[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Architecture and art](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art) › [Defence Architecture in Early North Karnataka](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981) › c16 # Defence Architecture in Early North Karnataka c16: Chapter - VII Defence Architecture in Early North Karnataka c16 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c16.s1 The Fort of Vijayanagara](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1) — 9 parts - [c16.s2 References to Forts](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2) — 10 parts - [c16.s3 References to the forts by the foreign visitors](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3) — 11 parts - [c16.s4 Forts and their Remains](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4) — 11 parts - [c16.s5 The Gate-ways](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5) — 9 parts ### Chapter - VII ### [c16.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.1) The fort in Vijayanagara (Hampi) - The Description and the critical analysis ### The Fort of Vijayanagara ### [c16.s1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.1) The very name Vijayanagar in the history of South India in particular and of India in general, immediately stirs indescribable thrill and amazement on the part of listeners, for as repeatedly described in a most unparallel way Vijayanagara was a catch-word for the extraordinary glory and prosperity in the whole of Asia then. Likewise, its defensive walls protecting the capital were by far the most extensive covering incredibly a very vast area. The fort has been described by the contemporary foreign itinera^nts^ies, who visited the capital, as the most stupendous. ### [c16.s1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.2) Hampi to some extent is somewhat informative in the light of the recent archaeological studies. In Hampi proper, in the recent excavations an inscription of lime stone has been found, this inscription palaeographically ascribable to 2nd c. A.D. Near Mahānavami Dibba are many structures. In the construction of these structures are found many well out lime stone blocks and slabs. These indicate that the inscription in question was not brought from else where i.e. from a distance but from nearby structure/s in the same area; that is to say that Hampi was an important centre during the Sātavāhana period and it continued to be so almost throughout the history, for the original part of the Virūpāksha temple and some of the inscriptions are of the Kalyāṇa Chālukya period, i.e. the times of Somesvara I and Vikramāditya VI in the early part of the 12th century A.D., who had established one of the strong political bases at Kampili, nearby Hampi. In the wake of the dwindling Hoysala kingdom, during the early part of the 14th century A.D., there was already rising a small but powerful principality in Kamalāpur area; and further, its security is provided by the natural hill ranges of immense strength. All these factors in addition to the religious significance the place has i.e. Kishkinda or Bhāskara Kshētra, must have prompted Hukka and Bukka to make it the capital of their kingdom under the guidance of sage Vidyāraṇya. An inscription at Bāgepalli (E.C. X No. 70) states that Vidyaranya directed the building of a city called Vijayanagara and the king Harihara following these directions built a city near Pampā-Kshetra and called it as 'Vidyanagara' in honour of the sage. ### [c16.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.3) Located in a most ruggedly hilly areas on the right bank of the Tungabhadra (Fig. 57), the city was certainly in a most strategic position, where nature had been then to a great extent a mighty protector. Taking into consideration a large area, with Hampi (Fig.58) as the centre, one will realise that the latter comprises so many hills and valleys, that with the little effort of connecting them would prove to be effectively defensive. Even the Tungabhadra on the north side runs on a bouldery bed in a winding way. A person, who is not familiar with the course of the river, is bound to meet fatal end while crossing. ### [c16.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.4) Wisely understanding the natural potentialities of the whole area, the builders of Vijayanagar empire selected the Hampi region as the centre of their political activity. The importance and wisdom of their selection would be much better in view of the technological advancement made in the military equipments then such as heavy guns. It may be noted here that the transport of such heavy guns in such hilly areas was almost impossible and without such guns, the fort walls (Fig.58) forming part of the natural hill-ranges could never be conquered. The physiography, therefore, of the region had been most cleverly made use of by the builders of Vijayanagara empire. ### [c16.s1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.5) The capital of