Defence Architecture in Early North Karnataka c16.s5.t3: Pan-Supāri Gate
Defence Architecture in Early North Karnataka c16.s5.t3
- Language
- English
Pan-Supāri Gate
c16.s5.t3.1
Within the citadel, almost in the middle there is a crescentic row of huge boulders forming as if a natural fort wall, dividing the citadel into two parts, the north-eastern and the south-western. In the south-western part are the various mansions of the royal family.
c16.s5.t3.2
Now, there is a narrow open space between two boulders of this natural wall and here is raised a gate known as pan-supari gate (Fig.58, Schedule 19) connected with the walls to the boulders on the sides. This gate leads to the residental area of the royal family.
c16.s5.t3.3
It is not known, if the present name is original; however there is an age long tradition especially among the higher classes to welcome invitees, friends and relations with due ceremonies including offering of leaf and betel-nut (i.e. Pān-Supārī), probably guests were welcomed by the royal dignitaries at this gate, then, and this episode has remained symbolically in the name, it appears.
c16.s5.t3.4
The gate faces east. It has a rectangular barbican. On the outside of the gate is an entrance looking north. The gate has straight entrance passage without guard rooms. At the top is a corbelled arch.
c16.s5.t3.5
Watch-Towers (Fig.66 and Illn. 81)
c16.s5.t3.6
Close to the Janānā enclosure within the residential area is an enclosure (Fig.58, Schedule 22) having the inner apartment of the royal ladies. At the four corners of the wall are watch-towers. All of them are similar to one another. Each tower is about 30 m. high and 5 m square. At the top is a balcony with three arched openings on each side. And it has somewhat gabled roof. There is a stair-way within the tower leading to the balcony. The enclosure wall is about 10 m high and 2 m thick.
c16.s5.t3.7
Observations:
c16.s5.t3.8
It is worthy of note that the fort in Bījāpur chronologically follows immediately the Vijayanagara fort. It may not be ruled out that the building activity of the fort by Vijayanagara rulers might have been still continued when the fort in Bījāpur began to be constructed (1480-1510 A.D. - the period of Yusuf Ali Ādil Shāh). In view of this close proximity and even to a small extent of the overlap, we find here fundamental differences in the pattern of the layout of the gate-ways and the crowning part of the gateways of the fort.
c16.s5.t3.9
The concept and the form of the former are more in the line of those of the forts, excluding later additions and modifications of the proceeding ages i.e. the stone forts in Bādāmi, Malkhēd, Hāngal etc. It becomes evident by considering the lineal development of the style of Vijayanagara that the fort appears to be still traditional but for its extent and certain architectural components crowning the gate-ways. They appear to display more the glory and grandeur to visitors, than strictly for defence purposes. None of the gate-ways of the citadel and those, that are within and without, do not display architectural devices to trap enemies such as zig-zag narrow passages provided with not readily visible guard-rooms. Secondly, the gate-ways are not heavily and boldly fortified by imposing buttresses, rectangular or semi-circular in plan and at the top there is no provision of having a series of kanguras (battlements) helping soldiers to attack the enemies at the ground level at the same time being protected by the battlements from the onslaught of the enemies.
c16.s5.t3.10
On the other hand the gateways of the Bijāpur fort have all the architectural devices such as the extraordinarily fortified gate-ways with secret guard-rooms opening into narrow zig-zag passages. Enemies entering through the gateways can be got concentrated and trapped within the barbicans and can be destroyed from the top of the fort. At the top, there is a thick festoon line parapet wall with bastions at required intervals and on the top of the bastions are heavy guns, which have a very wide range so much so all round the fort, to a certain distance outside, the area is well protected from the enemies. The Bijāpur fort, therefore, displays a highly advanced military strategy to face enemies who are well equipped with advanced machinery including guns. The fort, therefore, clearly exhibits a striking and highly developed architectural device in response to the advanced military attacks. Probably it is this aspect of the Vijayanagara fort in relation to that of Bijāpur that accounts as one of the fundamental reasons for its downfall at the hands of the severe Muslim attacks.
c16.s5.t3.11
[Figure: NOTE: BASED ON SURVEY OF INDIA MAP PUB.- BANGALORE (1974)
c16.s5.t3.12
SCALE 0 60 120 KMS
c16.s5.t3.13
MAHARASTRA BHĪMĀ KAGINA KRISHNĀ ANDHRA PRADESH GOA VARADĀ TUNGABHADRA FORT OF VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) ARABIAN SEA KĀVĒRĪ KĒRALA TAMIL NĀDU
c16.s5.t3.14
Karnātaka — LOCATION OF THE FORT OF VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI),]
c16.s5.t3.15
VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) : FORT
c16.s5.t3.16
[Figure: VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) : FORT SCALE 0 1 2 KM A RIVER TUNGABHADRA HAMPI VENKATAPUR KADIRAMPUR KAMALAPUR TANK LB CANAL HOSPET SKJ.]
