South India and her Muhammadan Invaders c11: Lecture IV. Invasions of South India Under the Khaljis
South India and her Muhammadan Invaders c11
- Language
- English
Contents
- c11.2 — 3 parts
- c11.9 — 6 parts
- c11.s1 The Sack of Śrīrangam by Malik Kafur — 36 parts
Lecture IV. Invasions of South India Under the Khaljis
c11.2.1
Malik Kafur's project for an invasion of Ma'bar for the same object, plunder.—According to Amir Khusru 'the Malik represented that on the coast of Ma'bar were 500 elephants, larger than those which had been presented to the Sultan from Arangal, and that when he was engaged in the conquest of that place he had thought of possessing himself of them and that now, as the wise determination of the king, he combined the extirpation of the idolaters with this object, he was more than ever rejoiced to enter on this grand enterprise.' Amir Khusru makes it appear that having seen all the country from the hills of Ghazni to the mouths of the Ganges reduced to subjection and having effectively destroyed the prevalence of the 'Satanism' of the Hindus by the destruction of their temples and providing in their stead places for the criers to prayers in monques, Alau-d-din was consumed with the idea of spreading the light of the Muhammadan religion in the Dekhan and South India. According to the same authority Ma'bar was so distant from the city of Delhi 'that a man travelling with all expedition could only reach it after a journey of twelve months,' and there 'the arrow of any holy warrior had not yet reached.' Apart from this statement of Amir Khusru, the object of this expedition is made quite clear in what he puts in the mouth of Malik Kafur himself that what he actually coveted were the elephants of better breed, and, what went along with them of course, other items of wealth.
c11.2.2
Having in the two previous invasions brought both the Dekhan kingdoms, Deogir and Warangal under subjection there remained only two more in the farther south, the Hoysala kingdom of Dvārasamudra and the Pāṇḍya kingdom farther south again. The army left Delhi on the 24th of Jumada-l Akhir, A.H. 710 (November A.D. 1310), and marched by the bank of the Jamna and halted at Tankal for fourteen days. After taking the muster of the army at that place, they marched rapidly for twenty-one days when they arrived at Kanhun. A further march of seventeen days brought them to Gur-Ganw (Gurgam). During these seventeen days Amir Khusru says they had to pass through the ghats and the road lay across heights and depths, where even elephants became nearly invisible. That was not all, they had to pass three rivers of which the Narbada was the greatest, and the other two of about the same size but smaller than the Narbada. At the end of this march the Raja of Telingana sent twenty-three powerful elephants. They remained at Gurgam for about twenty days, taking a muster of the army and sending on the elephants in advance. According to Amir Khusru they marched on towards Gurgam and reached ultimately the river Tawi (Tapti). Having crossed it, they reached Deogir on the thirteenth of Ramzan, apparently the same year.
c11.2.3
There they halted for preparations ‘for extirpating Billal Deo and other Deos (demons).’ Here the Rai Raiyan, Ram Deo, true to his allegiance forwarded all the preparations necessary for the equipment of the army ‘to render it available for the extermination of rebels and the destruction of Bir and Dhur Samundar.’ That was not all. The Rai Raiyan, who had already sent ahead his Daḷavāy (Dalvi, Commander-in-Chief) Paras Deo (Parasuram Deo) ‘to hold the gates of access to the Bir and Dhur Samundar’ was directed by his master to see to the wants of the Muhammadan army. On the seventeenth of Ramzan, the army departed ‘from Imanabad Deogir to the Kharabad of Paras Deo Dalvi, in five stages, in which three large rivers were crossed,’ the three rivers being ‘Sini, Godaveri and Binhur (Bhima).’ Then ‘after five days the army arrived at Bandri, in the country (Ikta) of Paras Deo Dalvi, who rendered all the assistance for the ultimate conquest of “Bir Dhul and Bir Pandi.”’ At Bandri, Malik Kafur stayed sometime to obtain information of the state of things in Ma’bar. According to Amir Khusru he was informed that there were two rulers in Ma’bar, of whom the elder was Bir Pandya and the younger Sundara Pandya who till then were friendly, but had gone to war against each other at the time. ‘Billal Deo, the Rai of Dhur Samundar (Dvārasamudra), had marched down upon their cities with the object of plundering, but returned on hearing that the Muhammadan army was on the march.’
c11.3
Invasion of Dvārasamudra.—On Sunday, the 22nd of Ramzan, Malik Kafur held a council of war. Apparently as a result of a resolution he took with him a select body of cavalry, and appeared before the fort of Dhur Samundar on the fifth of Shawwal ‘after a difficult march of twelve days over hills and valleys and thorny forests.’ Seeing the destructive character of the invasion, the ruler Vīra Ballāḷa III having ascertained the strength of the Muhammadan army sent agents to propose peace, though Vīra Pāṇḍya had despatched an army to assist him.¹ Malik Kafur is stated to have sent the reply ‘that he was sent with the object of converting him to Muhammadanism, or of making him zimmi (one who could enjoy the same political privileges as the Muhammadans on payment of Jiziya) and subject to pay tax, or of slaying him, if neither of these terms were assented to.’ The Rai agreed to surrender all his property ‘except his sacred thread’ and on Friday the sixth of Shawwal, six elephants were sent accompanied by three plenipotentiaries. The next day some horses followed and on the Sunday following he is himself said to have paid a visit to the Commander-in-Chief and surrendered all his treasures, having spent a whole night in taking them out. Malik Kafur remained twelve days in that city, which, according to Amir Khusru, is four months distant from Delhi, to which he sent the captured elephants.
c11.4
¹ Wassaf on p. 50 Elliott iii.
c11.5
The Ballāḷa Prince sent over to Delhi.—The final terms of the treaty, however, do not appear to have been settled by Malik Kafur himself. As he did in respect of Ram Deo at Deogir, he sent prince Ballāḷa to Delhi along with the elephants and horses on this occasion also to obtain the ratification of the terms from Alau-d-din himself. Amir Khusru does not state this detail, but there are a few inscriptions of Vīra Ballāḷa III, which do make a reference to it. Two records¹ dated A.D. 1310 refer to the Muhammadan invasion, another one is² not dated but the name of the year is given from which we can make out that it refers to A.D. 1313. This latter records a grant to a temple on the occasion of the entry into the capital of Prince Vīra Ballāḷa Rāya returning from Delhi after the war against the ‘Turukas’ (Muhammadans). Having achieved this at Dvārasamudra and satisfactorily settled matters as far as the Hoysala kingdom went, Malik Kafur got ready for the invasion of Ma’bar which term then stood for the country of the Chola and the Pāṇḍya under Pāṇḍya rule for the time being.
