Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of the Qaraunah Turks in India c11: Chapter VI. The Deccan

History of the Qaraunah Turks in India c11

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VI. The Deccan

c11.2

Though the situation of the Deccan has invested it with a security which few provinces possess, it is not impenetrable, for the Vindhya and the Satpura ranges that divide it from the north are not impassable, and the foreigners have not found it impossible to cross them. The fabulous wealth of the Deccan fired the lust of Muhammadan adventurers and invested their expeditions, in their eyes, with the character of a *Jihād*. But no Muhammadan rulers of Dihli thought of conquering the Deccan owing to the half-established character of their governments until ‘Ala-al-Din developed a far-reaching imperialistic policy, which gave him a large and extensive empire greater than that of any of his predecessors. The Muslim power paralysed all opposition, and for the time being the old culture and civilisation of the Hindus was crushed by the might of the conquering class. The followers of Islam easily overpowered their enemies, whose philosophical quietism placed them at a considerable disadvantage, when they were pitted against a warlike community which was bound together by the closest affinities of caste and creed. The success of the Muhammadans in the Deccan was due to the lack of unity and organisation among the Hindus of the south, and their mutual dissensions. The Muslim conquest opened a dark chapter in the history of the Deccan.¹ The superior might of the Muslims, their warlike spirit, and their iconoclastic zeal

c11.3

¹ The aggressions of the Muhammadans caused untold suffering in the country. They carried off huge quantities of gold and silver and stopped public worship. So great was the fear that the tutelary God of Śri-rangam had to be removed to a more secure place.

c11.4

Madras Epigraphical Report for 1916 Sec. 33.

c11.5

Extracts from the *Prapannamritam* of Anantārya in S. K. Ayyangar's sources of Vijayanagar History, pp. 34—40, and from the *Āchāryasuktimuktāvali* of Nāmbūri Keśvāchārya in Ayyangar's work, pp. 40—45. The latter work deals overbore all opposition and the whole country lay smitten to death, as it were, under their terrible onslaughts. The religion of the Hindus was treated with open disregard; old shrines venerated for centuries were desecrated, and their most cherished susceptibilities were outraged in a wanton manner. But the establishment of Muhammadan supremacy was far from complete in the South. The Deccan drew the northern invaders far away from their base, and the long distance made them ever anxious for the security of their possessions in Hindustan. The absence of means of communication made it impossible to hold large tracts of land permanently. What the rulers of Dihli could do was to exercise a perfunctory supervision from the headquarters, while the actual work of government was left to the provincial satraps who were appointed by the imperial government and who were all Muhammadans. The Muslim conquest of the Deccan did not lead to the Islamisation of the Hindus, for the forces of conservatism proved too strong for the new influences. The Muslim invasions were usually accompanied by acts of vandalism so that the conquerors came to be looked upon with secret but inextinguishable hatred. The smallness of their numbers compelled the Muslims to leave much of the administration to the Hindus themselves, whose pride of caste and creed did not allow them to mix with their conquerors or to adopt their customs and manners. While the north had somewhat tamely submitted, and the Rajputs bowed before the Muslim throne, the potentates of the Deccan assumed an attitude of sullen hostility and never ceased to strive for independence. The Muslim governor was not slow to take advantage of inadequate and spasmodic supervision of the central government, and he was more interested in trying to establish his own independent power than in the consolidation of the imperial rule. This fact is borne out by the frequent rebellions of provincial satraps, who withheld public revenues and formed cliques to support them in overthrowing the imperial yoke. Defiance of the central government was a normal feature of provincial politics in the middle ages, and the Deccan governors easily took

c11.6

with the history of Śrīvaiṣṇavism in Telugu. It relates the tragic story of the dancing girl who saved the temple of Śrī-rangam from destruction by captivating by her charms the Muhammadan chief and finally by murdering him. The descendants of this woman still enjoy certain privileges in the temple in recognition of the service rendered by their ancestors.

c11.7

the first place among such malcontents. Little regard was paid to public weal and the energies of the local administration were consumed in levying grinding exactions upon the people. When there was a strong ruler at Dihli, he asserted his authority and undertook punitive expeditions to chastise the rebellious governors, which resulted in much suffering to the population. The rapidity with which the governors were changed goes to illustrate the half-organised character of the Muslim polity in the Deccan. The Muhammadan government was in the nature of a military occupation, and its continuance was conditioned by its ability to maintain itself in a hostile land, where the people clung to their old habits and beliefs with an uncompromising tenacity.

c11.8

Though the old dynasties of the Hoysalas, the Kākatīyas and the Yādavas, which had stood for social order and the preservation of Hindu culture had struggled in vain against their Muslim invaders, the forces of reaction had not wholly died out in the Deccan. They only wanted time to develop strength. Just as a Muslim was impelled by his religious instincts to fight and die in a cause which he deemed sacred, in the same way the Hindu captains and leaders considered resistance to him a matter of pious obligation. The idea of defending their religion against the attacks of the Muslims fired them with an unconquerable enthusiasm, and the religio-political revolts, which were organised by the representatives of ancient dynasties, were meant not merely to recover their lost independence, but also to shield their faith from the attacks of its avowed enemies. The first few years of Muhammad Tughluq's reign represent the palmiest days of the Tughluq empire. The whole country was completely subdued, and, from Dihli to Dwarsamudra and Lakhnauti to Sindh and Multan, the overlordship of Dihli was acknowledged by all Princes and chieftains as is proved by the testimony of Barani and the author of the Masālik-al-absār. But Muhammad's reckless profusion, his merciless treatment of subordinates, his capricious behaviour towards the hereditary nobility whom he excluded from his favour, and his preferential treatment of the foreign amirs—all combined to precipitate the disruption of his empire. When political unrest spread over Northern India, the countries to the south of the Narbada found it hard to resist the temptation of throwing off the yoke of the imperial government and established for themselves well-defined principalities with their capitals at Madura, Warangal, Vijayanagar and Kulburga.

