Talk:Origin of the Vijayanagara Empire

NPoV?

The above heading was added on 24 March 2007, and most of the following headings downgraded in an effort to make the argument below more readable. Could all contributors please follow the guidelines for use of discussion pages, and sign and date their comments please. It is hard to see who has said what in the following text. Imc 14:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Psuedo-historian

Kannambadi claims himself to be an authority on Vijayanagar Empire. He has been selectively inserting material to show that Vijayanagar empire solely becomes the heritage of Kannadigas. One glaring example is the omission of Telugu literature. It is common knowledge that Vijayanagar period was a glorious chapter in Telugu literature. Ashtadiggajas (eight great poets) were the most celebrated group in Krishnadevaraya's court. Tenali Rama, known all over India, was a part of the group. The emperor himself was a great poet having written "Amuktamalyada" in Telugu. Many such glaring omissions make Kannambadi either an ignorant historian or a parocial psuedo-historian. As such, his arguments about the origin of the empire should taken with a pinch of salt.

1. False logic: Just because more coins were found with Kannada script, the empire becomes Kannada.

2. The empire initially encompassed predominantly Kannada areas known as Karunadu/Karnata. It is logical that the kingdom came be known as Karnata kingdom. Even Telugu poets referred Krishnadevaraya an "Karnaataandhra" king (of course he was also extolled as Andhra Bhoja).

3. Music composed in Karnata region is known as Carnatic music. That does not make all of South Indian music as that composed in Kannada language. It is simple logic.

4. Bellary/Hospeta/Anegondi area is historically Telugu-speaking area. Only after the reorganization of states, the demography changed.

5. The psuedo-historian does not believe in Sewell who is considered the ultimate authority on Vijayanagar empire. But he conveniently depends on him for list of dynasties, kings etc. What a perversion?

6. A Sanskrit manuscript found in deep Kannada country becomes hearsay/tales for the Psuedohistorian.

7. Mr Deasi is an authority for the psuedo-historian just because Desai based his "evidence" on the fact that the guru of Harihara and Bukka was a Kannada guy. What a great logic!!

8. Inscriptions in Kannada areas would certainly be in Kannada. What else? How does this deny the Telugu origin of Harihara and Bukka?

9. How do Appadorai's statements attest the theory of the psuedo- historian? It beats logic.

10. Marital alliances were made for convenience in medieval times. Hoyasalas were on the decline. They must have found it convenient to give a woman in marriage to Harhara to hang onto the benefits of power. It is again a simple reasoning.

11. What stake Muslim historians would have had in writing that the brothers were captured, converted but voluntarily reconversted later? They only stated facts of that time.

Psuedo-historian makes feeble attempts to reverse the historical facts as accounted diligently by early historians.

I appeal to all Telugu historians to notice and correct the false history being popounded by Kannambadi (Psuedo-historian).

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.197.227.228 (talk • contribs) and —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.141.12.194 (talk • contribs)

No personal attacks

to the anonymous author of the above comments: Please do not indulge in personal attack. You can comment on the contribtions of an editor, but not call them names like 'pseudohistorian', etc. If you want to correct any incorrect information, please be bold and edit the information with proper citations. Creating a user id for yourself and logging in while editing and signing your comments will certainly increase the value of your contributions among the other editors of WP. I hope you will stick along and make valuable contributions to WP. - Parthi 23:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

This is unwarranted & was not required at all. Even most telugu scholars agree to the kannada/karnataka origin. They also consider as their elder sister. Some telugu fanatic who has no facts/correct information has come here to create some nuasance. If it all if he has any material/concrete evidence of telugu he must produce it. Language wise telugu has evolved very late compared to kannada & it does't need any discussion on that topic here. It is well known that ppl from andhra were using prakrit,sanskrit along with telugu before telugu came into promimence. Kannada was also used in some parts of andhra prominently in olden days. Nobody can change the fact that kannada is older to telugu. Origin of Vijayanagar Empire is very much of kannada origin. Some kannada rulers also started supporting telugu (because of no of speakers in the kingdom) after some time during vijayanagar empire. More than 60 % of old inscriptions,writings are in kannada during this time. The rest is in Sanskrit,Telugu,Tamil.