this Chivalrous dynasty, thus, was "located in a land scope of wild resolute character, dominated by huge fantastic boulders (Fig.58) within mountain ranges (Sewell,R., 1962, p.20). The engineers, particularly in the field of defence architecture, must have studied the geological, geographical and ecological aspects of the terrain and advised the royal authorities on the problems of defence from time to time. ### [c16.s1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.6) The picturesque irregularity of the terrain not only aided the builders in raising the fortifications here easily, because of the abundance of material naturally available, but also made the close association between the buildings and the solid rock foundations so that it is difficult to tell, where nature leaves off and the work of man begins. ### [c16.s1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.7) The intervening gaps in between the huge rocks and hillocks, which spread almost around the entire environs of Vijayanagar city, were bridged with solid mess of stone walls, that served a frame work of the impregnable defence-wall-system. The high hills (Fig.58) rocks and boulders were the gifts of nature, that stand erect, even now, as the watch-towers and defensive bastions, over looking the plains beyond on the west, south and the east. ### [c16.s1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.8) The whole area is dotted with rather barren and rocky hills. The hills are of granite with bluish and gray to rich golden brown. Many boulders weigh hundreds of tons. In places, huge rocks stand deliberately poised one upon another and they form quite impassable stone screens. On the sides of these hills and along the low ground between them, there are the fortified enclosure walls of the old city, which are often in several lines, one behind the other. ### [c16.s1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s1.9) On the northern sector, the unfordable Tungabhadra (Fig.58) has been again the natural gift of water defence, which runs so swiftly and piercing like the sharp sword of a warrior. The river is unfordable because, it is exceedingly zig-zag and runs over rocky boulders and makes here and there several whirls. It is therefore extremely dangerous to cross the river without properly knowing the physiography of the course even when it is knee-deep, during the dry days of the southern summer.³⁵ ### References to Forts ### [c16.s2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.1) Local traditions speak of a town on the right bank of the Tungabhadra, centuries before the birth of Vijayanagar empire. Here certain spots are associated with Rāmāyaṇa episodes, such as Mātanga parvata, Văli-Dibba, Rishyamukha, Malayavanta. ### [c16.s2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.2) Vijayanagara was one of the few medieval capital cities that has been described most by foreign visitors. The description by the some of the foreign visitors shed welcome light on the layout and various functions of the different parts of the fort. They are immensely valuable in view of the fact, that practically little traces of the outer forts are extant. ### [c16.s2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.3) For instance Torangal, about 33 km. south-east of Hampi, derives its name after its important position in relation to the fort, as the main gate-way and the first to Hampi. Similarly in some other localities encircling Hampi at varying distances, like Kampli, Sāndūr, Hospet and Mallāpur, also were gate-ways. ### [c16.s2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.4) Kampli gate way ### [c16.s2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.5) Kampli (Gaz. Bellary, 1972, pp. 692-93) is situated 34 km north-east of Kamalāpur and 40 km to the east of Hampi. In 1064 A.D., it is said, it was a capital of a chieftain of Kalyān Chālukyas. Ibna Batuta mentions, it was one of the strongholds of the original chiefs of Anegundi and was a kind of out-post of the city of Vijayanagar. The fort built of dark rock, found from the bed of the Tungabhadra stands at the edge of the river. It is said it was built by one of the Pālyagārs of Bellary. The heros, Kampilarāya and his son Kedugali Kumara Rama died^ here within the fort, fighting the invading Muslims. ### [c16.s2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.6) Sandur Gate way ### [c16.s2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.7) Originally Sandur (Gaz. Bellary, 1972, p.669) was known as Skandapuri, city of Skanda or Kumaraswāmi. The plase has been fortified during Vijayanagara rule and served as gateway to the city of Vijayanagara. Later Haider Ali built a fort outside altogether, called Krishnanagar fort: It is quadragular in plan, with stone curtains 6 m high,connected with bastions and surrounded by a ditch. Entrance is by only one gate. ### Gateway of Hospet ### [c16.s2.