c11.9.1

The Sultanate of Madura was established in 1335 A.D. and Muhammad was prevented by unforeseen circumstances from arresting the progress of this revolutionary movement in the South.² The new sovereign struck coins in his name and began to organise his resources to wage war against the hostile chiefs, who enclosed his dominions on all sides. This was not all. In 1336 A.D. the foundations of the kingdom of Vijayanagar were laid by Vidyāraṇya, and Hari Hara I became the first ruler of the dynasty.³ Tradition says that two brothers Bukkā and Hari Hara, who were employed in the service of the king of Warangal at the time of the destruction of that kingdom by the Muhammadans in 1323 A.D., fled with a small escort and found shelter in the mountainous region of Anāgoṇḍi.⁴ This tradition finds a partial corroboration in Barani who says that ‘one of the relations of Kanyā Nāyak (referring to Hari Hara) whom the Sultan had sent to Kambālā, apostatised from Islam and broke out into rebellion.’⁵ This view is confirmed by Ibn Batūṭah, who in his account of Bahā-al-Din Gashtāsp’s rebellion says, that the captive princes of Anāgoṇḍi embraced Islam, and probably he loosely uses the word princes for all those dignitaries who were captured during the war.⁶ The Portuguese chronicler, Nuniz,⁷ relates the circumstances under which Hari Hara was entrusted with the country round Anāgondi as an imperial vassal by Muhammad Tughluq.

c11.9.2

According to Nuniz, Deo Rao (Hari Hara Deva Raya) was the minister of the ruler of the territories round Nagundy (Anāgondi). About 1334 A.D. Togao Mamede (Muhammad Tughluq) invaded those territories and the Raja was slain in battle. The minister, along with the treasurer and four leading officers, was taken prisoner to Dihli, while the conquered lands were entrusted to an imperial deputy whom Nuniz calls "Enebiquymelly" or "Mileque niby" or "Melinebiquy" (Malik Nāib). Malik Naib failed to manage the country owing to the hostility of the Hindus and the Sultan was obliged to restore the principality to the Hindus. He released the captives and made over the country to them. Accordingly the minister was raised to be king and the treasurer to be minister and after taking from them oaths and pledges of their fealty as vassals, he despatched them to their lands with a strong contingent to defend them, if anyone molested them in the way. Deo Rao was welcomed by the people. They hailed him with delight because they "had felt so deeply their subjection to a lord not of their own faith." They gave feasts in his honour and made obeisance which is due to kings. The imperial deputy, when he became aware of this, yielded the fortress and the kingdom to him and left the country. Deo Rao pacified the people and by his kindness won their esteem. One day, while hunting on the banks of the Tungbhadra, he met a hare which boldly turned towards his dogs and attacked them.

c11.9.3

The Prince was astonished at this miracle, and while returning homewards, he met on the river bank a holy man to whom he related what had happened. The holy man saw the place and advised the king to build a city on the spot where the miracle had happened. This hermit was the celebrated Vidyāraṇya. The city was founded and named after the hermit Vidyānagar. In course of time it came to be called Bisnagā or Vijayanagara. Sewell in his valuable history of the Vijayanagara empire has enumerated seven traditionary accounts of the origin of the empire,⁸ but the most reliable seems to be that which says that it was founded by two brothers, Hari Hara and Bukkā who were employed in the service of Pratap Rudra Deva of Warangal, and who fled from the country when it was overrun by the Muhammadans. They accepted service under the Raja of Anāgondi who employed them in his service, but when that kingdom was overthrown, they were carried off to Dihli as prisoners after the rebellion of Bahā-al-Din.⁹ When the imperial deputy Malik Maqbūl failed to maintain order in the country, they were released and were appointed ruler and minister of Anāgondi and were compelled to acknowledge the suzerainty of the Dihli emperor. Apart from the evidence of Barani that the person whom the Sultan had sent to govern Kambālā and who had embraced Islam was related to Kanyā Nāyak, there is other evidence to show that the two brothers originally belonged to Telingana.

c11.9.4

The foundation of the empire of Vijayanagar was followed by the introduction of the Telugu language and literature in the Kanarese country. The civil and military officers of the new empire were largely men of Telugu origin, who exerted their influence to introduce their own language, habits and customs among the people over whom they ruled. The effects of Telugu colonisation were seen in the adoption by the Tamils of strange festivals and observances and even superstitions, which were the principal features of the civilisation of their conquerors.¹⁰ The evidence of inscriptions leaves no room for doubt that Hari Hara and his brothers were Yadava Kṣatriyas descended from the Lunar race.¹¹ The Bitragunta grant of Saṃgamā II dated Śaka-Saṃvat 1278 (1356 A.D.) makes mention of the five sons of Saṃgamā I and a grandson of his who is named Saṃgamā II who is wrongly identified with the progenitor of the Vijayanagar Princes.¹² Saṃgamā I had five sons, Hari Hara, Bukkā, Kampā, Marappā and Mudappā, who all united to form a new kingdom in the Deccan with the help of the famous sage and scholar Vidyāraṇya, to serve as a bulwark against the Muhammadan aggressions. Mādhava, surnamed Vidyāraṇya, on account of his vast intellectual attainments, was instrumental in founding the empire of Vijayanagar in 1336 A.D.¹³ Firishta's account of the foundation of Vijaya-

c11.10

² The Sultan went to quell the revolt but returned on account of the epidemic which broke out at Arangal. Barani, p. 481. Ibn Batūṭah also says the same thing III, pp. 333-34.

c11.11

³ This date is mentioned in an inscription which Vidyāraṇya has left in one of the temples at Hāmpi. It appears that the city was not a new creation but a revival of some old ruined town. The inscription is as follows:-- ‘On Wednesday, the 7th lunar day of the bright half of Vaiśākh in the year Dhātu Śālivāhan Śāka 1258, in an auspicious time with Guru (Jupiter) in the rising sign (Lagna) I, the prince of ascetics, have constructed the city in Vijayanagar.’

c11.12

⁴ This story is related with a slight variation in a Sanskrit work called the “Vidyāraṇya Sikka” noticed by Buchanan in his “Travels in Southern India.” (Mysore, III, p. 110).

c11.13

⁵ Barani writes this in giving an account of the revolt of Kṛṣṇa Nāyak in the South, p. 484. He does not mention the exact relationship, but it is clear that Hari Hara was in some way connected with the ruler of Telingana.

c11.14

⁶ Ibn Batūṭah, III, p. 320. Ibn Batūṭah says he saw some of these princes with his own eyes.