Sri Krishna Devaraya patronised telugu & gave push up for the language.

who said bellary,anegondi(kannada word),other parts were only telugu speaking..u r one nuts..they may be bilingual along with kannada speakers. U only agree with the fact Telugu started evolving during krishna devaraya times. wat was the status of telugu before that. Tell me more about it. Status of Telugu from 10th to 15th centure. Can you write an article abt it.

Reply

Dear Mr Parthi, I hated to do that. But, I did it because he called me Cynic. Please go through the whole discussion I had with Kannambadi here as well as in the "Discussion" of "vijayanagar Empire", right from the beginning. Please tell me who behaved in a mature and logical manner after reading the whole stuff. You got to do it. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.141.12.194 (talk • contribs)

The request was aimed at both parties. We sometimes let our feelings of regional nationalism and language affinities influence our activities in WP. I can see a number of instances of this everyday on WP by various nationalities. It is not worthwhile wasting our energy arguing about petty differenes. Due to the nature of WP and the vast number of input it receives everyday. the neutral point of view and verifiability will prevail eventually with any article. I have also seen this happen. So, there is no point in carrying these arguments to a personal level. There are arbitration mechanisms available to solve content disputes. - Parthi 02:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Dear Mr Parthi, I very much appreciate and respect your views.

Addition

Some additions regarding the role of Vidyaranya were made. The material was taken from the great South Indian historian Mr N. Venkataramanayya, an authority on Vijayanagar Empire.

My opinionDineshkannambadi 00:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi there. I kind of like the idea of arbitration, but there is one problem. I am not sure what a few guys on wikipedia would be able to decide when noted scholars from India and abroad have not been able to come to conclusion regarding this controversial topic (Kannada or Telugu origin). I was reading something written by well known Karnatakan scholar Dr. Jyotsna Kamat that every new evidence that is brought out only adds more questions to the origin of Hakka and Bukka, on both sides of the fence. I feel we should just continue to contribute without personal attacks and let the world decide for itself. From my side, I have pulled up some interesting books (obviously to bolster my pro-Kannada argument) I intend to buy (at least a couple), add to my collection and read (available at Vedams books).

1. History of Vijayanagar empire - Decline and disappearance, M.H. Rama Sharma
2. Yadavas through the ages - from ancient period to date, J.N. Singh Yadav
3. History of Vijayanagar, B. Suryanarain Row
4. Vijayanagar: History and Legacy, S. Krishnaswamy Aiyangar
5. Sources of Vijayanagar history, S. Krishnaswamy Aiyangar
6. New light on Hampi: recent research at Vijayanagar , John M. Fitz and George Michell
7. Recent advances in Vijayanagar studies, P Shanmugam ans S. Srinivasan

This issue is such a vexed issue that it has really got into local guides at Hampi also. I was there few years back. On the first evening of our tour around Hampi, our ad hoc guide (whom we met in front of a temple) told me that this was an entirely Telugu show, there was no Kannada anywhere in the picture (he must have been of Telugu background)(See, I betray my anti-Telugu bias here). The next day we decided to go with a guide from the "Archaelogical Survey of India" (we payed him lot more though) and he gave us a more balanced opinion (a Kannada local with whom I have wavelength match). In fact he works for ASI both as a guide and in excavations and can be considered more reliable. He gave an account that closely matches what Dr. Jyotsna Kamat writes in her web page that linguistic lines were rather blurred and the need of the hour was an entirely different one (to establish Kannada supremacy).

If one pulls back from all the rhetoric between myself and Mr. Unsigned Telugu, its clear that our arguements, debates and acrimony is precisely "NOT" the reason why the Empire was so successful (Had I been there I would have wiped out all those Telugu affiliations). I believe I am mature enough to understand that (as you can see in all my Wiki contributions to establish Indian history as that of Kannadigas and Karnatka). In fact I intend to go to Hampi again in a few years (with so many places to visit in Karnataka) and do more snooping around (good choice of words!!). In the meantime, I intend to order for some books (I made enough in USA to do so).

