मधुराविजयम् /77
This page has been fully proofread once and needs a second look.
Though now and then, the local people could recapture it, it did
not continue for long as a Hindu kingdom. Ferista wrote, that,
Mohammad-Bin-Toglak of Delhi has conquered the entire
South India by 1367 A.D. History reveals that in the 14th cen-
tury before (1340 A.D) Jalaluddin Hasansha the commander of
the Sultan of Delhi was holding sway over the Pandya kingdom.
This Kavya, enables us to conclude that he swallowed not only
the kingdom of Pandya but also of the Cholas, driving away their
kings. In describing the Sultan it is stated पराक्रमाधः
कृतचोलपाण्ड्यम्" (Sloka 29.S.9) clearly. That this sultan is the last of
those who ruled over Madhura is also recited (sloka 41.S.9). With
his demise stability has been secured to the south. All dangers were
averted. Jalaluddin Hasanshah ruled only for five years. His-
torians say that his minister and son-in-law, Gayajuddin succeed-
ed him at Madhura. This cannot be true. Even if they ruled
for a while, it must be not independently but only as representa-
tives. The expression 'हतपारशीका' indicates that many of
the Muslim rulers lost their lives as traitors in this battle.
There is another proof to say that that Muslim ruler,
Jalaluddin Hasanshah, himself was the king. The expression,
तुरुष्कसाम्राज्यकृताभिषेकम् " indicates that this Surathrana is
as great as Suratrana of the Puranas. History tells
that Jalaluddin Hasan Shah had defied the Sultan of
Delhi, minted coins, in his own name, began to rule indepen-
dently here and had become as powerful as the Surathrana of
Delhi. "अज्ञातसेवोचितचाटुवादं दिवौकसामप्यकृतप्रणामम्" (Sarga 9, sc. 38)
This kavya establishes that he has a very keen sense of self-
respect. It is also emphatically stated that he was the person who
killed Veera Ballala. This book enables us to assert that this
sultan Jalaluddin himself is the counterpart of its hero. He alone
not continue for long as a Hindu kingdom. Ferista wrote, that,
Mohammad-Bin-Toglak of Delhi has conquered the entire
South India by 1367 A.D. History reveals that in the 14th cen-
tury before (1340 A.D) Jalaluddin Hasansha the commander of
the Sultan of Delhi was holding sway over the Pandya kingdom.
This Kavya, enables us to conclude that he swallowed not only
the kingdom of Pandya but also of the Cholas, driving away their
kings. In describing the Sultan it is stated पराक्रमाधः
कृतचोलपाण्ड्यम्" (Sloka 29.S.9) clearly. That this sultan is the last of
those who ruled over Madhura is also recited (sloka 41.S.9). With
his demise stability has been secured to the south. All dangers were
averted. Jalaluddin Hasanshah ruled only for five years. His-
torians say that his minister and son-in-law, Gayajuddin succeed-
ed him at Madhura. This cannot be true. Even if they ruled
for a while, it must be not independently but only as representa-
tives. The expression 'हतपारशीका' indicates that many of
the Muslim rulers lost their lives as traitors in this battle.
There is another proof to say that that Muslim ruler,
Jalaluddin Hasanshah, himself was the king. The expression,
तुरुष्कसाम्राज्यकृताभिषेकम् " indicates that this Surathrana is
as great as Suratrana of the Puranas. History tells
that Jalaluddin Hasan Shah had defied the Sultan of
Delhi, minted coins, in his own name, began to rule indepen-
dently here and had become as powerful as the Surathrana of
Delhi. "अज्ञातसेवोचितचाटुवादं दिवौकसामप्यकृतप्रणामम्" (Sarga 9, sc. 38)
This kavya establishes that he has a very keen sense of self-
respect. It is also emphatically stated that he was the person who
killed Veera Ballala. This book enables us to assert that this
sultan Jalaluddin himself is the counterpart of its hero. He alone