c11.15

⁷ Chronicle of Nuniz, Sewell, A Forgotten Empire, pp. 291-300 also pp. 8-15.

c11.16

⁸ Sewell, A Forgotten Empire, pp. 18-23.

c11.17

⁹ The date 1334 given by Sewell is incorrect. According to Ibn Batūtah, Firishta, and Nunīz the country was conquered during the revolt of Bahā-al-Din Gashtāsp which occurred early in the reign sometime in 1326 A.D. Muhammad Tughluq's war against the Raja of Kampila was waged, according to Ibn Batūtah, because he had given shelter to the rebel and not, as Nunīz says, on account of greed of conquest. Ibn Batūtah further says that Belala Deo to whom Bahā-al-Din fled, unlike the Raja of Kampila, refused him shelter and sent him to the imperial army. Firishta corroborates Ibn Batūtah. The author of the *Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi* who is an earlier writer than Firishta also says that Bahā-al-Din fled, and was captured by the Hindus who sent him alive to the imperial Durbar. Sewell, A Forgotten Empire, p. 18. Ibn Batūtah, III, p. 321.

c11.18

¹⁰ Wilks, Historical Sketches, History of Mysore, p. 14. Caldwell, Tinnevelly, p. 48. Ind. Ant., 1914, pp. 112-13. Rangachari's article on the Telugu origin of Vijayanagar kings. Lewis Rice's suggestion that the Vijayanagar kings were Mysorean by origin cannot be accepted. The earliest inscriptions of these kings are found north and west of Mysore, not because they originally belonged to Mysore, but because that country first came under their control. Lewis Rice, Mysore, I, p. 345.

c11.19

¹¹ Epig. Carn., VI, Sg. No. 1; also Kp. 25. Sewell, Lists of Antiquities, II, Nos. 58, 79.

c11.20

¹² See verses 3 and 4 in the Indian Antiquary III, 1894-95, p. 25.

c11.21

¹³ Epig. Carn. VI, Sg. 11.

c11.22

Mr. Rangachari, speaking of the effects of Telugu colonisation, says that the civilisation of the Tamils became mixed with the civilisation of the "Bādūgas." The "Bādūgas" were a race of strong and muscular physique in the armies of the Rāyas of Southern India. The Vijayanagar kings employed them very largely in their armies and also appointed them as provincial governors. For Bādūgas see Christian College Magaz., IX, pp. 753—64; and also 830—43.

c11.23

तस्मादुद्भवन्पंच तनयाशौर्यशालिनः ।
कल्पावनिरुहाः पूर्वं कलशांबुनिधेरिव ॥
आदौ हरिहरक्षमाभ्रुदथ कंपमहीपतिः ।
ततो बुक महीपालः पश्चान्मारप मुद्पौ ॥

c11.24

Also Epig-Carn. VI, Ch. 64. The sons of Saṃgamā I are mentioned also in this inscription.

c11.25

In 'Śringeri Guru Paramparā' Vidyāraṇya is called विद्यानगर निर्माता the constructor of Vidyānagar or the city of learning. Report on Sanskrit and Tamil MSS. for 1893-94, No. 49.

c11.26

Also Hampi Inscription in B. S. Row's History of Vijayanagar, p. 10. This has been referred to before. Lewis Rice, Mysore and Coorg from the Inscriptions, p. 113. Another important inscription dated S. 1258 (1336 A.D.) testifies to the grant of a village named Kapalam otherwise called Hari Hara puram in free gift to a Brahman named Kesava Bhatta. There is a place in Mysore called Hari Hara puram. It was probably called Kapalam before Hari Hara.

c11.27

It is stated in Cd 46 that the city was founded and named Vidyānagari in the time of Hari Hara I, but it appears from Cn 256 that the city was afterwards built and its name changed to Vijayanagari or city of Victory in the time of Bukkā Rāya.

c11.28

Sewell makes mention in his "Lists of Antiquities" of a Nandinagari grant of the year 1336 S. S. 1258 of king Hari Hara. The grant is of the village of Kapālam otherwise called Hari Hara puram in free gift to the son of a Brahman named Keśava Bhatta. Lists II, pp. 11-12.

c11.29

nagar is incorrect both in date and details. He puts it after the rebellion of Kriṣṇa Nāyak and writes: " Belāl Deo founded a city in the mountainous region of his frontiers in a well-fortified place after the name of his son Sajan Raya, which came to be known as Bijannagar and by frequent use became Bijānagar. He sent numerous infantry and horse with Kriṣṇa Nāyak and succeeded in recovering Warangal. Malik 'Imad-al-Mulk the Wazir fled to Daulatabad. After this Belāl Deo sent fresh reinforcements to Kriṣṇa Nāyak, and the combined forces of both the Rais recovered from the Muhammadans the countries of Ma'bar and Dhorsamundar which had been for a long time tributaries of the ruler of Carnatic. On all sides the flames of war and rebellion were kindled and of the distant provinces nothing was left to the Sultan except Gujarat and Deogir."¹⁴ Firishta's Belāl Deo cannot be Vīr Ballāla III, for Kriṣṇa Nāyak's revolt occurred after his death in 1342 A.D. If it is Ballāla IV, then the foundation of the city must be dated later than 1342 A.D. But this is in conflict with the evidence of inscriptions which describe Vidyāraṇya as the founder of the city of Vijayanagar and which show that Hari Hara I had acquired considerable power before 1342 A.D.¹⁵ The city at first was called Vidyānagar, but afterwards, as the power and prosperity of the new principality increased, it came to be known as Vijayanagar or the city of Victory. Hari Hara I became the first ruler of the dynasty, and in a few years the boundaries of his kingdom widened, until in 1340 A.D. it included the valley of the Tungbhadra, portions of the Konkan, and the Malabar Coast. Several forts were built to strengthen the new kingdom; one was built by Hari Hara himself at Barukuru about the year 1337 A.D. and another was built at Bādāmi by one of his vassals.¹⁶ Ibn Batūṭah who visited Hanaur sometime towards the close of 743 A.H. (1343 A.D.) or in the beginning of 744 A.H. (July, 1344 A.D.) writes that the Sultan of Hanaur, Jalal-al-Din was at that time subject to a Hindu prince called Harib or Horāib by which is certainly meant Hari Hara whose authority was acknowledged along a portion of the Malabar coast.¹⁷ This shows that Hari Hara's power was fairly well established in the north, and the Hoysalas had retired towards the South leaving the kingdom of Vijayanagar to curb the aggressions of the Northern Muhammadans.

