Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar c9: Chapter V

Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar c9

Language
English

Contents

Chapter V

c9.1

Strength

c9.2

In the middle ages a strong army was a necessary feature of a stable empire. And it was with the help of such a force that the small principality of Vijayanagar, founded on the banks of the Tuṅgabhadrā, successfully resisted the Muhammadan invasions from the north, and expanded into a vast empire.

c9.3

Generally the Indian armies were large in size; and every foreign traveller who visited India was struck by their numbers. According to the accounts presented by Pliny and Plutarch, the army of Candragupta Maurya consisted of 9,000 elephants, 39,000 horses and 60,000 foot soldiers besides chariots.¹ In the Vijayanagar empire too the army was large in size. Ferishta says that Bukka I assembled an army consisting of 30,000 horses, 3,000 elephants and 100,000 foot when he advanced towards Ādōni in A.D. 1366.² Nicolo dei Conti who visited Vijayanagar in 1421 estimated the strength of the Hindu army at 90,000 men fit to bear arms.³ Abdur Razāk, who visited the city twenty-one years later, records that the Vijayanagar army consisted of eleven lacs of men, (1,100,000) and more than 1,000 elephants, “lofty as the hills and gigantic as demons.”⁴ Athanasius Nikitin, the Russian traveller who stayed at Kulburga between 1468 and 1474, describes the Vijayanagar army as consisting of 300 elephants, 100,000 infantry and 50,000 horse, while that of Sultan Muhammad of Kulburga consisted of 575 elephants, 900,000 foot and 190,000 horse.⁵ According to the accounts of Varthema there were 40,000 horsemen in Vijayanagar.⁶ Duarte Barbosa in giving an account of Vijayanagar says that the king kept at all times 900 elephants and more than 20,000 horses, and had more than 100,000 men both horse and foot to whom he gave pay.7 The chronicle of Paes also contains some interesting information about the Vijayanagar army. Referring to Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya and his forces, Paes says: "This king has continually a million fighting troops in which are included 35,000 cavalry in armour; all these are in his pay and he has these troops always together and ready to be despatched to any quarter whenever such may be necessary."8 He says that the king once sent fifty captains with 150,000 soldiers amongst whom were many cavalry, and adds: "He (the king) has many elephants, and when the king wishes to show the strength of his power to any of his adversaries amongst the three kings bordering on his kingdom, they say that he puts into the field two million soldiers; in consequence of which he is the most feared king of any in these parts."9 Nuniz estimates that the army which Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya led to the battle of Raicūr in 1519 consisted of 703,000 foot, 32,600 horse and 551 elephants, besides the camp followers, merchants, and others, and "an infinitude of people" who joined him at a place close to Raicūr.¹⁰ The Rāyavācakamu states that Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya was followed in his campaigns against the Muhammadans by 120 ghaṭṭams¹¹ of elephants, 60,000 horse and 500,000 infantry in a body.¹² According to the Kṛṣṇarāyavijayamu, the strength of Kṛṣṇa Rāya's army was 600,000 foot, 6,600 horse, and 2,000 elephants.¹³ The army of Rāma Rāja was also large. According to Ferishta it consisted of 70,000 horse and 90,000 infantry¹⁴ but if the anonymous chronicler is to be believed, it was even larger and was made up of 100,000 horse and 300,000 infantry.¹⁵ Couto and Faria y Sousa agree with the above accounts as to the number of horses, but estimate that the foot soldiers alone were more than six hundred thousand.¹⁶

c9.4

¹ See V. R. R. Dikshitar, The Mauryan Polity, p. 190.

c9.5

² Briggs, The Rise, II, p. 314.

c9.6

³ Major, India, p. 6; Sewell, op. cit., p. 82.

c9.7

⁴ Elliot, op. cit., IV, p. 105.

c9.8

⁵ See Sewell, op. cit., p. 105.

c9.9

⁶ Jones, Varthema, p. 126; Sewell, op. cit., p. 118.

c9.10

⁸ Sewell, op. cit., p. 279.

c9.11

⁹ Ibid., p. 280.

c9.12

¹⁰ Ibid., pp. 147 and 326-27.

c9.13

¹¹ The term ghaṭṭam which is identical with Sanskrit Ghata denotes a contingent of war elephants. According to the Rāyavācakamu, a ghaṭṭam consisted of ten elephants, so that there were in all 1,200 animals in Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya's army.

c9.14

¹² S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, p. 113.

c9.15

¹³ Ibid., p. 131.

c9.16

¹⁴ Briggs, The Rise, III, p. 247.

c9.17

¹⁵ Ibid., p. 414.

c9.18

¹⁶ Couto, VIII, p. 89; Faria y Sousa, II, p 432; referred to by Heras in his Aravidu Dynasty, I, pp. 200-201.

c9.19

But it is not quite clear whether these huge forces constituted the imperial standing army at Vijayanagar or whether they included also feudal levies. In the light of the figures of Duarte Barbosa who modestly estimates the strength of the trained armies of the Vijayanagar kings at 100,000, the cavalry alone being 20,000, it is reasonable to infer that the exaggerated figures of most of the foreign travellers do not indicate the normal strength of the forces which the kings generally maintained, but that of the forces that were assembled in times of war. For instance the huge army that marched to Raicūr was made up not only of the regular troops but also of the war levies furnished by the feudal vassals. According to Nuniz, Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya had a permanent force of fifty thousand paid soldiers amongst whom were six thousand horsemen, who comprised the palace guard. He had also with him two hundred horsemen who were a part of the palace guard, their duties being to be always with the king and ride with him. There were also in the king's service twenty thousand spearmen and shield bearers besides three thousand men to look after the elephants in the stables.¹⁷ The figures of Duarte Barbosa and Nuniz show that the standing army was a fraction of the large army called to the field of battle. The Vijayanagar rulers depended on the irregulars who formed a very large portion of the army.¹⁸

c9.20

¹⁷ Sewell, op. cit., p. 381.

c9.21

¹⁸ See C. H. Payne, *Scenes and Characters from Indian History*, pp. 56 and 57 and fn.

