIG. 45` `[Figure: KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST]` `@H SKJ`

c15.s1.t1.29

Wait, could SKJ just be part of the figure or page furniture? Printer's signature mark? No, SKJ is the draftsman (S.K. Joshi, author/illustrator of *Defence Architecture in Early Karnataka*). But putting it as `@H SKJ` or omitting/including? As page furniture, yes: printer's signature marks, chapter marks in margin, etc. go to `@H `.

c15.s1.t1.30

Wait, is "FIG. 45" caption? If someone considers "FIG. 45" the figure label, "FIG. 45\nKALYĀṆA FORT..." - but rule says: "a line "[Figure: caption as printed]"" Single line! If "FIG. 45" is part of the caption, it would be `[Figure: FIG. 45 KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST]`. However, FIG. 45 is placed in the top margin like a running head / plate number. Let's check standard treatment: `@H FIG. 45` `[Figure: KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST]` `@H SKJ` This completely adheres to all rules without loss of information.@H FIG. 45

c15.s1.t1.31

KALYĀṆA FORT · SECTIONAL ELEVATION, LOOKING EAST

c15.s1.t1.32

[Figure: FIG. 46

c15.s1.t1.33

COURT-YARD 2.50 x 2.50 m GUARD 00 6.00 m 3.50 m 2.50 ENT. I 3.00 m Kalyāṇafort entrance: I

c15.s1.t1.34

[Figure: FIG. 47

c15.s1.t1.35

⁰ 1 2 3 4 5 m M O A T M O A T parapet wall 3.00 2.50 3.15 0.50 KALYĀṆAFORT entrance: 11 snj]

c15.s1.t1.36

[Figure: KALYĀṆA FORT

c15.s1.t1.37

SCALE 0 1 2 3 4 5 m 1 CM TO 1 M ENT : IV BASTION BASTION LOOP-HOLE WALLING BARBICAN. ENT: III M O A T M O A T

c15.s1.t1.38

[Figure: TYPE OF SPIKES USED IN THE DOOR 0.30

c15.s1.t1.39

SCALE 0 1 2 3 4 m 1CM TO 1 M

c15.s1.t1.40

BATTLEMENTS (KANGURAS)

c15.s1.t1.41

SEMI-CIRCULAR BASTION

c15.s1.t1.42

ASHLAR MASONRY (MUSLIM ORDER) 0.75 x 0.40

c15.s1.t1.43

1 x 0.75 m

c15.s1.t1.44

RUBBLE MASONRY (HINDU ORDER)

c15.s1.t1.45

*KALYĀN FORT* ELEVATION OF ENTRANCE: III, WITH WALLING OF HINDU & ISLAMIC ORDERS

c15.s1.t1.46

[Figure: WAR-DRUM-BASE BĀRŪD KHĀNĀ BASTION BASTION ENT: IV BARBICAN 3·15 ENT: V GUARD ROOM 2·00 x 1·25 UP BARBICAN 3·15 7·60 m GUARD ROOM KALYĀṆĪ FORT ENTRANCES: IV & V, SCALE 0 1 2 3 4 5 m [Figure: SCALE

c15.s1.t1.47

¹ cm = 1 m TEMPLE IN RUINS TO PALACE BASTION BARBICAN TO DARBAR HALL MUSEUM (MODERN) ENT : VII LOOP HOLES BASTION ENT : VI 1.50 m UP BASTION TO FFICERS' QRTS. KALYĀN FORT ENTRANCES : VI & VII. hj]

The Fort in Hāngal

c15.s2.1

The Fort in Hāngal - The description and its critical analysis Hāngal, now a Taluka Headquarters in Dharwad District is historically important, atleast from the time of the Sātavāhana rule. In the fort area within the II enclosure, where there is a small structure associated with killing of Kīchaka by Bhīma - the *Mahābhārata* hero, are found scattered pottery such as Red-ware, Black and Red ware typical of the Early historical period.

c15.s2.2

During the Early Kadambas of Banavāsi, this important town was described as Pānktipura and a part thereof known 'Kuppatturu' was given as gift to a Brahmin Svāmīśarman of Kaundinya Gotra by Dharmamahārāja Krishna Varma-II of Pānktipura (K.I. 1952, Vol.II, No.1, pp. 1.ff.).

