Volume III (Special Issue on Defense), Summer 2007

eSSAYS

Printer-friendly version

Significance of Forts during the Vijayanagara Period (14th-16th Centuries)

by P. S. Harish

Forts play a crucial role in the protection of a region or territory. A significant characteristic of defence in Ancient and Medieval times was the construction of forts in important cities and places of strategic value. In fact, it can be said that the entire land of India is studded with magnificent fortresses from where kings are said to have ruled. Though the primary motive of building forts was for military operations, the impact of forts on the political and administrative matters was more profound. 

One of the first innovations of civilization seems to be the growth of fortifications. The erection of a physical barrier between oneself and an anticipated enemy is the basic concept of fortification (Bag, 1997, 524). The nature of barrier changes with reference to the thing to be protected and the danger to it perceived by its protector. For example the object of protection could be a temporary camp and the danger apprehended might be of wild animals; or it could be a whole city and an army equipped with artillery might pose a problem. In the case of former, a train of carriages chained to each other and small screen of tough branches or bamboo in between would be enough, whereas a strong wall of considerable height and thickness would be needed in the case of latter. The fortification is thus static; purely defensive in purpose and is in the nature of a well thought out reaction to a given set of circumstances (ibid). 

The importance of forts can also be seen in providing shelter and security to various administrative establishments and protection of wealth. While commenting on the utility of forts the ancient Indian Hindu lawgiver Manu says that, “a warrior protected by the fort can fight with hundred enemy soldiers and a force of one hundred fighting from the fort can encounter ten thousand enemy soldiers.” (Prabhakar, 1982, 7) Similarly while stating the significance of forts for a king Manu further adds that just as animals like deer need not fear the hunter if they take shelter, in the same way king in a fort too can remain protected from the invader (Ibid). The term fort in ordinary usage implies stronghold offering protection and security to the inhabitants that seek refuge in it. In Sanskrit it is known as Durga, which means hard to approach or difficult to access (Ramachandra Murty, 1996, 55). The Vedic literature also alludes on forts, for the Rig Veda mentions Agni and Indra as ‘Destroyer of forts’. It calls the latter as ‘Demolisher of forts’. Even the kalika Purana gives more stress on the construction of forts by kings (Naravane, 1995, 19). Kautilya’s saptanga or the seven-element theory for a state imparts a very crucial role for forts in defending the empire. Sometimes forts were constructed to demonstrate strength and it was considered as a symbol of pride and prestige. 

Coming to the medieval period in South India we see a historical event that shaped the character of the region for centuries to come-the founding of the Vijayanagara Empire. Legend has it that two brothers known as Harihara and Bukka founded Vijayanagara or the ‘City of Victory’ in AD 1336 in southeastern part of the Deccan. This large empire that ruled south India for more than three centuries was constantly in conflict with its neighboring kingdoms for gaining supremacy over the region. From its inception the nascent Vijayanagar region was surrounded by enemies. Kapaya Nayak who had expelled the imperial governor of Telingana and Malik Maqbul who was holding Warangal were anxious to capture the newly established empire. Similarly in the northeast Qutulugh Khan, the Devagiri governor was looking for an opportunity to conquer Vijayanagar. This problem of defence got compounded with the founding of Bahmani Empire to the north of Vijayanagar in AD 1347. There were frequent conflicts between the two empires over the question of Raichur doab owing to its fertile nature and strategic importance. Keeping in view of the increasing threat of external invasions the Vijayanagar empire had to develop sophisticated military apparatus from the beginning itself for safeguarding its growing territory. High priority was given by the rulers to the aspect of safety and security for constant fear of being attacked and keeping this in view many strong forts were constructed all over the empire especially in frontier regions. The city of Vijayanagar grew in a fortified area and the Persian traveler Abdur Razzak talks of seven walls of fortification around the city. He further explained that it was built in such a manner that seven citadels and the same of walls enclose each other. The outer citadel had a fortress of round shape built on the summit of a mountain constructed of stone and lime (Elliot& Dow son, 1964, 106). 

One of the interesting aspects around the capital city of Hampi is the existence of fortifications prior to the coming of Vijayanagar Empire. For instance Torangal about thirty-three kilometers southeast of the capital derives its name after its important location in relation to the fort as the main gateway first to Hampi (Joshi, 1985, 97). Similarly in localities around Hampi we find Kampili, which was a part of the Kalyani Chalukya territory. Here the fort was built of dark rock obtained from the Tungabadra riverbed. Many fortified gateways were constructed in different directions for entry into the Vijayanagar city. For example Sandur or Skandagiri was one of the fortified gateways. Hospet was another entrance built by the great king Krishnadeva Raya that was the entry point for the foreign travelers coming from Goa and other Western countries. According to the Portuguese traveler Domingo’s Paes, it was a very strong fortified place with huge walls and towers in which traders are said to have settled. Kamalapura gateway was in the middle of Hampi and Hospet. Hence the presence of various fortified entrances to the city of Vijayanagar clearly reflects the planning of city in such a way that it was defended from all sides making it inaccessible to the enemy. This shows the high-level defence strategy employed by the rulers of that time. 

