Why people go to Angkor Wat, not Hampi

I have visited both the Vijayanagar temples at Hampi and the Angkor Wat temples of Siem Reap, Cambodia. Both belong to a similar period in history. The Hampi temples were built in the 14th to 16th century, notably during the reign of Krishnadeva Raya; the Angkor Wat, a 12th century funerary temple was built by King Suryavarman II.

Both Hampi and Angkor suffered extensive damage. The Vijayanagara empire was conquered, pillaged and destroyed by the Sultanate armies in 1565, after which Hampi remained in ruins; Angkor Wat collapsed in 1431, following an invasion and seven-month siege by the Ayutthaya kingdom. Both have their religious motifs derived from Hinduism, and the temples themselves are dedicated to Shiva, Brahma and Vishnu.

In both cases, the temple walls are covered with high quality bas-relief sculptures representing Hindu gods and scenes from the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. Both attractions are UNESCO World Heritage Sites, Hampi so declared in 1986, Angkor Wat in 1992. Both sites are equally accessible, Hampi is 12 km from Hospet, conveniently covered by the ubiquitous autorickshaw, while Angkor Wat is a mere 5 km from Siem Reap by “tuk-tuk”.

With such extensive similarities, with equally brilliant temple architecture, why is there such a vast difference between the number of visitors to Siem Reap and Hampi? The year before the Covid pandemic disrupted travel, 26 lakh people visited Siem Reap; Hampi had a pitiful 3.5 lakh tourists. The Giant Ibis bus service I had taken from Phnom Penh to Siem Reap was packed with tourists of all nationalities; in Hampi, the number of foreign tourists are minuscule. Even the number of Portuguese, Persians and people of other nationalities visiting the Vijayanagar empire in its heyday were much more than the handful of foreign visitors I could spot on my Hampi visit.

So what accounts for the pitiful flow of tourists to Hampi as compared to Siem Reap?

When visiting Angkor Wat, you are engulfed with hordes of tourists massed in front of each temple taking pictures, listening to audio guides, studying the intricate carvings, bas-reliefs, corridors, towers, baths and libraries.

In front of an equally intricate Virupaksha temple, the only “living” temple from the Vijayanagar period, a small number of domestic Indian tourists are seen dodging aggressive touts and guides wanting to be engaged, hawkers selling maps, books and pamphlets.

You have to periodically shell out small amounts to keep your shoes safe, to feed bananas to an elephant inside the premises, to go close to the deity, to take pictures, while fending off flies and moneys as you make your way through dirty, partially locked-up and ill-kept ruins with poor signage and badly maintained toilets.

Undoubtedly, the facilities need drastic improvement. The ASI must maintain heritage sites in the required manner and immediately attend to the mountains of avoidable garbage visible everywhere. Safe and clean hotel rooms with no frills for middle-class tourists must be easily available.

Well-maintained and functional toilets near each attraction are a compulsory requirement. Nasty, stinking toilets turn off any tourist, domestic or foreign.

Also, access to Hampi must be improved. While convenient trains do exist, today, it’s easier for the average tourist to fly down to Cambodia, considering today’s airfare and accommodation costs. Secondly, the sites must be marketed widely. When The New York Times could rank the ruins of Hampi the “2nd must see” global destination in a list of ‘52 places to go in 2019’, where is our marketing effort to fuel interest in visiting heritage landmarks?

Yes, the watershed 1565 Battle of Talikota between the Vijayanagara empire and the alliance of the Deccan Sultanate ended with the victorious Muslims using fire, sword, crowbars and axes for a full five months, seizing, pillaging and plundering exquisite stone buildings and carvings, while the royal pavilions, the king’s palace and Zenana residences were reduced to rubble. The Angkor temples fortunately suffered lesser punishment and have largely been restored, leaving much less to a visitor’s imagination.

Even as we mourn the destruction of whatever is left after the pillage, the surviving ruins of our valuable heritage are still a treat to visit.

A way forward is to use the private sector for preservation and restoration of our heritage. Maintenance of the facility and marketing the heritage site requires a lot more vigour, enthusiasm and energy than government tourism departments and the ASI seem capable of. The Hampi landscape, riddled with temple ruins and rock structures, is no way inferior to the wondrous sites of Angkor Wat. Visit and see for yourself!

(The writer is a former Executive Director and Member, Board of Directors, BEML)