c11.30

¹⁴ Firishta, Lucknow Text, p. 138. Briggs I, p. 427. Firishta's statement is wrong.

c11.31

¹⁵ Hampi inscription in B. S. Row's History of Vijayanagar, p. 10. Epig. Carn., VI, Sq., 11. Report on Sanskrit and Tamil MSS. for 1893-94, No. 49.

c11.32

¹⁶ Sturrock, South Canara Manual, I, p. 65. Ind Ant., X, p. 63.

c11.33

¹⁷ Ibn Batūṭah writes and says, "The city is situated on the shores of the gulf through which ships can come and go. It is half a mile distant from the sea. The sea swells enormously during the rainy season, and for four months nobody ventures into it." IV, p. 63. Ibn Batūṭah left Dihli on the 17th Safar 743. An inscription dated 1346 A.D. states that a Virakal was set up in honour of certain 'gawdas' of 'Chapradahalli' who died fighting in the service of their king Hariappa Odeyar. This shows that Hari Hara must have been a prince of substance at this time.

c11.34

Though Hari Hara exercised sovereignty over a large area, he did not assume the titles of an independent monarch. He is described in his inscriptions as "Mahāmandaleśvara" or 'Hariyappa Vodeya' which indicates a lesser dignity than that of a full-fledged ruler.¹⁸ This modesty was probably due to a remarkable foresight. He wanted to play a waiting game. The interests of his growing empire demanded that he should do nothing to offend his powerful neighbours. Towards the north were the possessions of the Dihli Sultan, whom he could ill afford to displease or perhaps with whom he wished to keep friendly relations at least in appearance, and towards the south were the famous Hoysala ruler Vīr Ballāla III who still exercised paramount authority over the Southern Districts, and the Sultan of Madura who held extensive possessions in the South-east, and who was always ready to fight against his Hindu neighbours. Prudence dictated caution; and Hari Hara clearly saw the danger to which his kingdom was exposed and avoided coming into collision with these formidable neighbours. He was more afraid of his southern neighbours than of the Sultan of Dihli, as is shown by the share which he took in the grand confederacy that was organised by Kriṣṇa Nāyak of Telingana, a few years later, to expel the Muhammadans from the Deccan. But Vijayanagar had a great future before it. A power of substance was needed in the South to rally the forces of Hinduism against Islam, and it was this glorious rôle of the champion of Hindu interests which devolved upon the rulers of Vijayanagar after the disappearance of the Hoysalas from the political field.

c11.35

¹⁸ Bādāmi Inscription of Śaka-Samvat 1261 in the Indian Antiquary, X, p. 63. Epig. Carn., VII, Tl. 154. Sewell, Lists of Antiquities of Madras, II, p. 244. It was Bukkā who first assumed royal titles. Indian Antiquary, X, p. 63. J. B. B. R. A. S., XII, pp. 340-41.

c11.36

The Sultans of Madura, as has been observed, gradually increased their power which now grew to formidable dimensions and challenged the Hindu princes of the South. Jalal-al-Din Ahsan Shah ruled for five years and was all his life engaged in fighting against the Hindus. The only powerful Hindu Prince against whom he had to contend was Vir Ballāla, who is described in an inscription of 1338 A.D. as "terrifier of Chola, Mālava, Gaula and Gujjara, splitter of the skull of the Magadha king, sun of the south, emperor of the south, a royal tiger to kings" and in another inscription of 1341 A.D. as "mahārājādhirāj of the whole circle of the earth, Rājparmeśvara, sun in the sky of the Yadava Kula, king over the hill chiefs."¹⁹ He fortified his possessions and guarded his frontiers effectively to prevent the Muhammadans of the north from sending succour to their co-religionists in the South. Ibn Batūtah describes Belāl Deo (Ballāla III), the Hindu Prince, as a grand monarch who ceaselessly waged wars against the rulers of Ma‘bar, and whose object was to bring the whole province within the orbit of his dominions. Ballāla appears as the leading figure in the revolutionary movement which was started in the Deccan to expel the Muhammadans, and though he had passed through great trials and tribulations in an unusually long term of life, he had lost none of the fire and energy of youth. The ultimate object of his campaigns was to drive the Muhammadans out of Madura. Ahsan Shah died after a brief rule of five years and was succeeded by one of his amirs, ‘Ala-al-Din Udaiji, who led an expedition against a Hindu Prince, and having seized immense booty returned to his country.²⁰ Next year, again, he led an expedition against the Hindus and defeated them, but he was himself killed by an arrow in battle during this campaign. After him his son-in-law, Qutb-al-Din was elevated to the throne, but he turned out a bad and vicious man, and was murdered forty days after his accession. He was followed by Ghiyas-al-Din who had also married a daughter of Ibn Batūṭah’s father-in-law, Jalal-al-Din Ahsan Shah. Ghiyas-al-Din Damghāni, who is described on his coins as Ghiyas-al-Din Damghān Shah was formerly employed as a trooper in the service of Malik Majīr bin Abu Rajā who was one of the servants of Muhammad Tughluq. He afterwards took service under Amir Hāji and declared himself king under the title of Sultan Ghiyas-al-Din Damghān Shah.²¹ Ibn Batūṭah found him reigning in Ma‘bar when he reached there in 745 A.H. (1344 A.D.).²² Ghiyas-al-Din set up a splendid court and

c11.37

¹⁹ Epig. Carn., IX Cd. 6. Ibid., III, Md. 85.

c11.38

²⁰ Ibn Batūtah says Ahsan Shah ruled for five years and he is corroborated by the evidence of coins. Ibn Batūtah, IV, p. 189. J. R. A. S., 1909, pp. 672, 675.

c11.39

²¹ Ibn Batūṭah, IV, pp. 188-89. J. R. A. S., 1909, p. 677.