c11.6
¹ *Epigraphia Carnāṭaka*, vol. v, Has. 51 and 52.
c11.7
² *Epigraphia Carnāṭaka*, vol. vii, Sh. 68.
c11.8
Invasion of Ma’bar.—We have already detailed above the state of the country of Ma’bar. The occasion that called for intervention by the Muhammadans is given as the fratricidal war in the Pāṇḍya country between the two brothers Sundara Pāṇḍya and Vīra Pāṇḍya. Hence there is very little doubt left that the ultimate objective of the invasion was the Pāṇḍya kingdom wherever it be. The Chola kingdom which ought naturally to come between the Hoysala and the Pāṇḍya country had practically gone out of existence as a separate political entity. Although perhaps the incidents of the war did take place as much in the Chola country as in the Pāṇḍya, still the ruling power against whom Malik Kafur directed his invasion was that of Vīra Pāṇḍya, as he had sent an army to assist Vīra Ballāḷa against Malik Kafur. In the words of Wassaf ‘Rai Pāṇḍya (meaning apparently Ballāḷa) offered opposition, and begged the assistance of an army from Ma'bar. At that time enmity prevailed between the two brothers, Sundar Pandi and Tira Pandi, after the murder of their father. The latter sent to his assistance an army of horse and foot.’ It was probably in consequence of this state of disunion that ‘in the month of Rajab of the year A.H. 710 (A.D. 1310) the appointed leaders, accompanied by a select army, were despatched to conquer Ma'bar, and some of the towns were obtained through the animosity which had lately arisen between the two brothers; when at last a large army, attended by numerous elephants of war, was sent out to oppose the Muhammadans. Malik Nabu, who thought himself a very Saturn, was obliged to retreat, and bring back his army.’ This was apparently an invasion distinct from the one by Malik Kafur himself.
c11.9.1
The Pāṇḍya Fratricidal War.—It was already pointed out in a previous lecture that the Pāṇḍya who ruled almost up to the time of this invasion was Māravarman Kulaśēkhara I. He had two sons known to history; one of them, a ‘natural’ son Vīra Pāṇḍya, he associated with himself in the Government from A.D. 1296. The other, the ‘legitimate’ son Sundara Pāṇḍya attained to that dignity sometime in A.D. 1302. Both these princes, Vīra Pāṇḍya and Sundara Pāṇḍya, take the prefix Jaṭāvarman in inscriptions, and should not be confounded with others of the name but with a different prefix. This difference of treatment between the two sons may have been due merely to a difference of age or ability. According to one authority Sundara Pāṇḍya was the elder; Amir Khusru makes him younger; but both of them Wassaf and Amir Khusru, agree that Sundara Pāṇḍya was ‘the legitimate’ and Vīra Pāṇḍya perhaps an ‘illegitimate’ son of the ruler for the time being. The preference given to Vīra Pāṇḍya either by advancing him to the position of co-regency, or because sometime about A.D. 1311 Kulaśēkhara, almost at the close of his life, actually ordered the succession in favour of Vīra Pāṇḍya, Sundara Pāṇḍya felt so far discontented as to assassinate his father and actually take possession of the throne. Vīra Pāṇḍya soon after attacked him and drove him out of Madura.
c11.9.2
Sundara Pāṇḍya thus driven from the throne looked out for help and sought the assistance of the Sultan of Delhi either at head-quarters directly, or with the Naib of the Sultan, Malik Kafur, who was then in the South. Sundara’s appeal gave the occasion for interference, if such an occasion were necessary for Malik Kafur at all. This is the trend of events described by Wassaf in relation to the fratricidal war in the Pāṇḍya country. Kales Dewar, Kulaśēkhara Dēva, was a highly prosperous monarch whose rule extended over ‘forty and odd’ years, ‘during which time neither any foreign enemy entered his country, nor any severe malady confined him to bed.’ He had accumulated much wealth during this long reign so that he had in the ‘treasury of the city of Mardi’ (Madura) 1,200 crores of gold not counting the accumulation of precious stones ‘such as pearls, rubies, turquoises, and emeralds.’ ‘This fortunate and happy sovereign had two sons, the elder named Sundar Pandi, who was legitimate, his mother being joined to the Dewar by lawful marriage, and the younger named Tira Pandi, was illegitimate, his mother being one of the mistresses, who continually attended the king in his banquet of pleasure.’ ‘As Tira Pandi was remarkable for his shrewdness and intrepidity, the ruler nominated him as his successor. His brother Sundar Pandi being enraged at this supersession killed his father in a moment of rashness and undutifulness, towards the close of the year A.H. 709 (A.D.
c11.9.3
1310), and placed the crown on his head in the city of Mardi (Madura). He induced the troops who were there to support his interests, and conveyed some of the royal treasures, which were deposited there to the city of Mankul.'¹ Then there was a war between the brothers and a battle is said to have taken place, 'on the margin of a lake which, in their language, they call Talachi.' Both the brothers fled away from the field, each ignorant of the fate of the other; 'but Tira Pandi being unfortunate, (tira bakht), and having been wounded, fell into the hands of the enemy, and seven elephant loads of the gold also fell to the army of Sundar Pandi.' Vīra Pāṇḍya, however, according to this authority obtained the assistance of 'Manar Barmul, the son of the daughter of Kales Dewar, who espoused the cause of the Tira Pandi, being at the time at Karamhati, near Kalul.'² With this assistance Tira Pandi advanced to oppose him, at the head of his army 'in the middle of the year A.H. 710 (A.D. 1310).' 'Sundar Pandi, trembling and alarmed, fled from his native country, and took refuge under the protection of Alau-d-din of Delhi, and Tira Pandi became firmly established in his hereditary kingdom.' According to Wassaf's account therefore, Sundara Pāṇḍya found refuge in the court of Alau-d-din, and that gave the occasion for interference, if such an occasion were necessary for Malik Kafur who was already on this invasion.