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.t1.1) Hospet (Gaz., Bellary, 1972, pp. 690-91) was built by Krishnadēva Rāya, in 1509 to 1520) A.D. in honour of his wife Nagaladēvi. It was originally known as Nāgalāpur. In his time it was the entrance-gate to the city of Vijayanagara for the travellers coming from Goa and other western countries. According to Paes, a Portuguese traveller, it was a very strong place fortified with walls and towers and it was a part-time residence of the king and he induced the traders to settle there. ### [c16.s2.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.t1.2) Krishṇadēva Rāya got constructed the enormous embankment south of the town, which connects the two ends of the two parallel ranges of hills, which, further south,enclose the Sondur valley. It was executed by the Portuguese defence engineer Joao-de-la-Ponte. ### Kamalāpura gate-way ### [c16.s2.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.t2.1) Situated north of Hospet and south of Hampi, Kamalāpur (Gaz. Bellary, 1972, P. 691) served as another inner gateway and a part of the site of the old city of Vijayanagara. It contains also a fort with high round towers in the centre and circular bastions in the middle of the walls connecting them. ### Mallāpura Gate-way ### [c16.s2.t3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.t3.1) It was located (10 km) to the west of Hampi, which had a fortified wall around. Mallāpur served as a gateway to the city of Vijayanagara, from the west. Now it is submerged under the waters of the Tungabhadra Dam. ### [c16.s2.t3.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.t3.2) All these gateways referred to above were connected with high screen walls and hill ranges concentrically. But, now there are hardly any traces of these concentric fort-walls in these localities. ### [c16.s2.t3.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s2.t3.3) The main gateways and the forts, that were there once, have been passed on to legends. They would have been the only sources to know conjecturally about the most invulnerable nature of these forts, but for the foreign notices. It is in this way the descriptions of the foreign visitors are of great value. ### References to the forts by the foreign visitors ### [c16.s3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.1) Among the visitors, chronologically Nicolo-conti (an Italian, 1420 A.D.) states that "the city, which was about 60 sq. miles in area,had walls that were carried upto the mountains and enclosed the valleys and at their fort in the city there were ninety thousand men fit to bear arms" (Sowell, R. 1962, PP. 89-91). ### [c16.s3.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.2) Abdul Razak, a Persian (1443 A.D.), is probably the best in his accounts and most informative so far as the city and the enclosing forts were concerned. ### [c16.s3.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.3) According to Abdul Razak (Sewell,R., 1962, P.89-91) "the city was enclosed by 7 fort walls. In the open areas, in between the first 5 fortifications from the outer most, were mainly fruit gardens such as Banana etc. flower gardens of rose, Jasmin etc., besides some parts were under cultivation. The remaining areas were thickly populated by the artisans, the craftsmen, the village industrialists, the merchants, the sportsmen, the astrologists and other scholars. In particular, in the area between second and third of the inner most forts, were soldiers, priests and men of elite-class. There were many religious and secular buildings of high order". ### [c16.s3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.4) Abdul Razak adds that, "the inner most was the citadel, the centre of the Vijayanagara city. The citadel extends from Kamalapura to Hampi with many gates bearing towers at intervals. The path through these gates leads to the site of old palaces, various civil and administrative buildings etc." ### [c16.s3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.5) Further he says that "the citadel was the strongest as evidenced from the kinds of rock materials used, orientation and setting up of gateways at strategic points." ### [c16.s3.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.6) Abdul Razak is very graphic in his description of the city of the fort. "He further says that around the citadel were stones of the height of a man one-half of which is sunk in the ground, while the other half rises above the ground. These are the approaches to the citadel. These are fixed one beside the other in such a manner that no horse or foot soldier could boldly or with ease approach the citadel". ### [c16.s3.