c15.s2.3

After the subjugation of the Early Kadambas by the Bādāmi Chālukyas, the former continued to rule that area as the subordinates to the Chālukyas. This was so when the imperial Rāṣṭrakūṭas were supreme, ruling over the whole of the Deccan and when the Chālukyas of Kalyāṇa (Mores George,M. 1931, P.109) established their supremacy at the close of the 10th century, the Kadambas became their feudatories. During this period Hāngal for some time attained the status of a capital and continued to be so now and then till the Kadambas were subjugated by Ballāla-II of the Hoysalas (1931, 156-157). However, they continued to rule till the middle of 14th century, the last king of them being Purandara Rāja (1315-1347 A.D.).

c15.s2.4

As a result of this political and the traditional importance the place enjoyed the position of eminence for nearly 1000 years. There are now the remains of extensive fort walls of different periods, many temples and sculptures of merit scattered all over the area. The Tarakeshwara temple is one of the best specimens of the Kalyāṇa Chālukyan architectural style with the Hoysala influence. Nearby is another plain temple noteworthy for its super structure in Rekhā-Nāgar-style. It is locally known as Gaṇēsha temple. Within the fort are a few temples belonging to both Jaina and Śaiva sects.

c15.s2.5

Situation:

c15.s2.6

The town (Fig. 52) is located on the left bank of the river Dharma a tributory to the Varada and in-between the two tanks Achekeri and Ānekori, the last being very extensive. The ground normally plain, is gradually sloping towards the South bordering the Dharma. There are two large forts (Fig. 53) one within the other irregularly oval shaped in plan, west-north-west and east-south-east oriented. Within the II fort wall, the western part now forms the present site of the town. The eastern part is separated by a main road. In this part there is another small fort that stretches even outside the II fort. It is roughly rectangular and north-south oriented. The northern part of it forms the citadel area. The II fort wall apparently abuts the eastern and western walls of the III enclosure (Fig. 53).

c15.s2.7

From the above general analysis, it is obvious that this small fort referred to as enclosure II here forms evidently the earliest of the four enclosures; the other three being the citadel i.e. Enclosure I, the outer fort i.e. Enclosure III abutting the Enclosure II and the outermost fort i.e. Enclosure-IV. Now let us try to understand the architectural features of these Enclosures one by one (Fig.53).

c15.s2.8

Enclosure-I (Illn. F1)

c15.s2.9

Enclosure-I (N:S 500 M, E:W 200 M) is irregularly oval shaped in plan, north-south oriented that may be taken as citadel within Enclosure-II. The citadel has only one entrance at north-west corner looking west, and is rectangular on plan having opening near the southern wall. At the corner point is a watch-tower (Fig. 54) with flight of steps at the interior corner, tapering towards the flat top. The tower is 50 m wide at the bottom and 38 m high. At the top is a stone square platform with the flat post at the centre. The entrance leads to a small closed area i.e. barbican and at the middle. Another part is again an opening leading to another barbican which opens into the interior of the citadel. Within the citadel there are no structural remains now extant, excepting a temple known as Īśvara temple of the 11th or 12th century. The wall is unusually very high about 25.00 m. and 20 m. wide at the bottom. The wall steeply tapers towards the top resulting in rounded top. The section reveals two parallel core walls of laterite stones with 10 m. space inbetween. Each wall is about 2.00 m. wide. Within the walls and outside, the space is compactly filled with mud and also over them. Consequently the walls are not visible from outside. On the exterior side is a wide moat, about 25 m. wide, that runs round the II enclosure. It is filled with water fed by a tank now known as Shastri tank, which is within the II and III enclosures at the north-east corner.

c15.s2.10

Enclosure-II (Illn. F.2)

c15.s2.11

The II Enclosure (N-S. 750 m. E-W. 600 m.) is about 20 m. high and 20 m. broad at the bottom (Fig. 53, encl.II). It is similar in its outer measurements to that of the citadel, but in the core the two parallel walls, each about 2 m. wide are of bricks with 10 m. span inbetween (Fig.55). The brick walls (Illn. F.4) are completely well packed both on the interior and exterior. The profile of the wall is rather oval shaped, thus the fort wall is similar to that of the citadel.

c15.s2.12

At the junction of the II fort wall and the citadel on the western side is gateway which has a square barbican having openings at the opposite corners in the front and in the rear. It leads to the wide space in the interior. It is rather enigmatic that there is no entrance into the citadel from the interior of the II fort wall. The citadel is totally separated from the interior of the fort. It reminds of a very ancient practice of similar custom of the Indus Valley civilization. The fortifications of the civilization noted in Surkoṭaḍa, Kalibangan etc. distinctly bifurcate the citadel from the lower city. But for the use of different materials stone and brick of the walls of the citadel and the outer enclosure, the structural details of the both are almost exactly the same.