c11.9.4
It is this state of affairs that Amir Khusru described when he states that ‘the two Rais of Ma’bar, the eldest named Bir Pāṇḍya, the youngest Sundara Pāṇḍya, who had up to that time continued on friendly terms, had advanced against each other with hostile intentions and that Bellal Deo, the Rai of Dhur Samundar, on learning this fact, had marched for the purpose of sacking their two empty cities, and plundering the merchants; but that, on hearing of the advance of the Muhammadan army, he had returned to his own country.’¹ On Wednesday, 18th of Shawwal, Malik Kafur set forward on his expedition to Ma’bar and arrived at the mountains which separate Ma’bar from the Hoysala country after five days. There were two passes through these mountains, which Amir Khusru calls ‘Sarmali and Tabar.’ After traversing the passes they arrived at night on the banks of the river ‘Kanobari’ and bivouacked for the night on the sands. They then set forward for ‘Bir Dhul’ and committed massacre and devastation all round it. The Rai Bir wished to seek security by fleeing ‘to his islands in the ocean.’ He was advised to seek protection on the land itself. He took a certain amount of treasure and property with him and fled for protection to ‘Kandur.’ Not finding it secure enough from the enemies he fled further into the jungles. Malik Kafur pursued him, and found at Kandur some Musalmans, who were subjects of the Hindu ruler.
c11.9.5
They offered to join the Muhammadans, and in spite of their being half-Hindus Malik Kafur spared their lives, ‘as they could repeat the Kalima (the declaration of faith of the Muhammadans).’ Malik Kafur then set forward after returning to ‘Bir Dhul’ in search of the Raja to Kandur, to which place apparently he had returned. He was there informed that the Raja had fled to a place which Amir Khusru calls ‘Jalkota’ an old city of the ancestors of Bir. Pursuing him closely there, Malik Kafur found that he had again escaped to the jungles, and the Malik had therefore to return to Kandur, where he searched for more elephants and perhaps even treasure. ‘Here he heard that in Brahmastpuri there was a golden idol, round which many elephants were stabled.’ Malik Kafur started on a night expedition against this place and in the morning seized no less than 250 elephants. He then determined on razing the beautiful temple to the ground—‘you might say that it was the Paradise of Shaddad, which, after being lost, those “hellites” had found, and that it was the golden Lanka of Ram’—‘in short, it was the holy place of the Hindus, which the Malik dug up from its foundations with the greatest care,’ and the heads of the Brahmans and idolaters danced from their necks and fell to the ground at their feet, and blood flowed in torrents.
c11.9.6
‘The stone idols called Ling Mahadeo, which had been a long time established at that place, up to this time, the kick of the horse of Islam had not attempted to break.’ The Musalmans destroyed all the Lings, ‘and Deo Narain fell down, and the other gods who had fixed their seats there raised their feet, and jumped so high, that at one leap they reached the fort of Lanka, and in that affright the Lings themselves would have fled had they had any legs to stand on.’ Much gold and many valuable jewels fell into the hands of the Musalmans, who returned to the royal canopy, after executing their holy project, on the 13th of Zi-l-ka’da A.H. 710 (A.D. April 1311). They destroyed all the temples at Birdhul, and placed the plunder in the public treasury.
c11.10
¹ This is not Namkal as surmised by Elliott, but in all probability one of the Mangalams, Mēla Mangalam or Kila Mangalam, in the western hills, not far from Madura and quite close to Periyakuḷam. It is to this vicinity that the earlier Vīra Pāṇḍya fled for refuge driven by his more powerful rival Kulaśēkhara Pāṇḍya in the war of succession in the twelfth century; or Mangalam in the Sattur Taluka a place of consequence in the same war. See Lecture I above.
c11.11
² Kalul is apparently Karur and Karamhatti may be error for Paramatti.
c11.12
¹ Elliott, iii, p. 88.
c11.13
Chidambaram. The tank within the temple (by permission of Messrs. Wiele & Klein, Madras)
c11.14
Capture of Southern Mathra (Madura).—After five days, the royal canopy moved from Birdhul on Thursday, the 17th of Zi-l-ka’da, and arrived at ‘Kham’, and five days afterwards they arrived at the city Mathra (Madura), the dwelling-place of the brother of the Rai, Sundar Pāṇdya. They found the city empty for the Rai had fled with the Ranis, but had left two or three elephants in the temple of Jagnar ‘(Jaganath, rather Śokka-nātha?)’. The elephants were captured and the temple burnt.
c11.15
Amir Khusru in this work of his, Tarikh-i-’Alai, brings the campaign to a close with this. The number of elephants that Malik Kafur captured extended over a length of three parasangs according to him and counted 512 in number. He had besides taken five thousand horses and five hundred maunds of jewels of every description, diamonds, pearls, emeralds and rubies.
c11.16
But in another work of his called ‘Ashika,’ he gives more details of this particular campaign. He says there that the army proceeded to Ma’bar ‘that it might take the shores of the sea as far as Lanka and spread the odour of the amber scented faith.’ The ruler of the place was according to him ‘a Brahman named Pāṇḍya Guru.’ He had many cities in his possession and his capital is said to have been ‘Fatan,’ where according to him there was an idol laden with jewels.
c11.17
This ‘Pāṇḍya Guru’ might be one of the number of Pāṇḍyan Princes whose inscriptions have come down to us, other than the brothers Sundara Pāṇḍya and Vīra Pāṇḍya.¹ The fratricidal war was obviously for the ‘kingship’ which carried the overlordship of the other chieftaincies with it. (Cf. Marco Polo : passage cited above, Lecture II).
c11.18
¹ It is just possible that this Pāṇḍya guru was a priest or mahant with authority over Rāmēśvaram and other temples in the vicinity. There is no definite authority to lead to this conclusion however.