The Rayas of Vijayanagar divided their forts into several types following the Early Hindu tradition. The Rayavachakamu (written by one of the governors of Krishnadeva Raya on his campaigns) mentions four kinds of forts like giridurga (Hill fort), sthaladurga (Land fort), jaladurga (water fort) and vanadurga (Forest fort) (Ramanayya, 1986, 120). It is likely that the last of forts mentioned was located in frontier region since Krishnadeva Raya in his valuable work Amuktamalyada says that forests have to be grown in border areas of the territory and those in the middle of the kingdom should be eliminated so that there wouldn’t be fear of any robbers (Kotesvara, 2001, 445) Most of the forts were built of mud and the construction of stone walls being permitted incase of a city situated at the extremity of the territory. The forts had all necessity commodities needed for the soldiers under the command of an officer known as durgapati. A garrison that was sufficient to repel all attacks of an invader was placed under him. It is interesting to note that Krishnadeva Raya mentions about his forts having yantras (devices) fitted to them, which might have included guns too (Mahalingam, 1969, 157). The land forts had deep moats around them to prevent the entry of the enemy into the fort. In order to impede the progress of enemy’s cavalry, pointed stones of great height were fixed. Forts were sometimes erected in newly conquered regions or where there were rebellious tribes.

STRUCTURE OF FORT AND METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION: 

While the idea or concept of a fort as a defensive structure remained constant, the fort as a military structure appears to have undergone many changes with the passage of time depending on the growing necessities. For building the forts, it can be said that two aspects were taken into consideration and they included location of site and material available. Most of the forts in early period were built on flat surface or plain area, as direct attack on a fort was comparatively less. But with the advent of medieval and Late Medieval times direct attack on forts increased due to frequent external invasions. The concept of surrounding a fort became widespread (1).  More hill forts were constructed along with forest and water forts. Though the last two forts were comparatively less, the purpose of all the above-mentioned forts was to make the enemy inaccessible. 

In ancient times forts were mainly built of perishable materials like mud and brick and with the advent of medieval period, stone became the chief ingredient of construction. A technique known as cyclopean was prevalent during this time in which large blocks of stones were piled up one above the other, tightly fitted into it without the use of any joining or binding material (Murty Ramachandra, 1996, 104). Yazdani while writing about forts in medieval Deccan observes that by the advance of knowledge and technology, masonry seems to have introduced first in crude form and later quite regular in building defence works, although the cyclopean technique remained a significant feature of military architecture till the advent of Muslim rulers. This technique can be seen in most of the forts, as it is the indigenous method of building. For example this style is very much visible in Penugonda fort of Anantapur district of Andhra Pradesh. 

One of the criteria that governed the construction of fort is the availability of strong building material. This is amply proved by the fact that several hill forts were built on high rocks where granite and igneous rocks easily available. The hill forts like Gutti, Kondavidu, Kondapalli and Udayagiri were built of red granite. On the other hand Penugonda, Chandragiri and Adoni were built of white granite procured from the nearby hills. The role of forts became more complex during medieval times. They became large in size and height. The thickness of the walls and its height also underwent a transformation. The reason for this might be the introduction of sophisticated methods of attack like artillery due to Muslim incursions. 

An important characteristic of fort building during Vijayanagar period was the stone veneering technique in which neatly dressed cut out stones were arranged on the either side i.e., exterior and interior with hollow space inside being filled with earthen and rubble (2). This process gave extra strength and durability to the structure. For example this style is more evident in the forts of Hampi and Chandragiri. The Late Medieval period witnessed Indo – Sarcenic influence where although cyclopean style continued to be used, its chief feature lies in the use of lime and mortar as joining or binding materials for decorative or ornamental purpose in the superstructure over ramparts of forts and gateways. 

Finally it can be said that forts did play a significant role in all times of need and they served the dual purpose of shelter and storage. In fact, they acted as shield to the monarch and his subjects whenever there was security problem. With the changing times the technology of forts also changed and new means of defensive measures began to take shape. The more number of forts a king had the more powerful he was considered and it spoke of the ruler’s superiority. 

Bibiliography

Bag, A.K., History of Technology in India from Antiquity to AD 1200, Vol 1 (ed), Indian National Science Academy, New Delhi, 1997.

Begde, V. Prabhakar, Forts and palaces of India, Sagar Publications, New Delhi, 1982.

Joshi, S.K., Defence Architecture in Early Karnataka, Sundeep Prakashan, Delhi, 1985.

Mahalingam, T.V., Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar, Part1, University of Madras, Madras, 1969.

Murty, Ramachandra, Forts in Andhra Pradesh from Earliest times to Sixteenth Century, Bharatiya Kala Prakashan, Delhi, 1996

Narvane, M.S., Forts of Maharashtra, APH Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 1995.

Raya, Deva, Krishna, Amuktamalyada, by Thummalapudi Kotesvara Rao, Malayakuta Publications, Hyderabad, 2001.

Razzak, Abdur, Matla ‘u-s saladin of Abdur Razzak, in The History of India as told by its Own Historians, ed, by John Dowson, Vol IV, Kitab Mahal, Allaha bad, 1964.

Venkataramanayya, N., Studies in the History of the Third Dynasty of Vijayanagar, Gian Publishing House (reprint), New Delhi, 1986.

P. S. Harish is a Research Scholar in the Department of History at the University of Hyderabad.

Copyright ©2007 Teaching South Asia (ISSN 1529-8558) and P. S. Harish.  All rights reserved.  No part of this article may be reprinted in any form without written permission from Teaching South Asia or P. S. Harish.