H-M synthesis: Conquest of Vijayanagar

Discussing the Battle of Talikota where the Vijayanagar kingdom was wiped out by the Bahamani rulers invariably touches a raw nerve in any knowledgeable telugu. The reason is that the court language of these kings was telugu. Krishnadeva Raya, greatest of the Vijayanagar kings, declared that of all the languages he knew telugu was the sweetest.

The conquest of Vijayanagar by the Bahamani rulers is often portrayed as a victory of muslims over hindus. But the matter is not so simple. The armies of Bahamani kings were employing hindu soldiers and the army of the Vijayanagar kings included muslim soldiers. Indeed, the king of Vijayanagar who managed to lose the empire (Rama Raya) had once worked as a senior army officer in the army of one of the Bahamani rulers.

(Prior to the conquest of Vijayanagar, Rama Raya on several occasions invaded other Bahamani kingdoms for the purpose of looting. Typically, when invading one of the Bahamani kingdoms, the Vijayanagar kingdom under Rama Raya would collude with one or more of the other Bahamani rulers and jointly go forth on the invasion. )

This shows that with respect to the hindu vs muslim issue, the Bahamani rulers (and also the Vijayanagar rulers) were secular in their approach.

When the Vijayanagar kingdom was conquered, an important Vishnu temple was destroyed by the conquerors while an important Shiva temple was spared. Why was this done? I wrote about this earlier:

Initially, Virupaksha (considered a form of Shiva) was
the family deity and also the state deity of Vijaynagar.Important state
transactions were formalized in the presence of Virupaksha. Then there
was a period in which Vishnu started becoming important to the
Vijaynagar rulers. A Lord Ram temple was built and Lord Venkateshwara
was ardently patronized during this period, but important state
transactions continued to be formalized in the presence of Virupaksha
during this period. Finally from 1516 to 1565 (1565 being the date for
the battle of Talikota), the vast majority of state transactions were
finalized (witnessed and authenticated) before the Vaisnava God
Vitthala. This seems to be the reason why the Vitthala temple was
destroyed, and the Virupaksha temple spared; the idea being that the
state deity--being a visible representative of the state--had to be
destroyed to crush the morale of the people and force them to accept the
defeat of the state. Destroying the state temple or looting the main
image of the state deity kept in the state temple was standard practice
in dealing with a defeated enemy even in pre-muslim India; the caveat
being that in pre-muslim India, the looting of the state deity seems to
have occured a lot more frequently than the destruction of the entire
state temple.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/personal/carvaka-275896.htm

One of the turning points in the history of India was the Battle of Talikota in which the Vijayanagar kingdom was wiped out. The battle could have easily gone the other way but for the fact that Rama Raya, king of Vijayanagar, was surrounded, captured and killed on the battlefield after a surprise attack during the battle. Rama Raya was 80 years old at this time and one has to wonder what he had been smoking when he decided to personally lead the army and not get one of his generals to fight such an important battle.

An exciting, and i think authentic, account of what happened at the Battle of Talikota:

What was Rama Raya doing at this time? He was on a palanquin
according to Ferishta’s account after disregarding the pleas of his
advisors to stay on a horse for a quick escape if necessary. He instead
reprimanded them saying that the opposing Deccanis were mere children
and he would get rid of them in no time. He had also asked his men to
get the head of Nizam Shah to him and bring Adil Shah and Ibrahim Qutb
Shah to him in chains where he would keep them in a cage forever. How
man proposes and how God disposes!!!!

Rumi Khan’s elephant charged directly at the Raya after his bodyguard
was overcome by the Deccani horse and Rama Raya fell off his palanquin.
Shirazi writes that the elephant wounded Rama raya too. Rumi Khan had
no idea that the man lying sprawled on the ground was after his
contemporary Akbar in the North, the greatest of Indian Kings – Raja
Rama Raya. And at that moment, Rama Raya’s Vakil (Shirazi calls him
Peshwa – Prime Minister), Dalpatraya fell onto his master shielding him
from the elephant and disclosing to Rumi Khan the identity of Rama Raya.