c11.19
The ruler had many troops and ships, and Musalmans and Hindus were in his service. He was possessed of a thousand elephants of Ma’bar and innumerable horses. When the Muhammadan army arrived, the Raja fled from Fatan, where the Musalmans in the service of the Hindu Raja sought the protection of the Muhammadans. Five hundred elephants are said to have been taken, and after destroying the idol, Malik Kafur returned to Delhi. Apparently this is a continuation of the campaign from the Chola into the Pāṇḍya country, and Fatan must be the Paṭṭaṇam, the one of the two or three Paṭṭaṇams in the vicinity of Rāmēśvaram, if not Rāmēśvaram itself, and the temple therein referred to, is almost certainly the great temple in Rāmēśvaram. From all that is before us, it would be safer to regard this as a continuation of the campaign, which, according to the previous account, terminated in Madura, and to extend it to Rāmēśvaram. But the clear mention of Fatan leaves no alternative but to accept the progress of the Muhammadan raid up to Rāmēśvaram. The ports near this contained, at that time, a comparatively large Muhammadan population which finds mention in this work of Amir Khusru.
c11.20
The Route of the Invasion.—In regard to the invasion of Dvārasamudra and Ma'bar the route taken is the road leading from Delhi straight across the middle of Rajputana to Gurgam; Tankal on the Jamna, where the muster roll was taken, is not shown on the maps accessible to me. There is a place Kanhur, which may be identified with Kanhun in Rajputana, a little aside of the road from Ujjain to Delhi, and this was twenty-one days' march from Tankal. Another seventeen days brought the army to Gurgam, very probably the Kharagam of the maps, a little way to the south-west of Indore, and a little to the east of the main road to Dhar and Ujjain. Therefrom the army went to Deogir, probably by the main road from Dhar to Deogir. Thenceforward the road taken seems to be the road from Deogir to Bir, a few marches to the south-east of it. Therefrom winding south-westwards, an old road leads to Barsi Railway station, and thence across the Bhima, so that the three rivers Godaveri, Sini and Bhima are passed. The army then should have come upon the place called Bandri in the country of Paras Dalvi. Bandri is apparently Pandharpur just on the right side of the Bhima, and the five days' march from Kharabad of Paras Deo, which seems to be indicated, would answer well. The only difficulty in this route is what actually is intended by the name, Kharabad. It was possibly another name of Bir or some other town in that vicinity.¹ At Bandri, Malik Kafur was said to have halted to make enquiries about the countries farther south.
c11.21
¹ Bir would be conveniently situated as the head-quarters of a frontier province, from which to watch the movements of hostile powers such as the Kākatīyas on the one side and the Hoysalas on the other. Adoni and places along the line from Bir to Adoni figure often in these campaigns. South of Pandharpur was the territory of the Hoysalas. Bir would be placed beyond reach of the enemies and within striking distance of either frontier.
c11.22
Pandharpur seems to have been then a frontier station between the Mahratta country and the Karnāṭa of the Hoysalas. It was already pointed out that an inscription of Vīra Somēśvara has recently been discovered there, which perhaps marks it as the northern-most limit of the Hoysala dominions. The road thence to Dvārasamudra seems to have followed either of the two well-known roads, but probably the eastern road from Pandharpur to Bijapur, from Bijapur to Harihar; from Harihar to Hiriyūr and thence across from the main road to Bāṇavar and Haḷebīḍ a possible and fairly convenient route of march even now. That fixes the route of march of Malik Kafur to Dvārasamudra. The route thence is not equally simple. According to Amir Khusru they marched five days to get to the mountains; that means, the distance from Haḷebīḍ to Hosur, was a five days' march. The road taken must surely have been not the road from Haḷebīḍ by way of Mysore down the Satiyamangalam ghat into the Coimbatore district. It appears to be the eastern road that was taken; therefore the army must have come back to Bāṇavar; from there they must have struck the main road somewhere about Chikkanāyakanhalli, and thence by way of Tumkur and Bangalore to Hosur. Of the two passes mentioned, there is nothing satisfactorily answering to the Sarmali of Amir Khusru. From the way that he mentions the two, we have to look for both of them close to each other among the passes that lead from the Mysore plateau into the country below the ghats. One of the passes leads through the Mēlagiri hills, and that does not bring the Mēlagiris near in sound to Sarmali. The whole country on this side was known in those days as Puramalai Nāḍu, the country outside the hills. It is not certain whether something like that is not the cause of the confusion. But the other pass that he actually does mention as ‘Tabar’ is the pass on the main road, now commonly known as the Toppur Pass, well-known also in the campaigns of early British India. Getting across the mountains by the Toppur pass, the army reached the river ‘Kanobari,’ apparently Kaveri, and then bivouacked for the night on the sands. It is not clearly inferable from his account whether the army actually crossed the Kaveri and took the road on the right bank, or whether it pursued its way by the road on the eastern bank of the river. As apparently the Kaveri did not contain much water, they might have crossed the Kaveri and taken the western road till they came to Muśiri, where the main road gets across the Kaveri to the other side and joins the Namkal road. The objective of the march all along is said to have been the ‘country of Bir’ or what seems a city or town under the name ‘Birdhul.’ Since there is no mention in the narrative of the second crossing of the Kaveri, it is just possible the route taken was the other; from Toppur to Omalur and thence to Salem by Tiruchen-gode; from there to Namakal and down on the high road to Kaṇṇanūr and Śrīrangam by the left bank of the Kaveri itself. Whichever of the routes was taken it is clear that the road taken was the well-beaten road from above the ghats to Trichinopoly, the route taken by Hoysala Narasimha when he intervened effectively against the Pāṇḍya invasion of the Chola country, as I have already pointed out in the previous lectures. The campaign in this region hovered round the Chola capital, Gangaikondaśolapuram and the Hoysala capital of Kaṇṇanūr (Sanskrit, Khaṇḍanapura, and Kandur of the Muhammadan historians); Chidambaram, Śrīrangam and various other temples suffered.
c11.23
The actual route taken from here to Madura is not quite so clear in the narrative. The only lead that the account gives us is that the army first moved on and encamped in a place called Kham, and from there it set forward and reached Madura in five marches. Taking it that the starting point of Malik Kafur was his camp at Kaṇṇanūr, there are three roads by which the advance could have been made. The one along the road following more or less the South India Railway line now to Dindigul and the Palnis, and thence along the road to Periakuḷam almost due west of Madura as far as a village called Butlaguṇḍu, and turning eastwards to Madura. Another a little to the east of it, proceeding straight down to Viralimalai, going further down through what is now the Zamindari of Marungāpuri through Koilpaṭṭi and Tovarankurichi, striking the great trunk road from Vaṭṭāṇam to Dindigul, at Nattam. The road thence leads between Śirumalai (the possible Sarmali of Amir Khusru) and Aḷagarmalai straight down to Madura. The third road of the present day, perhaps the most important at the present time, is the road leading from Trichinopoly by way of Kīranūr to the town of Pudukoṭṭa straight, and thence to Tirumeyyam; from there to Tiruppattūr and from Tiruppattūr to Madura.