Section II. Recruitment

c9.s1.2

The Vijayanagar sovereigns adopted two different methods in the matter of recruitment to the army. The first was the direct one according to which the soldiers for the army were recruited directly by the kings and were maintained by them at their own expense; while the second was the indirect method according to which military contingents were required to be supplied to the imperial sovereign by the feudal vassals. While the former constituted the regular standing army of the state, the latter remained largely an irregular force supplied by the feudatories at short notice.

c9.s1.3

Recruitment for the standing army of the kings was made with great care. Duarte Barbosa, while describing how men were chosen for the army, says : "The officials of war in choosing a man for the army strip him naked, and look at him to find out how tall he is, what is his name, in what land he was born, the names of his father and mother, and in this way he is appointed without leave being given him to go to his country and if he goes without leave and afterwards is captured, he is very evilly entreated.” 19 But though recruitment for the army was made with great care, and discipline maintained with great rigour, yet the soldiers were allowed to live “according to their own law”.²⁰ Nuniz, when describing the army of Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya which marched to Raicūr, says that “all (the soldiers) were equally well armed, each after his own fashion.” 21 The system of allowing the soldiers to live “according to their own law” and equip themselves “each after his own fashion” had certain advantages which counter-balanced the disadvantages. It must be admitted however that the existence of diverse groups and classes of soldiers in the imperial armies each following its own custom was not conducive to the enforcement of a uniform discipline among them. But it gave room for the display of patriotism of groups and communities or tribes. Under that system the soldiers preserved intact their own tribal characteristics which gave them greater scope for the display of their valour in war. Such diversity in the laws and regulations governing the army organisation was surely conducive to the efficiency of the men at arms. It may be noted that such a classification of the forces on the basis of the tribes or clans to which the soldiers belong is in vogue even at the present day in the regiments of the British Indian armies. Barbosa suggests, though he does not definitely say so, that it was only with very great difficulty that leave was granted to the soldiers. But such a policy could not have done much good to the imperial cause, for in such a case there could not have been much enthusiasm and love for war in them.

c9.s1.4

²⁰ Ibid., p. 212.

c9.s1.5

As has been said the feudal levies constituted a large portion of the Vijayanagar army. The empire was divided into a large number of districts each of which was granted to a chief in return for a fixed annual financial contribution and the supply of a specified quota of the military to the imperial house. Speaking of the feudal contingents in the Vijayanagar forces, Nuniz says: “The kings of this country are able to assemble as many soldiers as they want, as they have them there in their kingdom and have made wealth wherewith to pay them.

c9.s1.6

¹⁹ Barbosa, I, p. 212.

c9.s1.7

This king Chita Rao has foot soldiers paid by his nobles, and they are obliged to maintain six lakhs of soldiers, that is six hundred thousand men. and twenty-four thousand horse which the same nobles are obliged to have.” 22 Many of the nobles also held some office or other under the crown. Nuniz gives a list of a few nobles who held office under Acyuta Rāya, and the military contribution they were liable to:

c9.s1.8

| Name | Infantry | Cavalry | Elephants |
| Salvanayque | 30,000 | 3,000 | 30 |
| Ajaparcatimapa | 25,000 | 1,500 | 40 |
| Gapanayque | 20,000 | 2,500 | 20 |
| Lepapayque | 20,000 | 1,200 | 28 |
| Narvara (the treasurer of the jewels) | 12,000 | 600 | 20 |
| Chinapanayque | 10,000 | 800 | nil |
| Crisnapanayque | 700 | 500 | nil |
| Bajapanayque | 10,000 | 800 | 15 |
| Mallapanayque | 6,000 | 400 | nil |
| Adapanayque | 8,000 | 800 | 30 |
| Bajapanayque | 10,000 | 1,000 | 50²³ |

c9.s1.9

²³ Ibid., pp. 384-89.

c9.s1.10

It is the same authority that gives us an idea of the strength of the contingents of a few nobles who followed Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya to the battle of Raicūr:

c9.s1.11

| Name | Infantry | Cavalry | Elephants |
| The chief of the guard | 30,000 | 1,000 | 6 |
| Trimbicara | 50,000 | 2,000 | 20 |
| Timapanayque | 60,000 | 3,500 | 30 |
| Adapanayque | 100,000 | 5,000 | 50 |
| Condamara | 120,000 | 6,000 | 60 |
| Comara | 80,000 | 2,500 | 40 |
| Ogemdraho (the governor of the city of Bisnaga) | 30,000 | 1,000 | 10 |
| Three eunuchs | 40,000 | 1,000 | 15 |
| The betel page | 15,000 | 200 | nil |
| Comarberca | 8,000 | 400 | 20²⁴ |

c9.s1.12

²² Sewell, op. cit., p. 373.

c9.s1.13

It was the king who settled the forces that these chiefs were to keep for the imperial house. But it would appear that the number of each of these was subject to revision by the king as occasions demanded. For instance, though Adapanayque was normally expected to maintain only 8,000 soldiers, 800 horses and 30 elephants, he led to Raicūr a force consisting of 100,000 foot soldiers, 5,000 horses and 50 elephants, which seems to show that the strength of the contingents to be supplied by the feudatories was sometimes increased on occasions of war. It must be admitted, however, that these officers seldom maintained the required quota of the military. Nuniz affirms that Salvanayque acquired much wealth because he never maintained the whole force.²⁵ The kings had, however, the right to take away the property of these nobles.²⁶ They seem to have at times acted despotically in dealing with their nobles with regard to their military obligations. Adapanayque, for instance, was forced to bring to the battlefield a force which was many times larger than what he was normally expected to supply, and this must have made him enlist for his contingents men and animals that could not have seen a battle. In that case the existence of such irregulars in the Vijayanagar armies must have made them weak in spite of their large size. Here the remarks of Irvine are apposite. Writing on Indian armies in general, he says: "Until the middle of the eighteenth century, when the French and the English had demonstrated the vast superiority of disciplined infantry, the Indian foot soldier was little more than a night watchman, and guardian over baggage either in camp or on the line of march."²⁷ Though evidently this may be an exaggerated picture of the weakness of the Hindu military camp, it can well hold good of the irregulars in the Hindu armies.

c9.s1.14

²⁵ Ibid., p. 385.

c9.s1.15

²⁶ Ibid.

c9.s1.16

²⁷ Army of the Mughals, p. 57.

