Suggestions pertaining to India

[Aagney]

• I would like to thank @Trin Tragula that I took to study the history of South India and learnt a lot of things in the process.
• This is still a first-draft so I might change the contents when I get some more clarity on the subject, if I feel a rectification necessary.
• I started editing on EU4 map but soon got into technical difficulties and then I chose to represent the provinces on the District map of South India instead. Please refer to the attachment.
• As far as possible I have not breached into the area of another State while carving a province except along Karnataka & Maharashtra and Karnataka & Telangana boarders.
• As far as possible I have tried to maintain the district boarders but many a times they have been breached for historical relevance and province size.
• All the internal boarders of provinces have been drawn manually without using grids and hence is far from accurate.
• Suggestions and notes in current post are pertaining only to South India. I may write about other parts of India later. The entire purpose is keep the historical settings in 1444 as close to historical reality.

Spoiler: Province Summary

I. Tamil Nadu

A. Pandya Nadu

1. Tirunelveli:
   1. Province: EU-2101 - No Change
   2. Active Core 1444: Pandya
   3. Dormant Core: None
   4. Production: Gems
2. Madura:

1. Province: EU-536 - Large Territorial readjustment
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Pandya; Madura (New Madura-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Silk

3. Ramnad:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar (Ambiguity for Ramnad in 1444 - as Vijay Vassal)
3. Dormant Core: Ramnad (New Sethupati-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Pearl/Chilli/Milk (Gems/Spices/Livestock) (Spices)

B. Chola Nadu

4. Tanjore:

1. Province: EU-2026 - No Change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Tanjore (New Tanjore-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Cloth

5. Tiruchirapalli:

1. Province: EU-2085 - Some Territorial readjustment
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Pandya; Madura (New Madura-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Cotton

6. Coromandel:

1. Province: EU-540 - Little Territorial readjustment (unintended)
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Senji (New Senji-Nayak Tag - Senji or Jinji or Gingee)
4. Production: Cloth

C. Tondaimandalam (Tondainadu)

7. Kanchipuram:

1. Province: EU-539 - Little Territorial readjustment (unintended)
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Kalahasti (New Kalahasti-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Cloth

8. Gingee:

1. Province: EU-1947 - Some Territorial readjustment (unintended)
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Senji (New Senji-Nayak Tag - Senji or Jinji or Gingee)
4. Production: Cloth

9. Arcot:

1. Province: EU-2027- Little Territorial readjustment
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Senji (New Senji-Nayak Tag - Senji or Jinji or Gingee)
4. Production: Iron

D. Kongu Nadu

10. Dindigul:

1. Province: New Province (Carved out of EU-538)
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Pandya; Madura (New Madura-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Cotton

11. Coimbatore:

1. Province: New Province (Carved out of EU-538)
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Pandya; Madura (New Madura-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Incense/ Cloth

12. Salem:

1. Province: New Province (Carved out of EU-538)
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Pandya; Madura (New Madura-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Incense/ Dye

II. Andhra Pradesh

A. Rayalaseema

13. Chandragiri:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Kalahasti (New Kalahasti-Nayak Tag)
4. Production: Cloth

14. Pendukonda:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Poligar Chieftains (Pendukonda Nayaks & others)
4. Production: Cotton/ Gems

15. Kurnool:

1. Province: EU-2090 - Territorial adjustment
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Golkonda, Poligar Chieftains (Adoni Nayak & Others)
4. Production: Gems/ Cotton

B. Coastal Andhra

16. Udayagiri:

1. Province: EU-2083 - Massive Territorial adjustment
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Andhra (Kondaividu Reddy)
4. Production: Cotton

17. Velanadu:

1. Province: EU-543 - No Change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Andhra (Rajamundury Reddy)
3. Dormant Core: Andhra (Kondaividu Reddy)
4. Production: Gems/ Cloth

18. Konaseema:

1. Province: EU-2084 - No Change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Andhra (Rajamundury Reddy)
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Iron

19. Kalingandhara:

1. Province: EU-549 - No Change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Orissa
3. Dormant Core: Andhra (Rajamundury Reddy)
4. Production: Cotton

20. Srikakulam:

1. Province: EU-2080 - No Change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Orissa
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Sugar

III. Telangana

21. Golkonda:

1. Province: EU-542 - Massive Territorial adjustment
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: Golkonda
4. Production: Gems

22. Devarakonda:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Recharla Nayaks (New Tag)
3. Dormant Core: Golkonda
4. Production: Cotton

23. Indur:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: Golkonda, Recharla Nayaks (New Tag)
4. Production: Iron

24. Warangal:

1. Province: EU-2037 - Massive Territorial adjustment
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: Golkonda, Recharla Nayaks (New Tag)
4. Production: Dyes

25. Mahur:

1. Province: EU-2028 - No change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: Golkonda, Chanda, Recharla Nayaks (New Tag)
4. Production: Tropical Wood

IV. Kerala

26. Venad:

1. Province: EU-537 - No change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Venad
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Spices

27. Cochin:

1. Province: EU-535 - No change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Cochin
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Spices

28. Calicut:

1. Province: EU-534 - Large Territorial Changes
2. Active Core 1444: Calicut
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Spices

29. Kolathiri:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Kolathiri (New Tag)
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Spices/ Tropical Wood/ Ship Building

V. Karnataka

A. Southern Bayaluseeme

30. Mysore:

1. Province: EU-533 - Little Territorial Changes (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Mysore
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Iron / Silk

31. Channapatna:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Poligar Chieftains
4. Production: Toy - Tropical Wood/ Incense /Paper

32. Yelahanka:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Yelahanka Nayaks (New Tag)
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Livestock / Silk

33. Chitradurga:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Poligar Chieftains (Chitradurga Nayaks - New Tag)
4. Production: Livestock / Cotton

B. Central Bayaluseeme

34. Vijayanagar:

1. Province: EU-541 - Massive Territorial changes
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Poligar Chieftains (Bellary and Devangere Nayaks)
4. Production: Livestock / Grain

35. Raichur:

1. Province: EU-532 - Some Territorial changes (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: Vijayanagar, Bijapur
4. Production: Cloth

36. Savanur:

1. Province: EU-2033 - Some Territorial changes
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: Bijapur, Keladi (Debatable), Savanur (Nawab of Suvanur - New)
4. Production: Cotton

C. Northern Bayaluseeme

37. Bijapur:

1. Province: EU-569 - Some Territorial changes (Unintended)
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: Bijapur
4. Production: Cotton

38. Gulbarga:

1. Province: EU-2033 - Some Territorial changes (Unintended)
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Grains / Iron

39. Bidar:

1. Province: EU-1948 - Some Territorial changes (Unintended)
2. Active Core 1444: Bahamans
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Silk

D. Malnad

40. Bendur:

1. Province: EU-2032 - Massive Territorial changes
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Keladi Nayaks
4. Production: Spices / Sugar

41. Balam:

1. Province: New Province
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Kodagu Nayak, Keladi Nayak, Poligar Chieftains (Balam Nayaks)
4. Production: Coffee

42. Tulunadu:

1. Province: EU-2029 - Some Territorial changes
2. Active Core 1444: Vijayanagar
3. Dormant Core: Keladi Nayaks
4. Production: Spices/ Tropical Wood

43. Gersoppa:

1. Province: EU-531 - No Change (Perhaps)
2. Active Core 1444: Gersoppa (New Tag)
3. Dormant Core: None
4. Production: Spices

Spoiler: Some Suggestions some Notes

• Tamil Nadu

1. In Tamil Nadu, Madurai has been bifurcated to make room for Ramnad and Kongu has been trifurcated into Dindigul, Coimbatore & Salem. Rest all territorial changes are unintentional. Further, the northern boarder of Arcot & Tondainadu (Kanchipuram) has been readjusted to not breach into Andhra Pradesh. PDX can stick to their own boarder but should reflect Nellore district more appropriately as Udayagiri. Means narrower southern tip of Kosta.
2. Name of Tondainadu has been changed to Kanchi or Kanchipuram. Would like to change the name of Coromandel as well but I am at a loss of good ideas. Both Tondainadu and Coromandel actually corresponds to a larger geo-political area covering part of Tamil-Nadu and around.
3. Tamil-Nadu territories has been divided into Tondaimandalam (Tondainadu), Chola-Nadu (Cholamandalam), Pandya-Nadu (Pandyamandalam) and Kongu-Nadu (Cheramandalam).
4. District of Puddukotai has been included into Ramnad, If this is part of Tanjore (or Tiruchirapalli) in the current map then it should be included into Tanjore, or else for any balance issue. Ramnad should be a vassal of anyone ruling Madura. Small Principality of Ramnad has been acting as an ancient neutral state for religious reasons.
5. New Nayak Tags should be included: Madura, Tanjore, Gingee, Kalahasti.
6. Since Madura Nayaks be called Madura, current Madura (At Tirunelveli) should be called Pandya.
7. Carnatic word should be discontinued instead use Nawabdom of Arcot or Nawab of Arcot. It is nice to see Wiki devoting a paragraph on inappropriate use of the word Carnatic. Modern sensible authors don’t use it anymore and PDX as an ultra-modern “history teacher” should try to bring less ambiguities. Please refer geography section of the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnatic_region
8. Further, Arcot should not have core on these provinces in 1444, like Nizams or Maratha, not unless Mughals are formed and its post 1600.
9. It is difficult to represent various Poligar chieftains ruling Kongu-Nadu, Rayalaseema and most of southern and central Karnataka except Mysore. But these potentates should be reflected in some way within the polity.

• Andhra Pradesh

1. Rayalaseema area as a territory has been readjusted and carved into Chandragiri, Penukonda, and Kurnool. Chandragiri should actually be a bit smaller. If PDX don’t mind adding a new province here then Cuddapah as a fourth province should be carved out of Northern Chandragiri, Southern-eastern Kurnool, Eastern Penukonda & North-western Udayagiri.
2. There were over 200 small poligar chieftains in this area ruling till 1800 and living almost semi-independent. Thomas Munro (1802) provides some valuable information about them.
3. Tag Andhra (Reddy’s) should not have any core in this area. Additional tags like Nawab of Cuddapah, Kurnool, Adoni etc. can be added but more important is the representation of powerful poligar confederacy in this area busy fighting among themselves and changing their allegiances between Bijapur, Golkonda, Mysore, British & Maratha.
4. Name of Kosta has been changed to Udayagiri and its territories readjusted. Also it is now a part of Coastal Andhra.
5. In Coastal Andhra, except for the territorial changes to Udayagiri (Kosta), all others are unintentional and PDX can stick to the present provincial boundaries.
6. Udayagiri has been a bone of contention between Vijayanagar & Orissa. It is interesting to note that Udayagiri from 1446 was owned by a vassal of Orissa after Orissa won it from Vijayanagar and also removed Reddy dynasty from coastal Andhra. So it was with Vijayanagar till 1446. Then to Orissa (through Vassal) till 1470. Won by Vijayanagar and kept till 1500. Again to Orissa (through vassal) from 1500-1514 and then again a part of Vijayanagar. Not sure if a new tag should be added here, also the details are scanty but these are the rulers: Family: Kantamaraju Vallabha (A Kalinga General) - father of Tammabhupala (1446-1454) - father of Basavabhupala (1454-1463) - father of Pasapati Timmabhupala (1463-1470).
7. Some sources at hand reflect that within Kalingandhra region apart from some petty chiefs, there were two prominent small kingdoms, Korukonda - with capital at Pithampura and Machikonda (ruled by Kesarni & Kesava Nayak). Both these were feudatories of Orissa in 1444.