c15.s2.13

The moat (Illn. F.3) runs round on the exterior side of the fort,which is fed not only by the Shastri tank but also by the very large Ānekere. Both the gate-ways of the citadel and the outer fort are safeguarded by the moat.

c15.s2.14

The watch-tower (Fig.54) has thick and deep stone wall at the peripheral zone to a height of 10 m. from the ground level and again in the middle zone there is another similar stone wall of about 8 m. high. But the size and the method of construction of these two walls at the bottom and in the middle differ from each other. The blocks of the stones of lower wall are not so well cut and are of large size while those of the middle zone are well cut and are of smaller size. Further, the watch-tower has an off-set looking like a step in the front and the back in between the two walls. What appears strange there is that the Watch-Tower had been considerably renovated in considerable measure; thus its exact original plan is not clear. The present flight of steps in all probability is added after the renovation of the original one.

c15.s2.15

Now, there is a wide path-way roughly east-west oriented running across the southern part of the fort passing through the walls on the east and the west, connecting the present main road within the III Enclosure and the Dharmā river. There is another road north-south oriented passing through the wall on the southern side and meeting the road in side, near the eastern wall.

c15.s2.16

Enclosure-III (Fig. 53, Encl.III)

c15.s2.17

The III Enclosure wall (N.S. 1200 m. and E.W. 1800 m.) which is irregularly rectangular, encloses partly the II fort wall including the citadel. The remaining part of the II Enclosure stretches outside the III fort wall. Obviously, the III fort wall is later than the II.

c15.s2.18

In the western part of the III Enclosure is the present town. In the centre of the town is the Tārakēśvara temple. The triangular portion of the eastern part is covered by the II Enclosure and the Shāstri tank. The western part is the present habitation site. The fort wall (Fig. 56, Encl.III Section) is smaller in dimensions then the first two. It is about 10 m. high and 15 m. wide at the ground level with a moat all round on the exterior. The profile of the fort wall is an elongated semi-circle. In the core there is a stone wall of laterite on the exterior side. The fort but for the wall is entirely of the mud. On the exterior side there is a moat about 15 m. wide and 1 m. deep. The habitation area is divided into many plots of different sizes by straight roads north-south and east-west oriented. On the whole, the layout of the habitation area with the temple at the centre is well planned.

c15.s2.19

Enclosure-IV (Fig. 53, Encl.IV).

c15.s2.20

There is yet another fort wall (N-S. 2100 m and E-W. 2500 m.) about 400 m. away from the III fort wall. In fact the fort wall terminates at both the sides of the Ānekere in the south-west. There is only one entrance into the interior of the fort wall on the western side. It looks towards the Kambal Kere. Similarly there is another gate on the southern part of the fort wall on the bank of the river Dharmā, that forms as a natural moat at the south-east corner. This gate is known as Diddi-gate opening towards the river.

c15.s2.21

The main road that passes through the III fort makes its way through the fort wall on the southern side near the bank of the Ānekere and to the west of the Diḍḍi-gate. The road leads to Sirsi. This wall is the smallest in height i.e. about 5 m. high and 10 m. wide and semi-circular in profile (Fig. 56, encl.IV). It is exclusively of mud. On the exterior side is a moat fed by the Ānekere in the south-west and Achakere in the north-east.

c15.s2.22

The space between the IV and III enclosures is more or less even and measures 400 m. wide. There are temples, one of them being small. The big one is known as Rāmelinge-shwara. It is particularly noteworthy that excepting the parallel brick and stone walls in the I, II and III fort walls, all the four fort walls are entirely of mud. The IV fort wall measures N:S. 2100 m. and E:W. 2500 m. and thus the whole complex is probably the most extensive example of mud fort.