c11.24
The Śilappadhikāram describes the roadways feasible for travellers from Uraiyūr, the suburb of Trichinopoly, to Madura in early times; and then apparently there was only a single road going down to Koḍumbāḷūr not far from Viralimalai. This branched off from there into three, somewhat in the shape of a trident one leading westwards to a little way to the west of Madura from where one had to make a turn eastwards and reach Madura. The middle road took itself straight down, and was apparently the shortest; but it went through a desert tract and was infested by robbers. It was therefore not worth taking for a party in which there was a young and apparently well-bred lady. The third road slightly longer went through a much more hospitable country and took one on, through stages, to Tirumāliruṅśolai (Aḷagarmalai), said to be a place worth visiting for its own sake, and thence to Madura. This eastern-most road of the Śilappadhikāram is however not identical with the high road between Trichinopoly and Madura known to historians.
c11.25
In the course of the Ceylon war of Parākrama Bāhu, Laṅkāpura the general marched in pursuit of Kulaśēkhara from Madura along the road from Madura to Tiruppattūr and followed up the march along the same high road from Tiruppattūr to Poṇ-Amarāvati. Here is a clear lead where to look for the high road from Madura to Trichinopoly. We have already spoken of the invasion of the Chola country by Māravarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I. His inscriptions, and perhaps even restorations of various temples along the high road are traceable from Tiruppattūr by way of Kaṇḍavarāyaṉpaṭṭi to Vēlankuḍi and thence to Poṇ-Amarāvati. At Tiruppattūr I was informed that an old road branching off from a point a few furlongs from Tiruppattūr along the Tiruppattūr-Tirumeyyam road took one to Kaṇḍavarāyaṉpaṭṭi, from which an old broad avenue road takes one to Tirukkaḷākkuḍi (written Tirukkoḷakkuḍi in inscriptions) and thence to Pūlānkurichi (Pūvālankurichi) on the Poṇ-Amarāvati way. The road continued southwards from Tiruppattūr to Tirukkoshṭiyūr, and from there through Madagupaṭṭi to Śivaganga. From Śivaganga there is the road proceeding to Mēlūr, and from there to Aḷagarmalai, from which Madura could be reached. For our present purpose the high road from Madura came down to Tiruppattūr and the same high road apparently carried one to Pon-Amarāvati;¹ that is the point that has to be made.
c11.26
¹ Strangely enough the revised Madura Gazetteer edited by Mr. Francis states on p. 33 that Pon-Amarāvati has not yet been identified. There never has been any doubt about the identity of Pon-Amarāvati, and the epigraphist's report treating of the War of the Ceylonese (1899) identifies the place with Pon-Amarāvati in Pudukoṭṭa. At any rate, there can be absolutely no doubt now in the face of the clear statement of the Mahāvamśa that the utmost boundary of the Pāṇḍya country was a line drawn through Pon-Amarāvati, Kiḷānilai, and Maṇamēlkuḍi, a little way south of the mouth of the southern Veḷḷār. Mr. Hemingway's Trichinopoly marks it on the map.
c11.27
The bit of the old road between Tiruppattūr and Pon-Amarāvati which is said to be about six or seven miles long shows even old bridges. This confirms the statement of the Mahāvamśa that the high road went from Tiruppattūr to Pon-Amarāvati. The road must have continued from Pon-Amarāvati to Trichinopoly either through Pudukoṭṭa or just outside of it. The present day high road from Trichinopoly goes from Trichinopoly to Pudukoṭṭa, from Pudukoṭṭa to Tirumeyyam, and from Tirumeyyam to Tiruppattūr, leaving Pon-Amarāvati at the centre of the arc from Pudukoṭṭa to Tiruppattūr. As far as I have been able to make out there is no road connecting Pon-Amarāvati with Tirumeyyam, and therefore it is inevitable that a road from Pon-Amarāvati must have led towards Trichinopoly. The present day road to Pon-Amarāvati from Pudukoṭṭa, branches off a little way from Pudukoṭṭa along the Pudukoṭṭa-Kuḍumiyāmalai road. That road continues almost unbroken northwards to Annavāśal, from which another place Nārttāmalai (Nagarattārmalai) is reachable at a short distance cross country. I am told that an old road, the road is in use even now, leads from Koḍumbāḷūr to Kuḍumiyāmalai, and thence to Pudukoṭṭa, the Pon-Amarāvati road branching off from this. Inscriptions of Māravarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I are found in the temples ruined and standing along this road. They are found in Pon-Amarāvati, in Iḷayāttākuḍi and in one part of Narttāmalai called Kaḍambarmalai. It seems likely therefore that the high road continued from Pon-Amarāvati towards Kuḍumiyāmalai across to Annavāśal and thence to Kaḍambarmalai, wherefrom it would follow the present road almost, to Trichinopoly, or might go round by way of Viralimalai and Koḍumbāḷūr to Trichinopoly. The road Malik Kafur followed seems to be the former. The Kham of Amir Khusru seems to be a corruption of, or a contraction from, Kaḍambavanam which must have been another name of what is called Kaḍambarmalai now, as the god of the temple in the locality is named Kaḍambavanēśvara. From Kaḍambavanam, Kham is a possible contraction in the mouth of a Muhammadan. This Kaḍambamalai must have been a fortified place. There are remains of what was intended to be a strong fortification on the hill and about; the temple is a structure altogether in the character of those of Māravarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I, the special feature of which is a high plinth, popularly called Sundara Pāṇḍyan Koraḍu. I have not been able to trace any inscription of a Pāṇḍya later than this Māravarman Sundara Pāṇḍya I in this place which is full of inscriptions. Kaḍambavanam is one of the names of Madura, and it is likely that the place was built by Māravarman Sundara I as a new frontier town.
