A Forgotten Empire: Vijayanagar, Robert Sewell [books under 200 pages .TXT] 📗

“Diogo Lopes de Sequeira, AS soon as he arrived at Goa (from the Red Sea), all necessary arrangements having been made for the government of the city, AND PRINCIPALLY OF THE MAINLANDS, WHICH HE FOUND THAT RUY DE MELLO HAD TAKEN ... went to Cochin;”

and thence to Diu, where he arrived on February 9, 1521.[227] Another passage farther on in the narrative of Barros also establishes the fact that Ruy de Mello took the lands during Sequeira’s absence at the Red Sea.[228]

Faria y Souza, a Spanish writer, whose work was first published a century after these events, confirms the period, February 1520 to February 1521, as that of Sequeira’s absence at the Red Sea, and he writes: —

“While the governor229 was in the Red Sea, the King Crisnao Rao of Bisnaga covered the plains and hills and stopped the flow of the rivers230 with an army of thirty-five thousand horse, seven hundred and thirty-three thousand foot, and five hundred and eighty-six elephants carrying castles with four men in each, and twelve thousand watermen … and baggage in such quantities that the courtesans alone numbered more than twenty thousand.”[231]

Souza also states, as does Nuniz, that after the defeat of the Adil Shah, Krishna Deva Raya demanded that, as the price of peace, the former should visit him and kiss his foot; and that, taking advantage of the Adil Shah’s difficulties, Ruy de Mello seized the mainlands of Goa.[232] It is clear, therefore, that both authors are writing of the same event.

Osorio, a later writer, confirms the story in most of its details, stating that after the defeat of the Adil Shah, Krishna Raya sent to Ruy de Mello (“Roderigo Melos”), captain of Goa, offering the mainlands, and promising after the return of Sequeira to send a regular embassy to conclude a solemn treaty. De Mello accordingly took the mainlands.

Lafitau233 also states that the war took place during Sequeira’s absence at the Red Sea, and that the mainlands were taken after the Adil Shah’s defeat.[234]

Turning to Firishtah, I find a difference. He states that the battle of Raichur took place in Hijra 927 (December 22, 1520, to December 1, 1521, A.D.), which, if it was fought in May, as Nuniz declares, makes the date May 1521. That he is speaking of the same affair is obvious from the details given. He mentions, for instance, the vast host constituting the Hindu army, the Shah’s force advancing to the river Krishna, the too hasty crossing of the river, the gallant fight of the Muhammadans, their defeat and rout, the fact of the Adil Shah’s forces being driven to the river and perishing in large numbers while attempting to re-cross it, the Shah’s narrow escape, and his dependence on Asada Khan. All this leaves no room for doubt. The only difference is that, whereas we learn from the other authorities that the fortress of Raichur was in the hands of the Muhammadans, Firishtah states that the war arose because the Adil Shah “made preparations for marching to recover Mudkul and Roijore from the Roy of Beejanuggur,” as if the latter were then in possession of those places. As to Firishtah’s date, I believe it to be wrong by one year, for the reasons given above. It must be remembered that he wrote many years after the event.

Having thus, I hope satisfactorily, established the fact that the date given by Nuniz for the battle of Raichur is wrong by two years, and should be 1520, I turn to examine the day and month. It was the new moon day of May, according to Nuniz, and a Saturday. Krishna Deva Raya was ready for battle on the Friday, but postponed his attack to the next day since Friday was considered an unlucky day.

The moment of the occurrence of new moon in May 120 was 2.27 A.M. on the morning of Thursday, May 17. We do not know whether Nuniz ascertained his facts from native almanacks or the calculations of the astrologers, or whether he spoke from observations made by himself or by some one who was present; but Nuniz was an ordinary person, not a skilled astronomer, so far as we can tell, and he may well have called the day on which the crescent of the new moon first made its appearance just after sunset the “new moon day.” This first appearance actually took place on the Saturday following. The first day of the Muhammadan month Jamada’ l akhir, corresponding to the heliacal rising of the moon on that occasion, was Saturday, May 19.

I therefore believe that this great battle took place on Saturday, May 19, A.D. 1520,[235] a date almost synchronous with the of the “Field of the Cloth of Gold.”

The Number of Troops Engaged.

When we total up the list given by Nuniz of the columns that marched from Vijayanagar for the campaign, the amount is so huge that we pause in natural doubt as to whether the story could by any possibility be true: 703,000 foot, 32,600 horse, and 551 elephants, BESIDES the camp followers, merchants, &c., and “an infinitude of people” who joined him at a place close to Raichur! It certainly demands a large strain on our credulity.

Let every one form his own opinion. I can only call attention to the fact that large armies seem to have always been the rule in India, and that certainly Krishna Raya had the power to raise immense numbers of troops,[236] though whether so many as is stated is another question. His power to do so lay in his mode of government. Allusion has already been made to this, and Nuniz gives us interesting details. The whole empire was divided into provinces and estates, held by chiefs bound to keep up masses of troops fit for immediate service. It is, of course, natural to suppose that in this great war the king would have put forth all his strength.

