Hi, To whom you referring by Alexander of South India, is it Rajaraja Chola or Rajendra Chola? If yes, then I have my doubts on such comparison. Should we consider our kings with Alexander, Darius or Napoleon or any other similar emperor or monarch. No doubt these kings were great, powerful and an iconic figure in the eyes of their people but when we compare then with whom we should compare? In case of the Chola kings, if you want to compare, there are many early Indian kings who can be taken for comparison like Asoka, Chandragupta Maurya, Samudragupta, Chandragupta, Skandagupta, Pravarsena II, Harsha etc etc. There is a long list of able and influential kings in our annals of history then why take a foreigner for comparison? I am not against any foreigner king, as I said above that these kings were able commanders in their own respects, if we do such comparison then how it would be seen by people? Comparing with Alexander, as I see it, sets Alexander as a standard and we trying to match our king with that standard. Why not set standard with an Indian king when we have plenty of kings who can be taken as standard.
Its just a thought from my side, I do not force anyone to buy this, comparison should always be done with the highest standard. Its ok if some foreigner compares our kings with Alexander as he knows more about the latter then the Indian kings, but if an Indian also does the same then I feel sad. No offense to you Sakti, its just what I feel and think.
The title " SOUTH INDIAN ALEXANDER " belongs to RAJENDRA 1. I think this title was given by thescholars of south india.
The book " THAMIZLAKA VARALAARUM MAKKAL PANPADUM " ( IN TAMIL ) notifies that one of the countries mentioned in Rjc's Meikeerthi, the " MASUNI DESAM " is thesame country " MASSANAE "which is mentioned in thelist of countries conquered by Alexander the great in the 4th centuryB.C. This " MASSANAE " is in PAKISTAN, which has been identified byALEXANDER CUNNINGHAM in hisbook" THE ANCIENT GEOGRAPHY OF INDIA ".
I think that, after this notification only they may call Rjc as the " south indian alexander " and they never compared any other aspects of Rjc and Alexander.
According to me, still thecountries MATHURA MANDALAM, NAMANAIK KONAM, PANJAPPALLI, MASUNI DESAM, which were conquered by RAJENDRA,were still UNIDENTIFIED.
why i say like this,
All the scholars never think about the geographical and epihets attached in the meikeerthi lines which notifies the above mentionedcountries.
I'm not a scholarly one. but,whenever,I read the details given by the scholars about these regions,I'm not satisfied.
If need I will give my doubts about the IDENTIFICATIONS.