Got the book Vantharkal Vendrarkal by Madan from the book fair. It was such an interesting book to read, but I cannot help have a feeling that the all the pages were soaked with blood. The book speaks only about the Muslim invasion of india and the reason's why indians faltered againt them time after time. I felt numb half way through the book to see the brutality of the kings not only to the people but to their own siblings, parents, their own blood. Almost all the kings who ruled delhi has killed or tortured either thier father or Siblings except a very few. I cannot help feeling sorry for the northen india, as I guess southern part was relatively calm from the blood shed.
There was a question in this forum some time back "What period was the best to live?" and many answered they wanted to be in the golden chola period. But reading the above book, I feel any type of Monarchy is dangerous and I am better off in a democracy.
I cannot help feeling sorry for the northen india, as I guess > southern part was > relatively calm from the blood shed. >
Hi sivaram
it was a cruel time. not only the north but also the south.
what about aditya karikalans invasionof madurai. what about his own death what about the jains being impled by the thousands after nedumaran converted from jainism to hinduism.
blood and gory was cheap those days. well, with life expectancy so low in those days it can be expected. venketesh
I too belive south was relatively clam, to compare with north, AK's Madurai Victory, and later Sundarapanidan's victory over cholas all has some meaning , but Kiiling of own blood towards power is very high in north.
And coming to the query of Sivaram, the north Muslim kings life has been well documented , Babar Nama, Akbar Nama, and many more, but in south we have no such documents, we have to depend on inscriptions, and in that also its not directly communicating about the king or their life style.