To prove that immense armies were often employed by Indian kings, we have only to refer to a succession of writers. Barros notes the great power of the sovereign of Vijayanagar and his almost incredible richness, and is at pains to give an account of how these enormous forces were raised, “lest his tale should not be believed.”

In the second volume of Scott’s “History of the Dekhan,” a translation is given of a journal kept by a Bondela officer in the reign of Aurangzib, an officer who served under “Dulput Roy” in A.D. 1690. Writing about Vijayanagar in former days, at the height of its grandeur and importance, he says, “They kept an army of 30,000 horse, a million of infantry, and their wealth was beyond enumeration.”

Conti, who was in India about a century earlier than the war in question, told Bracciolini that the Vijayanagar army consisted of “a million of men and upwards.”

Abdur Razzak (1442 A.D.) tells the same story, putting the number at 1,100,000 with 1000 elephants.

Twenty years later Nikitin states that the Kulbarga forces marching to attack the Hindus amounted to 900,000 foot, 190,000 horse, and 575 elephants.

The Sultan himself, independently of his nobles, took the field with 300,000 men, and even when he only went out on a hunting expedition he took with him a train of 10,000 horse, 500,000 foot, and 200 elephants. He states that the Malik ul Tujar alone had an army of 200,000 employed in the siege of one city. The Hindus fought almost nude, and were armed with shield and sword.

Even so far back as the time of Alexander the Great (about B.C. 320) the army of Magadha was computed by the Greeks as consisting of 600,000 foot. 30,000 cavalry, and 9000 elephants, though Quintus Curtius makes a much more modest estimate.

Lord Egerton of Tatton states237 that an army of Hindu confederated states, mustered for the defence of Northern indict against the Muhammadan invasion in 1192 A.D., amounted, “according to the most moderate estimate,” to 300,000 horse, 3000 elephants, and a great number of infantry.

In A.D. 1259 a Mogul embassy was received at Delhi by an escort of 50,000 horse, and was led past lines of infantry numbering as many as 200,000 in their ranks.

It will be remembered how Muhammad Taghlaq of Delhi238 raised, according to Firishtah, an army of 370,000 men for the conquest of Persia, and when he wanted to destroy the inhabitants of a certain tract of country, he “ordered out his army as if he were going hunting,” surrounded the tract, and then, pressing inwards towards the centre, slaughtered all the inhabitants therein. This implies that he took, when merely hunting, immense numbers of men with him. Shahab-ud-Din, indeed, declared that Muhammad Taghlaq had an army of 900,000 horse;[239] and Nuniz, on the opening page of his chronicle, says that this Sultan invaded the Balaghat with 800,000 horse.[240] This estimate was, of course, only according to the tradition extant in 1535.

Faria y Souza, writing in the seventeenth century, estimated the forces of Bahadur, king of Cambay, in 1534, as 100,000 horse, 415,000 foot, and 600 elephants.

As late as 1762 the Mahrattas are said to have had an army of 100,000 horse.

Nuniz241 gives details of the provincial forces of Vijayanagar, compulsorily maintained by eleven out of a total of two hundred nobles amongst whom the empire was divided, and the total of the forces of these eleven amounts to 19,000 horse, 171,700 foot, and 633 elephants.

Castanheda confirms other writers in this matter, stating that the infantry of Vijayanagar were countless, the country being of large extent and thickly populated, so that the king could call upon a million, or even two millions, of men at will.[242] This writer visited India just at the close of the reign of Krishna Deva Raya. He states that the king kept up at his own cost an establishment of 100,000 horses and 4000 elephants.

As to all this, I repeat that every one is at liberty to form his own opinion; but at least it seems certain that all the chroniclers believed that the king of Vijayanagar could, if he so desired, put into the field immense masses of armed men. They were probably not all well armed, or well trained, or well disciplined, but as to large numbers there can be little reasonable doubt. A relic of this may be seen every year at modern Haidarabad, the capital city of H.H. the Nizam, where, at the annual festival known as the “Langar,” armed irregulars in very large numbers file through the principal streets. They are for the most part a mere mob of men with weapons, and are not maintained as State troops, but they are brought up by the various nobles in separate bodies, each chief mustering for the occasion all his hereditary retainers and forming them into rough regiments and brigades.

As to the description given by Nuniz of the offensive armour of the elephants, which are stated to have gone into battle with long swords like scythes attached to their trunks, the story is confirmed by many other writers.

Firishtah’s Narrative.

Firishtah’s account of the battle of Raichur is interesting, as it gives a description of the affair from the enemy’s point of view. Ismail Adil Shah marched

“to recover Mudkul and Roijore from the roy of Beejanugger, who, gaining early intelligence of his designs, moved with a great force, and stationed his camp on the bank of the Kistnah, where he was joined by many of his tributaries; so that the army amounted at least to 50,000 horse, besides a vast host of foot. The sultan would now have delayed his expedition, as the enemy possessed all the ferries of the Kistnah, but that his tents were pitched, and it would have