c11.40

²² Ibn Batūṭah started on his Chinese mission from Dihli on 17th Safar, 743 A.H. (July 22, 1342 A.D.). Having passed many cities of which he gives a detailed account, he reached the Maldive Islands where he stayed for about two years. He left the islands on 15th Rabi-‘al-Sani, 745 A.H. (Aug. 26, 1344 A.D.), IV, p. 164. He embarked for Ceylon and visited several places and finally reached Ma‘bar sometime in the year 745 A.H. He is remarkably corroborated by numismatic evidence. Starting from Dihli, Ibn Batūṭah traversed the following places:—

c11.41

In Dr. Hultzsch’s collection there is a coin of Udaiji Shāh which bears the date A.H. 740. No. 10, p. 675. ‘Ala-al-Din Udaiji ruled only for a year, for we have a coin of his successor Qutb-al-Din Firuz Shah which is dated A. H. 740, No. 12, p. 676.

c11.42

He must have come to the throne late in the year 740 A.H., for he was murdered after 40 days, and the coin of his successor Ghiyas-al-Din Damghāni bears on it the date 741.

c11.43

No. 13, p. 677. See Figure 10.

c11.44

The Arabic text of Ibn Batūṭah has ‘Ala-al-Din Udaiji (IV, p. 189).

c11.45

Mrs. L. Fletcher writes Udeidjy as in the French translation of Ibn Batūṭah’s text. A portion of her translation which appeared in the Madras Journal of Literature and Science for 1888-89 is reproduced by Aiyenger in his ‘South India and her Muhammadan invaders.’” pp. 231—44.

c11.46

(1) Tilpat.
(2) Biyanah.
(3) Kol.
(4) Brij purah.
(5) The Kali river and Kanauj.
(6) Hanol-Wazirpur-Bajalasā Moori.
(10) Alapur.
(11) Gwalior.
(12) Barun.
(13) Amwāri.
(14) Kachrad.
(15) Chanderi.
(16) Dhar.
(17) Ujjain.
(18) Daulatabad.
(19) Nadarbar.
(20) Sagar.
(21) Khambayat.
(22) Gawi or Qandhar.

c11.47

wished to play the rôle of a conqueror anxious to extend his influence to distant countries. So punctilious was he in maintaining the etiquette of the court that he allowed no one to appear in his presence without socks. Ibn Batūṭah, who was sockless, relates that although several Muhammadans were present, he had to procure socks from a Hindu, whose generosity agreeably surprised him. The Moorish traveller urged the Sultan to send an expedition to the Maldive Islands. An order was issued that ships should be equipped and presents for the queen of the Maldives and robes of honour for her nobles and ministers should be prepared. He ordered three vessels to be filled with alms which were to be distributed among the poor and the indigent. But the project was abandoned, for the chief admiral Khwajah Sarlak expressed the opinion that it was not possible to sail for the Maldives until the expiry of three months. Ghiyas-al-Din was a ruffian utterly devoid of human feelings. The Moor who was related to him and whom he received with great courtesy relates the horrible cruelties which were practised under his orders, and observes that "such atrocities and disgusting brutalities I have never witnessed practised by any king and it was because of his cruelties that he met his early doom." Neither age nor sex was spared, and the massacre in cold blood of women and children excited so much disgust that more than once Ibn Batūṭah had to withdraw, for he could not bear to see such terrible sights. The hands and feet of these hapless victims were chopped off, and their heads were fastened on to the posts to satisfy this Muslim Caligula of the South.

c11.48

But Ghiyas-al-Din had a powerful enemy to cope with. He was Vīr Ballāḷa III, whom Ibn Batūṭah calls Belāḷ Deo. According to the Moor Vīr Ballāḷa had a force which numbered one hundred thousand and which included 20,000 Muhammadans most of whom

c11.49

It was at Gawi or Qandhar that he embarked in a ship on the Malabar coast and passing through Bairam or Ghogo, Sindapur, and Hanaur he reached the Maldive Islands.

c11.50

The route taken by Ibn Batūṭah is rather curious. From Tilpat he goes to Biyanah and then again comes back to Kol and passing through Kanauj goes to Gwalior.

c11.51

For the places visited by Ibn Batūṭah please see Yule's Cathay and the Way Thither, IV, Series II, pp. 22—23, and Note B., pp. 63—66.

c11.52

were thieves, dacoits, and runaway slaves.²³ Ballāla III had set his heart on the extirpation of the Madura Sultans and for the last fifteen years he had ceaselessly waged war against the Muham-madans to establish his dominion over the entire Coromandel coast. In 1342 A.D. he made a gallant attempt to invade Ma‘bar. The Sultan had at that time a force of only 6,000 men, half of whom were practically useless and ill-equipped for active service. No time was lost and the parties engaged each other in battle outside the city of Kubbān belonging to the Sultan of Madura, in which the Ma‘bar forces were routed and compelled to retreat towards the capital. From Ibn Batūṭah’s narrative it appears that the city of Kubbān was either in the north or north-west of Madura and was

c11.53

²³ Ibn Batūṭah, IV, pp. 195-96.

c11.54

Vir Ballāla came to the throne on the 1st February, 1292 A.D., and was killed fighting against the Turukas on the 8th September, 1342 A.D. This is established by the evidence of inscriptions.

c11.55

Epig. Carn., VI, Cm. 36; Kd. 75.

c11.56

Ibid., III, Md. 85.

c11.57

This inscription shows that Ballāla was alive in 1341 A.D. a year before he had publicly declared his son as his heir.

c11.58

Epig. Carn., IX. Bn. 111.

c11.59

Ballāla III’s son Virūpākṣa Ballāla IV was anointed to the crown on the 11th August, 1343 A.D. There is a grant (Sri Vajreśvara deva) signed by him.

c11.60

Epig. Carn., VI, Cm. 105.

c11.61

That Ballāla was alive in 1342 A.D. is proved by a record from Mālūr which mentions his full titles and ascribes to him the building of the Setū Mūla Jayastambha (pillar of victory in honour of beginning the bridge at Rāmeśvaram).

c11.62

Epig. Carn., X, Mr. 82.

c11.63

Soon after this he fought against the Turukas or Muhammadans.

c11.64

Ibn Batūṭah’s statement that Ballāla was a powerful prince is corroborated by the evidence of inscriptions. He is described (Epig. Carn., VII, Sh. 69) as a terror-giving fever to Chola, Malava, Gaula, and Gurjjara, a Visnuvardhanā and emperor of the south.