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.7) "The seventh fortress is to the north and is the place of the king. The space which separates the first fortress is filled with cultivated fields and with houses and gardens. In the space from the third to the seventh one meets a numberless crowd of people, many shops and Bazaars. By the king's palace are four Bazars, placed opposite to each other. On the north is the portico of the 'Rai'. Above each Bazar is a lofty arcade, with a magnificent gallery, but the audience hall of the kings palace is elevated above all the rest. The Bazars are extremely long and broad." ### [c16.s3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.8) "Each elephant has a seperate compartment, the walls of which are solid and roofs composed of strong pieces of wood. Opposite the mint is the house of the Governor, where are stationed twelve thousand soldiers on guard". ### [c16.s3.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.9) Another chronicler, Duarte Barbose (Portuguse, 1504-16 A.D.) refers to the city (Sewell, R., 1962, P.129) as "located on the level ground and surrounded by a very good wall on one side and the river on the other". He says, "the king keeps at all times nine hundred elephants, more than twenty thousand horses all bought with his own money". ### [c16.s3.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.10) Next, Nuniz (1535-37 A.D.) is probably the last in the series of foreign visitors giving accounts of the city of Vijayanagara and her glory. He records (Sewell,R.,1962, P.277) that "the city was enclosed by many walls". What is more interesting to note in his account is a reference to the renovation of the fort. He says, "This king made in the city of Bisnaga many walls and enclosed it a new". He further states that "a dam was constructed across the river Tungabhadra to get water for the gardens etc. of the city". ### [c16.s3.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s3.11) The above accounts would help us to locate the forts and to trace them as far as possible. Accordingly an attempt was made to study the citadel area. ### Forts and their Remains ### [c16.s4.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.1) At present, only the fortification wall of the citadel area is almost completely extant. The second fort wall is not continuous (Fig.58). On the east and west, the walls are raised roughly, in North-South orientation connecting the river on the north and a very large lake locally known as Nagalāpura tank on the south. This fort encloses Kamalapuram, which is about 5 km from Hampi on the bank of the river Tungabhadra and Kadirampuram. Only some parts of this fort are now extant near Kamalapuram and Kadirampuram. ### [c16.s4.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.2) It is in between the wall referred to above and the fort wall of the citadel, from Kamalapuram onwards in a circumambulatory way are found numerous stately temples of the Vijayanagara period such as Paṭṭabhirām temple near Kamalapuram, Uddana Vīrabhadra temple, Saraswati temple, Kaḍalekalu Gaṇēsha, Sasivekalu Gaṇēsha, Lakshmi-Narashimha, Krishna temple, Vithala temple, Kōdandarāma temple, Purandaradāsa Mandapam, and the most famous Virupaksha temple. Of these temples, the original part of the temple of Virupaksha was of circa 11th century A.D. At least from about 10th century A.D., therefore, the place was gaining importance. ### [c16.s4.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.3) Now, within this citadel is again another enclosure wall surrounding the royal buildings and also the famous temple Hajāra-Rāma. At present, the plan of the fort wall of the citadel alone can be made known (Fig.58). ### [c16.s4.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.4) The plan is roughly oval shaped and east-west oriented. On the eastern side is a high hill range full of boulders and difficult for crossing. The fort wall abuts these hill range. It is particularly noteworthy that the main entrance in the citadel wall faces roughly East. The gate is locally called 'Gumbaz Darwāza' or 'Domed Gate' (Fig.61). ### [c16.s4.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.5) The Walls (Fig.58) ### [c16.s4.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.6) The outer wall (Section 3, fig.67) of the citadel is very thick about 6.60 m. wide at the bottom and slightly tapers upwards. The upper most part of the wall is disturbed almost throughout. At present, the maximum extent of the wall extant is 7.20 m. The core of the wall is made up of mud and pebbles. The blocks of stones used for the sides of the hearting i.e. core, are well laid, with big dimensions and roughly cut into rectangular forms. The exterior faces of them are roughly dressed. ### [c16.s4.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.7) At the top, at the exterior edge is an unbroken parapet wall of large blocks of stones, leaving on the inner side flat wide wall walk, that has lime mortar plaster. It is curious to note here that the parapet has no slits at regular intervals like the contemporary Muslim fort in Bijapur. Even the kanguras i.e. battlements are deliberately missing at the parapet wall. The reason for this lacuna in defence architectural member especially in this wall may be assigned to the fact that it is not the outer most enclosure wall of the Vijayanagar city but the IV from outside. The enemies had to cross all those outer walls and then approach this wall under description, whereat a very heavy and alert guards were placed throughout. And hence the battlements atop the parapet wall were not practically needed and therefore they have been avoided. On the exterior side of, the wall is the moat. ### [c16.s4.