This page was proposed for deletion by TimothyBlue ( talk · contribs) on 13 April 2023. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
It is suggested to add more information to this page. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 19:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Many secondary references have been added to the article which indicates that the Turquoise throne was indeed an object of interest and a symbol of prestige during the Bahmani sultanate reign. It is better to keep the page from deletion. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 14:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Bsskchaitanya, you write:
But, he [Musunuri Kapaya Nayaka] was killed by a confederacy of Kondaveedu Reddy kings and Recherla chiefs in a battle at Bhimavaram in 1368 CE. [1]
References
- ^ Somasekhara Sarma, Mallampalli (1931). "Kapaya Nayaka". Journal of the Andhra Historical Research Society. 5 (4): 227–228.
Can you provide a quote from the source that establishes the claim? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Kautilya3 I took that reference from the Musunuri Nayaks page. Now, I have gone through the book by M. Somasekhara Sarma, History of Reddy Kings. The information about the death of Musunuri Kapaya Nayaka at Bhimavaram around 1368 CE is mentioned on page 22. The link to the book from the www.archive.org website is given: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.32066/page/n37/mode/2up .
I have realized now that when taking a reference from the Musunuri Nayak page, I have given the wrong reference (i.e. the above-mentioned journal) instead of the correct one (the book on Reddi Kings mentioned by me in this reply). I sincerely apologise for this mistake and would like to rectify it. I thank you for rightly pointing out this issue. However, in Somasekhara's book, only mentioned the war between the Velama chiefs of Recherla and the Musunuri Kapaya Nayaka, but no reference to the Reddy king's involvement. However, I remember reading some other book about the involvement of Reddy King in the death of Kapaya. It seems the Reddies split into Kondaveedu and Rajahmundry branches and one of them fought against Kapaya Nayaka. So, I will modify the sentence removing the reddy king involvement, and also provide the correct reference by removing the incorrect one. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 10:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
His weakened position was exploited by the Reddis of Kondavidu and the Recherla Nayakas, the latter of whom killed him in battle at Bhimavaram in 1368. There is no mention of any "confederacy". Neither does the source mention such a thing.
You have to consistent with Richard Eaton, who is a renowned historian:
Crafted by Telugu artisans, the throne was framed in ebony, covered with plates of pure gold, studded with precious gems, and enameled with a turquoise hue. It had originally been built for Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq, probably intended as tribute during the period that the Tughluqs ruled Sultanpur/Warangal (1323–36). But the Tughluqs were driven out of Warangal before the throne could be delivered to Delhi. Ultimately, Kapaya Nayaka transferred it to Sultan Muhammad I (1358–75) as part of a treaty agreement in which the two rulers fixed their common border. It was then used by every Bahmani ruler until the last, Sultan Mahmud (1482–1518), who dismantled it for its valuable gems. [1]
Note that Eaton believes that it was commissioned during the Tugluq rule, not by Musunuris. Kapaya Nayaka seems to have agreed to gift it to the Bahamani sultan, essentially signifying that he accepted the latter's supremacy. The Bahamanis were essentially trying to establish themselves as the Deccan Sultans to parallel the Delhi Sultans. The throne was an important part of this. [2] -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
References
Kautilya3 The sentence related to cutting of the alliance with Vijayagara by Kapaya during the truce negocitation we taken from this book, 'A Military History of Medieval India' by G. S. Sandhu. The exact words in the page 320 of that book are
"He promised to hand over a Turquoise throne (Takht-i-firoza) in his possession to them. He also gave an undertaking that he would not enter into an alliance with Vijayanagara provided the Bahmanis respected his borders." [1]: 320
He was a Major General in Indian Army and wrote many books related to Indian military. You can find an article about his demise in https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/maj-gen-gurcharan-singh-sandhu-pvsm-retd/articleshow/8099549.cms . I presume his book is a valid reference. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 11:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
References
This page was proposed for deletion by TimothyBlue ( talk · contribs) on 13 April 2023. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
It is suggested to add more information to this page. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 19:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Many secondary references have been added to the article which indicates that the Turquoise throne was indeed an object of interest and a symbol of prestige during the Bahmani sultanate reign. It is better to keep the page from deletion. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 14:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Bsskchaitanya, you write:
But, he [Musunuri Kapaya Nayaka] was killed by a confederacy of Kondaveedu Reddy kings and Recherla chiefs in a battle at Bhimavaram in 1368 CE. [1]
References
- ^ Somasekhara Sarma, Mallampalli (1931). "Kapaya Nayaka". Journal of the Andhra Historical Research Society. 5 (4): 227–228.