c11.28
Madura. General View of the temple and town (by permission of Messrs. Wiele & Klein, Madras)
c11.29
Māravarman’s aggressive activity along this line was apparently put a stop to by the occupation of Kaṇṇanūr by the Hoysalas, and in his later campaigns at any rate, Māravarman probably took a more eastern road by way of Vallam, Tanjore and further east. There are visible signs of wanton destruction in the locality, which may be due to the Muhammadan invaders; and the last of all Kaḍambarmalai would be about seventy-five miles, and therefore five marches, from Madura. It therefore seems likely that Kaḍambavanam was the camping ground Kham of the Muhammadans after they left Trichinopoly. This identification receives further confirmation from an inscription of A.H. 761 (about A.D. 1359-60) in the Tirukkaḷākkuḍi temple which relates to a dispute between certain villagers in Pon-Amarāvati Nāḍu. A number of Muhammadan generals who went down to destroy Śūraikkuḍi are said to have been in camp at Māttūrkuḷam where they summoned the inhabitants of the two villages of Viraiyāchilai and Koṭṭiyūr, to settle their disputes. This apparently means that Māttūrkuḷam was in the high road from Pon-Amarāvati to Trichinopoly. Mātturkuḷam is just in the line from Kuḍumiyāmalai almost on the Trichinopoly-Pudukoṭṭa road now. The road therefore seems then to have run from Trichinopoly to Māttūrkuḷam, from there to Kuḍumiyāmalai across by way of Śittannavāśal, a few miles from Kuḍumiyāmalai, and straight along to Pon-Amarāvati, thence to Kaṇḍavarāyanpaṭṭi, Tiruppattūr, and thence along the present high road to Madura. And this seems clearly the road taken by Malik Kafur in his invasion of Madura.
c11.30
Brahmastpuri is Chidambaram.—There are three places that figure in this campaign frequently, ‘Bir Dhul,’ ‘Kandur,’ and ‘Jalkotta.’ Any identification of all these, from the nature of their names as given by Amir Khusru, must turn upon the identification of the great temple Brahmastpuri, which Malik Kafur plundered. According to the description given there, it was a temple roofed over with gold, set with gems. It contained both the Linga, emblematic of Śiva (Ling Mahadeo), and Viṣṇu (Deo Narain). These indications give sufficient lead to identify the place with Chidambaram. Chidambaram is popularly known as Kanakasabhā or Ponnambalam (golden hall) from Pallava times. That was because the whole of the inner shrine of the temple was roofed over with gold, and that was renewed two or three times under the great Cholas.
c11.31
The later members of this dynasty from Kulottunga I onwards, if not from Rājēndra I, were specially devoted to this temple, and seem to have always completed the ceremony of coronation in the capital Gangaikondaśolapuram by a visit to this temple.¹
c11.32
¹ *Vide* Kulottunga Śoḷan ulā. Madura Sangam manuscripts : lines 63-6.
c11.33
Hence at the time it must have been one of the richest temples in this part of the country. The name Brahmastpuri is apparently the slightly modified Brahmapuri, which is the sacerdotal (āgamic) name given to Chidambaram as a whole in Śaiva literature. There is one temple dedicated to Śiva, which goes by the specific name Brahmapuri, and the name of the deity itself is Brahmapurīśvara, and is known ordinarily as Tirukkaḷanchēri, the northern part of Chidambaram, and this particular temple received a gift of 1,100 gold pieces annually for certain festivals, etc., from Kulottunga III.² Hence there is little doubt that the Brahmastpuri of Amir Khusru is Chidambaram.
c11.34
² Epi. Rep. for 1914, sec. 17.
c11.35
Śrīrangam, a possible alternative.—The possible alternatives to this would be, having regard to the description of gold roofing, Śrīrangam. If exclusive attention should be paid to the name alone, Shiyāḷi would be an alternative; and the incidental statement in the description of Amir Khusru, who puns on the legless character of the Lingas, that they all at one kick from the horse of Islam jumped to the island of Lanka, may lead one to identify Brahmastpuri with Rāmēśvaram. This last or Shiyāḷi, so far as our present knowledge of these places goes, does not answer the other details. Śrīrangam may be just possible; but the difficulty against Śrīrangam is that the temple does not contain both the images of Śiva and Vishnu like the other two above. If Chidambaram is Brahmastpuri, what is Bir Dhul, what is Kandur and what is Jalkotta. It must be borne in mind here that at the time Sundra Pāṇḍya put the father to death, Kulaśēkhara, the father ‘Kales Dewar,’ was apparently in Madura. Sundara put him to death, took possession of the treasury and installed himself in Madura before Vīra Pāṇḍya could intervene. Hence it is clear that Vīra Pāṇḍya was not in government at Madura, and in all probability his government was elsewhere. We pointed out elsewhere that Māravarman Kulaśēkhara resided in his palace outside Jayankoṇḍaśolapuram, six miles from Gangaikoṇḍaśolapuram as his capital. That apparently was the capital of the Chola country under Pāṇḍyan rule. Either the whole of the town, or the new suburb in which Kulaśēkhara erected his palace, might have gone by the name Vīra Śoḷan for various reasons. Bir Dhul cannot be anything else than Vīra Śoḷan, in the mouth of the northern foreigner unless he meant ‘the Chola country under Bir’, as a whole. Amir Khusru speaks of the country as ‘the country of Bir’ which is synonymous with Vīra, may be Vīra Śoḷa or Vīra Pāṇḍya. Apparently Amir Khusru means Vīra Pāṇḍya. If Bir becomes Vīra, Dhul by itself cannot stand for any particular place, and seems to be the Tamil Śola either the country or the king, thus rendered in the phonology of the northern foreigner. Gangaikoṇḍaśoḷapuram, or its new neighbour might have borne this name as these often did change their names with successive rulers. If Jayangoṇḍaśoḷapuram, the possible capital of Vīra Pāṇḍya is the Bir Dhul, Kandur is almost certainly Kaṇṇanūr (the Khaṇḍanapuram of Sanskrit writers). If Jayangoṇḍaśoḷapuram were attacked, the ruler thus attacked would move for shelter to Kaṇṇanūr, the capital of the Hoysalas till recently, a place strongly fortified in their time, and occupying a strategic position along the main artery of communication between Trichinopoly and Tiruvaṇṇāmalai which at the time was one of the capitals of the Hoysalas. Wassaf states clearly that when Malik Kafur invaded Haḷēbīd, the Hoysala asked for help, and of the brothers it was Vīra Pāṇḍya that sent it. If that is so, when the Pāṇḍya’s capital Bir Dhul had been attacked, he would naturally look for assistance to the Hoysala, and such assistance as the Hoysala could render must come from Tiruvaṇṇāmalai, the eastern capital, or from Mysore, wherefrom an army did come into the Chola country ordinarily by way of Tiruvaṇṇāmalai. Hence Kandur is unmistakably Kaṇṇanūr, north of Śrīrangam. The campaign oscillated between Jayangoṇḍaśolapuram (Bir-Dhul) and Kaṇṇanūr (Kandur); and that would certainly be justified by the respective position of these places. There is the additional recommendation that the Pāṇḍya retreated from Kandur for shelter to the forests; the locality of Kaṇṇanūr would suit it very well indeed as he could retire into the hilly tracts of the Kollimalais on the borders of Salem and South Arcot.