c11.65

Again in Gu. 58 and 69 (Vol. IV, Epig. Carn.) he is described as the Pallava Sun and the Pallava Trinetra.

c11.66

He is styled sun of the South, emperor of the south and worshipper of the lotus feet of Viśveśvara. An inscription in Yelandur Jagir (Epig. Carn. IV, N, 39) recording a grant to six persons for building Upendapattana, a new Ballāla is described as Pratap Chakravarti, strong-armed Hoysala, ruling the kingdom of the world. Several inscriptions mention his fights with the Turks.

c11.67

Epig. Carn. V, Hn. 51, 52.

c11.68

Ibid., Ak, 31.

c11.69

one of the most strongly fortified cities of the Sultan.²⁴ The nobles told the Sultan that if the Raja captured the city of Kubbān, he would advance upon Madura and capture it. Professor Krishna-swami Aiyenger identifies Kubbān with Kannanur, a place of vital strategic importance to which a reference is made in an inscription of Jātāvarman Sundara Pandya I.²⁵ Ballāla followed up his victory and laid siege to the town of Kubbān which Ibn Batūtah describes as a “large and well-fortified city.” The siege went on for ten months and the Sultan was filled with dismay, for the fall of Kubbān would have rendered his position untenable in Madura. The garrison in the fort had provisions which could only last for fourteen days, and the Raja sent word to them that he would spare their lives, if they evacuated the fortress. They replied that they would consult the Sultan and Ballāla granted them fourteen days for this purpose. He also sent a letter to Ghiyas-al-Din which was read by the latter to the assembled populace on Friday. With tears in their eyes, his nobles and officers told him that they would sacrifice their lives in the cause of God. They unanimously suggested a daring course in self-defence and resolved not to flee from the field of battle. They tied their headgears round the necks of their horses which was a sign with them of unflinching determination. The need of self-preservation sometimes calls forth the best qualities of men's character, and these 300 chosen warriors of Madura like the brave men in the charge at Balaclava proceeded to the field of battle to deliver a surprise attack. The army was divided into three sections after the traditional manner of the east. The right was placed under the command of Saif-al-Din, a brave, pious and learned man; the left under Malik Muhammad Silahdār (armour-bearer of the Sultan), while the centre was under the command of the Sultan himself.

c11.70

²⁴ Amir Khusrau in his *Khazāyan-al-Fatūh* (MS. f. 74a) makes mention of the city of Kabam or Kubam (كهم) in describing Kafur's expedition to Ma'bar. Probably this Kabam is identical with Ibn Batūtah's Kubban.

c11.71

²⁵ Professor Aiyenger says, the nearest South Indian Equivalent of Kubban could be only Koppam referred to in the preamble to the inscription of Jatavarman Sundara Pandya as Kannanur-koppam. Kannanur is about eight or nine miles from Trichinopoly. The learned Professor thinks that Kannanur passed into the hands of the Muhammadans either during the invasion of Malik Kafur himself, or in the interval between that and this last battle. The change of capital to Tiruvannamalai was intended by the Hoysalas to serve as a counter-work to Kannanur which had passed into Muslim hands. South India and her Muhammadan Invaders, pp. 173–75.

c11.72

The rear guard was formed of 3,000 men who were stationed behind the main wings of the royal army under the command of Asad-al-Din Kai Khusrau of Persia.²⁶ At Siesta hour they started towards the Hindu camp. The enemy was unprepared for attack; his horses had gone out to graze in the fields. Asad-al-Din delivered a surprise attack. Vir Ballāla, mistaking the enemy for thieves, came out to fight with them, but the lack of preparation proved fatal. The stratagem of the Musalmans succeeded well enough, and the cause which the octogenarian warrior had at heart was lost. He attempted flight, but was captured by Nāsir-al-Din, a nephew of Ghiyas, who was about to slay him. His life was spared when it was discovered that he was the Raja himself.²⁷ The captive warrior was taken to the heartless Ghiyas who shrank from no crime, however atrocious, to satiate his wrath, and though apparently the Sultan treated him with courtesy and accepted riches, horses, and elephants from him, he was afterwards killed and his skin was stuffed with bran and hung from the ramparts of Madura, where it was seen by Ibn Batūtah in that condition.²⁸ All his baggage was seized by the enemy until nothing was left. Thus perished the greatest of the Hoysalas, a warrior of undying fame, who notwithstanding the infirmities of age, fearlessly strove to check the power of the Musalmans. The circumstances in which he met his death have invested his career with a halo of martyrdom, and there is no

c11.73

²⁶ Ibn Batūtah, IV, p. 197.

c11.74

²⁷ Ibn Batūtah, IV, p. 198.

c11.75

²⁸ Ibn Batūtah, IV, p. 198.

c11.76

That his death occurred in 1342 is established by the evidence of inscriptions. The exact date as stated in a previous note, is September 8, 1342 A.D. Ghiyas-al-Din had promised that he would spare his life but the promise was not fulfilled. Ibn Batūtah, IV, p 198. The fact of Ballāla's having met his death at the hands of the Madura Sultan is borne out by the following passage in the "Kamparaya Charitam" of Ganga Devi in which the Madura Sultan is described as an axe to the creeper of the prosperity of the Ballālas.

c11.77

पराक्रमान्नयकृत चोलपाण्ड्य' बल्लाल सम्पल्लतिका कुठारम् । रक्षोमुखं कम्पन्नृपोऽभ्यनन्दीत् वीरसुरत्राणमुदग्रशौर्यः ॥

c11.78

"King Kampa of rising valour welcomed the warlike Sultan who had by his bravery humbled the Cholas and the Pandyas and who was an axe to the creeper of the prosperity of the Ballālas."

c11.79

See extracts from the Kamparaya Charitam of Ganga devi in Ayyanger's Sources of Vijayanagar History, p. 28. Lewis Rice, Mysore and Coorg from the Inscriptions, p. 108. Kd. relates that Ballāla died fighting against the Turukas in a battle at Beribi on the 8th of September, 1342.