Rumi Khan then took Rama Raya and bound him with a rope and put him
on an elephant to take him to his master Nizam Shah. There, when Nizam
Shah confronts his old nemesis Rama Raya, Shirazi recounts their
conversation.

Nizam Shah asked Rama Raya - ’Are you all right?’. Rama Raya does not
reply and points his hand to his head, a signal that Shirazi
interpreted as Rama Raya suggesting that he had reached his destiny. In
the meantime news reaches the Nizam Shahi camp that news of Rama raya’s
capture had reached Ibrahim Adil Shah’s camp and he was rushing to the
spot. This put the Nizam Shahi camp in a dilemma because Adil Shah was
close to Rama Raya who had adopted the former as his son some time ago.

Yes, these were the ways of the Deccan where father waged war on the
son. Adil Shah had visited Vijaynagara the year before where he was
honoured by Rama Raya and the Queen mother in front of all those
assembled called him her dear son. And Bijapur and Vijaynagar swore
alliance with each other and promised to make war on their mutual
enemies-the other Deccani Sultans. Of course this alliance was
shortlived and we see them meet each other in the field at Talikota.
Returning back to the Nizam Shahi camp where Rama Raya stands bound
before Nizam Shah, a prominent Noble of Nizam Shah, Qasim Baig Hakim
protests to Nizam Shah that this was not the time of discourse and
reminds him that Adil Shah was near. Hearing this, Nizam Shah ordered
Rama Raya to be beheaded on the spot. Some sources suggest that Nizam
Shah slit Rama Raya’s neck himself but in all probability and as per
Shirazi’s account, this would have been done by an executioner...


However when I survey this scene in my mind, as a student of history I
cannot help being both confused and amazed at the actors on the
battlefield, that fateful day. The battle was not a simple black and
white, Hindu versus Muslim war......


Ibrahim Adil
Shah was an adopted son of Rama Raya. Adil Shah was a great patron of
Hindu art and was the first Bijapur Sultan to engage local Deccanis a
large number of them being Maratha Hindus in his court. It was in his
time that public accounts of the state began to be maintained in the
Marathi language.



Nizam Shah,
the inveterate enemy of the Raya had an army whose infantry wing was
dominated in number by Hindus. A very large component of his army even
at Talikota would have been composed of these Hindu elements.



And lastly,
Rama Raya was not a Muslim hating figure that many make him out to be.
It is ceratainly true that he was constantly at war with them, and was
harsh to his enemies, but so is the nature of empires. Rafiuddin Shirazi
notes in his acccount, that Rama Raya’s court had in it several Muslim
nobles who had deserted the neighbouring Muslim states and had come to
settle in Vijaynagara. They were given important positions in court and
accorded great respect. A copy of the Koran was always kept above Rama
Raya’s throne so that Muslim noblement entering the court could pay
obesience to it while saluting Rama Raya. Shirazi goes further to
narrate an incident where Rama Raya’s brother asked the Raya to insist
upon the Muslims to stop sacrificing animals. Rama Raya replied ” These
people (Muslims) have accepted your jobs for applying their service, not
for quitting their religion’.

There is a story current in several quarters about 2 Muslim generals in
the service of Rama Raya who desert him on the battlefield at the last
moment – the Gilani brothers, but I am of the opinion that this is only a
legend as I have yet to come upon any original source which
corroborates this account. Neither does Ferishta, nor Shirazi make even a
passing mention of any ‘Gilani brothers’. But what we know for sure is
that the Deccani Sultans had a large number of Hindus, serving with them
and there is no account of these Hindu soldiers deserting their Muslim
masters either.

http://toshkhana.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/last-of-the-rayas-an-eyewitness-account-of-the-defeat-and-death-of-rama-raya-of-vijaynagara-at-talikota/

Description in OXFORD HISTORY OF INDIA ( written by vincent smith )--

this is the description in the book of the muslim's destruction of the great south indian hindu city of vijaynagar. i am giving you as a example of muslim atrocities recorded in the book.


here is it-


-( after the defeat of the hindu army in the battle of talikota) the princes fled from the city with all their countless treasures loaded upon more than five hundred elephants , and the proud capital city lay at the mercy of the victors.