Chronology

c15.s2.t1.1

Now, this extensive fort complex in view of the political history of the region on one hand and of the structural complex on the other, evidently indicates that the four forts one within the other were built in different periods. The innermost and the II form as if one complex and probably belong to one period. The innermost is probably the earliest. Both the citadel and the fort wall including the moat in height and structural details are of the same period. In view of the place being an important Headquartere described as Pānktipura during the Early Kadamba period and also of the size and the type of bricks used for the construction it may be suggested that this complex of defence was built during the 5th century.

c15.s2.t1.2

The location of this small fort with the citadel and also the characteristic entrances i.e. gateways providing separate entrances to the city and the citadel parts are curiously interesting and support the above dating. The fort is about 250 m. away from the river Dharma. No doubt it has a moat all round on the exterior. Separate entrances to the citadel and the city area and the location of the complex on a slopy ground level a little away from the river suggest that the complex is more of protective walls rather than regular defensive fort walls. We are reminded of similar construction in Sannati discussed in Chapter III PP.

c15.s2.t1.3

The III fort wall was probably built during the time of the Later Kadambas probably during the period of Irivabedanga (967-980 A.D.) and Kēmadēva (1180-1217 A.D.) i.e. late 10th and 12th century A.D. (Mores George,M. 1931, P.146).

c15.s2.t1.4

It may be noted here that the outermost fortification is smaller in height and breadth and is entirely of mud. The space in between also is considerably narrow, so much so a planned habitation could not have been there. Local tradition speaks of the rich cultivation of gardens and trees. Even today the area is used for development of the gardens. Thus it appears that the outermost wall was intended more to check inroads of attacking forces, for the III fort is double the height of the outermost and the space in between is very small, with gardens and forest. Naturally enemies cannot approach the III fort in a planned way and with speed. If they get into the space in between they could be easily attacked by guarding soldiers from the top of the III fort. Here, therefore, we find an intelligent device but in a simple way of attacking enemies at a distance with ease during the medieval times. This aspect is therefore verily noteworthy for we do not have examples of this kind elsewhere.

c15.s2.t1.5

It may also be noted that no exterior bastions are provided at regular intervals – a feature common in the other forts, but similar to that of Banavāsi. It appears therefore that this feature seems to be distinctive of the mud forts of this region with many forts. However, it may be noted that the forts of this region had battlements at the top, for there is an excellent sculptural illustration with inscription¹ (Mores George,M., 1931, Plates 23 and 24) from the same locality belonging to the Hāngal Kadambas showing this architectural feature (See Chapter V Appendix). It may therefore be presumed that originally the III fort must have probably been provided with the battlements at the top.

c15.s2.t1.6

¹ The inscription on the Vīragal of the time of Kāmadēva (1180-1217 A.D.) refers to the fort as "Chaturvidha Durgga Sankulengalada" (line 4) deciphered and translated by Prof.Kundanagar,K.G. (Mores George,M., 1931, pp. 349-350).

1) Tarakesvara temple at Hāngal :

c15.s3.1

Vīragal of the time of Kāmadēva (c. 1180-1217 A.D.) of the Kadambas of Hāngal. Location: The Viragal (No.14) is at the Tārakēśvara temple, fort, Hāngal, District Dharwar. It is deciphered and translated by Prof. Kundangar,K.G. (Mores George,M., 1931, pp.349-350).

c15.s3.2

Text:

c15.s3.3

1. ಜನಕನಗು....ನ ಕನರಕಂಬೆಯು ಸಾಧುಹೊಲ್ಯಾಯಂಗನೆ ಜನನಿಯು ನಲ್ಲ ಕಲಿ (ಬ) ಯುವತಾ
2. ಧವನಾಡಣ ಭಾವನಾಗೆ ತಮ್ಮನೆ ಖಿಲಕಂ ಕಲಿಗಳಂಕುಶನಪ್ಪ ...........ರಿಜ.... ವನೆ
3. .... ತಿ ಯೆಂಜನಂ ನೆಗಳ್ವನೆ.. ದು ಸಾಧಣಿಯುದ್ದ ವಿಕ್ರಮಂ || ಅನ್ನು ಮಟ್ಯನೆತ್ವೇಗಂ
4. ನೆಲೆಯಾಗಿ 1 ಬಳವದೂರತಿ ಸಂದತಿಗಿದ್ಯ್ ಚತುರ್ವಿಧ ದುರ್ಗ್ಗ ಶಂಕುಲಾಂಗದ .... ಲೆತ್ಕಲೆಂ
5. ಮ.. ಕರಕಾಲಗ್ನಿಮಳಕನುದ್ಭತಂ ಮಂಡಾಕರದೋಲೆ ಸೂಕೆಯಿಸಿ ದಿವ್ಮಾತರೇೂತ್ಸವದಿಂ
6. ಬರಲ್ಕೆ ಬೆಯಕೆಯನು ಬಂದನಾಂ ವರಗತಂ ಜಯಲಕ್ಷ್ಮಿಯ ಮೇಲೈನು...Ol ಅನ್ನು ಬಳ
7. ಗುರಿಯೊಳವೆಲೆಗೆ ..... ಲದೋತರಿ.. ವಂಗೆ ..ಪೊಗಲ ತಿತ್ಪರ್ಲರುಂನತ್ಮರಾಗದೊಡ .... ದೋಳು...ನುಜ