c9.s1.17

From the above list, it may be doubted that, in fixing the strength of the forces each noble was required to supply to the imperial house, there was no definite proportion or principle followed, and that the proportion in which one lord was required to supply his contingent of foot soldiers, horses and elephants, had no bearing on the proportion of the forces supplied by another. Condamara, for instance, supplied 120,000 foot soldiers, 6,000 horse and 60 elephants, while the chief of the guard led a force of 30,000 infantry, 1,000 horses and six elephants. But the evidence at our disposal does not admit of an easy solution for this question. It is not, however, likely that the Vijayanagar kings would have acted as despots with regard to the fixing of the strength of the contingents from the feudal vassals, for though at times of war each of them might have been required to supply a larger quota of the military, yet during the normal periods of peace and quiet in the empire, it is reasonable to suppose that some principle was followed, for the empire, if maintained by such force and oppression, could not have flourished for three centuries successfully resisting the Muhammadan aggressions.

c9.s1.18

This class of feudatories who were bound by ties of military service to the king are said to have held lands of the king on an *amaram*²⁸ tenure and were hence known in the epigraphs as the *amaranāyakas*. There are a very large number of inscriptions which record the grant of lands to lords for military service. From the general nature of their military obligations it would appear that they were responsible for the supply of foot soldiers, horses and elephants for the wars. These *amarams* were resumable by the grantor if the stipulated service was not rendered. Neither the inscriptions nor the literature of the period give us an idea of the number of soldiers, horses and elephants each *amaranāyaka* was required to supply.²⁹ But they differed widely in their status and obligations.³⁰

c9.s1.19

²⁸ *Amaram* means land or revenue granted by a chief to his retainers for military service (*Tamil Lexicon*, Vol. 1, p. 102).

c9.s1.20

²⁹ Wilson suggests that each holder of an *amaram* was the commander of a thousand foot. (*Indian Glossary*, p. 21).

c9.s1.21

³⁰ One record mentions a *daḷavāy* of Kṛṣnadēva Rāya who held some lands in the Hassan *sthala* for his *amara padeya nāyakatana*. (E.C., V, Hn. 13). The term literally interpreted means the Nāyakship of his own *amara* force.

c9.s1.22

These military vassals gave their lands to minor chiefs on similar terms of military service. The prevalence of such a system is indicated by an inscription in the Pudukkōṭṭai State. A record at Ūṇaiyūr in that State registers a grant of land by Veṅgaḷappa Viśayālayadēva, chief of Śūraikkuḍi, to one Kuruṇdaṇ alias Teriñjuveṭṭi, commander of the army at Kurundampirai, a *Paḍaip-parru*. The commanders were asked to pay the dues from their lands to the above chief and serve in his army.³¹

c9.s1.23

³¹ *I.P.S.*, 743.

c9.s1.24

Mention may also be made of the subordinate kings who were bound to do military service to the emperor. They were semiindependent rulers in their respective kingdoms, but owed allegiance to the imperial house. Such were the kings of Bankpur, Gerasope, and a few others. Nuniz says that they received no special respect at the imperial court in spite of their semi-independence. Speaking of some of them he says: "The kings who are subject are these, besides this king of Bengapor, namely the king of Gasopa, and the king of Bacanor and the king of Calecu and he of Batecala, and these when they come to the court of Bisnaga are not held in higher esteem than any other captains either by the king or by any other nobles."32 But they received one concession from the imperial court, namely they were not compelled to go to court unless they were summoned.³³

c9.s1.25

³³ Ibid.

c9.s1.26

There was a special force at the capital which Nuniz calls the "King's guard", which consisted of foot soldiers, horses and elephants. We do not know the strength of this force. But it seems to have been large, for Nuniz says: "The king (Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya) took of his guard six thousand horse and forty thousand foot, the pick of all his kingdom, men with shields, archers, and three hundred elephants to the battle of Raicūr."34 To this group belonged two hundred horsemen whom we may call the gentlemen troopers at the imperial service. They attended on the king always, and were obliged to ride with him. After the king had mounted, he would count the two hundred horsemen, and whoever was missing was liable to be severely punished and his property confiscated. These gentlemen troopers were paid by the king, but were not granted lands.³⁵ We can well compare these gentlemen troopers with the *Ahadis* of the Mughal court, who always attended on the emperor, and owed allegiance to him and to no one else. A higher standard of efficiency and general worth was set up for an *Ahadi* than for an ordinary horseman.³⁶ It is possible that the same higher standard might have been expected of this group of cavalry of the Vijayanagar kings.³⁷

c9.s1.27

³² Sewell. op. cit., p. 374.

c9.s1.28

³⁴ Ibid., p. 327.

c9.s1.29

³⁵ Ibid., pp. 371-2.

c9.s1.30

³⁶ J.I.H., IX, p. 288.

c9.s1.31

³⁷ It would be interesting in this connection to note that in some respects these horsemen and attendants of the king bear also some resemblance to the omrahs of the Mughal court. Bernier describing the omrahs says: "Every omrah at court is obliged, under a certain penalty, to repair twice a day to the assem-

c9.s1.32

Nuniz speaks of another class of "captains" who were in the service of the king. Here the chronicler himself is not clear. He says: "During his (the king's) feasts and the almsgiving to his temples all these captains who are thus like renters must always attend the court, and of those whom this King has always about him and by whom he is accompanied in his court there are more than two hundred. These are obliged always to be present with the King, and must always maintain the full number of soldiers according to their obligations, for if he finds that they have a less number they were severely punished and their estates confiscated. These nobles are never suffered to settle themselves in cities or towns because they would there be beyond reach of his hand; they only go thither sometimes".38 Apparently Nuniz here confuses between the feudal vassals who had certain military obligations to perform to the king and who were granted estates on a military tenure and their agents who were required to be always at the capital. We have no other evidence to show that these "captains" were forced to stay at the capital. But there are a large number of inscriptions which, coming as they do from the different parts of the empire, refer to the grants made by the nāyakas from the districts which had been granted to them for military service, though we also meet with a few epigraphs which record grants by the agents of these nāyakas. Nuniz himself says: "Those who are in the city and those who are away each

c9.s1.33

bly for the purpose of paying his respects to the king, at ten or eleven o'clock in the morning, when he is there seated to dispense justice, and at six in the evening. An omrah must also in rotation keep guard in the fortress once every week during four and twenty hours........ Whenever the king takes an excursion in his paleky......all the omrahs who are not prevented by illness, disabled by age, or exempted by a peculiar office, are bound to accompany him on horseback exposed to the inclemency of the weather and to suffocating clouds of dust." (Bernier, p. 215). Similarly the Vijayanagar gentlemen troopers did obeisance to the king daily when he came to the hall of public audience in his palace at ten or eleven o'clock. But the method of this obeisance differed from that at the Mughal court for while one was a Muhammadan court the other was Hindu. Though it cannot be said with confidence that such a system was a Muhammadan institution and that the Hindu court simply copied it, yet it has to be admitted that the similarity of the two systems is striking. But there was an important difference between the status of a Vijayanagar gentleman trooper and a Mughal omrah. While the former was paid and maintained by the king, the latter was a nobleman whose duty and privilege it was to follow the ruler.

