________________
248 EPIGRAPHIA INDICA
[Vol. XXXII the title Rāya-bandī-vimochaka, said to have been borne by Récherla Sinigama I, one of the Nāyakas in the service of Pratāparudra, has given rise to the belief that he rescued the king from captivity and that the latter continued to rule his kingdom even after the fall of Warangal in 1323 A.D. Now, the Santamāgalūru inscription is a solitary record unsupported by other evidence; and no trace of Pratāparudra's rule is found anywhere subsequent to his capture by Ulugh Khan. Moreover, the Muslim forces were still busy with the subjugation of the country and they would not have tolerated Pratāparudra's rule in any part of it. The setting up of an inscription at Santamāgalūru by Kolani Rudradēva in 1326 A.D. must be attributed to the feelings of loyalty to his old master and his irreconcilable hostility to the Mussalmans who had overthrown his authority. The title Rāya-bandi-vimochaka is of uncertain origin. There is no evidence to show that it was ever borne by Singama I. None of his records has come down to us; and the Velugoțiväri Vamšāvali does not associate the title with his name. It occurs for the first time in an inscription of his son Anavõta I, dated 1369 A.D., at Ayyanavõlu in the Warangal District." Anavõta I was not a contemporary of Pratāparudra, and he could not have participated in that monarch's wars with the Muhammadans. Therefore, the origin of his title Rāya-bandi-vimochaka must be traced to some event which must have taken place in his (Anavõta's) own time.
The present insoription, which must have been issued within about a decade or go of the Muslim conquest of Tiling, not only confirms the evidence of Shams-i-Shirāj 'Afif that Pratáparudra died on his way to Delhi but also specifies the locality where his death had taken place as the bank of the river Sömödbhavā (verse 20). There is reason to believe that he did not suffer natural death, but put an end, unable to bear perhaps captivity, to his own existence. In the Kaluvachēsu grant of the Reddi queen Anitalli dated 1423 A.D., exactly a century after the fall of Warangal, it is stated that Pratāparudra departed to the world of the gods by his own desire. This seems to suggest that he either committed suicide or was slain at his own instance by one of his own followers.
The statement that, on the death of Pratāparudra, the entire Andhra country passed into the hands of the Muhammadans is corroborated by the evidence of other contemporary and nearly contemporary records. The Rajahmundry mosque inscription of Sālār Ulwi bears testimony to the subjugation of the Gõdāvari delta. The Futuh-us-Salafin refers to the conquest of Kalinga and the capture of the forts of Gooty (Anantapur District) and Kanti (Gandikota in the Cuddapah District). A chātu verse in Telugu addressed to Sangama II (1356 A.D.), nephew of Harihara I and Bukka I of Vijayanagara, alludes to Muslim occupation of the Nellore District immediately after the rule of Muppidi-näyaka (1323 A.D.). Although the Andhra country was thus rapidly subjugated, it did not long remain under Muslim rule. This was mainly due to the oppressive character of their government which is vividly portrayed in the present inscription (vv: 22-27). Unlike other conquerors of India, the Mussalmans were not satisfied with the acquisition of more political power. They descended on the Deccan not as mere conquerors in search of new countries but as crusading warriors to spread the true faith in the land of the infidels. To stamp out heathenism, and gather all the people within the fold of Islam, they prohibited, as
1 M. Rama Rao, Kakatiyas of Warangal, pp. 97-98. · Velupötivari Vathsacharitra, Appendix No. 4. .J.Tel.Ac., Vol. II, p. 106. Tasmin Pratáparudre sua-sthanam sv-échchhay=aiva yatavali atha să blur=Yavanamayi ját-air-aho mahāmaho mahima. .A..Rp., No. 426 of 1926. . Puth-us-Salātis (Madras edn.), pp. 402-03 ; albo p. 31. Chafupadyamarimavinjari :-Muppidi tagandle mudamuto Turakat.