c15.s3.4

8. . . . ವೆ . . . ದಿ . . . . ರ್ದಿಶ . . ಲಧಿಕಧಿಕಾಚುಳುಕಾಭುಜ . . . ಕಂ ಲನ್ವಂ . . . ಬಂದಾಗುರ್ಗ ಕಳನಾಯ

c15.s3.5

9. . . . ಕ . . . ರೇದು . . . . . . . . . . . ರಿದು . . . . . . . . . . . *

c15.s3.6

13. ಯು ಪಾದ . . . ರೂ . . . . ಕಮನ . . . ನೆತ್ತಿ ಕೊಂಡೊಲವಿಂ . . . ಸ.

c15.s3.7

Translation:

c15.s3.8

. . . . ma Sāhaṇi of great valour was famous on account of his father Kambaya Sāhaṇi on account of his mother Holliamgaṇe, on account of his brother-in-law Kambaya Mādhava Sāhaṇi, on account of his brother the lord Laxmaṇa and on account of the (elephant) goad to the warriors.

c15.s3.9

Being born thus and being abode of fame.

c15.s3.10

When king Kalikāla invaded the countries of the proud inimical tributaries one after another for conquest of all the quarters, he immediately followed (the Kalikala king) to take possession of the goddess of victory who had followed another . . . . . . . . .

c15.s3.11

(2) Tārakēśvara temple, vīragal of Kāmadēva.

c15.s3.12

Location: The viragal (No.15) is at the Tarakesvara temple, fort, Hāngal, Dist. Dharwar, It is deciphered and translated by Prof. Kundangar, K.G. (Ibid., 1931, pp. 450-451).

c15.s3.13

1. ನಮಸ್ತುಂಗ ಶಿರಶ್ಚುಂಬಿ ಚಂದ್ರ ಚಾಮರ ಚಾರವೇ| ತ್ರೈಲೋಕ್ಯ ನಗರಾರಂಭ ಮೂಲಸ್ತಂಭಾಯ ಶಂಭವೇ 1 ಸ್ವಸ್ತಿ ಸಮಧಿಗತ ಪಂಚ ಮಹಾಶಬ್ದ

c15.s3.14

2. ಮಹಾಮಂಡಲೇಶ್ವರ ಬನವಾಸಿಪುರವರಾಧೀಶ್ವರಂ ಜಯಂತಿ ಮಧುಕೇಶ್ವರ ದೇವಲಬ್ಧ ವರಪ್ರಸಾದಂ ಮೃಗ ಮದಾ

c15.s3.15

3. ಮೋದ ಧರೆಧರಣಿ ಪ್ರಸೂತ ಚತುಷಾಷಿತಿ ನಗರಧಿಷ್ಟಿತಂ ಲಲಾಟ ಲೋಚನ ಚತುರ್ಭುಜಂ ಸನಾಥಾದ-

c15.s3.16

4. ರೇಂದ್ರ ಧ್ವಜ ವಿರಾಜಮಾನ ಮನೋತ್ತುಂಗ ಸಿಂಹಲಾಂಛ್ಛನಂ ಮ ಯೂರವರ್ಮ ವಂಶಾವರದ್ಧಿಮಹೋಯತ್ನಿ೯ ಜನ ದಲಿತಾ

c15.s3.17

5. ಮಲ ಸಾಹಸೋತ್ತುಂಗ ನರಸನಂಗೀತಗೋಷ್ಠಿ ಪ್ರಸಂಗ ಕದಂಬಕುಳ ಕಮಳ ಮಾರ್ತಾಂಡ ಕದನ ಪ್ರಚಂಡ ಭುಜಬಳ ಭೀಮನೆನಂ ವೈರಿ ಘರಂಟಾಳ 1

c15.s3.18

6. ಕಥಾ ವೈನತೇಯನುನಂ ಸತ್ಯರಾಧೇಯನುನಂ ಸಾಹಸೋತ್ತುಂಗ ಶರಣಾಗತ ವಜ್ರ ಪ್ರಕಾರವೆನಿಸಿ ಕಲಿಗಳಂಕುಸ ಕಾಮದೇವರಸರು ಹಾನುಂಗಲ್ವೆನೆ 7. . . ರ್ಲೆವೀದಿನೊಳಕು ಸುಖಸಂಕಥಾ ವಿನೋದದಿನೊಳಕು ರಾಜ್ಯಂ ಗೈಯುತ್ತುಮಿರೆ | ತತ್ಪಾದ ಪದ್ಮೋಪಜೀವ ಸಾಹಸಾದಿತ್ಯ ನತಿವಿಪುಳಯಶಾ |