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.8) The intermediary wall (Section 2, Fig.67) enclosing the royal mansions is of stone on the exterior side supported by the slopy earthen ramp of mud and rubbles on the inner side. The height of the wall is 7.00 metres and it is 6.00 m. wide. On the exterior of the wall is another moat. Thus this wall is also as thick and almost as high as the outer wall. ### [c16.s4.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.9) Again, some of the most important royal buildings such as Janāna mansion (i.e. royal harem) Public bath, Mahānavami Dibba, Dandanayaka Mansion, Private royal buildings like 'Ranga-Mahal' as known from the recent excavations¹ (1977-78 and 1978-79 and 1979-80) at the Mint area, are enclosed by high but rapidly tapering walls (Section 1, Fig. 67). The wall generally is about 2 metres wide at the top, it has rounded coping about 60 cms wide. The height, in general,of the wall is 10 metres. The hearting is mostly of mud and the stone blocks of the wall are comparatively small in size, well and firmly placed one upon the other. ### [c16.s4.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.10) ¹ I fortunately participated in the excavations at Hampi in all three seasons. No excavation reports have come out as yet. However, Dr.Nagaraj Rao,M.S. and (late) Sri Mishra,V.K., opine that the structure is 'Ranga Mahal'. I agree with them. ### [c16.s4.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s4.11) Raising up of high walls round the important buildings is the typical feature of the Vijayanagara fort architecture. ### The Gate-ways ### [c16.s5.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.1) From the above description in detail, we can understand that what remains of the fort wall is but very small of what was there originally. In the extant outermost wall found in fragments here and there is a gateway known as Penugoṇḍa gate (Fig.59) for the main way from this gate (Fig.58, Schedule 21) leads to Penugoṇḍa (now in Āndhra Pradēsh) during the time of Vijayanagara empire. Its location now is about 2½ km. east of Kamalāpuram. This gate is taken up for the study first, but it does not imply that this was the first gate then. Among the extant gates this is the outermost. Similarly there is another gate in the northern wing of the wall from the Kamalāpuram tank, almost at the same distance west of Kamalāpuram, but now this gate is not much known and not used by the public. ### [c16.s5.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.2) Penugonda Gate (Fig. 59 and Fig. 58, Schedule 21) ### [c16.s5.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.3) With regard to the Penugonda gate, only its lowest part is extant; now we can only know about the ground plan of the gate. It abuts on the northern side a huge boulder. The street through the gate is straight and not zig-zag. The gate is square in plan having guards' Pavilions on the sides of the street. The Pavilion is pillared. There are two pillars in the facade and two and three pilasters in the rear. The pavilion opens into a facade facing the street. Both the pavilions could accommodate a small group of soldiers. ### [c16.s5.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.4) The plan of the gate indicates that it is quite simple and looks as though less defensive in comparison with the gateways with protective devices in the contemporary Muslim fort of Bījāpur. But here, we should take note of the fact that this gateway is not the first and certainly not of the outermost wall. In fact, the wall with this gate (Fig. 59) is only a sort of protective enclosure to the citadel in side. ### [c16.s5.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.5) To the south of the gate is a circular bastion in the fort wall with the watch-tower at the top. On the inner side of the gate, the wide street goes straight to Kamalāpuram. On either side of the street are temples here and there; for example: a mandapa on the northern side, an Îshwara temple on the southern side, the nameless pavilions and temples still ahead, as one moves towards Kamalāpuram and the Pattabhirāma temple on the north, in the end. The location of these temples on the sides of the street warrants that the gate under discussion was essentially meant for entrance to the inner citadel and the wall with it served more as enclosure wall than defensive to fight out the enemies. ### [c16.s5.