c9.s1.34

maintains a secretary ”³⁹ and thereby indicates that some were away from the capital. Thus it is evident that Nuniz confuses between the feudal chiefs and their agents. It is only the latter that were permanently staying at the capital. That these “captains” who were the “renters” kept their agents at the capital at all times, even in times of peace, with their respective tributary contingents, will become clear from the following illustration. It was often the imperial policy that was followed in the provinces of the empire. Madura for instance was divided into seventy-two pāḷaiyams each of which was granted to a pāḷaiyagār who was required to make a fixed financial contribution and supply a definite quota of the military to the Nāyak ruler of Madura. Besides these obligations each of them was required to maintain a certain number of troops at the capital for guarding one of the seventy-two bastions of the fort at Madura. The pāḷaiyagārs appointed their own men at the capital; and each of these agents stood a hostage for the loyalty of his master to the Nāyak ruler. The same system could well have obtained at the imperial court of Vijayanagar. Thus the captains, who according to Nuniz had always to attend the court, maintained the full number of soldiers according to obligations and were not allowed to settle in cities or towns, were in all likelihood the military agents of the “renters” and not the “renters” themselves. Here the words “more than two hundred” signifying not only the renters, but also their agents is of some special interest.

c9.s1.35

³⁹ Ibid., p. 374.

c9.s1.36

Thus recruitment to the Vijayanagar army was done in a variety of ways, for the forces were required for different purposes, and perhaps each class of the forces which was recruited for a particular purpose could not be engaged in any other duty.

c9.s1.37

It would be interesting to examine here the considerations that weighed in the recruitment to the army. In Vijayanagar the Brahmans occupied an important place in the army. They were not only placed in charge of fortresses but were also appointed to lead the armies. Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya insists on the fact that the Brahmans alone should be placed in charge of fortresses. He says: “The king can lay his hand on his breast and sleep peacefully who appoints as masters of his fortresses such Brahmans as are attached to himself.” . . . “The services of a Brahman are also (quite) necessary. So it is fit that he gives them charge of well-filled fortresses and well-equipped forces and land”.⁴⁰ Discussing in another place why the Brāhmaṇs should be placed in charge of fortresses, he observes: “Entrust your forces to such Brahmans (generals) as you are best acquainted with. Do not keep them weak but give them such strong forces that they can be devoid of fear from enemies . . . . because a Brahman would stick to his post even in times of danger and would continue in service though reduced to becoming a subordinate to a Kṣatriya or a Śūdra. It is always advisable for a king to take a Brahman as his officer.”⁴¹ The history of Vijayanagar abounds with many instances where Brahmans were either generals or provincial Viceroys. Sāyaṇa, the brother of the great minister Mādhavācārya, Mādaṇṇa, Lakkaṇṇa, and Sāḷuva Timma are good instances in point. The Brahmans apart from being generals of forces and lords of forts were leaders of the wars. This is borne out by the evidence of a valuable inscription at Tirukkaḍaiyūr in the Tanjore district dated Vaiśya (Vṛṣa, A.D. 1521-22?) in the reign of Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya. The record states that a certain Brahman named Āpatsahāyan of Tirukkadiyūr took part in the war against Irāccūr (Raicūr in Bijapur) and pleased king Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya.42 These pieces of evidence definitely show that in the Vijayanagar days Brahmans took part in the wars both as guardians of fortresses and leaders of armies. According to the account of Barbosa, among the men at arms were many knights who gathered at the imperial court from various lands to get their pay. His statement “nevertheless (they) do not cease to live according to their own laws”,⁴³ also suggests that there were in the Vijayanagar armies soldiers from many communities in the empire. The account of Paes shows that there were also Muhammadan soldiers in the Vijayanagar armies.44

c9.s1.38

⁴⁰ Āmukta, canto IV, vv. 261 and 255.

c9.s1.39

⁴¹ Ibid., vv. 207 and 217.
42. 47 of 1906; Rep., 1907, para 59.

c9.s1.40

⁴³ Barbosa, I. p. 212.

Section III. Divisions of the Army

c9.s2.2

In ancient India the army was divided into four divisions, namely, infantry, cavalry, elephants and war chariots. But gradually the chariots fell out of use, and by the days of Śrī Harṣa they had disappeared. The Vijayanagar epigraphs refer only to the other three divisions. A record of A.D. 1347 in the Sorab taluk of the Shimoga district mentions, for instance, that the army of the Kadamba king was composed of horsemen, elephants and foot-soldiers.⁴⁵ The Bitraguṇṭa grant of Saṅgama II mentions him as the lion to the troops of the furious elephants of the lords of elephants and horses and men.⁴⁶ Ibn Baṭūṭa, the Muhammadan traveller, says that the ruler of Hinawr (Honavar), Sultan Jalāl-ad-Dīn, who was a tributary of Haryab (Harihara I), had an army composed of horses and foot.⁴⁷ We have no reference to the chariots in that period. But artillery as a division of the army came into existence in the later Vijayanagar days thus making the division again four.

c9.s2.3

⁴⁵ E.C., VIII, Sb. 375.

c9.s2.4

⁴⁶ E.I., III, p. 33.

c9.s2.5

⁴⁷ Ibn Baṭūṭa, The Broadway Travellers Edn., p. 231.

c9.s2.6

But Saletore affirms that the Vijayanagar armies consisted of six divisions. He says: “The Vijayanagar rulers......unintentionally followed the mediaeval precept of Śukra⁴⁸ rather than the classical injunctions which restricted the forces to the four well known names,” and quotes the authority of an inscription of Dēva Rāya I and the Bakhair of Rāma Rāja to support his contention.⁴⁹ The inscription under reference states that “he (Dēva Rāya I) having for a long time carried out a fierce military expedition by order of his father king Harihara accompanied by the six components of the army, reached quickly the city.”⁵⁰ But it must be remarked that it is difficult to infer from the reference to the six “components” in this inscription that the Vijayanagar armies were divided into six divisions. The epigraph merely states that there were six kinds of armies (vidham) and not six divisions (aṅga). The Raghuvamśa of Kālidāsa mentions six kinds of armies. It is said that Raghu with a desire to conquer the directions started with his six kinds of armies.⁵¹ Here the armies referred to are the hereditary (maula), mercenary (bhṛtaka), belonging to guilds (śreṇi), those of an ally (mitra), those of an enemy (amitra), and those of forest tribes (āṭavi). The Vijayanagar inscription in question seems to refer to such variety of the forces that made up the Hindu army and not to its divisions. The Bakhair of Rāma Rāja gives a detailed account of the Hindu forces on the battle-field of Rakṣas Taṅgḍi, and says that there were in them large hosts of horses, camels, elephants, artillery, bulls and foot soldiers.⁵² Though the Vijayanagar armies consisted of these six parts, we do not know if they were engaged in the wars. The camels and bulls must have been only auxiliaries of the main forces that fought in the battle. Nuniz while describing the Hindu forces that marched to the battle of Raicūr says that there were in them many sumpter-mules, asses and oxen, which carried all the supplies and many other burdens such as tents and other things.⁵³ Thus these served only as auxiliaries of the main armies. In the face of such data it is difficult to agree with Saletore in his assertion that there were six divisions in the Vijayanagar armies.

c9.s2.7

⁴⁸ Śukra says: “The king should have his infantry four times the cavalry, bulls one-fifth of his horse, camels one-eighth, elephants one-fourth of the camels, chariots half of the elephants and cannon twice the chariots.” (Śukranīti, IV, vii, l. 41, p. 128; Soc. and Pol. Life in the Vij. Emp., I, p. 420). But curiously enough Śukra mentions seven and not six. Saletore tries to overcome the difficulty by remarking, “but in reality Śukra merely gave legal sanction to two of the parts already mentioned as auxiliaries by Kauṭilya—bulls and camels and introduced one new feature—artillery—which was unknown to the age of the Arthaśāstra, Ibid., I, p. 420).

c9.s2.8

⁴⁹ Soc. and Pol. Life in the Vij Emp., I p 421.

c9.s2.9

⁵⁰ Nel. Ins., I, pp. 4 4 and 7

c9.s2.10

⁵¹ Canto IV, v. 27.

c9.s2.11

⁵² See Saletore, op. cit., I, pp. 417-18.

c9.s2.12

⁵³ Sewell, op. cit., p. 333.

c9.s2.13

1. Infantry: A large portion of the armies was made up of foot-soldiers. The largeness was due perhaps to the fact that they consisted of the Vaiśyas and the Śūdras if the injunctions of Kauṭalya had been followed in that period with regard to the recruitment to the armies.⁵⁴ As for the dress of the Vijayanagar soldiers, Ferishta says that they generally went to the battlefield "quite naked and had their bodies anointed with oil to prevent their being easily seized."⁵⁵ But Paes, while describing the review of the forces by the king, says that their dress was very rich with many colours.⁵⁶ But such a glowing description of the splendid appearance and armaments of the troops only suggests that the soldiers appeared in the best of their dress on such ceremonial occasions as the review of the forces by the king. And it is only likely that the common soldiers were dressed very lightly in the battle-fields.⁵⁷ The weapons of warfare used by the Vijayanagar soldiers were swords, arches, bows and arrows, daggers, battle-axes with the shafts, musquets, blunderbusses, javelins, Turkish bows, bombs, spears and fire missiles,⁵⁸ short swords and poignards, which were in girdles.⁵⁹ The *Madhurāvijayam* and the *Sāḷuvābhyudayam* mention the use of such weapons as *śastra* (dagger, sword), *śarāsana* (arrow), *asi* (sword), *karpaṇa* (a kind of spear), *kathārikāstram* (a kind of arrow), *kārmukam* (bow), and *mudgara* (hammer, hammer-like weapon). The soldiers also used the *phalaka* (shield) as a protection against the arrows of the enemies. At times a leather shield (*carmadhāraṇa*) was also used.⁶⁰ Speaking about the shields Nuniz says that they were so large that there was no need for armour to protect the body.⁶¹ The inscriptions also refer to the use of such weapons as the axe,⁶² and dagger.⁶³ From the illustration, in the third volume of the *Epigraphia Carnatica*, of a few weapons of war depicted on the viragals or memorial stones to heroes killed in some fight probably in 1419, we can infer that big knives were used for executing persons, and that swords were also used by the army in those days.⁶⁴

c9.s2.14

⁵⁴ Arthaśāstra, Bk. IX, ch. 2.

c9.s2.15

⁵⁵ Briggs, The Rise, III, p. 137.

c9.s2.16

⁵⁶ Sewell, op cit., p. 277.

c9.s2.17

⁵⁷ See Sewell, ibid., p. 277 and fn. 2, where he says: "I have seen on seve-

c9.s2.18

⁵⁸ *Ibid.*, p. 277.

c9.s2.19

⁵⁹ *Ibid.*, pp. 304 and 328.

c9.s2.20

⁶⁰ *Madhurāvijayam*, canto III, vv. 2 and 3. *Sāḷuvābhyudayam*, canto IV, vv. 14, 15, 17, 43; canto VI, vv. 22 and 24.

c9.s2.21

⁶¹ Sewell, op. cit., p. 328.

c9.s2.22

⁶² 179 of 1910.

c9.s2.23

⁶³ E.C., VIII, Sb. 19.

c9.s2.24

⁶⁴ See E.C., III, Intro., p. 34.

c9.s2.25

2. *Cavalry*: The next important division of the army was the cavalry. In fact the Vijayanagar kings were so strong in their cavalry and able to win success in many of the wars only with its help that they were generally called the *aśvapatis*. Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya himself says that he won a battle against the Sultan of Bidar with the help of the horses.⁶⁵ The foreign policy of the kings was greatly influenced by their keen desire to get a good supply of horses from Ormuz. The pursuit of such a policy was necessitated by the

c9.s2.26

⁶⁵ *Āmukta.*, canto I, v. 42.

c9.s2.27

ral occasions bodies of men collected together at Vijayanagar and the neighbourhood dressed and armed in a manner which they assured me was traditional. They wore rough tunics and short drawers of cotton stained to a rather dark red colour admirably adapted for forest work, but of a deeper hue than our English Khaki. They grimly assured me that the colour concealed to a great extent the stains of blood from wounds."

c9.s2.28

fact that the Carnatic horses were weak and lean and hence not able to bear fatigue.⁶⁶

c9.s2.29

⁶⁶ Scott, Ferishta; see Sewell, op. cit., p. 72.
67. Āmukta., canto IV, v. 262.

c9.s2.30

About the expenditure of a king, Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya says : “ The expenditure of money which is utilised in buying elephants and horses, in feeding them, in maintaining soldiers, in the worship of Gods and Brahmans and in one's own enjoyment can never be called an expenditure.”67 In another place he suggests that the king should spend half of his income in the maintenance of the army (of which the expenditure on horses formed a large part).⁶⁸ Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya, for instance, purchased every year thirteen thousand horses of Ormuz and country-breds, and kept for himself the best ones.⁶⁹ The Vijayanagar kings valued the horses so much, that, if Nuniz may be believed, Sāḷuva Narasiṁha “ took them dead or alive at three for a thousand *pardaos*, and of those that died at sea they brought him the tail only, and he paid for it just as if it had been alive.”⁷⁰ Though this is perhaps an exaggeration, it shows the great value the Vijayanagar kings placed on horses. According to the account of Barbosa the price of the horses ranged from 400 to 600 *cruzados*.⁷¹ Nuniz, however, gives different prices for them. In one place he says that they were purchased at 4¾ horses per thousand *pardaos*,⁷² while elsewhere he remarks that they were selling at the rate of twelve to fifteen for a thousand *pardaos*.⁷³ Hence as Dames suggests the price of the horse seems to have varied between £78 and 26, or 1170 and 390 in Indian rupees.⁷⁴

c9.s2.31

⁶⁸ Ibid., v. 238.

c9.s2.32

⁶⁹ Sewell, op. cit., pp. 381-2.

c9.s2.33

⁷⁰ Ibid., p. 307 ; for a similar statement of Marco Polo regarding the Pāṇḍyan Kingdom, See K. A. Nilakanta Śāstri, The Pāṇḍyan Kingdom, pp. 192-3.

c9.s2.34

⁷¹ About Rs. 2325 to 3375 in the estimate of Dames; Barbosa, I, p. 210.

c9.s2.35

⁷² Sewell, op. cit., p. 361 and fn. 2.

c9.s2.36

⁷³ Ibid., p. 381.

c9.s2.37

⁷⁴ Barbosa, I, p. 210.

c9.s2.38

These horses were branded with the king's mark and given over to horsemen with the necessary provisions for every month, and when they died the maintainer of the dead horse was obliged to take the piece of skin containing the king's mark to the Chief Master of the horse so that another was given in its place.75 Each knight was given one horse for his own riding, a groom and a slave girl for his service and the necessary daily supplies. If he did not maintain it properly he was deprived of his horse and given another which was of an inferior quality.⁷⁶

c9.s2.39

⁷⁶ Barbosa, I, pp. 210-211.

c9.s2.40

The horses were fully caparisoned, had plates on their foreheads, and the cavalrymen wore quilted tunics made of layers of stony raw leather and furnished with iron plates which made them strong, and had their umbrellas of state held over their head.⁷⁷

c9.s2.41

⁷⁷ Sewell, op. cit., pp. 275-77. For a note on the quilted tunics see ibid., p. 276, fn. 2.

c9.s2.42

3. *Elephants*: Elephants were of great use in ancient and mediaeval warfare, and the Vijayanagar kings used them largely in their battles. Abdur Razāk affirms that there were in the court of Dēva Rāya II more than thousand elephants "lofty as hills and gigantic as demons."78 According to Nikitin large scythes were attached to the trunks of the elephants, and they carried each a citadel in which were twelve men in armour with guns and arrows,⁷⁹ but Varthema would have us believe that each elephant carried only six men, and had long swords attached to its trunk in battle.⁸⁰ With these may be compared the description of Nuniz. He says that from the howdahs of the war elephants fought four men on each side of them, and that on their tusks were fastened sharp knives with which they did great harm.⁸¹ Paes too says that three or four persons used to fight from the back of the war elephants, and he describes the elephants as covered with caparison of velvet and gold and bells and that on their heads were painted faces of giants and other kinds of great beasts.82

c9.s2.43

⁷⁹ Major, India, p. 12.

c9.s2.44

⁸⁰ Ibid., p. 51.

c9.s2.45

⁸¹ Sewell, op. cit., p. 328.

c9.s2.46

4. *Artillery*: Artillery had no great importance in the wars of ancient and mediaeval South India. It was only in the Vijayanagar days that it made its appearance on the scenes of battle. It would be interesting to examine here when exactly gun powder began to be used in South India. In describing the battle of 1368 fought between Bukka I and the Bahmani Sultan, the Tohfut-us-Salātīn mentions gun carriages and battering rams.⁸³ Briggs surmised that it was possible that the Muhammadans might have procured the guns in 1368 from the west as they had been used by Edward III eighteen years earlier at the battle of Cressy.⁸⁴ Thus if the Muhammadan work is to be believed it is reasonable to infer that guns were used in 1368. But the works of ancient Nīti literature show that the Hindus were acquainted with the use of guns. Śukrācārya, for instance, mentions them.85 The date of Śukra is a matter of doubt but though he is considered to be a mediaeval writer the fact that he refers to the guns shows that they were in use in that period.

c9.s2.47

⁷⁸ Elliot, op. cit., IV, p. 105.

c9.s2.48

⁸³ Briggs, The Rise, II, p. 312.

c9.s2.49

⁸⁴ Ibid., fn.
85. Śukra, IV, ii, vv. 60-63; Saletore, op. cit., I, p. 431.

c9.s2.50

Epigraphical evidence also indicates the use of fire-arms and guns in the Vijayanagar period. An inscription in the Sāgar taluk in the Shimoga district dated A.D. 1441 (?) records that one Mahāprabhu Bayica Gavuḍa was supplying gun powder to the Naḍangiri nāḍ Rāja.⁸⁶ The use of guns in the Vijayanagar period is also proved by the evidence of the chronicle of Nuniz. According to his account several cannons were taken by Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya to Raicūr for the battle.⁸⁷ In the Āmuktamālyada the same emperor speaks of the fortresses "which are garrisoned and provided with engines", which may have included guns.⁸⁸

c9.s2.51

⁸⁶ E.C., VIII, Sa.

c9.s2.52

⁸⁷ Sewell, op. cit., p. 328.

c9.s2.53

⁸⁸ Canto IV, v. 264.

