Talk:Vijayanagara Empire

India's map

Why is JnK and Arunachal Pradesh in India's map are shown as disputed(different coloured) 103.240.204.210 (talk) 17:23, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

The Vijayanagara Empire, also called Karnata Kingdom,[3] was based in the Deccan Plateau region in South India. It was established in 1336 by the brothers Harihara I and Bukka Raya I of the Sangama dynasty, members of a pastoralist cowherd community that claimed Yadava lineage.[4] The empire rose to prominence as a culmination of attempts by the southern powers to ward off Islamic invasions by the end of the 13th century. At its peak, it subjugated almost all of South India's ruling families and pushed the sultans of the Deccan beyond the Tungabhadra-Krishna river doab region, in addition to annexing modern day Odisha (ancient Kalinga) from the Gajapati Kingdom thus becoming a notable power.[5] It lasted until 1646, although its power declined after a major military defeat in the Battle of Talikota in 1565 by the combined armies of the Deccan sultanates. The empire is named after its capital city of Vijayanagara, whose ruins surround present day Hampi, now a World Heritage Site in Karnataka, India. The wealth and fame of the empire inspired visits by and writings of medieval European travelers such as Domingo Paes, Fernão Nunes, and Niccolò de' Conti. These travelogues, contemporary literature and epigraphy in the local languages and modern archeological excavations at Vijayanagara has provided ample information about the history and power of the empire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullammanavar m (talk • contribs) 11:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Map of Vijayanagar Empire

Dear Wiki users,The map of Vijayanagara empire seems to have a small correction.Vijayanagara empire of sangama dynasty never ruled whole srilanka and they ruled only the upper part of srilanka controlled by the Arya-chakravarthies during the time of 1441 AD to 1450 AD.Please verify it. Truk789 (talk) 06:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Changing Vijayanagar Kingdom's Map

The sources do not mention that Vijayanagar ruled Sri Lanka. The cited atlas has several issues, as many of its kingdom maps are inaccurate, and it conflates the histories of multiple empires from the same era. DeepstoneV (talk) 15:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

It looks like a proper consensus is needed on the maximum extent of the Empire, and the inclusion or exclusion of Sri Lanka and some other parts. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 03:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC) This comment folded into this discussion after the comments below through Special:diff/1219672658

The map doesn't shows Vijayanagara rule in Sri Lanka but shows its supremacy over it - https://archive.org/details/in.gov.ignca.16035/page/260/mode/1up?view=theater - According to Persian ambassador Abdur Razzak Vijayanagaran dominions spread over from Ceylon to Kulburga as supported by Nuniz Sathyashraya (talk) 12:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

The cartographer also included tributary regions on the Vijayanagara map. However, the same source you provided also mentioned Vijayanagara's tribute to the Bahmani Sultanate. Therefore, it would be appropriate to depict Vijayanagara territories under Bahmani Sultanates as well.Even if we consider Vijayanagara Suzerainty over Sri Lanka than it would only be on Jaffna kingdom of Sri Lanka not all of Sri Lanka. I can make a accurate map of Vijayanagara empire if u can Provide me the source that Jaffna Kingdom of Sri Lanka was under vassalization of Vijayangar DeepstoneV (talk) 18:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Restored to the original version for now until a consensus here can be formed and especially be attributed with sources. Noorullah (talk) 21:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

The current map appears to be more accurate, as Sri Lanka was not governed by Vijayanagara. If it had been ruled, it would have been only the Jaffna Kingdom under their suzerainty.The old map collides the histories of multiple kingdoms. DeepstoneV (talk) 08:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

• 
  Sangamas of the Vijayanagara Empire (made by Noorullah21)
• 
  Map of Vijayanagar Kingdom (made by DeepstoneV)
• 
  Vijayanagara 1450s
• 
  Vijayanagara Empire 1336 – 1646 ad
• 
  Vijayanagara Empire

Previous, current? Please be specific. I've added a gallery, to make it clear what we're talking about. Looking at this map ("globalsecurity.org") (webpage here) and this map ("Ancient Indian Coins") (webpage here), it seems that Calicut, Sri Lanka, and apart of the Gajapati Kingdom of Orissa were tributaries of the Vijayanagara Empire. This is reflected in none of the maps above. Also, the extent of the Vijayanagara Empire's hold on Sri Lanka seems to be disputed, and the inclusion of the coastal area of the Bahmani Kingdom or Sultanate also seems a matter of dispute. So, we do indeed need a new map, based on more sources than just the present one, Schwartzberg, Joseph E. (1978). A Historical atlas of South Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 147, map XIV.l. ISBN 0226742210., which is obviously inaccurate. @Avantiputra7: could you offer your skills and talents here? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Successor and predecessor states