c11.80

doubt that afterwards kindred spirits derived hope and inspiration from his noble example. The Hindu cause suffered a heavy setback, but the war of independence was not abandoned. It was taken up by other men under whose leadership it achieved an appreciable measure of success. The career of this redoubtable Hoysala, extending over half a century, spent in unwearied struggle with the Muslims, is unique in the annals of the fourteenth century, and no student of history can fail to be struck by his magnificent display of valour and devotion. Ghiyas-al-Din died of plague in 745 A.H. and was succeeded by his nephew Nāsir-al-Din whom he had declared his heir during his life time. Ibn Batūtah writes that he was employed at Dihli in the service of Sultan Muhammad Tughluq, but when his uncle became king of Ma‘bar, he escaped from the imperial capital in the disguise of a mendicant.²⁹

c11.81

²⁹ Ibn Batūtah, IV, pp. 202-203.

c11.82

The defeat of Vīr Ballāla III at the hands of the Sultan of Madura failed to damp the ardour of the Hindu princes who had vowed vengeance upon the Muslims. The difficulties into which Muhammad Tughluq's government was plunged encouraged them in their efforts to shake off the foreign yoke. The issue was not merely political, but also religious. The bigotry of the Muhammadans had fanned the flame of popular discontent and kindled the bitterest animosities. There were three influential princes in the Deccan who could combine to accomplish the overthrow of the Muslims. They were Hari Hara of Vijayanagar, Kriṣna Nāyak of Telingana, and Virupāksa Ballāla, the son and successor of the illustrious Ballāla III. The kingdom of Vijayanagar founded in 1336 A.D. had now made considerable acquisitions of territory and risen to the position of a substantial power in South India. Hari Hara and his brothers had launched upon a career of glorious conquests and quietly grabbed the territories belonging to the Hoysalas and the Muhammadans. Hari Hara professed to own allegiance to Dihli, but the mask was worn thread-bare and he sympathised with and promised active support to the confederacy, the object of which was the expulsion of the Muhammadans from the Deccan, and ultimately he cooperated with the other Hindu chieftains to accomplish it. The leader and organiser of this confederacy was Kriṣna Nāyak, son of the famous Pratap Rudra Deva Kākatīya II, whose house had suffered great wrongs at the hands of the Muslims. Ever since the fall of Warangal in 1327-28 A.D. effected by Muhammad Tughluq's generals he had remained in a state of sullen hostility, maturing his plans for the speedy overthrow of his acknowledged foes. Virupākṣa Ballāla, better known as Ballāla IV, could never forgive the Muslims. The memory of his father's cruel death was still green, and the numerous insults and indignities, which the Muslims had heaped upon the Hindus of the South, constituted a festering sore which refused to heal. The increasing disorders of the Dihli empire provided its enemies scope for their ambitions, and encouraged by the political situation of the time, they renewed with greater determination and zeal the struggle for emancipation. Kṛṣṇa Nāyak became the soul of the triple alliance and received full co-operation from his confederates. Barani writes of the revolt in these words: "A revolt of the Hindus broke out in Arangal. Kanyā Nāyak had developed strength in the country. Malik Maqbūl, the nāib wazir, fled to Dihli and reached there in safety. The Hindus captured Arangal which was entirely lost. At this time one of the relations of Kanyā Nāyak, whom the Sultan had sent to govern Kampila,³⁰ apostatised from Islam and broke out into rebellion. The land of Kampila was lost and fell into the hands of the Hindus and Deogir and Gujarat alone remained in possession of the Sultan."³¹ Barani's statement regarding Kanyā Nāyak's relationship is supported by the Portuguese Chronicler Nuniz who writes that when Muhammad Tughluq found it impossible to hold the country round Kampila and Anāgondi by means of a governor, he appointed Deo Rao (Hari Hara Deo Raya) to hold charge of it.³² But there is nothing to show that Hari Hara embraced Islam in reality. Probably it was a political move to hoodwink the Sultan whose power no Hindu Prince could challenge in the South at the

c11.83

³⁰ It is Kampila in the Calcutta Text of Barani, p. 484. Kambila in Ibn Batūṭah (III, p. 318) and Kambala in Elliot (III, p. 247).

c11.84

³¹ Barani, p. 484. Sewell, Lists of Antiquities of Madras, II, p. 174. Nizam-al-Din Ahmad faithfully copies Barani. The Calcutta Text of the Tabqat has Kanya Payak which is obviously a mistake. Calcutta Text, pp. 207-08.

c11.85

³² Chronicle of Nuniz in Sewell's Forgotten Empire, pp. 296-98.

c11.86

We have no inscriptional evidence of Hari Hara's apostasy. It is probable that Hari Hara might have offered a nominal allegiance to Islam when he was at Dihli to gain the favour of Muhammad Tughluq. Such a thing was not unusual in the history of Muhammadan India.

c11.87

timé. Kṛṣṇa Nāyak's revolt occurred sometime in 1343-44 A.D. a year or so after the death of the mighty Vīr Ballāla.³³ The confederacy is also proved by the evidence of inscriptions. In one of the earliest Reddi inscriptions dated Saka-Saṃvat 1267 (1345 A.D.) Vema is said to have built a flight of steps at Śrīśailam and he is described as the " very Agastya to the ocean of the Mlecchas." He is also said to have restored all the agrahars of Brahmans which had been taken away by the wicked Muhammadan kings from king Vira Rudra of the Kākatīya dynasty.³⁴ The author of the Arabic History of Gujarat does not give the date and only says, " Kitā Nayak (Krisna Nayak) rebelled and attacked Malik Qabūl in Arangal. The viceroy fled, and Telingana slipped away from the control of Dihli."³⁵ Firishta³⁶ who is more detailed on this topic than other Muslim chroniclers writes thus of the revolt: " About this time (744 A.H. = 1343-44 A.D.) Krisna Nayak, son of Ladder Deo, who lived in the vicinity of Warangal went to Belāl Deo, the powerful king of Carnatic, and told him that the Muhammadans had entered Telingana and Carnatic and had made up their minds to exterminate the Hindus. He suggested that something should be done to avert the crisis. Belāl Deo called a meeting of his ministers and after a good deal of deliberation decided that leaving his provinces in the rear, he should advance to the route of the army of Islam, and deliver Ma‘bar, Dhorsamundar and Kambila from Muslim control and place them in the charge of Krisna Nayak.”³⁷

c11.88

³³ The last record of Ballāla IV is dated 1346 A.D. after which date nothing is known of the Ballālas. From this it appears that the confederacy of which Ballāla IV was an important member must have been organised before 1346 A.D. But the Reddi inscription which is dated 1345 A.D. shows that by that date the Kākatīyas had recovered their lost power. We may reasonably conclude that the rebellion of Kṛṣṇa Nāyak must have taken place in 1343-44 A.D. Also Sewell, Lists of Antiquities, II, p. 161.

