A Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar): A Contribution to the History of India c22: Appendices

A Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar): A Contribution to the History of India c22

Language: English

c22.s1 Appendix A. Diamonds — 16 parts
c22.s2 Appendix B. The Wealth of the Dakhan in the Fourteenth Century A.D. — 7 parts
c22.s3 Genealogy of the Bahmanī Dynasty — 4 parts
c22.s4 List of the Bahmanî Sultans of the Dakhan at Kulbarga — 2 parts
c22.s5 Genealogy of the Nizâm Shâhs of Ahmadnagar — 1 part
c22.s6 Genealogy of the Qutb Shâhs of Golkonda — 2 parts
c22.s7 Portuguese Viceroys and Governors of Goa — 7 parts

Appendices

c22.1

the Lacedaemonians, who had been waiting for the signal, now attacked the city. The Plataeans, seeing the enemy already inside and their own men falling, and knowing nothing of the plot, were seized with panic and, thinking that the Thebans were far more numerous than they really were, surrendered at discretion. But when they discovered that the Thebans were few, they took heart and, resolving to attack them, closed the gates and fell upon them.

c22.2

The Thebans, finding themselves in a trap, began to defend themselves. Twice or thrice they repelled the attacks of the Plataeans, but when the women and slaves began to shout and throw tiles and stones from the houses, and a heavy rain began to fall, the Thebans, confused and blinded, broke and fled through the city. Most of them, not knowing the way in the darkness and rain, fell into the drains or were killed by the Plataeans, who knew the streets. The gate through which they had entered had been shut by a Plataean who had found a javelin-head and used it as a bolt, so that there was no way out. Pursued through the city, some climbed the wall and jumped down, most of them perishing; others reached the gate and, finding it shut, were cut down by the women and slaves. A small party, seeing a large building with an open door, rushed in, thinking it was a gate, and were captured.

c22.3

Meanwhile, the main body of the Thebans, who were to have arrived at daybreak to support the first party, had been delayed by the rain and the swollen river Asopus. When they heard of the disaster, they hurried to the city, intending to seize any Plataeans who might be outside the walls. The Plataeans, suspecting their intention, sent a herald to them, warning them not to harm the prisoners they had taken, and threatening to kill them if they did not withdraw from their territory. The Thebans, upon this, retired.

c22.4

The Plataeans, having thus cleared the city, collected their dead and the prisoners. The prisoners, numbering about one hundred and eighty, were executed the next day, despite a message from the Thebans claiming that they had surrendered on terms. The Plataeans denied this, asserting that they had promised to spare them only if they did not commit further acts of violence.

c22.5

Thus ended the attempt of the Thebans upon Plataea, an event which was the immediate cause of the war between Athens and the Peloponnesians. The Plataeans, having secured their city, sent a messenger to Athens with the news, and the Athenians, fearing for the safety of the Plataeans, sent a garrison to their aid and removed the women and children to Athens.

Appendix A. Diamonds

c22.s1.2

HOWEVER much it may at first sight appear that our chroniclers have exaggerated in their description of the wealth of the Hindu sovereign and, his nobles, and of the wonderful display of jewels made on days of high festival by the ladies of their households, an account of which is given us by Paes, I for one see little reason for doubt. Nuniz distinctly states (p. 389) that the diamond mines, in their day the richest in the world, were farmed out on condition that all stones above twenty mangellins in weight—about twenty-five carats—were sent to the Râya for his personal use, and there must have been many of these. Barradas (p. 226 above) states that, according to rumour, even after the downfall of the empire the king at Chandragiri in 1614 A.D. had no less than three large chests full of diamonds in his possession; and every traveller and chronicler has something to say on the subject.

c22.s1.3

The principal mines were on the north bank of the Krishnâ river, and in the Kurnool and Anantapur countries, notably at Vajra Karûr. Generically these are known as "the mines of Golkonda," and the phrase has passed into a proverb.