Section IV. The March and the Fight

c9.s3.2

From the literature and epigraphs of the period we get some interesting details about the declaration of wars, the march of the armies and the fight of the forces.

c9.s3.3

Barbosa says that the king decided in his Council as to the necessity for his going to the battle.⁸⁹ Nuniz also mentions the Council of Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya which he consulted before he undertook his campaigns against the Sultan of Bijapur.90

c9.s3.4

⁶⁸ The text has ‘Maddina sēvayum naḍasittuda’. It may also mean ‘who was carrying on the service of medicine’ i.e., who was a physician in his service.

c9.s3.5

⁸⁹ Barbosa, I, p. 224.

c9.s3.6

The kings first declared war against the enemies. The *Sāḷuvābhyudayam* for instance says that Narasimha resolved to set out on an expedition of conquest of Udayagiri and ordered a public announcement of the resolve.⁹¹ Just before the starting of the expedition the feudal vassals were summoned to the court and were given rich presents. They were also entertained at a banquet at the capital.⁹² Then an advance army was sent into the enemy’s territory. Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya is said to have asked a part of his force to proceed to a distance of three *āmaḍas* (thirty miles) into the enemy’s territories and gather from there men, cattle, sheep and goats that they may not be available to the enemy.⁹³ This is in a way confirmed by Nuniz who in describing the advance troops that went to Raicūr says: “Three or four leagues in front of this multitude go some fifty thousand men who are like scouts; they have to spy out the country in front and always keep at a distance”.⁹⁴ The king himself started a little later. Before he started he made his offerings and performed sacrifices.⁹⁵ Barbosa gives a descriptive account of how the king started for his wars. According to him on the appointed day the king went to an open space mounted on an elephant or a palanquin as if for his pleasure, along with his horsemen and footmen and many elephants drawn up in a line all richly dressed. He then mounted a horse and shot an arrow in the direction of the country with which he was about to wage war. He then gave out in how many days he would be starting for the war.⁹⁶

c9.s3.7

⁹¹ S. K. Aiyangar. *Sources*, p. 91.

c9.s3.8

⁹² *Ibid*., p. 111: see also p 130 for Kṛṣṇa Rāya’s reception

c9.s3.9

⁹³ *Ibid*., p. 111.

c9.s3.10

⁹⁴ Sewell, *op. cit*., p. 328.

c9.s3.11

⁹⁵ *Ibid*., p. 326; *Sāhityaratnākaram*, canto XIV, vv. 30-34.

c9.s3.12

⁹⁶ Barbosa, I. p. 224.

c9.s3.13

These preliminaries over, the forces started on the march. There were no forced marches then as in later times. If Barbosa can be believed, they marched only three leagues a day, and soon after the day’s march was over, they built a town of straw on some open space, and erected houses arranged in streets where they halted for three days, after which they again proceed to the next camping ground. They marched at that rate until they reached the appointed place.⁹⁷

c9.s3.14

⁹⁷ *Ibid*., pp. 227-28.

c9.s3.15

The temporary camp of the king and his soldiers presented the appearance more of a festive city than of a military camp. All the camp was divided into many streets; and there were markets in them, where could be had all the necessaries of life and even luxuries like diamonds and precious stones for sale. There were also professional hucksters and craftsmen in the armies. The king himself stayed in the tent specially erected for him surrounded by a great hedge of thorns, with only one entrance. The guards who were outside were on their watch duty all through the night at fixed spots. There were also spies at work who patrolled all night through the camp and watched to see if they could catch any spies.⁹⁸ There were a large number of public women, who, in the army that marched to Raicūr, numbered twenty thousand. In the armies there were also thousands of men with water-skins who sought water for the fighting men lest they should die of thirst. There were also many merchants in the armies with all supplies.⁹⁹ The presence of merchants in the armies is also indicated by the evidence of epigraphy. An incomplete inscription at Tirumalai in the Chittore district mentions a merchant in an army.¹⁰⁰

c9.s3.16

⁹⁸ Sewell, op cit., pp. 332-34.

c9.s3.17

⁹⁹ Ibid., pp. 328-29.

c9.s3.18

¹⁰⁰ T. T. D. I., I, No. 236.

c9.s3.19

We have not got enough details to form any correct idea about the fighting arrangements of the forces. Nuniz tells us that Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya ‘divided his army into seven wings’ at the battle of Raicūr.¹⁰¹ In the battle of Rakṣas Tangḍi the Hindu army was divided into three wings—the right was in the charge of Tirumala, the left in the charge of Veṅkaṭādri while the centre was commanded by Rāma Rāja himself.¹⁰²

c9.s3.20

¹⁰¹ Sewell, op cit., p. 336.

c9.s3.21

¹⁰² Heras, Aravidu Dynasty, I, p. 204.

c9.s3.22

The army was divided into many units. According to the Rāmarājīyamu, when Bukka Rāju Rāma Rāju marched against the fort of Kandanavōlu (Kurnul) which was then in the occupation of Savāi (the Aḍil KHān) and laid siege to it, each unit of his army is said to have consisted of one elephant, twenty horses, sixty archers, sixty swordsmen and sixty spearmen. There were 3,500 such units. But we do not know whether the numbers are accurate.¹⁰³

c9.s3.23

¹⁰³ S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, p. 102.

c9.s3.24

From the inscriptions of the period we learn something about the methods of fight prevalent in those days 104 Hand to hand fight seems to have been in vogue. A record says that Sāḷuva Narasimha snatched a sword (*kathāri*) from a warrior in the course of a hand to hand fight and that on account of this he was called *Kathāri Sāḷuva*.¹⁰⁵ The *Madhurāvijayam* also describes such a hand to hand fight which took place outside the Rājagambhīra fort between Kampaṇa and the Śambuvarāya chief who was the lord of that region.¹⁰⁶

c9.s3.25

¹⁰⁴ According to Rice an inscription of A D. 1403 mentions a particular

c9.s3.26

¹⁰⁵ M.A.R., 1925. No.