• Telangana

1. After the fall of Musunuri Nayaks in 1368, the entire Telangana region except Golkonda has been in the state of political instability where possessions of the territories kept changing between Bahamans, Vijayanagar, Orissa till 1508 when Golkonda took over this region.
2. At the centre of all the affairs were Recharla Nayaks who would consider themselves legitimate lord of Orugallu region. (Earstwhile Kakatiya realm). They had been ruling Rachakonda & Devarakonda as feudatories of Kakatiya, then Delhi, and later Musunuri whom they overthrew.
3. In 1444 a line of Recharla Nayaks are still ruling from Devarakota and hence in order to accommodate them, Devarakota province has been created. It is entire Nalconda district + Nagarkurnool district (out of Mehboobnagar) + Srisaila from Kurnool (for historical relevance).
4. It is not very accurate to show them ruling the entire Devarakonda province in 1444. If PDX does not mind one more province here, some 35% (Northern Portion) of this province should become a new province with the name Rachakonda and should be in the possession of Bahamans in 1444. Rachakonda infact was their capital when Bahamans took it from them and Devarakonda used to be their subservient second capital.
5. It is only in 1433 that Recharlas have lost Rachakonda & Warangal, so they should have core in Warangal, Indur and Mahur. In 1461, they regained almost entire Telangana except Golkonda (With the help from Orissa) and became the master of Orugallu region. Recharla Nayaks ruled most of Telangana as a vassal of Orissa till 1475.
6. Indur was an important centre for Iron production, it has been bedazzled by the Golkonda Gems, hence a room for famous Golconda Iron has been made through new province Indur.
7. Culture in Mahur should be Gondi. It is only after 1860s, that people other than aboriginals have been settling in this area. Further, the eastern portion of this province should be in the possession of Chandrapur (Chanda).
8. It appears that some portion of Mahur falls into present day Maharashtra, if that is so, this should be redistributed, where eastern portion goes to Chanda or a new province can be carved out where Chanda become a two province Tag or whatever suits. In case it does not include any area from Maharashtra, Mahur should be renamed.
9. If Recharlas are included, Andhra should not have core in Warangal.

• Kerala

1. A new tag Kolathiri along with a new province has been created.
2. Malabar should be renamed as Calicut or something more suitable.
3. PDX can redraw these provinces as per the map of Kerala (1494) in the attachment.

• Karnataka

1. The term Maidan is a not appropriate in modern context. Introduced by Persian authors and later carried on by the British scholars, this remained a part of most of the history & geography books pertaining to this area but more recent works try to avoid using Maidan for it gives rise to ambiguities. Maidan means flat open field and is usually used to describe river plains in Indian context, like Maidan of Ganga, (river plains of Ganga). Northern Karnataka no doubt is less rugged topography than most of Deccan and does give a feeling of being like an open field when compared to other Deccan regions but it is essentially a semi-dry, drought prone more or less flat tableland on a large plateau which certainly cannot be compared with the plains of North India. And this is the reason the use of one word Maidan for two separate geographical features creates ambiguities.
2. Usually modern geography terms the region of Karnataka as North & South Bayaluseeme & Malnad. (Some early works trifurcate Karnataka as Malnad, Gadinad & Balevalanad). Since Northern Bayaluseeme becomes a large area, for our purpose I have broken it into east and west. Alternately, central Bayaluseeme (instead of North-western Bayaluseeme) for our purpose too doesn’t seem to make any harm. Krishna-Tungabhadra Doab can also be used for North-western Bayaluseeme.
3. I have created provinces in the southern Karnataka keeping three things in mind: a buffer state between Keladi & Mysore and similarly another buffer state between Mysore & Chitradurga; size of the province; and a room for tags like Chitradurga & Yelahanka.
4. PDX can work around resizing provinces their own way, for except for Mysore, this entire region including Devangere & Bellary districts (Vijayanagar) had numerous small and big poligar chieftains busy fighting each other and practically independent post 1565 till 1800. It is not easy to represent them. Various British report on Poligars particularly one by Thomas Munro (1802) in this regard can be referred for better understanding. This 1625 map of southern Karnataka can give some perspective. Imagine similar situation in Rayalaseema and Kongu-Nadu as well. http://barry-lewis.com/research/chitradurga/mysore1625/
5. The northern limit of Savanur province should be along the river Krishna, I have tried drawing it but have ended up having some unused territory in Belgaum district which is not unhistorical, This unused portion can be used under Desh or other province.
6. Suvanur could be a separate tag as Nawab of Savanur. However Savanur core should get activated post 1650. The book “The Nawab of Savanur” by Krishnaji Nageshwarrao Chitnis can be referred for valuable information on contemporary age and region vis-a-vis Bijapur polity.
7. Keladi should not have core in Savanur or Vijayanagar. If Poligars are represented, they held Vijayanagar for two and a half century till 1800.
8. Malenadu is a larger geographic area, Bendur has been created as the seat of Keladi Nayaks.
9. Kodagu district should be a separate tag but it becomes too small - PDX call. I have clubbed Kodagu, western portion of Hassan & Chikmagalur district in the spirit of Malnad-Coffee.
10. Province like Bidar & Bijapur will also take some area from adjoining Maharashtra which I have not included in the map.
11. A new tag in North Kanara, Gersoppa.
12. A new tag in Yelahanka, Yelahanka Nayak or Kampegowda.
13. Rename North Kanara as Gersoppa and South Kanara to Tulunadu.

• Others

1. I am not getting into development of these provinces, as these are various balance issues and let PDX decide those matter.
2. However to suggest a few off my head, development in Malabar region should be slightly higher. May be 2 base production and 1 base manpower for each.
3. Balgana though hilly has been as fertile as Khandesh area. Its development should be slightly higher. May be 1 base higher in each category.
4. Development in Vijayanagar is not reflective of its grandeur. (Pre 1565).
5. If possible split Gersoppa into Gersoppa & Haduvalli. Both having Jain monarch and religion in Haduvalli changed to Jain.
6. Sonda is another tag in this area but can only be represented at the cost of the size of Goa & North Kanara - tough call.
7. Introduce Tulu culture. Tulu culture in Bendur, Balam and both the Kanaras.
8. Mysore, Yelahaka & Gersoppa (perhaps Ramnad too) should start as vassal of Vijayanagar.
9. In 1444, Udayagiri & Tulunadu (South Kanara) should belong to Vijayanagar.

Spoiler: New Tags

Spoiler: Senji

Also referred to as Gingee or Jinji. The kingdom of Senji (along eastern coast from Palar in the north to Coleroon in the south) under a nayak seems to have originated during Krishnadevaraya's reign. One of the Jesuit letters of 1606 states that Nayak of Senji was the most powerful of the other two (Tanjore & Madura) and besides other feudatories, they had three prominent feudatory chief - 1. The Prince of Tiruvari (on the Gadilam river); 2. The Salavacha or Solaga of Tivakottai at the mouth of the Coleroon; and 3. The Nayak of Vellore.

Till 1592, all the nayaks of Senji remained loyal to Vijaynagar. However, the Vijaynagar ruler, Venkata III shifted his capital after 1592 from Penukonda to Chandragiri in order to strengthen Vijaynagar's hold over the Nayaks. This gave rise to resentment among the nayaks as they expected Vijaynagar's interference in their internal affairs. One instance of such interference is that the nayak of Vellore, who was subordinate to Senji Nayak, was encouraged by Venkata III to disregard the latter's authority. Venkata III followed the policy of 'divide and rule' to weaken the nayak of various tracts within the Empire. All this led the nayak of Vellore and Senji to rebel (sometime after 1600). In another instance, Vellore was taken over by Venkata III (1604).

It is undisputedly believed that Koneri Dynasty ruled over Senji earlier, which was taken over by Vijayanagar and put under governorship of the Nayak’s formally from 1464 when Venkatapati Nayak became the first Nayak ruler. There is some confusion regards the actual line of the Senji Nayak as different sources are giving different information but texts at hand has advocated for the Mackenzie manuscripts which is as below:

1464-1476 - Venkatpati Nayak
1476-1490 - Vaiyappa Nayak
1490-1520 - Tubaki Krishnappa Nayaka (also called Bala / Vala Krishnappa)
1520-1540 - Achyuta Vijaya Ramachandra Nayak
1540-1550 - Muthialu Nayak
1570-1600 - Venkatappa Nayak
1600-1620 - Varadappa Nayak
Appa Nayak - up to foundation of Nawab of Arcot. (1650s).

The Senji Nayak kingdom when established covered most of Northern Tamil Nadu including the present day Chennai, Puducherry and vast areas of Nellore, Chittoor, Vellore and Chandragiri. Its Southern boundary extended up to Kollidam River which marked the boundary between the Tanjore and Madurai kingdoms. Later, in early 17th centuries, the Senji Nayaks lost control of the Vellore Fort and its Northern provinces when their erstwhile Vijayanagara overlords under Aravidu Dynasty took possession of these places and re-established their later Kingdom.

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayaks_of_Gingee

Spoiler: Tanjore

In 1532 CE, Achyuta Deva Raya, of Vijayanagar granted Sevappa Nayak, the governor of Thanjavur, permission to establish a feudatory kingdom. The nayak of Tanjore remained loyal to Vijaynagar throughout the 16th century. They always sided with the Empire in its battles. For example, they helped Venkata III against Golkonda invasion and this loyalty continued till Venkata IIII’s death in 1614.

Sevappa Nayak (1532-1580) - Chevvappa Nayak a.k.a. Sevappa Nayak was the first Thanjavur Nayak king. He was the son of Timmappa Nayak, a Vijayanagara viceroy in the Arcot region from his wife Bayyambika. Sevappa's wife Murtimamba was the sister-in-law of Achyuta Deva Raya and the sister of the Vijayanagara Queen, Thirumalamba. Some sources suggest that Sevappa acquired the Thanjavur Kingdom as stridhana (dowry) from Achyutadeva Raya.

Achuthappa Nayak (1560–1614) - Co-ruled with his father under the Yuvaraja title till 1580 is said to be deeply religious and well considered a master in the art of warfare. His long reign of 54 years was of comparative peace apart from the internal struggles enabling him to contribute much to spiritual and public utility development. After battle of Talikota when the Nayaks of Senji & Madurai intended to break free from Vijayanagar and refused to pay tribute, Tanjore sided with the overlord Vijayanagar (now capital at Chandragiri) and defeated Madurai.
Helped King of Jaffna in successfully repelling Portuguese advances through many battles.
Built many temples, took irrigational and housing projects.

Raghunatha Nayak (1600–1634) - A gifted scholar in Sanskrit, Kannada and Telugu languages, as well as a talented musician co-ruled with his father till 1614 is regarded as the greatest in the Thanjavur Nayak dynasty. Raghunatha was a gifted scholar and an expert in the art of swordplay, a fine marksman and a skilled master in horse riding. He is famous for his patronage of literature other scholarly research. One of his wives, Ramabhadramba was highly educated and a gifted poet.

During his time he granted military assistance to the Chandragiri (Vijayanagar) ruler Venkata III to recover most of his lost areas from the Golconda forces.

In 1620 Raghunatha Nayak permitted a Danish settlement at Tarangambadi. This encouraged the English to seek trade with the Thanjavur Nayaks.

The Tanjore cannon or Raghunatha cannon, supposed to be the largest cannon in the world was installed during Raghunatha Nayak, built with Danish metallurgy know how. It was during Raghunatha's reign that a palace library was established.