c22.s1.4

Linschoten (ii. 136) writes: "They (diamonds) grow in the countrie of Decam behinde Ballagate, by the towne of Bisnagar, wherein are two or three hilles, from whence they are digged, whereof the King of Bisnagar doth reape great profitte; for he causeth them to be straightly watched, and hath farmed them out with this condition, that all diamonds that are above twenty-five Mangellyns in waight are for the King himselfe (every Mangellyn is foure graines in waight).

c22.s1.5

"There is yet another hill in the Countrie of Decam, which is called Velha, that is the old Rocke, from whence come the best diamonds and are sold for the greatest price. . . Sometimes they find Diamonds of one hundred and two hundred Mangellyns and more, but very few."

c22.s1.6

As regards the diamond "as large as a hen's egg," said to have been found at the sack of Vijayanagar and presented to the Âdil Shâh (above, p. 208), Couto (Decada VIII. c. xv.) says that it was a jewel which the Râya had affixed to the base of the plume on his horse's head-dress. Garcia da Orta, who was in India in 1534, says that at Vijayanagar a diamond had been seen as large as a small hen's egg, and he even declares the weights of three others to have been respectively 120, 148, and 250 *mangelis*, equivalent to 150, 175, and 312½ carats (Tavernier, V. Ball, ii. 433).

c22.s1.7

Dr. Ball has gone carefully into the question of the diamonds known as "Bâbar's," "the Mogul's," "Pitt's," "the *Koh-i-nûr*," and others, and to his Appendix I. I beg to refer those interested in the subject.

c22.s1.8

It is clear that this hen's egg diamond could not be the same as Sultan Bâbar's, because the former was taken at Vijayanagar in A.D. 1565, whereas Sultan Bâbar's was received by his son Humâyun at Agra in 1526, and could not have been, forty years later, in the possession of the Hindu king of the south.¹

c22.s1.9

¹ Its history is known from A.D. 1304, when it was acquired by Alâ-ud-Din Khilji from the Rajah of Malwa.

c22.s1.10

Dr. Ball has shown that probably the *Koh-i-nûr* is identical with the "Mogul's diamond." Was, then, this "hen's egg" diamond the same? Probably not. If we had been told that the "hen's egg," when found in the sack of Vijayanagar, had been cut, the proof *contra* would be conclusive, since the *Koh-i-nûr* was certainly uncut in A.D. 1656 or 1657. But there is no information available on this point.

c22.s1.11

The "hen's egg" was apparently taken by the Âdil Shâh to Bîjapûr in 1565, and it is not likely to have found its way, still in an uncut state, to the possession of Mîr Jumla in 1656.

c22.s1.12

The *Koh-i-nûr* was found at Kollûr on the river Krishnâ, probably in A.D. 1656. Mîr Jumla farmed the mines at that time, and presented it uncut to the emperor, Shâh Jahân. It is said to have weighed 756 English carats (Ball, ii. 444). It was entrusted to a Venetian named Hortensio Borgio, and was so damaged and wasted in his hands that, when seen by Tavernier in Aurangzîb's treasury in 1665, it weighed not more than 268½ English carats. In 1739 Nadir Shâh sacked Delhi and carried the stone away with him to Persia, conferring on it its present immortal name the "Mountain of Light." On his murder in 1747 it passed into the hands of his grandson, Shâh Rukh. Four years later Shâh Rukh gave it to Ahmad Shâh Durâni of Kâbul, and by him it

c22.s1.13

APPENDIX A

c22.s1.14

was bequeathed to his son Taimûr. In 1793 it passed by descent to his son Shâh Zamân, who was blinded and deposed by his brother Muhammad; but he retained possession of the stone in his prison, and in 1795 it became the property of his brother Sultan Shuja. In 1809, after Shuja became king of Kabul, Elphinstone saw the diamond in his bracelet at Peshawur. In 1812, Shuja, being dethroned by Muhammad, fled to Lahore, where he was detained as a quasi-prisoner by Ranjît Singh, the ruler of the Panjâb. In 1813 an agreement was arrived at, and Shuja surrendered the diamond to Ranjît Singh. Ranjît often wore the stone, and it was constantly seen by European visitors to Lahore. Dying in 1839, the *Koh-i-nûr* was placed in the jewel-chamber till the infant Dhulîp Singh was acknowledged as Ranjît’s successor. In 1849 it was handed over to Sir John Lawrence on the annexation of the Panjâb, and by him was sent to England to Her Majesty the Queen. In 1851 it was exhibited at the first great Exhibition, and in 1852 it was re-cut by an Amsterdam cutter, Voorsanger, in the employ of Messrs. Garrards. The weight is now 106 1/16 carats.

c22.s1.15

It would be interesting to trace the story of the “hen’s egg” diamond after its acquisition by the Bîjapûr sultan, Ali Âdil.

c22.s1.16

H. de Montfart, who travelled in India in 1608, saw a very large diamond in the possession of the Mogul emperor Jahângîr at Delhi,¹ but this had been pierced. “I have seene one with the great *Mogor* as bigge as a Hen’s egge, and of that very forme, which he caused expressly to bee pierced like a pearle to weare it on his arme. . . . It weighteth 198 Mangelins.”

c22.s1.17

¹ De Montfart’s “Survey of all the East Indies.” Translation, edition of 1615, p. 34.

Appendix B. The Wealth of the Dakhan in the Fourteenth Century A.D.

c22.s2.2

WHEN Malik Kâfur, in the year 1310 A.D., during the reign of Alâ-ud-Dîn Khilji of Delhi, carried out his successful raids into the Dakhan and to the Malabar coast, sacking all the Hindu temples, ravaging the territory of Maisûr, and despoiling the country, he is said to have returned to Delhi with an amount of treasure that seems almost fabulous. Firishtah writes: "They found in the temples prodigious spoils, such as idols of gold adorned with precious stones, and other rich effects consecrated to Hindu worship;" and Malik presented his sovereign with "312 elephants, 20,000 horses, 96,000 *mâns* of gold, several boxes of jewels and pearls, and other precious effects."

c22.s2.3

When we come to estimate the amount of gold we are met with a difficulty, as there are many varieties of *mâns* in India, the variation being as much as from 19 lbs. in Travancore to 163½ lbs. in Ahmadnagar. The Madras *mân* weighs 25 lbs., the Bombay *mân* 28 lbs. Hawkins, writing in 1610, gives 55 lbs. to the *mân*,¹ Middleton, in 1611, 33 lbs.² Now Firishtah had more to do with Ahmadnagar than any other part of India, and if his estimate was based on the *mân* of that tract, Malik Kâfur's 96,000 *mâns* of gold would have amounted to the enormous sum of 15,672,000 lbs. weight. It is hardly likely that Firishtah would have had in his mind the Travancore *mân*. Even if he was thinking of the Madras *mân*, which is not likely, his estimate of the weight of the gold carried off amounted to 2,400,000 lbs.

c22.s2.4

¹ Purchas, i. 218.

c22.s2.5

² See Yule and Burnell's Dictionary, *s.v.* "Maund."

c22.s2.6

Whether we accept these amounts or not, there can be no manner of doubt that the richness of the temples was very great, and the reason is easy to see. The country had always been subject to Hindu kings, and treasures had year by year accumulated. The Brahmans exacted gifts and payments from the people

c22.s2.7

APPENDIX B

c22.s2.8

on all occasions. Kings and chiefs, merchants and landowners, vied with one another in presenting rich offerings to their favourite places of worship; and when it is remembered that this practice had been going on from time immemorial, it need be no matter for wonder that the man who first violently despoiled the sacred buildings departed from the country laden with an almost incredible amount of booty. Colonel Dow, in his translation of the works of Firishtah (i. 307), computes the value of the gold carried off by Malik Kâfur at a hundred millions sterling of our money.

Genealogy of the Bahmanī Dynasty

c22.s3.1

¹ This Table is taken from Major King's History (Ind. Ant., xxviii. 121).

c22.s3.2

(According to the "Burhān-i Maāsir.")

c22.s3.5

¹ This Table is taken from Major King's History (Ind. Ant., xxviii. 121).

c22.s3.6

(According to Firishtah.)

List of the Bahmanî Sultans of the Dakhan at Kulbarga

c22.s4.1

(According to Firishtah.)

c22.s4.2

Genealogy of the Nizâm Shâhs of Ahmadnagar

c22.s5.2

1. AHMAD . . . . . . . . . 1490 to 1508
2. BURHÂN I. . . . . . . . . 1508 to 1553
3. HUSSAIN . . . . . . . . . 1553 to 1565
4. MURTAZÂ . . . . . . . . . 1565 to 1587
5. MÎRÂN . . . . . . . . . 1587 to 1588
6. ISMÂÎL . . . . . . . . . 1588 to 1590
7. BURHÂN II. . . . . . . . . 1590 to April 18, 1595
8. IBRAHÎM . . . . . . . . . April 18 to Aug. 6, 1595
9. AHMAD IBN SHÂH TAHÎR . . . . . Aug. 6, 1595, to 1596
10. BAHÂDUR . . . . . . . . . 1596 to 1599

Genealogy of the Qutb Shâhs of Golkonda

c22.s6.1

1. QULÎ QUTB SHÂH. QUTB-UD-DÎN (blinded by Jamshîd). 2. JAMSHÎD. HAIDAR (died without issue). 3. IBRAHÎM. SUBHÂN. ABDUL QÂDIR (poisoned by his father). A son (died before his father). 4. MUHAMMAD.

c22.s6.2

| | | A.D. |
| 1. QULÎ | . . . . . . . . | 1512 to 1543 |
| 2. JAMSHÎD | . . . . . . . . | 1543 to 1550 |
| 3. IBRAHÎM | . . . . . . . . | 1550 to 1581 |
| 4. MUHAMMAD | . . . . . . . . | 1581 to 1611 |
| 5. ABDULLÂH | . . . . . . . . | 1611 to 1672 |
| 6. ABÛ HASAN | . . . . . . . . | 1672 to 1688 |

Portuguese Viceroys and Governors of Goa

c22.s7.1

| | A.D. |
| DOM FRANCISCO DE ALMEIDA (*Viceroy*) | 1505-1509 |
| AFONSO DE ALBUQUERQUE (*Governor*) | 1509-1515 |
| LOPO SOARES DE ALBERGARIA (*Governor*) | 1515-1518 |
| DIOGO LOPES DE SEQUEIRA (*Governor*) | 1518-1521 |
| DOM DUARTE DE MENEZES (*Governor*) | 1521-1524 |
| DOM VASCO DA GAMA, CONDE DE VIDIGUERIA (*Viceroy*) | 1524 |
| DOM HENRIQUE DE MENEZES (*Governor*) | 1525-1526 |
| LOPO VAZ DE SAMPAIO (*Governor*) | 1526-1529 |
| NUNO DA CUNHA (*Governor*) | 1529-1538 |
| DOM GARCIA DE NORONHA (*Viceroy*) | 1538-1540 |
| DOM ESTEVÃO DA GAMA (*Governor*) | 1540-1542 |
| MARTIM AFFONSO DE SOUSA (*Governor*) | 1542-1545 |
| DOM JOÃO DE CASTRO (*Governor and Captain-in-Chief*) | 1545-1547 |
| " " (*Viceroy*) | 1547-1548 |
| GARCIA DE SÁ (*Governor*) | 1548-1549 |
| JORGE CABRAL (*Governor*) | 1549-1550 |
| DOM AFFONSO DE NORONHA (*Viceroy*) | 1550-1554 |
| DOM PEDRO MASCARENHAS (*Viceroy*) | 1554-1555 |
| FRANCISCO BARRETO (*Governor*) | 1555-1558 |
| DOM CONSTANTINO DE BRAGANZA (*Viceroy*) | 1558-1561 |
| DOM FRANCISCO COUTINHO, CONDE DE REDONDO (*Viceroy*) | 1561-1564 |
| JOÃO DE MEDONÇA (*Governor*) | 1564 |
| DOM ANTONIO DE NORONHA (*Viceroy*) | 1564-1568 |