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.6) From the area of the Pattabhirama temple there is another street leading north-north eastwards to the gate of the citadel and this gate is known as the Domed gate. Similarly, there is another gate in the citadel-wall corresponding to the gate of the citadel-wall near Kadirāmapuram. And in the wide space between the enclosure wall and the citadel wall (Fig. 58) are, as described above, many temples other than referred to just above; such as Gaṉēsh temple near the Domed gate, Basavanna temple, Veerabhadra temple, Śiva temple. ### The Gate to the north of Penugonda gate ### [c16.s5.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.1) In front of the Domed gate and about a kilometre away, but within the enclosure wall, is another gate nameless. It now stands isolated with stumps of fort wall on its sides. Unfortunately, no meaningful traces are available to apprise of its relative position with the enclosure wall. Presumably, there was probably another gate in the enclosure wall leading to this gate. But this part of the wall is not extant. The gate is quite simple in plan and elevation. On the frontal side of the gate are guard rooms. Again another unusual feature is on the jambs of the door are sculptures of the Dwarapalas with Danda in their hands. The upper part of the door is framed into an arch by corbelling with a typical Vijayanagara lotus motif in the brackets. On the sides of the passage through the gate there are no guard rooms. The street fr this gate leads to the Domed gate. ### [c16.s5.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.2) The Domed Gate: (Fig. 61) ### [c16.s5.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.3) The Domed gate is the main entrance through the citadel into the palace complex area. In fact in the citadel proper, from one end to the other, there are six entrances at irregular intervals providing access from different areas with temples, Bazars etc. outside the citadel (Fig. 58, Schedule 17). ### [c16.s5.t1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.4) The Domed gate (Illn. G4) faces east and probably forms the main entrance in view of its defensive architectural character. It may be noted here that at the entrance and on the top of the walls there are no bastions and kanguras i.e. battlements respectively. ### [c16.s5.t1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.5) The entrance is a simple opening with 5.60 m. wide with an arched facade rising above from top of the wall. At the top is again an elongated cylindrical domed structure. The dome has a horizontal band. The door-way upto the apex of the arch is 7.80 m. high and the total height from the ground level to the top of the dome is about 13.00 m., while the height of the wall is 3.80 m. Here, the verticality has been distinctly emphasized as if to proclaim the glory of the emperors. ### [c16.s5.t1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.6) On the inner side of the gateway is a barbi\c\e\a\n divided into two compartments, by projecting a wall in the barbican. Within the barbican, on the sides of the door-way are two temples dedicated to Îsvara and Hanumān. The partition wall obstructs the direct view from the door-way of the other compartment of the barbican. The area of the barbican is about 30 m. east-west and 30 m. north-south in the other compartment. From this compartment, in the northern wall, is another entrance (Illn.43) provided with corbelled gate. The passage passes in between the two guard-rooms on the sides on the other side of the compartment. ### [c16.s5.t1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.7) The locations of temples especially of Hanumān at the entrance is a feature to be noticed for the first time in the development of the fort architecture through the centuries. ### [c16.s5.t1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.8) Bhīma Gate (Fig.62) ### [c16.s5.t1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.9) From the Domed gate the street originally led to another gate known as Bhīma gate (Illn.G2). But now, in the place of the road a big reservior has been raised recently disconnecting specially the two gates. ### [c16.s5.t1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.10) Why this gate is called Bhīma gate may be explained from the sculptural relief on the wall looking north within the berbican (Figure at the spot B). In the panel Duśhyāsana has been smashed by Bhīma and Draupadi stands nearby with her hair dishevelled - an important episode of Mahābhārata. Probably the representation of this episode on this gate is significant for it seems to suggest a warning to the people that they would meet a similar end like Duśhyāsana at the hands of Bhīma, if they do not behave properly, for the gate is very close to the palace complex including the harem. ### [c16.s5.t1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.11) In front of the entrance is a Vishnu temple, but in view of the fact of the three sockets in a row on the pedestal in the Girbha-griha and a bas-relief of Garuda in the lintel of the entrance to the Gairbha-griha, suggests that the temple was dedicated to Sri Rāma, Laxmana