He successfully led his army along with the imperial Vijayanagari army in the famous battle of Toppur where Senji Nayak lost almost all his territory except the Gingee fort to Chandragiri (Vijayanagar) crushing the succession and installed the 15 year boy-king Rama Deva Raya to the throne of Chandragiri in 1617.

Vijaya Raghava Nayak (1634–1673) also called Mannaru Dasa. His long reign witnessed a large amount of literary output both in music and Telugu literature. Vijayaraghava’s court had a number of poets and literary scholars. Vijayaraghava Nayak wrote more than thirty books in Telugu.

The end of the Thanjavur Nayak dynasty was brought on by Chokkanatha Nayak, the Nayak of Madurai. Chokkanatha placed his younger brother Alagiri Nayak on the throne of Thanjavur, but within a year the latter threw off his allegiance, and Chokkanatha was forced to recognise the independence of Thanjavur. A son of Vijaya Raghava induced the Bijapur Sultan to help him get back the Thanjavur throne.

In 1675, the Sultan of Bijapur sent a force commanded by the Maratha general Venkaji to drive away the Madurai usurper. Venkaji defeated Alagiri with ease, and occupied Thanjavur. He did not, however, place his protege on the throne as instructed by the Bijapur Sultan, but seized the kingdom and made himself king. Thus ended the reign of Nayaks and the start of Maratha power in Thanjavur.

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanjavur_Nayak_kingdom

Spoiler: Madura

In EU4 terms province of Tirunelveli, Madura, Tiruchirapalli & Dindigul and Ramnad as vassal. (During Nayak rule, 1570).
Between 1500 and 1530s, the Madurai region had following viceroys appointed by Vijayanagar.

• Narasa Nayak
• Tenna Nayak
• Narasa Pillai
• Kuru Kuru Timmappa Nayak
• Kattiyama Kamayya Nayak
• Chinnappa Nayakka
• Ayyakarai Veyyappa Nayak

Vishwanatha Nayakka a Vijayanagar governor is supposed to be the founder of Madura Nayak who ruled from 1535 to 1544, and was succeeded by Varathappa Nayakkar who ruled for a very short period of about a year. In 1545, Dumbicchi Nayakkan became the Governor, and after twenty months, he was succeeded by Vishwanatha Nayakkan again, until Vitthala Raja took over in 1546. Vitthala Raja ruled till 1558. Thereafter Vishwanatha Nayak took over again from 1559 and rulers of Madura became hereditary. He ruled till 1563 when his son took over.

Kumara Krishnappa Nayaka (1563-1573) Viswantha Nayak was succeeded by his son Krishnappa Nayak who along with his father's able minister Ariyanatha expanded the Madurai Kingdom under the Nayaks and brought most of the ancient Pandyan territory under its rule. After Talikota, he became lax in paying tribute to Vijayanagar.

Kumara Krishnappa Nayak was succeeded in 1573 by his two sons, who ruled jointly and uneventfully until 1595, when they in turn were succeeded by their two sons, one of whom ruled until 1602. (More clarity needed).

Muttu Krishnappa Nayaka (1602-1609) These were followed by Muttu Krishnappa Nayak. He is credited with having given the Setupatis of Ramnad a considerable slice of territory in the Maravar country, on condition that they suppress crime and protect pilgrims journeying to Rameswaram.

Muttu Virappa Nayaka (1609-1623) Muttu Krishnappa Nayak was succeeded by his eldest son, Muttu Virappa. He began the construction of the Dindigul Fort at Dindigul on the Hill, along with the Temple on it, which later was completed by Tirumalai Nayak. Muttu Virappa is said to have have paid the Vijayanagara king at Chandragiri a tribute of 600,000 pagodas in 1616 post his defeat at battle of Toppur.

Tirumalai Nayaka (1623-1659) crushed the rebellion of the Setupatis of Ramnad. The Setupathi and his Maravas withdrew to the island of Pamban and procured the assistance of Europeans.

Muttu Veerappa Nayaka (1659-1662) He tried to induce the Nayak of Tanjore to join the enterprise against rising power of Sultan of Carnatic (Gingee). He tried to reconcile with the sultan but no qualms.

Chokkanatha Nayaka (1662-1682) At the age of 16, this young ruler began his reign with an ill-considered attempt to drive out the Muslim troops, despatching a large army against the Gingee fortress. His general, however, sold himself to the enemy and wasted time and money in a long and unprofitable campaign. It was not until he himself finally took command of the army that the Muslim invaders were driven back to Tanjore and eventually to Gingee.

In the next year (1663 or 1664) Chokkanatha paid a heavy price for his temporary success. The Muslims burst into the Trichinopoly and Madura districts and devastated the country with almost incredible cruelty. They besieged Trichinoploy, and he had to buy them off with a large sum. He consoled himself by punishing the Nayakkan of Tanjore and Setupati of Ramnad, who had failed to help him in repelling them. This latter enterprise was unsuccessful, for though he succeeded in taking several forts in the Marava country, he was baffled by the guerilla tactics of his adversary, and had to retire without obtaining that chief’s submission. This Campaign aspired the Setupati to form an independent kingdom.

A secret love affair with the princess of Tanjore and unfortunate turns of event where inspite of winning Tanjore he lost the Princess made him heart-broke.

Chokkantha was replaced on his tottering throne about 1678 by a Muslim adventurer who during the next two years usurped the whole of his authority, and even the ladies of his and his fallen brother’s harems, and at last was slain by Chokkanatha himself and a few of his friends.

In 1682 his capital was besieged by Mysore. The Marathas, who were now established in Gingee as well as Tanjore, inflicted a crushing defeat on the Mysore troops and drove them out of almost every corner of the Madura and Trichinopoly districts. Madura itself they were unable to capture, for the Maravans, regarding the men of Mysore as on the whole more eligible neighbours than the Marathas, helped the former to hold that fortress. The latter had pretended to be, and laid siege to Trichinopoly itself. In despair at their treachery, Chokkantha died of a broken heart in 1682.

Rangakrishna Muthu Virappa Nayaka (1682-1689) Rangakrishna Muthu Virappa Nayak, who succeeded Chokkanatha was a spirited boy of fifteen. He tried to revive the diminished fortunes of the kingdom. He made a name for himself by ignoring Aurangazeb with courage, but little enough of his territories remained to him to rule. The greater part of them was held by Mysore, some by the Maravans, some by the Marathas of Gingee, and some by the Marathas of Tanjore. At first, the country was subject to anarchy and pillage, foreign enemies occupied all the forts, and robber chiefs were masters of the rural areas and carried on their brigandage there with impunity.

Matters slowly improved, with Mysore soon distracted by a war with the Marathas of Gingee, and both the Sethupathis and the Marathas of Tanjore occupied by wars within their own countries. Emperor Aurangzeb in 1686–1687 conquered the kingdoms of Madura's old enemies, Golconda and Bijapur, and he was for many years engaged in an exhausting war with the Marathas.

Muthu Virappa recovered his capital in 1685, and he gradually reconquered large parts of the ancient kingdom of his forefathers and succeeded in restoring the power of the Nayaks of Madurai. Unfortunately he died of smallpox in 1689, at the early age of 22.

Rani Mangammal (1689-1704) Mangammal, the mother of the late Nayaka, acted for the next fifteen years as Queen-Regent on behalf of her grandson. In 1693, Madurai became a feudatory state to the emperor in Delhi with Nizams in Hyderabad as immediate Mughal representative and Arcot as vassal to Hyderabad as immediate mediator.

Vijaya Ranga Chokkanatha Nayaka (1704-1731) Apparently a dull reign of 26 years, paving way for the demise of the dynasty. His reign was distinguished by the ill-regulated and extraordinary munificence of his gifts to Brahmins and religious institutions. The injustice of his rule caused a serious riot in Madurai, the mutiny of his troops, and incessant disturbances. His only warfare was over the succession to the throne of Ramnad, in 1725. Of the two claimants, one was supported by Tanjore Marathas and the other by Madurai and the Tondaiman of Pudukottai. The Tanjore troops won a decisive victory and placed their protégé on the throne. A year or two later the Tanjore king deposed this very protégé, and divided Ramnad into Ramnad and Sivaganga, which became independent Marava powers.
Queen Meenakshi (1731-1736) Vijaya Ranga Chokkanatha died in 1731, and was succeeded by his widow Meenakshi, who acted as Queen-Regent on behalf of a young boy she had adopted as the heir of her dead husband. She had only ruled a year or two when an insurrection was raised against her by Vangaru Tirumala, the father of her adopted son, who pretended to have claims of his own to the throne of Madurai. At this juncture representatives of the Mughals appeared on the scene and took an important part in the struggle.

A succession between Queen Meenakshi & Vangaru Tirumala in 1734 was interfered by Arkot (local Mughal representative as vassal of Nizams). Vangaru was given Madurai & Tirunelveli after paying 3 millions while Queen Meenakshi could keep Trichinopoly after paying 10 millions.

Chanda Sahib accepted the crore of rupees and departed to Arcot. Two years later, in 1736 he returned, admitted into the fort, and proceeded to make himself master of the kingdom. He eventually marched against Vangaru Thirumala, who still was ruling in the south, defeated him at Ammaya Nayakkanur and Dindigul, drove him to take refuge in Sivaganga, and occupied the southern provinces of the Madurai kingdom. Chanda Sahib along with his 2 brothers as governor at Dindigul & Madurai and himself at Tiruchirapalli ruled Mudarai region away from Nawab of Arcot between 1736-1740.
Vangaru Thirumala asked help of the Marathas and therefore in 1740, they appeared in the south with a vast army, defeated and killed the Nawab of Arcot, seized Trichinopoly, Dindigul and Madurai and captured Chanda Sahib but disregarding the claims of Vangaru Tirumala, appointed a Maratha, the well-known Morari Rao of Gooty, as their governor of the conquered kingdom.

Morari Rao remained in power for two years and finally retired. In 1743 the invading army of the Nizam re-established his weakened authority in the Tamil Nadu and in 1744 appointed Anwar-uddin as Nawab of Arcot. The Nizam ordered that Vangaru Tirumala should be appointed king of Madurai, however the Arcot Nawab disregarded this order and Vangaru Tirumala disappeared from the scene, poisoned, some say, by Anwar-uddin. In 1751 the Madurai kingdom smoothly passed into the British fold, when the Arcot Nawab ceded the former state to the later for the repayment of his huge loans from the British East India Company.

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madurai_Nayak_dynasty

Spoiler: Ramnad

It is interesting to note that for thousands of years, there was a royal family in South India with its headquarters at Ramanathapuram near Rameshwaram, known as the Sethupati Rajas or the guardians of the Sethu (Bridge between India & SriLanka). The specific task of these kings was to guard the sanctity of Rameshwaram temple and protect the Sethu.

In fact even today, though the famous Rameshwaram temple (which technically belonged to the Sethupatis) is administered by the Government of Tamil Nadu, the head of the Sethupati dynasty, at present Rajeshwari Nachiar, is the hereditary head of the temple’s board of trustees.

Detailed information about the Sethupathis is available in the ‘Ramnad Manual’ maintained by Tamil Nadu archives. Although the dynasty claims that they are mentioned in the 2000-year-old sagas of Tamil literature, as the brave Marava community guarding the Sethu since the times of Lord Rama, the first historical reference comes only in the 11th century AD, when Chola king Rajaraja made the head of Marava community as Sethupati to protect the pilgrims to Rameshwaram temple and the Rama Sethu.

The temple complex itself was built by Sethupati rulers in the 12th century, with Sethupathy Maravar beginning the construction of the grand Ramanathaswamy temple. Then again reference is made in 1434 to the repair of the temple walls by the head of the Sethupati clan, Udayan Sethupati.

It is only from 1590, that we find a detailed history of these chiefs, who are described as masters of Sethu and their kingdom described as Sethu Nadu (Land of Sethu). After the establishment of the Sultanate of Madura, Sethupathis were suppressed and deprived of their realm. It is not clear if the establishment of Vijayanagar empire in Madura region re-installed Sethupatis in Ramnad to their ancient “job”. But the 1434 inscription in the name of Udayan Sethupati does make us think that the Setupathis were in charge of the region as a vassal of Vijayanagar. After the Madura Nayaks had their kingdom established, we get a concrete evidence of the re-appointment of the head of the same Marava community as the Sethupatis.

The most important of these monarchs was the Raghunatha Sethupati II alias Kilavan Sethupati (1671 to 1708 ), who ensured that Sethupatis with their fiefdom over the area known as Ramnad, remained all powerful. It was during his time, that the magnificent still existing palace of Ramlingavilasam was created as the residence of the Sethupatis. No other palace in Tamil Nadu has such extensive mural paintings. In 1978, the Sethupati family, unable to maintain the palace handed it over to the Government of Tamil Nadu.

In the18th century, when the British entered the politics of South India the Sethupatis were demoted as mere zamindars from 1803 onwards. After Indian Independence, the Sethupatis still retained their importance in the politics of Tamil Nadu. But the abolition of zamindaries by the Government of India, removed all sources of their wealth and today, the former Sethupatis are just well-known prominent magnates of Tamil Nadu.

Chieftains under the Madurai Nayaks
Sadaikka Thevar Sethupathi (1590-1621)
Kootan Sethupathi (1621-1637)
Dalavai Sethupathi (1637-1659)
Raghunatha Sethupathi (1659-1670)

Independent kings
Raghunatha Kilavan Sethupathi (1670–1708)
Vijaya Raghunatha Sethupathi I (1708–1723)
Sundaresvara Raghunatha Sethupathi (1723 -1728)
Kumara Muthu Vijaya Raghunatha Sethupathi (1728-1734)
Muthukumara Raghunatha Sethupathi (1734-1747)
Rakka Thevar (1747-1748)
Vijaya Raghunatha Sethupathi II (1748-1760)
Muthuramalinga Sethupathi I (1760-1794)

Ruler of princely state under the paramountcy of the British Raj
Mangaleswari Nachiyar (1795-1803)

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramnad_estate

Spoiler: Kalahasti

Srikalahasti is a holy town in the modern Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh on the banks of the River Swarmamukhi. A further south is Vandavashi or Wandiwash in the current Tiruvannamalai district of Tamil Nadu. The coastal tract between these two modern cities were taken care by the Kalahasti Nayaks under Aravidu Dynasty of the Vijayanagar Empire.

Damarla Chennapa Nayakadu was the Nayak ruler of Kalahasti and Vandsavasi under the suzerainty of Vijayanagar emperor Sriranga Deva Raya (1572-86). Chennai (British Madras), the capital of Tamil Nadu is named in his honour. His actual reign period is not known but he was active from 1580s to 1620s.

His son Damarla Vekatappa Nayak has reference in Dutch records and during the reign of Pada Venkat Raya of Chandragiri (Vijayanagar) 1632-42, he was the one who had negotiated the British on behalf of the Vijayanagar emperor for the grant of Chennai to them.

Another name in the line we see is Damarla Ayappa Nayak from the Kalahasti Nayak line, however information are very inadequate. But the line of the Kalahasti Nayaks survived another century as well for there there is a reference of the Kalahasti Nayaks taking side of Hyder Ali during Second Anglo-Mysore War (1780-1784). Further information are very scanty.

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayaks_of_Kalahasti

Spoiler: Chitradurga

Nayakas of Chitradurga (1588–1779 CE) ruled parts of eastern Karnataka during the post-Vijayanagara period.

Timmanna Nayaka (?–1588) of Matli: A chieftain from Matli in Davanagere taluk during the rule of Saluva Narasimha. He ruled areas covering Davanagere district and Chitradurga district.

Obanna Nayaka I (1588–1602) is also known as Madakari Nayaka I.

Kasturi Rangappa Nayaka I (1602–1652) Added territories such as Mayakonda, Santebennur, Holalkere, Anaji, and Jagalur.

Madakari Nayaka II (1652–1674) He is credited with a number of military successes, particularly in the regions east of Chitradurga.　He killed Shah Adib Allah in 1671 in a battle at Chitradurga.

Obanna Nayaka II (1674–1675) His rule saw civil unrest. He was killed by his own men.

Shoora Kantha Nayaka (1675–1676) His rule saw civil unrest. He was killed by his own men.

Chikkanna Nayaka (1676–1686)

Madakari Nayaka III (1686–1688)

Donne Rangappa Nayaka (1688–1689)

Bharamappa Nayaka of Bilichodu (1689–1721) known as the last of the great Nayakas of Chitradurga, he became a Maratha ally and fought in the battle of Dodderi in 1695 but had to pay tribute later to the Mughals for supporting the Marathas. He fought many pitched battles against the Mughals, and is credited for building many temples including the Ranganatha Swamy at Niratadi, and irrigation tanks.

Madakari Nayaka IV (1721–1748) was a Maratha feudatory. He was killed during continued hostilities against the Nayakas of Davangere.

Kasturi Rangappa Nayaka II (1748–1758), son of Kasturi Rangappa Nayaka II, retook Mayakonda territory and Buddha region. He achieved this with the help of the Maratha Sardar Murari Rao and the Subedar of Advani. He died in 1754 without an heir.

Madakeri Nayaka (1758–1779) the last, son of one Bharamappa Nayaka of Janakal-Durga. He was a brave soldier and a shrewd administrator. (also called as Madakari Nayaka V). He allied himself with Haider Ali of Mysore at times and at other times with the Marathas. It was during his time that Haider Ali attacked the Chitradurga Fort leading to the heroics of "Onake Obavva". Later having been betrayed by the Marathas and some local officers, Madakari Nayaka was defeated by Hyder Ali, taken prisoner and killed.

The Chitradurga Nayakas form an integral part of Kannada folklore.

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayakas_of_Chitradurga
• http://barry-lewis.com/research/chitradurga/

Spoiler: Kodagu

Kodagu Kingdom or Haleri Kingdom refers to the monarchistic dynasty that ruled the Kodagu region of Karnataka for over 200 years between 1600–1834 CE. The kingdom was named after a place called Haleri near Madikeri which they made as their capital. The Haleri kings were devout Lingyats and were an offshoot of the Keladi Nayaks. The kingdom's origin is traced to Veeraraja, a nephew of Sadashiva Nayaka of the Keladi dynasty.

Muddu Raja I (1633 - 1687)
Dodda Veerapa (1687 - 1736)
Chikka Veerappa (1736 - 1766)
Devappa Raja (1766 - 1770)
Muddu Raja II, Muddaya (1770 - 1774)
Appaji Raja II (1774 - 1775)
Linga Rajendra I (Linga Raja I, 1775- 1780)
Dodda Vira Rajendra (Dodda Vira Raja, 1780 - 1809)
Devammaji (1809 - 1811)
Linga Rajendra II (Linga Raja II, 1811 - 1820)

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodagu_Kingdom

Spoiler: Kandy

Sinhaladvipa Katha, the Nayak king Kumara Krishnappa, who reigned at Madurai (1562–1572), is said to have conquered Kandy. Kumara Krishnappa killed the then reigning Kandy king, sent the late king's wife and children to Anuradhapura and placed his own brother-in-law Vijaya Gopala Naidu as his viceroy in Kandy.

A cadet branch of the Madurai Nayak dynasty, the Kandyan Nayaks were related to the Tanjore Nayaks as well. In total, four Nayakkar monarchs ruled in Kandy, the last of whom, Sri Vikrama Rajasinha, was deposed as a result of the Kandyan nobility's collusion with the British and exiled to Vellore Fort in India.

The Nayaks of Kandy were notable for re-establishing the long-dormant tradition among the Sinhalese monarchs of marrying from South Indian nobility, and for their childless marriages resulting in non-linear succession.The Nayaks were originally Hindus, but later converted to Buddhism and were responsible for a renaissance of Buddhist culture on the Island.

The stability and power of the Kandyan Nayaks were heavily reliant on the support from the Madurai and Tanjore branches of the House, particularly in the form of military assistance against the Portuguese and Dutch- alliances cemented by intermarriage between Kandy and South India. Thus, intermarriage across the Palk Strait became a matter of policy for Kandy in 17th and 18th centuries.

The last king of the Kandy Mahanuwara dynasty was Vira Narendra Sinha who ruled from 1707 to 1739 and had married relation with brides from Madurai Royal family, had no children by either of the queens. Thus, the king nominated, as his successor, the brother of his first queen who had remained at the court ever since his sister married him. When Narendra Sinha's brother-in-law succeeded the throne, the Sinhalese Kandyan aristocracy had no problem with this new form of succession.The practice of marrying princesses from Madurai is said to have come into occurrence as the Kandy kings insisted on consorts from the Suryavamsa lineage to grace their coronation and to produce heirs acceptable to the people.

Sri Vijaya Rajasinha 1739–1747
Kirti Sri Rajasinha 1747–1782
Sri Rajadhi Raja Singha 1782–1798
Sri Vikrama Rajasinha 1798–1815

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayaks_of_Kandy

Spoiler: Gersoppa

In EU4 terms province of North Kannara.

The first ruler of Gerasoppe family was Saluva Narana and he was followed by Saluva Nagana. Then followed many rulers in that line; afterwards came Honna, Kama Mangarasa (Mavarasa) and Haivarasa. We do not very concrete data for the earlier kings but after Haivarasa we have many helps from inscriptions. All these kings were Jains rulers and subordinated to Vijayanagar empire. We do not have the exact date for the reign of Haivarasa but we now are certain that his wife was Bhairadevi Saluva. He had two sons Sangiraya (Sangamabhupa) and son-in -law Malliraja. Haivarasa Odeya ruled over most of North Kanara area: Haduvalli (Bhatkal), Gerasoppe (Honavar) Nagire & Gokarna (with a little of northern Tulunadu).

The Odeya dynasty like many of those in Tulunadu were matrilineal in which the sister’s son would be the next heir in line. In 1408, Sangiraya Odeya son of Haivarasa Odeya revolted against the succession in female line and founded a separate independent principality with its capital in Haduvalli (Near Bhatkal) and thus the family of Odeya Jain Kings of Gerasoppa spitted into two Branches, Gerasoppa or Nagire and Sangitapura (Haduvalli.)

The Vijayanagara rulers do not seem to have viewed this development favourably and there followed a series of rivalry and warfare between the two branches of the same family for a century and half when in 1550s both the branches of the family again got merged under Queen Chennabhairadevi.

It is suggested that the strained relation between the Nagire and Haduvalli Chiefs was basically due to the difference in the rule of succession i.e., while the Nagire Chiefs followed Aliya Aantana (succession through son-in-law) rule, the Haduvalli family pursued Makkaia Aantana (succession through sons). However, this may not be the only reason. The fact that the Nagire Chiefs were almost always on the offensive indicates that they did not like a collateral family ruling independently in the precincts of their own kingdom. The low lines of the family can be drawn as:

Gersoppe Branch

Sangama Malliraja (Manga III) (?-?)
Keshavdeva Odeyar (1401-1420)
Sangiraya Odeyar (1420-1428)
Bhairavdeva Odeyar I (1428-1462)
Immadi Bhairava (1462-1462)
Malliraja II (1462-1471) Ruling from Hanovar. Then 1471-1480 ruling from Gersoppe.
Devarasa Odeyar (1481-1502)
Saluva Bhairavraya Odeyar (1502-1508)
Mallrao Odeyar (1508-1512)
Saluva Immadi Devarasa Odeyar (1514-1523)
Padumala Devi (1523-1529)
Saluva Krishnadevasara Odeyar (1529-1559)

Sangitapura Branch (Haduvalli)
Sangiraya Odeyar (1408-1448)
Indagarasa Odeyar (1449-1460)
Sangiraya Odeyar II (1460-1476)
Indradevarasa (Saluvendra II) (1476-1508)
Devarasa Odeyar I (1508-1523)
Gururaja Odeyar (1527-1533)
Devarasa Odeyar II (1533-1541)
Chennadeviamma (1541-1551)

Chennabhairadevi (1551-1560) from Sangitapura and from Mrijan Fort 1560-1607 for United Gerasoppa).

In 1551 A.D. The ruler at Sangitapura was Chennadevi Amma. At the same time the ruler of Gerasoppe was Saluva Krishnadevarasa. The latter died without any issue while in Sangitapura Chennadeviamma was succeeded by her sister Chennabhairadevi. She was Sose (niece) of Saluva Krishnadivarasa. Since he had no issue, Chennabhairadevi took up the reign of the government of Gersoppa like also and thus by about 1560 A.D. both branches came to be united and both Gersoppa and Bhatkal (Haduvalli) enjoyed the position of headquarters of the principality.

Pepper Queen Channabhairadevi of Gersoppa (1551-1607).

“We must deal with her, most carefully and diplomatically. We must be courteous, polite and diplomatic to win her to our side” reads a Portuguese record of 1591 C.E. this was the realisation of the Portuguese after a very bad defeat they suffered at the hands of Chennabhairadevi, the Queen of Gerasoppa.

Inscriptions call Chennabhairadevi, as ruler of Haiva, Tuluva and Konkan areas. These roughly comprised of North and South Kanaras, southern region of Goa and northern Malabar. Since important harbors of Mrijan, Ankola and Bendur came under this territory, there used to be skirmishes with adjoining rulers throughout, which wanted to grab them. Besides, this entire belt was known as pepper country, where the spices grew abundantly in the virgin forests, which were in great demand in Europe. Actually Chennabhairadevi was known as Raina-Da-Pimenta or "Pepper Queen".

Though the Vijayanagara empire was on the decline, the queen called herself a subordinate (mahamandaleshwara) of Vijayanagar rulers. She was always busy checking the advances of Portuguese who were notorious for their unfair practices and treachery in Indian context. At the same time she had to be ever alert with the rulers of the adjoining Keladi kingdom and Bilgi chiefs, the latter being another principality near by. They always tried to grab the harbours and trade. She had sought help of Adilshah of Bijapur while crushing the Portuguese. The help did not reach on time, but she was successful. The Portuguese were humbled.

Herself a Jain, she gave grants to all Shaiva, Vaishnava and Shakti temples in Gokarna, Uppunda, Baindur and Khetappa Narayana temple of Bhatkal. Saraswat Brahmin businessmen and other skilled Konkani craftsmen from Goa came, settled and availed her benevolent rule, to escape Portuguese persecution. Most prominent among these were Lakkarasa Kamti and Kheta Pai who built beautiful temples. Akalanka, the Jain scholar and Bhattakalaka, the renowned grammarian were protégés of Gerasoppa queen.

But the efforts of Keladi Nayaka and Bilgi chiefs continued to pull her down. Finally a marital tie brought the two rulers together, literally joining hands! They jointly attacked Gerasoppa, completely defeating the brave queen. Gerasoppa thus became part of Keladi kingdom. The ageing queen was taken a prisoner and died in a prison in Keladi.

Thus ended the rule of a brave, kind, tolerant and benevolent queen who perhaps had the longest reign as a woman ruler in Indian history.

References:

• Goa-Kanara Portuguese Relations, 1498-1763 - Xavier Institute of Historical Research.
• Travels of Pietro Della Valle in India: From the Old English Translation of 1664.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirjan_Fort

Spoiler: Yelahanka

Jaya Kempegowda (1408-1433)
Gidde Kempegowda (1433-1443)
Kempananje Kempegowda (1443-1510)
Hiriya Kempegowda (Kempe Gowda I) (1510-1569)
Immadi Kempegowda (?)
Mummadi Kempegowda (?)
Dodda Veerappa Kempegowda (?)
Honappa Veerappa Kempegowda (?)
Anakanna Veerappa Kempegowda (?)
Kempa Veerappa Kempegowda (?-1728)

References:

• http://myvpa.org/vpa/history/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kempe_Gowda_I

Spoiler: Kolathunadu

It is difficult to make a perfect genealogy for the Kolathiri Kings as the Kingdom has been divided into a number of small principalities each headed by the royal members or kin of the same Kolathiri family. Chirakkal Raja of Chirakkal line of the Kolathiri Royal family is said to be an important one. An another line of the family Arakkal line got converted to Islam and was ruling from Laccadives Islands and a small portion of Cannonore city. Genealogy for Arakkal family line are available but it cannot be replicated for entire Kolathanadu. They can be made to rule at Laccadives Islands only if PDX intents to represent Laccadives Islands to the game.

Alternately the names of various Kolathiri royal branches with a suffix of Raja can also be used as a workable solution. Please refer to the 2 attachments about the Kolathiris, they can be dug out for some valuable information.

References:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolathunadu

Spoiler: Recharla Nayaks

15th century polity of Telangana has kept revolving round the Recharla Nayaks. They would in turn ally with Bahamans, Vijayanagar and Orissa and indulge in their wars; reap the benefit of friendship and pay the price for enmity. Recharla Padmanayakas had come into political prominence during the Kakatiya era. After the fall of Kakatiya kingdom, Recharla Padmanayakas (also called as Velama Nayakas) ruled the Telangana region in two branches with Rachakonda and Devarakonda as their capitals. After the Munusuri Nayaks asserted their kingdom upon the erstwhile Kakatiya realm, the Recharla Nayaks, feudatories of erstwhile Kakatiya, now became the feudatories of the Munusuri Nayaks. Recharla Nayaks had ancestral rivalry with the Kondaividu Reddy who were supported by Munusuri Nayaks as such the relationship between Rechalra Nayaks and their overlord Munusuri Nayaks could not remain cordial. Furthermore, When the relationship between Munusuri Nayaks & Bahamans went sour, Recharla Nayaks allied themselves with the Bahamans and took over Warangal in 1368 by removing the Munusuri Nayaks and themselves becoming the rulers of the entire Telangana except Golconda which was with the Bahamans. All these years they remained an ally of Bahamans.

However in 1424, when there was a succession crisis at their arch-rival Reddy of Kondavidu, things changed. Bahamans & Orissa supported the Kondavidu Reddy family while Vijayanagar supported the Rajamundry Reddy family. Recharla Nayaks in their enmity with Kondaividu Reddy, abandoned Bahamans and sided with Vijayanagar.

Bahamans didn’t take this development positively and attacked Warangal and occupied it in 1425 however after a negotiation Warangal was retuned to them. By 1428, the Kondaividu line of Reddy Kingdom was over and Kondaividu was being ruled by the Rajahmundry Reddy line. With the disappearance of common enemy between Vijayanagar & Recharla Nayaks, and creation of a new enemy, Rajahmundry Reddy, who had support of Vijayanagar, their relationship with Vijayanagar could remain as warm. Bahamans took advantage of this situation and attacked Warangal in 1433 and later took Rachakonda as well in 1435. Meanwhile Recharla Nayaks made alliance with Orissa who now had a common enemy - Rajamundry Reddy. With the help of Orissa they not only managed to save their second capital Deverakonda but were also able to successfully repulse any further Bahamans attack in the subsequent years. In 1461 in an another Bahaman attacks Recharlas sought help from Orissa with a promise to pay heavy sum. With the help of Orissa, Recharlas recovered almost all of their lost land and became the rulers of Orugallu except Golconda but they now had to become a vassal of Orissa. They kept ruling the region for a decade and half when around 1475 they were overthrown by Bahamans.

Singama Nayaka I (1326-1361)
Anavotha Nayaka (1361-1384)
Singama Nayaka II (1384-1399)
Immadi Anavotha Nayaka II (1399-1421)
Madanayaka Kumar Maganani (1421-1430) - From Devarakonda. Brother of Anayotha Nayak II acting as a Regent for infant Singama Nayak III.
Singama Nayaka III (1425-1475) Son of Anavotha Nayaka II
Lingamanedu (1430-1475) - From Devarakonda. Son of Madanayak Kumar Manganani

Singama Nayaka III was the son of Anavotha Nayaka II and was the last ruler of his dynasty. Ahmed Shah Bahamani occupied the fort of Rayagiri, Warangal and the region of Rachakonda between 1433-35. According to the inscription of Hariveeradeva, of 1461, the Recharla rulers regained all their land including Warangal fort. Dharmanayudu, brother of Singama Nayaka III was appointed as the ruler of Warangal. He issued the ‘Shayampet inscription’ in l462. After Singama Nayaka III, the Recharla Velama kingdom declined and their descendants took shelter in the court of Vijayanagara rulers.

Reference:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recherla_Nayaks

Spoiler: Savanur

Reference:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savanur_State
• The Nawabs of Savanur - Krishnaji Nageshrao Chitnis

 

[Afonso de Albuquerque]

This is fantastic work, well done! I hope Pdx is paying close attention, an Indian expansion is well past due.

 

[Trin Tragula]

Great post, both well researched and well presented

 

[Me_]

Darn, this is extensive and impressive. Good job!

 

[Aagney]

Some After-thoughts:

Regionalism: Regionalism has always been very high in India. This needs to be reflected at least in Indian Scenario. In EU4 tags usually grow in size and anything in opposite direction may look like anti-play. But given the nature of Indian polity there should be some way to represent it. In the timeline of discussion we see only a few states which actually grew: Delhi Sultanate, Vijayanagar, Sur, Mughals & Maratha. All others like Gujarat, Malwa, Bengal, Rajputana, Bahamans, Orissa, more-or-less remained confined within their local geography. It will also be wrong to assume that they didn’t have resources or that they were not able to win battles against each other and couldn't grow. But somehow it seems that they didn’t possess the administrative edge that enabled Vijay, Sur, Mughals, early Maratha to be able to operate at larger capacity.
I think the key should be in their respective government form and the way they were able to channelise their resources. Delhi Sultanate didn’t start growing till the various economic and administrative reforms were carried along. And they went weaker when Iqta had become almost heredity. With Bahaman too the various administrative reforms brought by Mahmud Gawan eventually became neglected after his death causing it to fall soon after. With Vijayanagar too in later days the Nayakan had started becoming heredity. With Mughals the Mansabdari mismanagement during Aurangzeb is said to be one of the important factors of their weakening. Even “Later Maratha” were marred by the regional ethos and were no longer working united under a Peshwa but had become like a kind of a confederacy. So in Europe when the nation states were uniting, in India different regions were fragmenting under own “regional nationalism”. One can see the seer number of Princely states in British India.

Some Lame Mechanic: What I like about the Iberian Wedding is they don’t happen always and they do happen most of the time. I would like a similar thing to happen to Vijayanagar & Bahamans (and later Mughals as well) where most of the time they would disintegrate into multiple respective successor states. Also I would like that such event should happen only to the AI and not punish a human player or only a weaker version of such events for the human players should occur that should be manageable most of the time.
Let there be a series of events which would reduce the legitimacy of the monarch first and then another series of events where a number of provinces would come under nobility, increasing their influence. More they are influential, more they want provinces further increasing their influence. Multiple nobility revolters under respective leaders would spawn and seize the provinces. After a ticking disaster, respective nobility would carve out a state of their own, (depending upon the dormant cores they have). Bahaman can get such event between 1500-1525 while Vijayanagar can get such event around 1550-1575. (Mughals post 1725-1750). This will keep India fragmented to some extent, and help European colonisers to play their part.

Indian Colonisation Mechanism: After establishing a trading company in India, extra merchant is earned. I suggest, give them an extra diplomatic slot too - one diplomatic slot per Indian Trade company region but not exceeding more than two in total. These two extra diplomatic slots should be hard coded so that they can only be filled by diplomatic ties in India, Indo-China & Persia. This will help AI to make alliance in India, indulge in battle here and gain territory - which is what happened historically.

Most of the time the game approaches with the philosophy of gaining grounds in India by keeping Indian powers technologically weaker and win a military war with superior tech. Technical inferiority of India vis-a-vis Europe from 17th century onwards is undeniable but the degree of weakness is a matter of debate. There was hardly an Indian state whose army were not trained by the French or the British or that they didn’t have access to the British or the French weaponry used by their respective East India Companies. The infantry weapons used by the Indian states and the BEIC were almost alike. India has been a highly populated, vast, ancient agrarian society, the approach and mindset used to colonise America and India need be different. For example after Chola no Indian power appears interested in maintaining a good navy perhaps with the exception of Calicut and later Maratha. So Portuguese had full sway in Indian waters. They had Goa in 1510, and monopoly in Indian Ocean but it took over 50 years to subdue a small power like Calicut. They could hold Goa against Bijapur only with the help of Vijayanagar as an ally. They enjoyed the support of the Indian mercantile class initially but their aggressive conversion policy made them unpopular soon - a very potent reason why the Dutch & the British later became a favoured merchants. We see even after a century the Portuguese were not able to make inland and had to confine themselves within small coastal pockets (They soon lost eastern coastal ports too). The war-game on the land was completely different. It took 150 years for the British to make inroads more-so-over they enjoyed much support from the Indian mercantile class. The very characteristic of 18th century India was a nexus between merchants, money lenders & BEIC, Zamindars and local Mughal officials (later Nawabs as well). At the helm of this nexus BEIC had already become a part of the Indian polity. When the other forces declined they became the king makers and master of India in mere 50 years. They won India through their diplomatic prowess. French too were diplomatically involved in India almost in the same degree as the British but they were out-played by the British. (As for the Spanish they have been unlucky about India from the very beginning!)

Trade Routes: Please bring about changes in the India Ocean Trade Routes. It is too dependent on the Gulf of Aden. Further owning Cape of Good Hope alone decides many things in this entire trading game, somehow it doesn’t appear neat. Ceylon to Zanzibar or Ceylon to Cape of Good Hope via Mauritius wont be unhistorical. Further a trade route connecting Malacca & Ceylon has been a very active one since Chola days, it is also not represented.

Succession: If you look at the immediate reason of the various battles in India then roughly over 70% of the battles had its roots in the succession. Wars of succession were so frequent that they would mar the prospect of any kingdom. Whether they be Bahamans or Vijayanagar or Orissa or Malwa, Gujarat, Rajputana, Delhi-Jaunpur conflict or Mughals, Maratha or Punjab; the crisis arising out of succession were the largest reason for various battles, political instability and their eventual decline. Even in the British days, BEIC seldom seem to be an aggressor, most of the wars had roots in the succession of a friend or a foe and they would help their cause eventually gaining territory out of these wars. Later many of the states were taken over by the BEIC through Doctrine of Lapse, too had roots in the succession. It is surprising that such mechanism are not included in the game.

 

[Czechoslovakia]

Wow, you truely have done your research! Would like to see a Sikh Empire appearing from AI (even though Sikhism does not happen often in my games)

 

[moscal]

Regionalism sound good. Problem is - how this make? Vassal system in EU4 isn't good to representation; quasi-shogunate also weak.

 

[Aagney]

It is indeed difficult to represent regionalism in EU4 when generally tags are meant to grow over time and I really don't have any concrete idea on the matter.
However I do see some flaw in the very design of the game with respect to India namely : Dormant cores which can be created out after a successful revolt and Primary Nation of a culture.

One basic flaw in the game design with respect to India is that as the game progresses there are leaser and lesser tags available contrary to what actually happened.
For example: Carnatic - if it is not created by 1594, this tag will be lost from the game while historically this tag was born in 1650s.
Similarly tags like Rohelkhand will cease to exist if not created before 1594 which is just unhistorical. Keladi, another tag will not be seen in the game if Vijay or Bahaman don't loose them out before 1594 while in reality they were at there prime in 1600s. Further Venad is a primary nation of Malayalan culture, which means it is at the cost of some original tags like Cochin & Malabar. Similarly Gondwana can be said to all prevail over some original tags like Chanda or Bastar. So this entire design principle is flawed and inconsistent. Out of Bahamani successor states Golconda is made as a primary nation of Telugu culture (although it may have promoted Persian culture). The other states like Bijapur or Ahmednagar will not appear post 1594 if not forced released although Bijapur in its prime days (1550-1650) were more powerful than Bahamani Kingdom. You won't even find Maratha as a primary nation of Marathi culture, no wonder, one never sees them in the game. Gujarat Sultanate is the primary nation of Gujarati culture (a promoter of Persian culture) which means it is at the cost of the very existence of many other original small tags in the area. There are more such example.

The very government form of Sultanates need be changed where they should not belong to any Indian cultures. (Some different version of Mamluk government can be worked out). A high religious tolerance of the Sultanates too should be represented other way, may be they start with high tolerance as a starting bonus say for 100 years and not as a part of Sultanate Ideas - later the Dhimmi estates could be made a more meaningful one than mostly a passive one right now. Even Mughals have high tolerance which is not unhistorical for early Mughals but after Shah Jahan the religious intolerance can't be represented correctly for high religious unity are a permanently coded in Mughal Idea. But all of it is again a PDX call how they want to keep things in India.

My suggestion would be to:
Add more tags and also there is a room for adding more cultures in India.
Further keeping a lot of territories of non-accepted culture can be made much less profitable without right policies and more active separatists in unaccepted culture could be given a slight favour.
Apart from culture, the territorial distance in unaccepted culture should also give disadvantage.
The tribal form of government should also be punished on the number of other acceptable culture.
One Culture - One Nation philosophy needs to change - One territory-culture nation makes more sense. (Or further some exclusive one-province Primary nations).
Make cores appear dependent on different Age (Discovery, Global Trade, Absolutism etc).

But having all that said in order to represent high regionalism the game needs to proceed in the direction where there are more tags and culture available and as the game progresses the centrifugal forces most of the time would be acting to break a nation into multiple smaller ones. The whole idea just sounds like a punishable play. One grows and is rewarded by breaking up of kingdom just doesn't make any sense. So its just not easy to represent, but there is a room for a lot of improvement which will definitely work to some extent.

 

[Canute VII]

The very government form of Sultanates need be changed where they should not belong to any Indian cultures. (Some different version of Mamluk government can be worked out). A high religious tolerance of the Sultanates too should be represented other way, may be they start with high tolerance as a starting bonus say for 100 years and not as a part of Sultanate Ideas - later the Dhimmi estates could be made a more meaningful one than mostly a passive one right now. Even Mughals have high tolerance which is not unhistorical for early Mughals but after Shah Jahan the religious intolerance can't be represented correctly for high religious unity are a permanently coded in Mughal Idea. But all of it is again a PDX call how they want to keep things in India.

The Indian Sultanate Ideas give +3 tolerance of heathens (tradition) and +50% religious unity (1st idea). That makes for a lot of stability in an otherwise very fragmented region and insulates them from unrest and corruption. Other indian idea groups have similar, but weaker rel. unity bonuses in them. I agree that there could be other ways to represent this and not make them <always> fall apart. Some Indian Sultanate Government modelled on the Mamluk Government is an interesting idea. The Cultural Interactions could give tolerance/rel. unity. However, I'm not deep enough into indian culture and history to suggest anything remotely plausible here.

Another idea could be to model this as a national decision every ruler can take when inaugurated. The availabilty of this decision could depend on ruler stats (e.g. only available if admin and/or diplo >= 2). Or it would be available to each ruler but come with a cost (e.g. -1 mercantilism {having in mind how the Mughals sold off economic control to the British and how they seemingly failed to counter them diplomatically}, or -2 tolerance of the true faith {maybe giving a little more unrest in muslim provinces}, or -25 prestige {hence less yearly legitimacy increase, less morale, less trade effciency...} ... or something with estates...?).

Or make a dedicated Government Mechanic that scales rel. Unity bonus with stability, say it would give +10% rel. unity at +1 stabiliity, 25% rel. unity at +2 stability and +50% rel. unity at +3 stabililty. That will make stability much more worthwhile for these countries while straining their admin capacity somewhat, which may result in smaller entities and less expansion or at least expansion would have more risk of being unstable.

Or this could depend on advisors. Advisors of hindu religion could give +15% rel. unity but also maybe +10% stability cost. So if the sultanates want to have high rel. unity they need to employ hindu advisors in their administration. This may lead to them burning some money for them and going for admin/ innovative idea group to gain more available advisors, while at the same time giving them a (minimally) harder time to have high stability.

Otherwise re idea groups, I think religious unity as a bonus should really be restricted to humanist idea group and some dedicated mechanic (whatever that would look like), instead of being hard coded into national ideas.

I don't know as to which one of these would be more historically accurate or even plausible, just throwing out some of my ideas here...


EDIT: just one more...: have a government reform "separation of church and state" / "secularization" giving options:
1. "Freethought": +25% rel. unity, +3 tolerance of heathens, maybe to balance: -10% tax income, -0.5% missionary strenght, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought#History and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism#Historical_background
2. "Traditionalism" (for lack of a better term): +1 tolerance of the true faith, -10% stability cost, +5% clergy loyalty, -15% institution spread

Maybe at least "Freethought" could be fitted in somewhere else into a reform category: like e.g. under "separation of power" for monarchies" (indians would start with this one enacted?) and "guiding principle of administration" for republics?

 

[Aagney]

.......
Or make a dedicated Government Mechanic that scales rel. Unity bonus with stability, say it would give +10% rel. unity at +1 stabiliity, 25% rel. unity at +2 stability and +50% rel. unity at +3 stabililty. That will make stability much more worthwhile for these countries while straining their admin capacity somewhat, which may result in smaller entities and less expansion or at least expansion would have more risk of being unstable.

Or this could depend on advisors. Advisors of hindu religion could give +15% rel. unity but also maybe +10% stability cost. So if the sultanates want to have high rel. unity they need to employ hindu advisors in their administration. This may lead to them burning some money for them and going for admin/ innovative idea group to gain more available advisors, while at the same time giving them a (minimally) harder time to have high stability....

You have supplied with so many ideas which need some thought. A combination of the above two really sounds interesting.

I would like to see a separate government form altogether where a non-accepted Culture & Religion of monarch is still viable without giving this government form so much of religious tolerance and stability. Further it should also not make them punishably unstable too.

Most the the sultanate rulers were Turkish (and later Afghans) and so were their nobility and the legitimacy of the monarch hardly mattered outside the circle of the nobility. So Nobility in the Sultanate was always the key deciding most of the prospect of the state (natural prosperity or ruins through multiple succession crisis). Many a times the next dynasty of the monarch was from the erstwhile nobility (few lucky ones who could exterminate the formal line). Going by this line a Mamluk form of government too looks to fit but it cannot be replicated for Indian sultanates were all hereditary. So a tweak of monarchy with mamluk characteristics can be thought of.

In your later suggestion about separation of power is something Islamic countries have not been able to achieve to this very day. So its difficult to go in this direction.

 

[Canute VII]

In your later suggestion about separation of power is something Islamic countries have not been able to achieve to this very day. So its difficult to go in this direction.

Yes, that's probably true. I see how Islam is at odds with the concept of secularism and it seems this would not accurately depict the islamic states of india. Judging by this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism_in_India tolerance was pretty much a thing based on ruler preferences instead of some characteristic of the sultanates. Maybe (yet another idea...) the standard setup should be to give most of the hindu provinces to the dhimmi estate, thus giving tolerance of heathens and local unrest reduction (which can only be done, once estates are in the base game) and then have some of those other government mechanics that i proposed? Maybe, so that the sultanates can reap better religious unity even without the idea in their national ideas,we could have a new special advisor granted by the dhimmis, who gives 10% religious unity (making the dhimmis even more important)? Maybe also add this advisor to the base advisor pool, so that it's accessible even without the estate interaction? -The national idea/tradition of sultanates could then be replace by +1 advisor-

 

[Aagney]

I would try to put some sketch work of early-modern Indian polity:

• All the Indian Sultanates had been established by some revolter nobility, as such the seat of Sultan often saw challenges from its very own nobility.
• There was seldom a case when a change in the ruler was not followed by a succession crisis. So there is hardly a Sultan who got the throne without killing his brothers or father and many a times a lucky Noble assassinated the Sultan to take his place.
• The power of Sultan, his influence and his very life depended on the very support of his nobility who in turn would just envy the position of the Sultan. (Why I can’t be that can you be!).
• So most of the Sultans always started with a questionable legitimacy in their early years of reign.
• The most common strategy followed by these Sultans to legitimise their rule was to take help from the Ulemas.
• A high influence of Ulemas in Indian scenario also meant more anti-Hindu policies by Sultan and a further tug of war between Ulema & Sufi.
• Wise Sultans would keep a balance and contribute to the prosperity of the kingdom, others would just fall a victim of further conspiracies, crisis, further weakening of the realm.
• Even though in most of the official work Turkish nobility were employed but particularly for book keeping and accounts and other rural interactions Hindus were exclusively employed for their better know-how on the subject, culture and geography.
• An important feature of medieval India has been the rise of Zamindar class (mostly Hindu) between nobility and peasantry which only kept on growing stronger right throughout till the British days.
• Being the rural magnate and a local power they were solely responsible for production and taxation as such the central nobility remained highly dependent on them. Further these Zamindars also maintained a small army in their own capacity.
• The relationship between nobility and these Zamindars remained a very complex one: the officials were viewed as offensive by Zamindars as representatives of central authority as well the nobility often would side with these Zamindars for their own private profits. In other words they became a partner in crime for they had two common enemies - Peasantry and the King.
• This connivance became the very source of the centrifugal forces, when a nobility in periphery area would revolt against its own Sultan, they had support from local Zamindars.
• Not surprising why Maratha or Punjab revolted successfully and became powerful in a very short span of time.
• Many sources indicate that from 17th century onwards the frequent revolts of these Zamindars became a common feature of the Indian polity.
• With the arrival of the British these Zamindars came in direct contact with them for very base of rural production and agricultural had got affected in the changed economic scenario and these two became a kind of partners - now Zamindars also had access to arms used by the British.
• 18th century polity saw a major shift in power from centre to the periphery (Zamindars) and from nobility to the mercantile class.
• The various Mughal Successor states - particular nawabdoms of Awadh, Hyderabad or Bengal actually were very decentralised weak entities which can best be described as a feudal lord of various smaller Nawabs & Zamindaris. Moreover these petty Nawabs and Zamindars (many of who were also merchants) would be in the direct touch with the British.
• Most of these Nawabdoms were helped by the British into establishing their own realm some way or the other while cutting away from the Mughals and they remained all time British ally. (Neither had they choice otherwise).
• Notorious for their lavish life style, many of these Nawabs ended up taking huge loans given by the BEIC or local merchants which were often paid by ceding some provinces to BEIC. (The word Nawab actually has a negative connotation in India - A lavish pleasure loving irresponsible person.)
• And by 1803, when the "emperor" of India - the Mughals became a British protectorate, many of these favoured Zamindars (who were sizeable) actually became New Princely States.

 

[Aagney]

• @Trin Tragula - For your critical reviews - if it can be of any help.
• Very many Thanks to the forum friends for their kind and encouraging words.
• Since PDX's 'love wheel' of fortune has moved towards India this time and half of the updated map already shared - indicating most of things already been decided by the Devs I do feel some kind of 'psychological' vanity writing into more such suggestions at the moment - I hope it passes soon.
• While researching about South India last time, I had some rough sketches about Gujarat but I had to delay that owing to an exam.
• Now that over and when I reached home, I had some 30 hours before Trin would come with another Dev Diary and so I decided complete those of Gujarat before that; no doubt my current post is hurried piece of work.
• The provinces has been carved out manually on the district map of Gujarat without using grids is far from being perfect.

Spoiler: Province Summary

I. Tapti

1. Navsari

• Province: New Province
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cotton/Salt

2. Surat​

• Province: EU-517 (Territorial Changes)
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Silk

3. Balgana ​

• Province: EU-2036 (Territorial Changes - only little northern portion within Gujarat)
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Grains

II. Narmada

4. Bharuch​

• Province: New Province
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Silk

5.Rajpipla​

• Province: New Province
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cotton/Agate

6. Baroda​

• Province: EU: 516 (Territorial Changes confined to modern Baroda district)
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cotton

III. Gujarat Hills (Bhilistan)

7. Champaner ​

• Province: EU: 2056 (Territorial Changes)
• Active Core 1444: Champaner
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Livestock/Tropical Wood

8. Idar​

• Province: New Province
• Active Core 1444: Idar (New Tag)
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Toy/Tiles - (Tropical Wood/Paper)

9. Palanpur​

• Province: New Province
• Active Core 1444: Palanpur (New Tag)
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Livestock/ Cotton

IV. Gujarat Plains

10. Cambay​

• Province: New Province
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Silk

11. Ahmadabad​

• Province: EU-2054 (Territorial Changes)
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cloth

12. Patan​

• Province: EU-2053 (Territorial Changes)
• Active Core 1444: Gujarat
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cloth

V. Saurashtra

13. Girnar (Junagadh)​

• Province: EU-515
• Active Core 1444: Saurashtra (New Tag)
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cotton /Sugar

14. Navanagar​

• Province: EU-2052
• Active Core 1444: Navanagar (?) New Tag / Porbandar/Rajkot Jethwas (?) New Tag)
• Dormant Core: Saurashtra (New Tag)
• Production: Pearl Fishing (Gems)

15. Bhavnagar​

• Province: EU 2051
• Active Core 1444: Bhavnagar (New Tag)
• Dormant Core: Saurashtra (New Tag)
• Production: Salt/ Cotton

16. Jhalawad ​

• Province: EU 521 (Terrotorial Changes)
• Active Core 1444: Halvad (Dharangadhra) (New Tag)
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cotton / Dye

VI. Kutch

17. Kutch​

• Province: EU 503 (Territorial Changes)
• Active Core 1444: Kutch (AKA Kathiawad currently)
• Dormant Core: None
• Production: Cotton for Bhuj + (Salt for another)

Spoiler: Suggestion & Notes

Gujarat:

From various sources it appears that the direct rule of the Sultanate of Gujarat remained only in Central and Coastal Gujarat while Kutch & Saurashtra was still ruled by multiple small and medium independent to semi-independent principalities (Zamindars of varied stature) which were later subdued by the Sultanate, however was seldom put under direct control (with few exceptions like Junagadh).

The general attitude of the Sultans towards these zamindars had two well defined facets. They were extremely suspicious and basically hostile towards the powerful ones located mainly on the periphery of the kingdom. Thus the big zamindars of Junagarh, Jagat (Dwarka) and Champaner were tolerated for some time only because these were too powerful to be so easily eliminated. But their existence was always considered a threat to the security of the Sultanate of Gujarat. Each one of them was promptly destroyed by the Sultans of Gujarat at the first opportunity that they offered. But on the other hand, the Sultans were extremely accommodating towards the smaller zamindars in general like those of Sirohi, Idar, Nadaut, Rajpipla, Jhalawar, Bhuj and Jam of Sorath were left unmolested and some time were given positions in the state.

I. Lata

1. Lata is the ancient name of Southern Gujarat region. I have broken it into two territories - Tapti & Narmada. (British sources may spell Narmada as Narbada, please use Narmada.)
2. Rajpipla is a new tag added here. An extension of Ujjain Rajput who also later got associated with Gohil Rajputs of Gohelwad (Bhavanagar) established a principality around 1340s. And ruled almost independently (and as tributary to Mughals and Maratha) till the British days. Rajpipla was the largest Princely state in the Rewakantha Agency.
3. The culture in Balgana, Rajpipla should be Bhili - Bhil tribal area. (Western half of Khandesh as well).
4. Balgana deserves better development for it had quite fertile land amid hills and forests.

II. Anarta

1. Anarta is the ancient name of Northern Gujarat region. I have divided it into two territories: Gujarat Plains & Gujarat Hills - though none a suitable name.
2. Please replace the name Rewakantha with Champaner.
3. A New tag added here is Idar. This was one of the principality which had its own love and hate relationship with the Sultanate - vassal to Gujarat Sultanate. Later in the British days it was the largest Princely State in the Sabarkantha Agency.
4. Palanpur is another new tag added here. It was ruled by the Jhalori dynasty of the Lohani Pashtun tribe - vassal to Gujarat Sultanate.
5. Culture in Champaner, Idar & Palanpur too should be Bhili - Bhil Tribal area.
6. If PDX is as generous with creating new provinces like in Garhjat Hills - Champaner can be further divided where roughly Southern-Eastern half of this province can be named as Chota Udaipur.
7. After the rulers of Champaner lost their kingdom, the surviving family went further south in tribal hill area and established a small kingdom of Chhota Udaipur after defeating the Bhil tribal chiefs of the area.
8. Chhota Udaipur was the second largest Princely state after Rajpipla in the Rewakantha Agency.
9. Ideally, the Mehasana district should be a new tag in itself but it becomes too small to be included.

