Daily Static Quiz Prelims Practice 2027
Option (c) is correct — Krishnadeva Raya stands as the supreme Vijayanagara patron: he sponsored the Ashtadiggajas (eight great poets) including Allasani Peddana, authored the Amuktamalyada (a Sanskrit treatise on governance and statecraft), commissioned the Krishna Temple at Hampi (1515–1520), and made his court a centre of pan-Indian learning. Options (a) and (b) misattribute achievements — Harihara I and Bukka I were military consolidators, not major literary patrons, and Deva Raya II's employment of Muslim mercenaries was administrative pragmatism, not Persian/Arabic scholarly patronage. Option (d) is wholly false: Aliya Rama Raya's era (1542–1565) was marked by political instability and military crisis, ending at Talikota.
- Harihara I's reign was dominated by constant military conflict with the Bahmani Sultanate over control of the Deccan plateau, establishing the pattern of rivalry that lasted for centuries.
- Krishnadeva Raya pursued an aggressive policy of military conquest, systematically destroying the Bahmani Sultanate and absorbing its territories into Vijayanagara.
- Aliya Rama Raya's interventionist policies in Deccan politics created hostile relations with all four successor sultanates, leading to their coalition against him at Talikota (1565).
Statements 1 and 3 are correct — Harihara I's persistent military rivalry with the Bahmani Sultanate over the Deccan plateau and the Krishna-Godavari doab established the structural Hindu-Muslim political divide that defined Deccan politics for over two centuries; and Aliya Rama Raya's meddling in Deccan succession disputes antagonised all four successor sultanates, uniting them into the coalition that crushed him at Talikota (1565). Statement 2 is incorrect: the Bahmani Sultanate had already fragmented into four successor states before Krishnadeva Raya came to power in 1509 — there was no unified Bahmani entity to conquer. His strategy was selective military campaigns, balance-of-power diplomacy and containment, not systematic conquest and annexation of sultanate territories.
Option (c) is incorrectly matched — it makes two false claims about Krishnadeva Raya: the Bahmani Sultanate had already fragmented into four successor states before his reign (1509), so there was no unified entity to conquer; and he neither destroyed all four Deccan kingdoms nor annexed their territories, which remained independent rivals throughout his reign. His actual strategy was pragmatic containment and selective military campaigns. Options (a), (b) and (d) are all correctly matched: Harihara I's foundational consolidation, Deva Raya II's cavalry recruitment and Telangana-Odisha expansion, and Aliya Rama Raya's fateful interventionism leading to Talikota are all well-documented.
Reason (R): Archaeological and literary evidence shows that no significant temples were built, no major administrative reforms were undertaken, and the military was severely weakened during the reigns of Krishnadeva Raya's predecessors between 1446 and 1509.
Assertion A is correct — the roughly six decades between Deva Raya II's death (1446) and Krishnadeva Raya's accession (1509) were indeed marked by relative decline: no ruler of comparable ability emerged, nayak feudalism increased, the Saluva dynasty (c. 1485–1505) offered only limited stability, and the empire faced persistent sultanate pressure, requiring Krishnadeva Raya to undertake recentralisation campaigns on taking power. Reason R is incorrect because it grossly overstates the degree of decline — architectural activity continued even if at a slower pace, administrative reforms were undertaken by Saluva-era rulers, and the military, while weakened, did not collapse; the empire remained a major regional power throughout this interregnum.
- Harihara I and Bukka I established the foundational military, administrative, and territorial basis upon which all subsequent Vijayanagara rulers built, making them the architectural engineers of the empire's longevity.
- Deva Raya II's administrative innovations in revenue collection, cavalry recruitment, and provincial governance set institutional precedents that stabilised the empire and influenced later rulers' policies, especially Krishnadeva Raya's administrative model.
- Krishnadeva Raya's golden age established a cultural and political zenith, but his death without a clear succession plan and the weakness of his successors directly reversed the empire's fortunes, ultimately leading to political fragmentation within a century.
All three statements are correct. Harihara I and Bukka I (1336–1377) created the nayak system, built Hampi as a planned capital, and consolidated territorial control — foundations so robust that the empire's basic structure persisted even through weak reigns, explaining its 230-year longevity. Deva Raya II (1422–1446) systematised revenue collection, integrated Muslim mercenary cavalry as a professional corps, and refined nayak accountability — institutional precedents Krishnadeva Raya directly built upon. Krishnadeva Raya's death in 1529 triggered a succession crisis: Achyuta Deva Raya was less capable, subsequent rulers weaker still, nayak autonomy grew, Aliya Rama Raya rose as regent-strongman, and by Talikota (1565) — just 36 years after Krishnadeva Raya's death — the empire was in terminal decline.