and Sîta, like that of Hajāra Rāma temple near the palace complex. ### [c16.s5.t1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.12) The Bhîma gate (Fig.58, Schedule 18) stands as if isolated, but probably it was part of another enclosure wall running round the palace complex. Only some stumps of the wall here and there are extant. For example, near the octagonal structure, probably meant for bath, is one such a stump. Nearby there is another temple. But it should be noted that the exterior sides of the gate have finished surface, suggesting that it was an independent entrance without walls on the sides, similar to the gate of north of Penugonda gate. If this observation is correct, again for the first time we find erection of gates at specific points through which the main street passed. On either sides of the street there must have been well planned mansions. This is again another important feature to be noticed in the fort architecture. ### [c16.s5.t1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.13) Now, coming to the gate proper, it is quite simple having a wide opening in the centre about 4.15 m. wide and 7.00 m. high. It has a corbelled roof with architectural motif of lotus buds hanging over at the centre. On the inner side of the gate is barbican, rectangular in plan; but the ground plan of the barbican is regularly zig-zag, created by the projected wall at the entrance point on the inner side. The passage takes left turn, then right, again right i.e. north-wards leading to another gate. On the other side of the gate, on the sides of the passage are guard rooms. Similarly in the front of the right turn is another guard room. ### [c16.s5.t1.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.14) Dakhani Gate (southern gate): (Fig.65) ### [c16.s5.t1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.15) The 'Dakhani gate' (southern gate) is so called as it looks southwards. Superficially, it looks like one of the main entrances into the citadel in the present state of its existence, but in reality it was not an entrance gate but a trap-gate, a fore runner of the Allapur gate of the Bijāpur fort. Actually the gate (Fig.58,Schedule 16) is on the out side of the fort wall and within the moat surrounded by the waters therein. In fact, the gate is meant for permanent exit for enemies and for escape of the inmates of the citadel, which is at a close proximity to the east of this gate, in times of overcoming danger. ### [c16.s5.t1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.16) Significantly, there is a Śiva temple right in front of the opening; for enemies it signifies their attainment of Kailasa and for the inmates it implies shelter symbolically. ### [c16.s5.t1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.17) The gate in the fort wall, opening into the barbican on the outside, leading to the big opening, is simple with the corbelled arch at the top. The width of the gate is 3.80 m. and the barbican is 13.80 m x 4.00m. There is an 'L' shaped wall in the middle of the barbican projecting from the eastern wall not connected to the other walls. It forms as if a closed screen to the opening. Enemy, when persued through this gate, will have to get into the barbican and then is pressed through the narrow space. On the other side of the 'L' shaped wall from where alone he can see the opening and the back wall of the Śiva temple. In a fit of fear and anxiety to save his life, he naturally tries to escape through the opening but actually falls fatally into the dangerous moat. The opening is narrow (3.00 m) and the back wall of the Siva temple provides a sort of illusion that the space inbetween the wall and the temple is an open space for escape. ### [c16.s5.t1.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t1.18) On the northern side near the extremity of the citadel wall abutting the natural wall of gigantic boulders, is another gate. ### The Talar Ghatta Gate ### [c16.s5.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t2.1) From the gate described above was another ancient road leading to Ānegundi across the river Tungabhadrā. At the point of the ford (Fig.58, Schedule 20) about 250 inside from the bank, is a gate built in between two huge boulders and connected to them with masonry walls on the sides. It forms as if a Mahadvara from Ānegundi side towards the citadel. ### [c16.s5.t2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t2.2) Here, a thicker wall of 5.80 m wide is raised in between the two boulders with the gate in the centre. The door-way of the gate is 5.50 m. wide. The entrance passage is straight and on the platform of the gateway is a two storeyed super structure. The lower storey has three entrance, on either side and the upper at the topmost flat-roof of the upper storey is a row of decorative projections. From these two storeys one can have a clear sight of the movements of people etc., over a considerable distance. The storeys have the commanding view of the river side. The ground-floor is of ashlar masonry, with the lime mortar as the binding material. ### [c16.s5.t2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t2.3) The fort wall on the other sides of the boulders, with the Talār Ghaṭṭa gate in between, is nearly half the thickness of the wall of the gateway. ### [c16.s5.t2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t2.4) It may be noted here that the river itself acts as natural perennial moat in this side. ### Pan-Supāri Gate ### [c16.s5.t3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.5) Watch-Towers (Fig.66 and Illn. 81) ### [c16.s5.t3.