c16.s5.t3.17
SCHEDULE:
c16.s5.t3.18
1. VIRŪPĀKSHA TEMPLE 2 KŌDANDA RĀMA " 3.VITHALA " 4.PURANDARA MANDAP 5.SŪLE BAZAR 6.GANAPATI 7.SARASVATI TEMPLE 8 NARASIMHA 9 DANDANAYAKA ENCLOSURE
10. MINT
11. HAJAR RAMA TEMPLE
12. MAHANAVAMI DIBBA
13. QUEENS' BATH
14. OCTAGONAL BATH
15. WESTERN GATE 16 DAKKHANI GATE 17 DOMED GATE 18 BHIMA GATE
19. PĀN SUPARI GATE 20.TALĀR GHATTA "
21. PENGONDA " 22 JANANA ENCLOSURE 23 ELEPHANTS' STABLE 24 PATTĀBHIRAMA TEMPLE.
25. GATE
26. "
c16.s5.t3.19
VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT, PENUGONDA GATE.
c16.s5.t3.20
[Figure: BASTION WITH WATCH TOWER ISHWARA TEMPLE FROM PENUGONDA TO PAṬṬĀBHI RĀMA TEMPLE MISSING PORTION OF GUARD ROOMS MANDAPA NOTE :- PENUGONDA GATE LEADS TO DĀRŌJI, DĒVALĀPURA KUDATI ALIPUR, BELLARY & FURTHER TO PENUGON.]
c16.s5.t3.21
[Figure: VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — A GATE TO THE NORTH OF THE PENUGONDA GATE FIG. 60 6·60 GL 3·75 ELEVATION WALL DEPICTION OF NANDI, SHIVA & THE DEVOTEE. FORT WALL GUARD ROOMS (NOW MISSING) DWĀRAPĀLĀS CORBELLED ARCH 3·75 4·40 PLAN
c16.s5.t3.22
[Figure: FIG.61 VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT, DOMED GATE. 3.80 4.80 2.30 2.00 7.80 5.60 WALL IN ASHLAR MASONRY GL ELEVATION SCALE m 0 3 6 9 30.00 30.00 m CORBELL GATE BARBICAN DOMED GATE 5.60 4.30 HANUMĀN ISHWARA LINGA PLAN
c16.s5.t3.23
[Figure: NOTE · B- WALL SCULPTURAL DEPICTION OF BHÎMA KILLING DUSHYĀSANA. ELEVATION ( SPANNED BY STONE LINTELS SUPPORTED FROM BELOW BY CORBELS IN HINDU STYLE OF ARCHITECTURE.) PLAN VIJAYA NAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — BHÎMA GATE
c16.s5.t3.24
[Figure: VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT -- PĀN-SUPĀRI GATE TO THE EAST OF ELEPHANT'S STABLE.
c16.s5.t3.25
ELEVATION
c16.s5.t3.26
VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — TALĀR GHAṬṬA GATE
c16.s5.t3.27
[Figure: ELEVATION SCALE PLAN]
c16.s5.t3.28
[Figure: VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — FIG · 65 SOUTHERN GATE
c16.s5.t3.29
CORBELLED ARCH ELEVATION SCALE MOAT PILLARED MANDAPAM (WATCH TOWER) SHIVA TEMPLE BARBICAN FORT WALL CORBELLED ARCH PLAN
c16.s5.t3.30
[Figure: VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — FIG. 66 WATCH TOWER ABUTTING TO THE NORTHERN WALL OF JANĀNĀ ENCLOSURE ELEVATION
c16.s5.t3.31
[Figure: OUT SIDE ↑ 10.00 IN SIDE ↓ ENCLOSURE WALLS OF IMPORTANT APA-RTMENTS IN SIDE THE CITADEL. GL 2.00 7.00 FORT WALL NEAR BHÎMA’S GATE EARTHERN RAMP MOAT 6.80 GL PARAPET WALL WALK WITH LIME MORTAR TOP 7.20 m FORT WALL NEAR DOMED GATE MOAT 6.60 m GL HEARTING IN MUD AND RUBBLES]
c16.s5.t3.32
VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — CROSS-SECTIONS SHOWING DIFFERENT METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION