[34] — EPIG. IND., iii. 36.
[35] — An inscription of 1368 — 69 (Saka 1290, year Kilaka) mentions Madhavacharya Vidyaranya, apparently as still living. IND. ANT., iv. 206.
[36] — See my "Antiquities of Madras," ii. 8, No. 58; Hultzsch's EPIG. INDICA, iii. 21.
[37] — Briggs, i. 427.
[38] — This is in itself absurd, and carries with it its own refutation. It would be manifestly impossible for the city to be "built" in so short a time, and, moreover, it would have been sheer waste of time for the Prince to have employed himself in such a way. The sentence was probably introduced merely to account for that city having been built ABOUT this period.
[39] — Firishtah says on 1st Rabi-ul-awwal A.H. 759; A.H. 761 (A.D. 1359 — 60) according to the BURHAN-I-MAASIR. But the author of the latter work says that Ala-ud-din reigned thirteen years ten months and twenty-seven days, which would make the date of his death the 22nd of Rabi-ul-awwal A.H. 762, or January 31, A.D. 1361. He does not, therefore, appear to be very accurate. Firishtah gives in words the length of his reign as "eleven years two months and seven days."
[40] — Certain inscriptions published by Mr. Rice state that the general who commanded Bukka's armies about this time was Nadegonta Mallinatha, son of Nadegonta Sayyana. These bear date A.D. 1355 — 1356 and 1356 — 57.
[41] — Called "Nagdeo" in Scott's translation (i. 19).
[42] — Briggs, ii. 307.
[43] — There is a confusion of dates here in Firishtah; but he definitely fixes the month and year when Muhammad set out, and we may accept it for the present. The BURHAN-I-MAASIR implies that the war against Vijayanagar took place prior to the campaign against Warangal. Firishtah places it certainly after the "Vellunputtun" affair.