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.7) Observations: ### [c16.s5.t3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.11) \[Figure: NOTE: BASED ON SURVEY OF INDIA MAP PUB.- BANGALORE (1974) ### [c16.s5.t3.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.12) SCALE 0 60 120 KMS ### [c16.s5.t3.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.13) MAHARASTRA BHĪMĀ KAGINA KRISHNĀ ANDHRA PRADESH GOA VARADĀ TUNGABHADRA FORT OF VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) ARABIAN SEA KĀVĒRĪ KĒRALA TAMIL NĀDU ### [c16.s5.t3.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.14) Karnātaka — LOCATION OF THE FORT OF VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI),\] ### [c16.s5.t3.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.15) VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) : FORT ### [c16.s5.t3.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.17) SCHEDULE: ### [c16.s5.t3.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.19) VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT, PENUGONDA GATE. ### [c16.s5.t3.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.24) \[Figure: VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT -- PĀN-SUPĀRI GATE TO THE EAST OF ELEPHANT'S STABLE. ### [c16.s5.t3.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.25) ELEVATION ### [c16.s5.t3.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.26) VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — TALĀR GHAṬṬA GATE ### [c16.s5.t3.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.27) \[Figure: ELEVATION SCALE PLAN\] ### [c16.s5.t3.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.28) \[Figure: VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — FIG · 65 SOUTHERN GATE ### [c16.s5.t3.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16.s5.t3.32) VIJAYANAGARA (HAMPI) FORT — CROSS-SECTIONS SHOWING DIFFERENT METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION ## Linked texts (28) - [Mahābhārata](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.vyasa) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Epigraphia Carnatica](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.corpora.ec) - [Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.ramayana.valmiki) — Vālmīki, Sanskrit - [Kamalapuram](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.kamalapuram) - [Venkatapura](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.venkatapura) - [Hampi](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.hampi) - [Krishnanagar Fort](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.krishnanagar-fort) - [Bijâpur](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.bijapur) - [Vitthala Temple](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.vitthala-temple) - [Badami](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.badami) - [Ishvara](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.ishvara) - [Saraswati Temple](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.saraswati-temple) - [Elephant's Stable](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.elephant-s-stable) - [Octagonal Bath](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.octagonal-bath) - [Pattabhirama Temple](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.pattabhirama-temple) - [Queen's Bath](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.queen-s-bath) - [Mint](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.mint) - [Kamalapur](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.kamalapur) - [Alipura](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.alipura) - [Nandi](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.nandi) - [Daroji](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.daroji) - [Mallapur](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.mallapur) - [Krishna](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.krishna-mahboobnagar) - [Sandur](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.sandur) - [Hangal](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.hangal) - [Hospet](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.hospet) - [Kampli](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.kampli) - [Vijayanagara](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.vijayanagara) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.art.joshi-1981.c16) · Pramāṇa