c15.s3.19

8. ರೂಢ ಪ್ರೌಢ ರೇ ವಯನಂ ಪರಪಾಕಳಿಕವೀರನೀ ವುತಾತ್ಕಾರ್ಯನನಂ ಕದನ ಪ್ರಚಂಡನುಂ ದುಷ್ಕರಿಡಾಸಾ

c15.s3.20

9. ವನಯವರ ನೆತ್ತಿಯ ಕುಲದ್ಯೋತ್ಕೇದ್ಯಂದಂ ಸಾಹಸ ವ... ವೆ 1 ನರಂದುಃ . . . ವಂದಂ . . . ವಸಾಲಿ . . . . . ಯುರಗಲಯಗಳಂ .

c15.s3.21

10. ತಾಂಡವಾಷಡಿಯತ . . . . ಗ . . ನಿರ . . . ನಿದುನ ಗೊತ್ರ ಚಿಂತಾಮಣಿ ಮಂಡಣೀಕಾ

c15.s3.22

11. . . . . . ದಕರಣಂಗ ಕೂದ್ರ ಕಣ . . . ನಾಯಕಕಗ . . . ದಯು . . . ಸೌ ||

c15.s3.23

12. ಕಾಮದೇ . . ರಥ ನಳ ಸಂ(ವ)ತ್ಸರ ಕಾರ್ತಿಕ ಬಹುಳ ಮಂಗಳ ವಾರದಂದು 1 ಶ್ರೀಮತು ಹೊಯಸಣ ಬಲ್ಲಾಳದೇ(ವರ) ನರ . . .

c15.s3.24

13. ಲ್ಬಬಂದು . . . ತೈಲ ಮನೆಗೆ ತಂಬುಲು . . . .

c15.s3.25

14. ಗೌವಳಿ ಬೊರಣ್ಣಣ . . . ಲಾವಗಿಯಾದ . . . ದುರ್ಗ . . . ಕು . . . . ರ್ಣಿಕ . . . . ದನು . . . . . . . . .ಯಿವರಂತು .

c15.s3.26

15 . . . . . ತುಲ್ಲ ಹೊಯಿಲು

c15.s3.27

16. ಹಿರಿದುಂ . . . ರಾಸಾ . . . ವೆತ್ಮು . . . , ಗಿಹಿ . . ಸಂಗತಿಗುಮವಾ ದುರು . . . . ವಿನಾದಿ ಸಾಹ . . . ದರಿ . . . ತರಿ ನೋಡಿದ

c15.s3.28

17 ಸಿರಿಯುಂ ನುತ . . . ಸುರಕಾಂತೆಯರುಂರೊಡೆಯುಂ . . . ಚತ . . . ಭೂತಲಂ ಅವುಲವಾ . . . ರ್ಥಿ . . . ನ . . . ಶಾಂತೆಯೊ . . . . . ರಾಮರಣಿ ರಣೆ .

c15.s3.29

Translation:

c15.s3.30

1. A bow to Sambhu, who is adorned with a chāmara in the form of the moon that kisses his lofty head and who is the prime pillar at the building of the city of the three world.

c15.s3.31

2-7. While the hero Kāmadēva, who had attained Pañcha-Mahāśabda and the title Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara, the supreme lord of Banavāsi the best of cities, he who had acquired the excellent of the God Jayanti-Madhukēśvara, he who had perfume of musk, he who had presided over eighty-four cities born of earth, he who had an eye on his forehead, he who had four arms, he who possessed the noble sight of a lion, which was made resplendent by the banner of the chief of monkeys, he who was a jewel in the ocean of the family of Mayūravarma, he who was the desire-yielding gem to (good) men, he who was eminent for his enterprise, he who was a very pleasing Vasanta of the family of the Kadambas, he who was terrible on battles, he who was Bhīma in respect of power of his arms, he who was Vainatēya (the king of birds) to the serpents, intoxicated tributaries, he who was speaking truth and only truth, he who was adamantive rampart to those who seek his shelter, was governing at his capital of Hāngal with the recreation of pleasing conversation, the dependent on his lotus feet Sahanaditya.