c11.36
There is one other place that is to be settled, and that is Jalkoṭṭa. It is not possible to offer as satisfactory an identification of this place as there is nothing further to lead us to an identification except the name. If Jalkoṭṭa means anything at all, it must be water-fortress; and I take it, it apparently refers to an island protected by deep waters round it. The only place in the vicinity that I could think of is the famous Devakoṭṭa of the early British Campaigns at the mouth of the Coleroon. There are the remains of huge brick walls, of bricks of the same kind and size as those found in Gaṅgaikoṇḍaśolapuram. One of the walls in the island at the mouth showed three parts—two brick walls of 2 to 2½ feet thick with an intervening mud wall about 6 feet. Another bit could be seen about five to six miles up the river and the present bed of the Coleroon seems to occupy the place of the rest of it. The course of the river has changed a great deal in the last few centuries. I am led to this suggestion by the strength of the fort on the island of which we have a very good description from the Jesuit priest Pimenta at the commencement of the seventeenth century, in addition to what we get from a number of works in Sanskrit and Telugu bearing on Tanjore history.¹ It was a place of considerable strength and great importance in the wars of the Portuguese and the Tanjore kings. It probably had this importance three centuries earlier, and was a place of refuge to monarchs of the Chola and the Pāṇḍya dynasties that held sway in this tract of country. That we have to look for these places in the Chola country and not in the Pāṇḍya is quite certain, as Amir Khusru takes us in a separate campaign to ‘Southern Mathra’ (Madura), and as a supplement, to a campaign against Fatan, the capital, apparently of another Pāṇḍya, (may be Vīra himself), which, as was already indicated, must be looked for about Rāmēśvaram.
c11.37
¹ Purchas, His piligrimes x, chapter vi. Sources of Vijayanagar History, Madras University. Extracts 90 and 91 in particular.
The Sack of Śrīrangam by Malik Kafur
c11.s1.1
benefactions of Sundara Pāṇḍya, not to mention a host of others before him.
c11.s1.2
There is direct evidence to confirm this presumption in a work called Kōyiloḷuhu. This is a work which deals with all the benefactions made to the temple at Śrīrangam by people from its foundation to almost the eighteenth century. There are various editions of this work, differing in details, which cannot all of them be regarded accurate without confirmation. The more important of these, however, seem based upon the inscriptions in the temple, some of which may not be available at present. This work has a few paragraphs devoted to the sack of Śrīrangam and the carrying away of the idol of Ranganātha, apparently under Malik Kafur. The account begins that the king of Delhi having conquered Pratāpa Rudra, invaded both the Toṇḍamaṇḍalam and Śōlamaṇḍalam. The invading armies spread along the whole country and made a general sack of temples carrying away the idols as well. In the course of this campaign, they entered Śrīrangam as well, by the north gate, which was in the charge of the Ārya Bhaṭṭas, the Northern Brahmans. The guards, by name Panjukoṇḍān, were over-powered, the temple was entered into and all the property was carried away including the idol of the god. There was a woman who had made it her daily habit never to take her food without worshipping the god in the temple. She was a native of Karambanūr, otherwise called Uttamarkoil, on the other bank of the Coleroon. As the army was retreating after the sack, she gave up her household and followed the army in the guise of a mendicant having learnt that they were carrying away the idol of Rāmapriya as well from Tirunārāyaṇapuram (Melukoṭṭai). She reached ultimately the palace at Delhi where these idols were all locked up in a safe chamber. One of the younger princesses of the Sultan's family having been struck with the beauty of the Ranganātha idol, asked permission and obtained the idol to play with. She kept herself in the constant company of the idol. Knowing so much, perhaps feeling that the idol was in safe custody, the woman managed to steal away from the palace and journeyed back to Śrīrangam to give information of it to the people there.
c11.s1.3
The more important among the citizens having deliberated as to what they should do, walled up the north gate of the temple and left the temple vacant burying the goddess idol that escaped capture under a bilva tree (Aegla Marmelos). Sixty of these men placed themselves under the guidance of the woman mendicant and set forward on their journey to Delhi. She put on the former guise and got entry into the palace as before. In the meanwhile those that followed her managed to get audience of the Sultan, and by exhibiting both the music and the dance for which they were famous, as having had to perform daily before the god, they pleased the Sultan so greatly and declined all rewards offered by the Sultan, preferring instead the one idol of Ranganātha, among the many, as the reward. The Sultan ordered that these men might be allowed to take the idol of their choice. Not finding this particular idol in the store-room and knowing as they did that it was with the princess, they reported the matter to the Sultan, who in joke told them that if it was their god they might call him and take him away. They agreed and sang their prayers, which the idol answered by following them. Showing this to the Sultan they obtained his permission and started off with their idol over-night. When morning broke, the princess was disconsolate at the loss of her idol and declined to live if she could not have it. Search for the party proving useless, he placed her under an escort and sent her off for the idol. The Brahmans of Śrīrangam having had a start, marched along ahead and reached Tirupati safe before they could be overtaken by the princess and her escort. At Tirupati they heard of the arrival of the party of the princess and feeling themselves unsafe, the party broke up and dispersed themselves to avoid observation leaving the idol in charge of three men among them, the father and son, and the son's maternal uncle. The big party having thus disappeared, the escort marched on till they reached Śrīrangam. Finding that the northern gate of the temple was walled up and the temple empty, the princess died of a broken heart.
