take it, therefore, that Harihara died in or about the year A.D. 1343.

As to his having reigned quietly, I know of only one statement to the
contrary. An inscription of Samgama II. recording a grant in 1356,
and referred to below, states that Harihara I. "defeated the Sultan;"
but perhaps this only alludes to the fact that Muhammad Taghlaq had
to abandon his hold on the country.

The next king was Harihara's brother, Bukka I. ("Bucarao"),
and according to Nuniz he reigned thirty-seven years, conquering
in that time all the kingdoms of the south, even including Orissa
(Orya). Without laying too much stress on conquests by force of arms,
it seems certain that most if not all Southern India submitted to
his rule, probably only too anxious to secure a continuance of Hindu
domination in preference to the despotism of the hated followers of
Islam.[33] According to the chronicle, therefore, the death of Bukka
I., as we must call him, took place about the year A.D. 1380. As to
inscriptions of his reign, Dr. Hultzsch[34] mentions that they cover
the period from about 1354 to 1371, while the first inscription
of his successor, Harihara II., is dated in 1379.[35] If, then,
we assume that Bukka I. reigned till 1379, we find the chronicle
so far accurate that Bukka I. did in fact reign thirty-six years,
though not thirty-seven -- A.D. 1343 to 1379.

But meanwhile we have another story from an inscription on
copper-plates which is to be seen preserved in the Collector's office
at Nellore.[36] It has been carefully edited by Mr. H. Krishna
Sastri. According to this it would appear that Bukka I., who
undoubtedly was a man of war, usurped the throne. It asserts that
the father of Harihara I., who was named Samgama, had five sons. The