Dinesh Kannambadi

Dont mix arguements

Dont mix arguements of various scholars propounding Telugu origin with those professing Kannada origin. The issue is complicated enough, unless your intention is to confuse people more like the Musilm/European travellers did.

Dinesh Kannambadi

Reply I did not 'mix' it. To refute your logic that para was included. I saw your contributions, edits, talk pages, arguments with other contributors etc in Wiki. Now I am convinced that you are a hardened Kannada fanatic. And you are quite active and doing a great job of claiming Indian history, culture, traditions, sculpture, music, literature and architecture as that of Kannada origin. I hope your work will be demolished by some real professional historians.

Please provide citations

Plese provide "reference notes with page numbers" for your references from the books of Venkataramanayya and Robert Sewell. This is a wikipedia requirement and rule. I have provided the needfull.Dineshkannambadi 01:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Free Advice

You have been spending quite a few bucks to buy books written by your fellow fanatics. Spend a few cents to buy Venkataramanyya's book. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.94.192.142 (talk) 17:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

Kannada origin

I seek clarifications regarding Kannada origin from Users who made the input before I do any edits.

1. Harihara I made a grant to Bharati Tirtha in the presence of Krishnayitayi, queen of Hoysala Veera Ballala (It is but natural that rulers make grants to local sages).

Reply-->The author cites the close ties between Hoysalas and Harahara I, not one of animosity. Also, the author discusses that Vidyaranya was instrumental in the formation of the empire. If you have issues, question the scholar. Published info cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

2. No war between the Hoysalas and the Sangama brothers took place in the time frame 1336, when the empire was founded (Can you cite evidence?).

Reply-->provided citation. For evidence please speak to the historian.Dineshkannambadi 02:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

3. Famous Telugu scholars Vallabharaya and Srinatha, in their works called the Sangama brothers Karnata Kshitinatha (Because they ruled from Karnata/Karunadu soil. Nothing to do with linguistic affinity. Going by your logic, Krishna Deva Raya comfortably becomes Telugu because he was called ‘Andhra Bhoja’).

Reply-->This is the authors opinion and is published. Please question the scholar if you have any issues. cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

4. Early records of Harihara I also called him Karnataka Vidya Vilasa or "learned man of Karnataka (As above; Krishna Deva Raya wrote a great Prabandha ‘Amukta Malyada’ in Telugu. That settles the matter!).

Reply-->removed. Not from my book.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

5. An early inscription of Harihara II called him, Lion to the scent elephant of the Andhra king (Cite the inscription) demonstrating their anti-Telugu propensity (This is a very unfortunate conclusion. Harihara and Bukka were great friends of Musunuri cousins from whom they drew inspiration. They jointly fought wars with Bahmanis. In fact, a Muslim scholar Zia Baruni stated that Bukka was a relative of Kapaya Nayaka, probably through some marital alliance. Bukka was Golla and Kapaya was Kamma).

reply-->It is unfortunate for you, not the scholar. Published info cant be removed. Question the scholar.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

6. It is also asserted that the theory of capture of Harihara I and Bukka Raya I by the Sultan of Delhi and conversion to Islam is false (Cite evidence) and that the testimony of epigraphs proves that the area around Hampi constituted their homeland (Cite evidence).

Reply-->Cleaned up. But the citation persists and citation is provided. Published info. cant be removed. Question P.B. Desai, Saletore and Heras.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

7. The empire never had a Telugu origin (A baseless and sweeping statement).

Reply--->Scholars opinion, published info cant be removed. Question the scholars.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

8. The patron saint of the early kings was saint Vidyaranya, the 12th Shankaracharya of Sringeri in Karnataka and this is proof enough of their unquestionable identity with the Kannada country (As in #1).

Reply-->Removed. Cleaned upDineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

9. Persian author Ferishta of Vijayanagara days wrote the emperors as "Roies of Karnataka" (No one disputes that).

Reply-->Good for you.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

10. The Kannada works of that time Chikkadevaraya Vamshavali and Keladinripa Vijayam state that the Sangama brothers were Kuruba by caste making them people of Karnataka (Golla and Kuruba are synonymous).