c11.s1.4
In the meanwhile, the three men in charge of the idol heard of the advance of the Muhammadans closer to the hill; fearing for their safety and that of the idol, the chief man tied himself down to the idol and asked the two others gently to let it down the slope of the hill, himself being always on the underside so that the idol may not suffer damage. Having got down safely, the three men lived on there in an isolated glen in the forest at the foot of the hill unfrequented by ordinary people. In the meanwhile, people at Śrīrangam thinking it impossible to recover the idol, made and consecrated others, instead of those of both the god and the goddess. In the meanwhile the three men continued to live on doing their daily service to the god in the usual fashion. For a period of fifty-nine and a half years from the date of the sack, of which two years were spent in the palace of the Sultan, the idol of Śrīrangam found its shrine in that sequestered glen. In the course of this long stay, the father and the uncle had died and the son had grown up to be an old man of eighty, looking more like a forest man than a civilized one. Feeling that his end was drawing near this one man showed himself to the hill folk about and let them understand how and why he happened to be there. Information of this reached the town by means of these people, and it happened to be the time of Gopana, who was in charge of Nārāyaṇapuram (Nārāyaṇavaram) near Chandragiri under the newly formed kingdom of Vijayanagar. He carried the idol to his later head-quarters at Ginji where he placed it in the temple called Singavaram even now, in a safe place difficult of approach even from Ginji itself. When Prince Kampana had over-powered the Muhammadan garrisons in the various localities in South India and brought the whole of it under the control of Vijayanagar, Gopana, his chief adviser got the idol re-installed in the temple at Śrīrangam in the Śaka year, 1293, A.D. 1370-71, in the year Paritāpi, month Vaikāśi, date 17.
c11.s1.5
The last date 1370-71 is admittedly taken from the inscription which gives a chronogram, which is interpreted here as 1293. Counting back fifty-nine and a half years from this will take us to 1310-11. This is most naturally referred to the invasion of Malik Kafur and cannot refer to one of the later invasions. But there is one apparent objection to accept this account. There is another sack of Śrīrangam referred to in the same work and of a later date certainly when the idol of Ranganātha had to be taken towards the south and ultimately brought back by way of Malayāḷam to Calicut, and across to Tirupati. We shall have to refer to this in another connection.
c11.s1.6
The memory of this particular migration of the idol is preserved in the temple where in the north-eastern corner of the outer Maṇḍapa, in the first line round the sanctum, there is a chamber containing a wall painting of this Suratāṇi (Sultana), popularly called Tulukkachchi Nāchiyār. At break of day worship is offered to her and to the god, with bread and butter, which is a special feature of this particular temple in regard to this particular deity.
c11.s1.7
*Epigraphical Evidence.*—There are a few references in inscriptions in this part of the country which throw considerable light upon the Muhammadan invasions having gone as far as the Pāṇḍya country. The earliest so far available is No. 434 of 1903 of the Madras Epigraphist's collection, which refers itself to the fourteenth year of Veṇru Maṅkoṇḍa Śambuvarāyan, whose date of accession is A.D. 1322 according to the late professor Kielhorn. This would mean that the reference is of date A.D. 1335-36, and it speaks of the Muhammadan invasions in ‘previous days’ and the destruction of the country by them. This record is in Tiruvāmāttūr a place in the South Arcot district. The next reference is in records of Tiruppattūr (in the Ramnad district just outside the southern border of Puḍukoṭṭa) referring themselves to the years forty-four and forty-six of Vīra Pāṇḍya, in which it is stated that Tiruppattūr temple was in the occupation of the Muhammadans during their campaign in the south, and the temple was reconsecrated in the said years by a certain Viśaiyālaya Dēvan. The name Viśaiyālaya figures in inscriptions of Māravarman Kulaśēkhara, and refers possibly to the same officer as the one referred to in the records of this Vīra Pāṇḍya.¹ If that were so, the date of these records would be A.D. 1339-40 and A.D 1341-42. The Vīra Pāṇḍya referred to above must be Jaṭāvarman Vīra Pāṇḍya against whom Malik Kafur undertook the invasion of the south and whose date of accession is A.D. 1295-96. The next later record is one of the seventh year of Rājanārāyaṇa Śambuvarāyan, whose sixth year, according to Kielhorn, is A.D. 1345, and therefore the actual date of reference is A.D. 1346. But the most important document in this connection is c. 64 of 1916 at Tirukaḷākkuḍi which refers explicitly to the invasion and occupation by the Muhammadans, the appropriation of temple lands, the neglect of temple worship, etc., till Kampana Uḍaiyār came and put an end to the Muhammadan domination and appointed officers (Nāyakanmārs) for supervision of temple worship and management. This record refers itself to the thirty-first year of a Māravarman Vīra Pāṇḍya and gives astronomical details which, according to Rao Bahadur Mr. Krishna Sastrigal, work out correctly to A.D. 1358.¹ The next one is No. 18 of 1899 at Tiruppuṭkuḷi of A.D. 1365, which states in clear terms that Kampana conquered Rāja Gambhīra Rājya, and was pleased to rule the earth permanently. This date A.D. 1358 is taken as a starting point by Mr. Sastrigal, and calculating back from it he fixes the date of Māravarman Vīra Pāṇḍya's accession as A.D. 1326-27 on the assumption of a forty-eight years' occupation by the Muhammadans beginning with Malik Kafur. This point will come in for discussion in connection with the dynasty of the Sultans of Madura. It is enough to state here that the assumption of the official date for the Sultans of Madura who ruled for forty-eight years in all is wrong, and hence this date for Māravarman Vīra Paṇḍya is untenable if it depended upon that assumption alone. For the present purpose this series of epigraphical references makes it clear beyond doubt that the early Muhammadan invasions reached certainly into the Pāṇḍya country, and raises a very strong presumption that it did go farther south both to Madura and to Rāmēśvaram as Amir Khusru claims, having regard to the character of the invasion as a mere raid undertaken for the sole purpose of plunder.
First 50 of 83 passages. Read on