Hello @Joshua Jonathan, this is concerning my edit you recently reverted. The successor and predecessor states are concerned with the states that immediately succeed the entity after it disestablished and the states that directly precede the entity just before it was created. All the states I removed from the predecessor list were the states which in part or whole conquered by the Vijayanagar Empire after it was established and the ones I removed from the successors list are the states that conquered parts of the Vijaynagar Empire, but do not succeed it. See articles like Russian Empire and German Empire for comparison. PadFoot2008 (talk) 11:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@PadFoot2008: thank you for your response. I don't think the comparison is apt; those empires may have been followed-up as a whole by successor states, but history doesn't alays seem to be that clear-cut; see Austrian Empire for another kind of comparison. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan, but the history is pretty clear cut in this case. It was founded in the former Hoysala territory and conquered by the Sultanate of Bijapur. And you can see for yourself how clumsy and unhelpful the the successor and predecessor list has become. It is not helpful at all to the readers. Just think how utterly cluttered the lists of pre-modern states in the Indian subcontinent (or anywhere else for this matter) would be, if we were to list every single state that conquered even the smallest portion of the concerned state or vice versa. And not to state it is completely unhelpful. PadFoot2008 (talk) 11:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@PadFoot2008: hm... The article itself states

During this period, more kingdoms in South India became independent and separate from Vijayanagara, including the Nayakas of Chitradurga, Keladi Nayaka, Mysore Kingdom, Nayak Kingdom of Gingee, Nayaks of Tanjore, and Nayaks of Madurai.[75]

Can we ask some other editors for their opinion? @Kautilya3 and Chariotrider555:? You know some more editors we can ask? Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 11:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan, It does indeed but they didn't succeed Vijayanagara. I don't think declaring independence from a country is the same as succeeding the country if it still existed after the declaration. Pinging @Fylindfotberserk. And it still doesn't justify including the successor and predecessor states that have nothing to do with what you said above and have been added just because they conquered some territories from the state and vice versa. PadFoot2008 (talk) 12:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, it is hard to know who "declared" independence, and who simply ignored the diktats, and who remained in the fold but acted independently etc. This is a "fissure", not "succession". Utcursch may know better. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

So @Kautilya3, should we leave the predecessor to just "Hoysala Kingdom" and the successor to "Bahamani Sultanate"? PadFoot2008 (talk) 13:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan and @Kautilya3 What is the consensus at the moment among you two? PadFoot2008 (talk) 05:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Kautilya3 and I have a consensus on relying on reliable sources, and oppozing Hindu nationalists - no, just kidding. I looked-up the template for further explanation, but it only says "preceding entity" and "succeeding entity," which is not very helpfull. I'd say that there are wide margins, but I'll have a further look at your proposal. I don't know that much about the empire, I just know how to find and judge sources. Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
The Bahamani Sultanate mostly did not cover the territory of the empire, so I disagree there. The Hoysala Kingdom covered a large part of what became the empire, but not all of it. The article says:

The Vijayanagara Kingdom was founded in 1336 CE as a successor to the hitherto prosperous Hindu kingdoms of the Hoysalas, the Kakatiyas, and the Yadavas with the breakaway Kampili Kingdom adding a new dimension to the resistance to the Muslim invasion of South India.[19][23]

So, I think I disagree there too. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 05:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Joshua Jonathan, No mate, you got it wrong there. "It was founded as a successor to prosperous Hindu kingdoms" is not meant to show that it came up in the territories of those states, rather it continued in their earlier attempts to resist the Muslim invasions of South India. Also about the Bahamani Sultanate, the Sultanate conquered the entirety of the empire in 1646. Your misunderstanding is due to it losing territories much, much earlier to other regional South Indian kingdoms, but they didn't succeed or fully conquer the Vijayanagara Empire. Rather it was a defeat for the empire but not it's end. PadFoot2008 (talk) 05:46, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Preceding and succeeding entities make sense only where there is clear-cut succession of polities. Vijayanagara neither succeeded anything, nor was it succeeded by anything. So both the fields should be blank.

Infobox should only summarise the body. It should not invent new facts of its own.-- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Respectfully disagree with you here. But then, as I already note, "preceding and succeeding entity" (see Template:Infobox country) is vague and ambiguous. I read it as 'the next state/kingdom at that territory', not as a succession of polities. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 08:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, well, that is what I mean though. (In India, these things have always been polities, or states if you prefer, never "countries"). When there is a clear-cut event of disintegration, like say the Soviet Union, we have clear succeeding polities. When there is a gradual disintegration, it is a process. These processes are certainly important, but they are hard to write about. One can develop this version of Nayaka dynasties into a WP:BCA, and that can be used to describe the process.

But, as of now, we don't have the information to declare "succeeding entities", because we don't know when they became independent, or de jure or de facto independence, or whether it is just somebody's opinion that they became independent etc. etc. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 09:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Infoboxes just aren't as clear as they seem to be at first sight... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 12:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree with @Kautilya3. The current list of "succeeding and preceding entity" is just loads of nonsense and very unhelpful to readers. It's better that to make it blank. PadFoot2008 (talk) 06:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Vandalism against vijaynagar Empire map

Previous uploaded map was in accurate Mnbnjghiryurr (talk) 15:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)