Reply-->Your opinion. Published info cant be removed, hence cited. If you have an issue take it up with the scholar. Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

11. Almost half of the Vijayanagar inscriptions are in Kannada out of a total of about 7000 available today and use surnames which are pure Kannada titles such as Bhashegetappuva - rayara - ganda, Moorurayaraganda and Arirayadatta. The remaining inscriptions are in Sanskrit, Telugu and Tamil (It is but natural and obvious because the empire had under its sway more Karnata region than other regions. The fortunes always fluctuated in Telugu region).

Reply--->Dont give your opinion. All info is publised hence permissible. Cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

12. Inscriptional evidence shows that Ballappa Dandanayaka, a nephew of Hoysala Veera Ballala III was married to a daughter of Harihara I, the founder of the empire. This is claimed proof enough of the association Sangama brothers had with the Hoysalas (Marital alliances in medieval times were made for political reasons. Also, see #5).

Your justification. published info cant be removed. If you have problems, take it up with the scholars.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

13. About the Muslim records that claim a Telugu origin of Harihara I and Bukka Raya, it is said that they are neither unanimous nor reliable in their claims (On what basis? Why should Muslims have any bias in this respect?).

Reply-->Ask the scholar, not me. Published info cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

14. In those days of tremendous religious rigidity, it is too far fetched to accept a theory of conversion to Islam and reconversion to Hinduism and still manage to win the trust and loyalty of Hindu subjects, in an hour of impending invasions (Absolutely not. Re-conversion was sanctioned by a well-respected Sage Vidyaranya. In addition, it was the need of the hour).

Reply-->Your opinion and you are not a scholar. Even if you were, you cant use it here as it becomes "original research". published info cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

15. It is further pointed out the great devotion the founders of the empire had in Lord Chennakeshava of Belur and Lord Virupaksha of Hampi (A weak argument; obviously the nearest gods and temples are visited often) though in political and administrative matters, the Vijayanagar kings followed the Hoysala, Kakatiya, Chola framework in the various regions of the empire (for administrative convenience).

Reply-->Dont pass your opinion. Published info and cited cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

16. It is also claimed that the Sangama brothers even signed their Sanskrit records in Kannada as Srivirupaksha and used their Kannada titles even in Telugu, Tamil and Sanskrit records (Only a claim! No evidence?). No such Telugu titles were used by them.

Repy-->Ask the scholars. published info cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

17. The popular chieftain and patriot of those times, prince Kumara Rama of Kummatadurga or simply Kummata (Kampili kingdom in Bellary District) was a relative of Sangama, father of Harihar I. This evidence exists in literary works by Nanjunda (Kumara Rama Charita) and others and that the early Vijayanagar kings raised memorials at Sandur, Chitradurga and Dharwad to sing the glory of Kumara Rama's valor and show their continued efforts to build an empire in his legacy. All this proved the Kannada origin of Harihara I and Bukka I (No citation!).

Reply-->Citation exists. Look carefully. published info cant be reomved.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

18. It has been brought to light that historians Fr. Henry Heras and Prof. William Coelho have identified Hosapattana, a city founded by Veera Ballala III as later day Vijayanagara. Hosapattana was identified as an alternate capital of the Hoysalas to resist Muslim invasion in those desperate years when all other Hindu states around them had fallen to Muslim conquest (No relation to the origin).

Reply-->removed. cleaned up.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC) Added same citation from fresh sources. According the these two historians, the founding of Hosapattanna by Veera Ballala III and the later choice of the same area as Vijayanagara capital points to a collaboration between Hoysalas and Harihara I.Dineshkannambadi 02:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

19. Regarding the earliest modern work on Vijayanagara Empire by Robert Sewell, A Forgotten Empire, 1901, it is claimed that he had not used all sources but had copiously used travellogues and other works by only European travellers (Most his sources were from Kannada region. He also cited many Sanskrit and Kannada works that affirmed his theory. N. V. Ramanayya independently verified Sewell’s sources).