the plunder was so great that every man in the muslim army became rich in gold , jewels , effects, tents , arms horses and above all hindu slaves;as the sultans left every person in possesion of what he had aquired only taking elephants for their own use.

ruin of vijaynagar---

the ruin brought upon the magnificient city may be described in the words of sewell, who was familiar with the scene of the desolation.

when the princes fled with their treasures ,

then a panic seized the city......no reatreat ,no flight was possible except for a few, for the pack oxen and carts had almost all followed the forces to the war and had not returned. nothing could be done but to bury all the treasures , arm the younger men and wait. next day the place became a prey to the robber tribes and jungle people of the neighbourhood. hordes of brinjaris , kurubas and the like pounced upon the hapless city, and carried off great quantities of riches. couto notes at least six concerted attacks on the city.

next day however , saw the begining of the end. the victorious mussalmans had halted on the field of battle for rest and refreshment , but now they had reached the capital ,and from that time forward for a space of five months vijaynagar knew no rest.

the enemy had come to destroy ,and they carried out their object rentlessly....NEVER PERHAPS IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD HAS SUCH HAVOC BEEN WROUGHT , AND WROUGHT SO SUDDENLY, ON SO SPLENDID A CITY ; TEEMING WITH A WEALTHY AND INDUSTRIOUS POPULATION IN THE FULL PLENITUDE OF PROSPERITY ONE DAY, AND ON THE NEXT SEIZED , PILLAGED , AND REDUCED TO RUINS ,AMID SCENES OF SAVAGE MASSACRE AND HORRORS BEGGARING DESCRIPTION.

vincent smith then says that the words of a hebrew prothet lamenting the destruction of jerusalem by muslim invaders apply to vijaynagar too----

" how doth the city sit solitary , that was full of people ! how she is become as a widow! she that was great among the nations and a princess among the provinces , how is she become tributary !....the young and the old lie dead on the ground on thr streets: my virgins and and young men are fallen by the sword.........how is the gold become dim! how has the value of the most fine gold changed ! the stones of the sanctuary are poured in the top of every street."

Vincent Smith was a British historian writing at the time when India was under British rule. It was natural for the British at the time to highlight, exaggerate (and in some cases resort to outright lies) the worst aspects of the social and military interactions of indian kings (and also of the common people) in pre-british india while neglecting all positive aspects of the same. This was standard British policy after the 1857 war of independence: they did not want this episode to be repeated and the best way to do this was to adopt the 'divide and rule policy'.

It is for good reason that the Cambridge History of India is now considered outdated and we have a much more balanced 'New Cambridge History of India'. I would in particular recommend this book (a part of the 'New Cambridge History of India' series) which has an excellent chapter on Rama Raya:

http://www.amazon.com/Social-History-Deccan-1300-1761-Cambridge/dp/0521716276/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1328172264&sr=8-13

Rashmun wrote:Vincent Smith was a British historian writing at the time when India was under British rule. It was natural for the British at the time to highlight, exaggerate (and in some cases resort to outright lies) the worst aspects of the social and military interactions of indian kings (and also of the common people) in pre-british india while neglecting all positive aspects of the same. This was standard British policy after the 1857 war of independence: they did not want this episode to be repeated and the best way to do this was to adopt the 'divide and rule policy'.

It is for good reason that the Cambridge History of India is now considered outdated and we have a much more balanced 'New Cambridge History of India'. I would in particular recommend this book (a part of the 'New Cambridge History of India' series) which has an excellent chapter on Rama Raya:

http://www.amazon.com/Social-History-Deccan-1300-1761-Cambridge/dp/0521716276/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1328172264&sr=8-13

--> The volume of the 'New Cambridge History of India', which i have read but do not possess right now, takes the same approach which i gave in my earlier posts i.e. it emphasizes the fact that the conquest of Vijayanagar should be understood in the context of the fact that the Bahamani rulers had hindu soldiers fighting on their behalf and the Vijayanagar kings had muslims on their side. Also, Rama Raya had earlier served as a senior officer in the army of the one of the Bahamani rulers.