context of pluralism of various kinds, orthopraxy is the propensity to retreat
into enclaves or to reassert one’s own sense of self in contradistinction to
others. This had occurred at various times in India’s religious history
as S ́aivites, for example, sought to distinguish themselves from Vais.n.avas
or Tantrics or Buddhists. Yet even in these movements toward reaffirma-
tion one may borrow from “others” and/or be in proximity to “others.” Such
was the case in this period when Islamization has become a part of the
subcontinent.
One form this took was in maintenance of polities, where Hindu dharma
was upheld. By the twelfth century, in a number of courts, Sanskrit texts were
appearing describing domains in which dharmawas to be maintained in
contradistinction to alternative cultural spaces.^1 In these settings, a particular
prince engaged in reciprocities with landowners and invited brahmans to
be the court’s advisers in a manner similar to that found in earlier settings.
Temple construction acted out these reciprocities between elites and also
served to integrate folk or tribal people under the state’s umbrella. Sectarian
leaders could be patronized. Mat.hasor monasteries served as centers for the
propagation of sectarian learning (just as the madrasaserved such a role in
Islamic polities). Brahmanical hegemony increased in the state structure
and the ritual life became more varied. Festivals, often patronized by the
king, became more visible – they demonstrated the king’s status while
incorporating commoners into the life of the realm. Mythologies of the
deities were elaborated; pamphlets on various temple sites and on proper
ritual behavior were produced. Folk traditions were accommodated into the
religious life and were increasingly evident in the temples. Vegetarianism,
though borrowed from Jainism and Buddhism, could be seen as an ideal in
certain circles (though not in such places as Bengal or Kashmı ̄r). In short,
the tenor of the Hindu state was neo-classical.
Hindu polities
There were at least three such major polities in this period: the Vijayanagara
dynasty, the Mara ̄tha ̄s, and the Ra ̄jputs. The pattern can be illustrated aptly
by sketching in the Vijayanagara context. The Vijayanagara dynasty was
founded on the banks of the Tungabhadra river in 1336 by two brothers who
had been fugitives from Wa ̄rangal when that seat of Ka ̄katiya power was
captured by a Tughluq sultan. The brothers were taken captive, Islamicized,
and commissioned to consolidate rule in Kampı ̄la; but the brothers
renounced Islam and established a “Hindu” polity, which became a counter-
part to the sultanate established at Ba ̄da ̄mi in the Western Deccan.^2
The Vijayanagara kings patronized the arts, philosophy, temple building,
and other forms of “Hindu” expression (even though they also hired
138 Developments in the Late Medieval Period