Reply-->Your opinion. Speak to the scholar. published info cant be removed.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

20. Mention must be made that the entire area that constituted the Hoysala kingdom came under the rule of the Sangama brothers without any clash for power. This would not have been possible unless the Sangama brothers were local to Hampi and of Kannada origin (Once a king is subdued in a battle, the whole kingdom follows suit. That is a simple historical truth)

Reply-->removed. no need to mention.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC) Added freash info with citation. No evidence of war between Hoysalas and Harihara I. Keep your opinion o yourself.Dineshkannambadi 02:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

(At the end, please do not cite local historians, web-history and travel brochures). Kumarrao 15:02, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Final Comment-->Thanks for helping with the cleanup of the article. Now we get to the Telugu origin portion which is completely uncited. You need to realise that published info from scholars (local or international) can be questioned in talk pages, but cant be removed. Your bias against Local historians is immaterial.Dineshkannambadi 18:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I have added citations for Kannada origin from foreign scholars, since you relish them so much. They are,

• Richard M. Eaton, The New Cambridge History of India - A Social History of the Deccan, 1300-1761, Cambridge University Press, 2006, ISBN 0521254841
• Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund, A History of India, fourth edition, Routledge, 2004, ISBN 0-415-32919-1

Edit

<<========>> I will tell you the exact linkage,caste and linguistic background of the founders of the vijayanagar empire.It all starts at the kingdom of KAMPILI which was ruled by KAMPILARAYA.His famous son of those times was GANDUGALI KUMARARAMA known for his valour and looks.There was a constant friction between the kingdom of kampili and the delhi sultanate led by MUHAMMAD BIN TUGHLAQ.HARIHARA and BUKKA were the sons of SANGAMA who was a cousin of kampilaraya and this made kumararama,harihara and bukka cousins.In the final battle that followed kampilaraya was defeated kumararama was killed and harihara and bukka had a narrow escape.They then wanted to continue the legacy of kumara rama.Then they found vidyaranya as their guru to find the vijayanagara empire.

Now comes the caste of all these historical characters.It is beyond doubt that the famous kumararama belonged to the BEDA caste who later on during the rule of vijayanagara empire came to be called as the NAYAKAS/ PALEGARS/VALMIKIS.So this made Harihara and bukka nayakas.This caste is prominent in the areas of bellary,raichur and chitradurga in karnataka and are also equally found on the Andhra side of the border too.Even today you can find the descendents of kumararama,harihara and bukka who all belong to the nayaka community.All the vijayanagara kings belonged to the Nayaka community.Today the descendents of KRISHNADEVARAYA call themselves as both KSHATRIYAS and NAYAKAS because kshatriyasation of the nayakas is very easy.Confusion prevails that harihara and bukka belonged to the kuruba community because after the fall of kampili kingdom they disguised themselves as sheperds known as kurubas in kannada to avoid exhibiting their royal origin till they found guru vidyaranya.Since nayakas are found in both karnataka and andhrapradesh claimants will be found on both the sides.But it is for sure that harihara and bukka were closer to kannada than telegu. -BY RASHMI R, TUMKUR, KARNATAKA http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Karnata_Empire

I think above link clearly states that it is something which belonged to karnataka...so kannadigas played prominent role in the origin of vijayanagara Empire...I think the respect for telugu during vijayanagar empire times should not be misconstrued/wrongly interpreted to twist historical facts.

There are contradictions regarding the caste of Harihara and Bukka Raya under the telugu origin section. One paragraph states that they were Kuruba Gowda which is definitely a Kannada based caste of Shephards. In the following paragraphs it states they are of Golla origin who are Cow Graziers. What is to be believed here?. Can some one verify the facts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:ABF:EEB4:E127:8190:7E7E:D7E8 (talk) 13:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

<<========>> Kumarrao (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Origin of Vijayanagara Empire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100731103941/http://www.ourkarnataka.com:80/history.htm to http://www.ourkarnataka.com/history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:55, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Kampili connection?

The Kampili connection is wholly mysterious to me. When are Harihara and Bukka supposed to have been in Kampili? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:44, 18 May 2019 (UTC)