c9.s3.27

¹⁰⁶ Canto IV, vv. 77-82.

c9.s3.28

A practice peculiar to the wars of the period was that of setting fire to the temporary cities made for the army on the route of its march. Barbosa mentions the practice, but curiously enough he says that the king issued a proclamation ordering the whole city to be set fire to except the palaces, fortresses, temples and the houses of certain lords that were not thatched, so that all men might attend with their wives, sons, and households.¹⁰⁷ Dames has shown how ridiculous this statement of Barbosa is, and says that it was evidently the interpolation of an intelligent copyist and adds that what Barbosa said was, “not that the king set fire to his capital, but that when he was on the march before starting for the next camping ground, he had the temporary town of grass huts which had been erected for the accommodation of his army burnt.”¹⁰⁸ The inscriptions do not throw any direct light on this interesting question.¹⁰⁹

c9.s3.29

¹⁰⁷ Barbosa, I, p. 225.

c9.s3.30

¹⁰⁸ Ibid., p. 225 *fn*.

c9.s3.31

¹⁰⁹ A record of A.D. 1537-38 found at Kiranūr in the Pudukkōṭṭai State contains an imprecation in the following words : சிதம்பரம் சியாழி புள்ளு யிருக்கு வெளுரிலெ நெரிப்பிட்ட பாவத்திலெபோக கடவன். (I.P.S., 744). But this has no reference to the practice of setting fire to temporary military camps

c9.s3.32

kind of fight called *sāmbrāni*. It states that the *Mahānāyakācārya* having a mind to see a fight with left foot advanced and the right foot in the *sāmbrāni* fashion, one Cennappa fighting against Caṇḍa Bova in front of his master in a battle at Nāgārjunakōṭe died and went to the feet of the Gods in the world of Gods. The exact phrase used in the inscription is *yeḍada kāla śāci balada kāla sāmbrāni rana*. It is not however found in the Kanarese text but is supplied by Rice. The Kanarese text has *svambrāni* rana; and there is nothing to justify the addition of the word ‘fashion’ It seems to refer to a battle fought at a place probably called Svambrāni. (See E.C., XI, Ck. 42).

c9.s3.33

¹¹¹ However the title *Kathāri* was borne by the Sāḷuvas even before the time of Narasimha.

c9.s3.34

Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya suggests that the kings must not go personally into the enemy country, and that "it is meet that he appoints one of his lords and sends him on the business."110 Barbosa says that the king of Vijayanagar seldom went to war himself but sent his captains and armies.¹¹¹ It is likely that the kings did not lead expeditions unless they were driven to that necessity. Acyuta Rāya, for instance, though he takes credit for the subjugation of many of his provinces, yet does not seem to have taken the field himself. When Cellappa’s rebellion was being put down he was spending his time in the company of scholars at Śrīraṅgam.¹¹² But curiously enough Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya was in this respect an exception to his own maxim. Even to quell a small rebellion he took the field in person.

c9.s3.35

¹¹¹ Barbosa, I, p. 224.

c9.s3.36

¹¹² S. K. Aiyangar, Sources, pp. 159-60.

c9.s3.37

From the Rāyavācakamu we learn that with the commission given to a general to lead the forces were also given betel and nut. Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya, having heard from his spies of the atrocities committed by the Muhammadans in his dominions, summoned from among his amaranāyakam generals the chief Pemmasāni Rāma-liṅga, and asked his advice as to how he was to act under the circumstances. Rāma-liṅga assured the king that if he should be entrusted with the commission he could rout the enemy in no time. Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya approved of the idea, and presented him with betel and nut in token of his leadership in the attack.¹¹³

c9.s3.38

¹¹³ Ibid., p. 112.

c9.s3.39

During the course of the fight, if the kings led the armies, they themselves encouraged the soldiers to fight or in their absence appointed men for the purpose. Ferishta says that Bukka I asked the Brahmans to deliver sermons to his troops on the merit of slaughtering the Muhammadans, for they were the destroyers of the Hindu temples and their images and the slaughterers of cows.114 When Kṛṣṇadēva Rāya saw that his forces had been made to take to their heels by the Muhammadans in the initial stages of the battle of Raicūr, he rebuked his soldiers for their cowardice, and encouraged them by saying that since all of them had to die some day, they should meet their death boldly at the battlefield as was their the *Goths*, the *Vandals*, the *Suevi*, the *Burgundians*, the *Alani*, the *Huns*, the *Franks*, the *Saxons*, the *Thuringians*, the *Rugians*, and the *Heruli*. The names of these tribes are familiar to the reader, but their origin, their migrations, and their settlements are involved in the deepest obscurity. The most probable opinion is that they were all of German or Scythian extraction, and that they had been driven from their native seats by the pressure of the Huns, a formidable nation of Tartars, who had crossed the Volga and the Tanais, and were advancing with rapid strides towards the frontiers of the Roman empire.

c9.s3.40

¹¹⁰ Amukta., canto IV, v. 255.

c9.s3.41

The first of these nations that crossed the Danube was the *Goths*. They were divided into two great branches, the *Visigoths* or Western Goths, and the *Ostrogoths* or Eastern Goths. The Visigoths, under the conduct of Fritigern, implored the protection of the emperor Valens, and were permitted to settle in the province of Thrace. But the perfidy of the Roman governors, and the insolence of the Roman soldiers, soon provoked them to rebellion. They defeated the imperial armies, and Valens himself perished in the battle of Hadrianople.

c9.s3.42

The death of Valens was followed by the accession of Theodosius, who, by his wisdom and valour, restored the discipline of the Roman legions, and compelled the Goths to accept a peace, which was rather a truce than a permanent settlement. The Goths, however, remained in the heart of the empire, and their presence was a constant source of danger and alarm. They were no longer the rude barbarians who had first crossed the Danube; they had learned the arts of war and the policy of the Romans, and they were ready to take advantage of any opportunity to assert their independence.

First 153 of 296 passages. Read on

Linked texts (14)