History of Orissa from the Earliest Times to the British Period v1.c29.2

v1.c29.2

The removal of the strong hand of Kapilendra Gajapati was followed by uprisings throughout Orissa. *Firishta’s* account of the Orissan wars of the Bahmani Sulṭāns bears on it the stamp of untruth. That author states that two sons of Kapilendra, named Maṅgal Rāi and Ambar Rāi, were rival claimants for the throne and the latter sought the alliance of the Bahmani Sulṭān Muḥammad III, who had succeeded his brother Niẓām Shah on the 30th July 1463.A.D. Therefore, at the time of Kapilendra’s death Muḥammad’s age could not have been more than eighteen, as at the time of his accession he was not more than ten. He was perhaps yet too young to take any real interest in the disputed succession of a powerful neighbouring State. The more blunt *Burhān-i-Ma’āṣir* enables us to tear the veil of camouflage of the polished diction of *Firishta*. The *Burhān-i-Ma’āṣir* says that, as soon as the news of Kapilendra’s death was received at Bidar, Sulṭān Muḥammad III rejoiced openly and determined to conquer Kapilendra’s dominions. A council of war was held and Niẓām-ul-mulk Ḥasan Baḥrī, the renegade Hindu and the worst traitor among Bahmani officers, volunteered to undertake the campaign against Orissa and was invested by the Sulṭān with a robe of honour.¹ The Bahmanīs of Bidar had not dared to raise their heads after their crushing defeat at the battle of Pevārkoṇḍā and they were now eager to wipe out the disgrace of repeated reverses at the hands of the Hindus. They considered the death of Kapilendra an opportune moment for the destruction of the Hindu empire. There is not a single line in the *Burhān-i-Ma'āṣir* about the disputed succession to the throne of Orissa. Therefore, the straightforward statement of the intentions of the Bahmanī officers and the Sulṭān Muḥammad III is much more reliable than the garnished account of *Firiṣhta*. Niẓām-ul-mulk Ḥasan Baḥrī defeated the Orissan army somewhere in the northern Telegu country and advanced upon Rājamahendrī. *Firiṣhta* agrees with the *Burhān-i-Ma'āṣir* in stating that Niẓām-ul-Mulk Ḥasan Baḥrī commanded the campaign in Orissa, but states in addition that in A. D. 1471=876 A. H., Ambar Rāi, a cousin of the king of Orissa, had appealed for help as the throne had been usurped by a brāhman named Maṅgal Rāi, the adopted son of the late king. Ambar Rāi joined Niẓām-ul-Mulk Ḥasan on the frontiers of Orissa and the latter, after defeating Maṅgal Rāi, placed Ambar on the throne of that country. Then he proceeded to capture Koṇḍapalle¹ and Rājamahendrī. The *Burhān-i-Ma'āṣir* states that after the capture of Rājamahendrī, Ḥasan marched against Koṇḍavidu and not Koṇḍapalle and captured it with several other forts.² That the story of the disputed succession in the empire of Orissa is a myth is proved by an inscription on the left-hand side of the Jayā-Vijayā gate of the *Jagamohana* of the temple of Jagannātha at Puri, which was incised on the 2nd *Aṅka* of the reign of Purushottama, *i.e.*, the year of his accession=12th April 1470 A. D.,¹ and as the same Purushottama has been proved to have reigned uninterruptedly up to 1496-97, *Firishta's* statement about Maṅgal Rāi being defeated and replaced by Ambar Rāi by Niẓām-ul-mulk Ḥasan Baḥrī can be rejected without further consideration.