Can you provide a quote from the source that establishes the claim? -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 09:24, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Kautilya3 I took that reference from the Musunuri Nayaks page. Now, I have gone through the book by M. Somasekhara Sarma, History of Reddy Kings. The information about the death of Musunuri Kapaya Nayaka at Bhimavaram around 1368 CE is mentioned on page 22. The link to the book from the www.archive.org website is given: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.32066/page/n37/mode/2up .
I have realized now that when taking a reference from the Musunuri Nayak page, I have given the wrong reference (i.e. the above-mentioned journal) instead of the correct one (the book on Reddi Kings mentioned by me in this reply). I sincerely apologise for this mistake and would like to rectify it. I thank you for rightly pointing out this issue. However, in Somasekhara's book, only mentioned the war between the Velama chiefs of Recherla and the Musunuri Kapaya Nayaka, but no reference to the Reddy king's involvement. However, I remember reading some other book about the involvement of Reddy King in the death of Kapaya. It seems the Reddies split into Kondaveedu and Rajahmundry branches and one of them fought against Kapaya Nayaka. So, I will modify the sentence removing the reddy king involvement, and also provide the correct reference by removing the incorrect one. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 10:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
His weakened position was exploited by the Reddis of Kondavidu and the Recherla Nayakas, the latter of whom killed him in battle at Bhimavaram in 1368. There is no mention of any "confederacy". Neither does the source mention such a thing.
You have to consistent with Richard Eaton, who is a renowned historian:
Crafted by Telugu artisans, the throne was framed in ebony, covered with plates of pure gold, studded with precious gems, and enameled with a turquoise hue. It had originally been built for Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq, probably intended as tribute during the period that the Tughluqs ruled Sultanpur/Warangal (1323–36). But the Tughluqs were driven out of Warangal before the throne could be delivered to Delhi. Ultimately, Kapaya Nayaka transferred it to Sultan Muhammad I (1358–75) as part of a treaty agreement in which the two rulers fixed their common border. It was then used by every Bahmani ruler until the last, Sultan Mahmud (1482–1518), who dismantled it for its valuable gems. [1]
Note that Eaton believes that it was commissioned during the Tugluq rule, not by Musunuris. Kapaya Nayaka seems to have agreed to gift it to the Bahamani sultan, essentially signifying that he accepted the latter's supremacy. The Bahamanis were essentially trying to establish themselves as the Deccan Sultans to parallel the Delhi Sultans. The throne was an important part of this. [2] -- Kautilya3 ( talk) 12:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
References
Kautilya3 The sentence related to cutting of the alliance with Vijayagara by Kapaya during the truce negocitation we taken from this book, 'A Military History of Medieval India' by G. S. Sandhu. The exact words in the page 320 of that book are
"He promised to hand over a Turquoise throne (Takht-i-firoza) in his possession to them. He also gave an undertaking that he would not enter into an alliance with Vijayanagara provided the Bahmanis respected his borders." [1]: 320
He was a Major General in Indian Army and wrote many books related to Indian military. You can find an article about his demise in https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/maj-gen-gurcharan-singh-sandhu-pvsm-retd/articleshow/8099549.cms . I presume his book is a valid reference. Bsskchaitanya ( talk) 11:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
References