c11.89

³⁴ For the Reddi inscriptions please see R. B. Venkayya's report of Epigraphy for 1899-1900, p. 23. Epig. Ind., Vol. VIII, p. 9.

c11.90

³⁵ The order of events in the Arabic History is not always correct, and for this we cannot blame its author because Muhammadan writers paid no attention to chronology. In this work Krisna's rebellion is placed just after the revolt of Baha-al-Din at Sāgar which is not correct. Arabic History of Gujarat I, p. 158. The Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi makes no mention of this rebellion.

c11.91

³⁶ Firishta puts the event just after the arrival of the Khalifah's envoy confirming Muhammad Tughluq's title to rule over his people.

c11.92

³⁷ This is a translation of the passage in the Lucknow Text of Firishta. Briggs’ version is somewhat different. Probably the passage in the text which he utilised was differently worded. He says: ‘ Belāl Dew, convened a meeting of his kinsmen and resolved, first to secure the forts of his own country, and then to remove his seat of government among the mountains. Krishna Naig promised, on his part also, that when their plans were ripe for execution to raise all the Hindoos of Warungole and Telingana, and put himself, at their head.” The rest of the passage agrees with the Lucknow Text of Firishta. Briggs, I, p. 427. Firishta’s Belāl Deo is of course Virūpākṣa Ballāla, son and successor of Vir Ballāla who was anointed to the Crown in 1343 A.D. This has been discussed before.

c11.93

“ In accordance with this plan Belāl Deo founded in the mountainous region near the frontier of his kingdom in a well-fortified place a city which he named after his son Sajan Raya. It was called Bijan Nagar, but by frequent use became Bijā Nagar. Numerous horse and foot were sent under Krisna Nayak and Warangal was captured. The governor ‘Imad-al-Mulk fled to Daulatabad. Belāl Deo and Krisna Nayak both combined their forces and delivered Ma‘bar and Dhorsamundar, which had been for years in the past tributaries of the ruler of Carnatic, from Muslim Control.

c11.94

On all sides the flames of war and rebellion were kindled and of the distant provinces nothing remained in the possession of the Sultan except Gujarat and Deogir.” Firishta³⁸ has fallen into error regarding the foundation of Vijayanagar, but he is right in saying that Belāl Deo (Ballāla IV) joined the confederacy organised by Kriṣṇa Nāyak. No detailed account of the Hindu rebellion is furnished by any Muhammadan writer, but it is certain that the Muhammadans made but feeble resistance to counteract the plans of their enemies, and Muhammad Tughluq’s government found no time to deal with the situation. It was impossible for Hari Hara to keep out of this powerful league. He shared in full the hatred which his co-religionists felt towards the Muslims and knew full well that he would not be able to extend his power without coming into collision with the Muhammadans. He was induced by considerations of duty as well as self-interest to join the confederacy—a fact which is corroborated by an inscription of Samgamā II which records that Hari Hara I had inflicted a defeat upon the Sultan.³⁹ Another evidence of a general character is to be found in a copper plate grant dated Śāka 1268 (1346 A.D.) which records that Hari Hara, having conquered the earth from the eastern to the western ocean, decided to commemorate his victory and along with his four brothers, son-in-law and other relatives made a gift of nine villages to Bhārati Tīratha Śrīpad and his disciples, as well as to forty Brahmans living at Śringeri⁴⁰ for the performance of religious rites and ceremonies. Thus the revolutionary movement organised by Ballāla and Kriṣna Nāyak finally culminated in the disappearance of the Muslim power in Warangal, Dwarsamudra, and on the Coromandel coast. But the Sultanate of Madura still continued, and Ballāla IV, like his great father, fought against it until he lost his life in the attempt in 1346 A.D.⁴¹ The somewhat unexpected death of the last great representative of the Hoysala dynasty left the field clear for the ambitious sons of Samgamā who were well-versed in the art of war and diplomacy. They at once stepped into the breach created by the disappearance of their formidable rival and took vigorous steps to bring his dominions under their control so as to make the kingdom of Vijayanagar a mighty bulwark against the Muhammadans of the north.⁴² After the fall of the Hoysalas their power rapidly develop-

c11.95

³⁸ Firishta’s account of Kriṣṇa Nāyak’s rebellion is correct. The date which he gives is borne out by the evidence of inscriptions. But his account of the foundation of Vijayanagar is entirely wrong both in date and details. If Firishta’s statement is accepted, the foundation of the city will have to be dated about eight years later than the actual occurrence of that event. Hari Hara’s power had considerably increased by this time and according to Sewell in 1340 A.D. he possessed large territories. He held sway over villages as far as the Kaladgi district north of the Malprabha which country had been overrun by the Muhammadans. A Forgotten Empire, pp. 25-26.

c11.96

³⁹ The Bitragunta grant of Samgama II, dated Śāka-Samvat 1278 (1356) makes a reference to Hari Hara's victories over the Muhammadan Sultan, in verse 5.

c11.97

⁴⁰ Epig. Carn., VI, Sg. 1. Śringeri is the seat of the *advait* school of philosophy founded by the great reformer Śankarāchārya.

c11.98

⁴¹ We have an unbroken series of coins of the Madura Sultans from 1335 to 1345 A.D. After this there is a break and we have no coin until the year 757 A.H. (1357 A.D.) when according to the evidence of coins one 'Adil Shah sat upon the throne of Madura. Dr. Hultzsch's article in J. R. A. S., 1909, pp. 678-79.

c11.99

⁴² A record of 1352 mentions Vīr Bukkā Rayalu ruling at Dhorasamudra and Penugondā. Epig. Rep. for 1918, Sec. 47.

First 101 of 333 passages. Read on

Linked texts (20)