III. Saurashtra

1. There were numerous small principalities in Saurashtra after the Chudasama rulers of Saurashtra had declined in prominence and were now left confined to Junagadh (Girnar).
2. Under the Sultanate of Gujarat, Saurashtra was divided into five divisions, namely, Halar, Gohilwad, Zalawad, Sorath and Kathiawad. Under the British, Saurashtra was divided into four divisions: Halar (Navanagar), Sorath (Girnar or Junagadh), Gohilwad (Bhavanagar) and Jhalawad. This the the exact division for Saurashtra that I have chosen. PDX of course can have its own preference. Please refer to the map in the attachment.
3. Junagadh (Girnar) is still ruled by the Chudasama Dynasty (the erstwhile rulers of Saurashtra since 10th century) who would be removed by the Sultanate in 1470.
4. Gohel Rajputs are ruling over Bhavanagar and who were once given this privilege by the Chudasamas in the past centuries and maintain marriage relation with each other. It is also evident that they had actually received some portion of their realm as a gift by the Chudasamas (erstwhile Saurashtra rulers) in their prime days.
5. Jhalawad is ruled by the various Jhala rajputs of which Dharangadhera-Halvad Pricely State is the largest one and can be represented as a new tag.
6. There is no substantial evidence that Jams of Kutch (Jadeja Rajputs) were ruling Navanagar in 1444. This entire region was under various Jethwa Rajputs and Kathi tribes chieftains.
7. There is an evidence that in 1313, the Jams of Kutch attacked Jethwas and Kathi Tribe and forced them to move further east but the Jams went back to Kutch.
8. It is only from 1535 that the Jam Rawal Hala established an another line of the Jam rulers in this area and established its Capital in 1540 which is named as Navanagar. Its is also owing to his name as Hala that Navanagar came to be known as Halar till the British days.
9. Further the Jams of Kutch and Jams of Navanagar though extension of the same family are actually not one kingdom but two different kingdoms as is evident from Gujarat Sultanate Zamindaris where Bhuj and Navanagar are separate entities; and during Mughal days where both are prestigious Zamindari Peshkashi and two separate entities; and in the British days where Princely State of Kutch (Cutch) is separate from that of Navanagar.
10. As is evident from the various sources that the Zamindari of the Navanagar was the richest of all (including four other Zamindari Peshkashi in adjoining Rajasthan boarder area during the Mughal era) and that the Zamindari of Bhuj (Kutch) was second richest.
11. I am producing these facts because development in Bhavanagar is around 10 (iirc), while Navanagar is around (5-7 iirc) while Kutch is 3. So it could be the base for redistribution of province development in these parts. I am attaching those files which can also be referred for other interesting facts about zamindars during Sultanate in Mughal era in these parts.
12. All these 4 provinces ideally should be under separate new tags in 1444.
13. Since there is a dilemma in the case of Navanagar rulers, Jethwas of Porbandar or Rajkot can also be shown instead for they were actually who had been forced to move to these parts by the Jam rulers.
14. Ideally Saurashtra should have a culture of their own separate from Gujarati.

IV. Kutch

1. Kutch ideally should be a territory on its own and a separate culture as well.
2. If PDX is okay with Kutch as a separate territory, Bhuj and Rapar can be two separate provinces (apart from the Salty marsh).
3. Though a larger portion of Kutch is salty submerged dessert (Rann) Bhuj area was famous for selling cotton to Thatta. It deserves better development. Another evidence of its better status can be affirmed from the privy-purse granted to the Princely State of Kutch during the British days.
4. Please rename the current tag Kathiawad to Kutch.

Spoiler: New Tags & References

Idar:

Rao Ranmal - 1401 - 1416
Rao Punja - 1416-1428
Rao Narandas 1428 - 1445
Rao Bhan (Also called Vir Rai / Hari Rai) 1445 - 1507
Rao Surajmal 1507-1509
Rao Bhim 1509-1515 (Brother of Rao Surajmal)
Rao Bharmal 1515-1515 (Son of Rao Bhim)
Rao Raimal 1515-1516 (Son of Rao Surajmal)
Rao Bharmal 1516-1520 (After winning succession between him & Raimal who later died in 1517)
Taken Under Gujarat Sultanate (1520-1521)
Rao Bharmal (1521-1543) (Again reinstated by Gujarat Sultan)
Rao Punjaji (1543 - 1573)
Rao Narandas II (? - 1573 -?)
Rao Viramdev (? - ?)
Rao Kalianmal (? - ?)
Rao Jagannath (? - 1656)
Idar lost to Enemies (1656 - 1658)
Rao Punjaji II (son of Rao Jagannath) (1658-1658) Took back after defeating enemies.
Rao Arjundas (Son of Rao Jagannath) (1658-1659)
Rao Gopinath (Brother of Rao Jagannath) (1659-1664)
Idar lost again (1664-1679)
Rao Karansing (son of Rao Gopinath) (1679 -?) (Took Back Idar)
Idar lost again soon after
Rao Chandrasing (Son of Rao Karansing) (1718 - ?) (Took Back Idar)
Sardarsing (Ruling in the name of Chanrasing)
Bacha Pandit (? - 1731)
End of Dynasty.
Thereafter, Mewar Dynasty took over Idar in 1731 and ruled it till 1948

Reference:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Idar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idar_State
http://www.indianrajputs.com/view/idar


Bhavnagar
Mokhadaji's elder son Dungarji (1347-1370) fled to Und-Saravaiyawad but he was captured by the Delhi forces. He was later reinstated as a chief of Ghogha and regained his father's possession of Umrala. His successor Visoji (1370-1395) was involved in dispute of Jani and Rana clans of Audichya Brahman landlords of Sihor. Jani clan summoned Visoji while Rana clan summoned Kandhoji Gohil of Gariadhar. Visoji defeated Kandhoji and captured Sihor. He fortified it and made it his capital. His successors were

Kanoji (1395-1420 CE)
Sarangji (1420-1445 CE)
Sivdasji (1445-1470 CE)
Jethiji (1470-1500 CE)
Ramdasji (1500-1535 CE)
Sartanji (1535-1570 CE)
Visoji (1570-1600 CE)
Dhunaji (1600-1619 CE)
Ratanji (1619-1629 CE )
Harbhamji (1620-1622 CE)
Govindji (1622-1636 CE)
Satrasalji (1636 CE)
Akherajji II (1636-1660 CE)
Ratanji II (1660-1703)
Bhavsinhji (1703-1764) established Bhavnagar in 1722-23 and made it capital of his state moving from Sihor.
Akherajji (1764–1772 CE)

Vala State was founded in 1740 by for his twin brother Visaji.

Many small estates in Gohilwad region of Saurashtra were offshoots from the parent stem. These States and estates were continued to rule for centuries and even under the British Raj. They were merged with the Union of India when India became independent in 1947.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gohil_dynasty


Junagadh (Girnar)

• Watson, James W., ed. (1884). Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency : Kathiawar.
• Harold Wilberforce-Bell (1916). The History of Kathiawad from the Earliest Times. London: William Heinemann.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chudasama_dynasty
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_Chudasama_dynasty

Jhalawad
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhrangadhra_State
http://www.indianrajputs.com/view/dhrangadhra


Navanagar
http://www.indianrajputs.com/view/nawanagar


Palanpur
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Palanpur
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palanpur_State


Rajpipla
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajpipla_State
http://www.indianrajputs.com/view/rajpipla


Kutch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutch_State


Porbandar
http://www.indianrajputs.com/view/porbandar


Rewakantha
http://www.indpaedia.com/ind/index.php/Rewa_Kantha

 

[Trin Tragula]

While the map changes are work in progress and so they can continue to be tweaked they are also what we do first in any patch. So posting a few hours before the DD is not going to make it more or less likely that you have an influence if you need your sleep

Nonetheless I appreciate the effort and I’m glad you made the post, I may have use for it yet. Later today you’ll see what we have planned for this region.
I hope you will like it

When the diary is posted I will as usual try to be around to answer questions (though perhaps with a bit of delay as today is a national holiday).

 

[Aagney]

While the map changes are work in progress and so they can continue to be tweaked they are also what we do first in any patch. So posting a few hours before the DD is not going to make it more or less likely that you have an influence if you need your sleep

Nonetheless I appreciate the effort and I’m glad you made the post, I may have use for it yet. Later today you’ll see what we have planned for this region.
I hope you will like it

When the diary is posted I will as usual try to be around to answer questions (though perhaps with a bit of delay as today is a national holiday).

Great to see a reply from you!

• Gujarat overall looks great and was delighted to see Chudasamas, Jethwas, Gohils and Idar getting a place.
• I wish you check for more information on merits of Jadejas in Halar in 1444. (Since you have given Rajkot too to them right from 1444).
• You have surely done more justice with Saurashtra than I have presented in my post - I was afraid to add more provinces. (out of 194 eligible though!).
• Somehow I envy your Khambhat with my Cambay!

 

[Trin Tragula]

As far as I have been able to find Rajkot and Halar were both under the same Jadeja branch as Kutch in 1444. We have them as separate tags in later starts.
If you have better information don’t be afraid to share it

 

[AirikrStrife]

While the map changes are work in progress and so they can continue to be tweaked they are also what we do first in any patch. So posting a few hours before the DD is not going to make it more or less likely that you have an influence if you need your sleep

Great! Then I will gear up to nitpick once the tibet map lands haha, well I already studied the trade map a bit and I'm really excited about it, looking like Tsang and Ü have become separate states and I can see a lot of new provinces in the area

As this thread is about India I will also include some updated suggestion pertaining to the himalayan states we've seen so far.

I want to shorten down the himalaya wasteland stretch a bit. In the east there should be the kingdom of Mustang, including the region of Dolpo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_Mustang
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolpo#History

In the west it is a large mess, but I'm looking at trying to improve the area of modern day Himachal Pradesh. Probably getting 1-2 new provinces in the area.
Most notably the Lahul, Spiti, Kinnauri and Kulu districts of the modern state were active players in the regional politics, while they're too small to be represented in that much detail, something about the area should be possible to get done
Particularly looking at this state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashahr
In general looking at the Simla hill states https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_States_of_India

surprisingly helpful source: https://www.lonelyplanet.com/india/himachal-pradesh/lahaul-and-spiti/history

I'm waiting to comment on the Ladakh situation until I've seen the whole map

 

[AirikrStrife]

This is a question to OP and trin. Do you have any idea on how to implement some flavor for s:t thomas christians in kerala? I understand getting a province seems unrealistic but maybe some event or advisors? Could possibly be an NI for kochin?

 

[Aagney]

This is a question to OP and trin. Do you have any idea on how to implement some flavor for s:t thomas christians in kerala? I understand getting a province seems unrealistic but maybe some event or advisors? Could possibly be an NI for kochin?

I think Trin is better suited to answer this, if he has anything on the matter in store or if he intends to add something in this regard. I am attaching a file which tries to put some light on the Christianity in Kerala. I don't know if it can be helpful, but its an interesting read (with invaluable maps by Rice).

Further I wish, before the Christians (and Jews too in Kerala) are represented, give Jains a representation.

 

[AirikrStrife]

I think Trin is better suited to answer this, if he has anything on the matter in store or if he intends to add something in this regard. I am attaching a file which tries to put some light on the Christianity in Kerala. I don't know if it can be helpful, but its an interesting read (with invaluable maps by Rice).

Further I wish, before the Christians (and Jews too in Kerala) are represented, give Jains a representation.

Yes I agree that Jains are the most important religion, to implement. Still, working with minorities like zoroastrians, jews, and christian could render some nice flavor. glancing at your source I see christian had good reputation and status aswell as being reknown traders up until around the 16th century then muslim pressure started marginalizing them. Having the possibility to at least have christian advisors along the coast seem like a good start.