<p>15/ Likewise, in the third part of the book, we learn about trade networks going both west (to the Arab worlds and Constantinople and, indirectly, to Europe) and east (to Indochina and China). Again, fascinating. Could have been expanded a lot more. ↵</p>

<p>14/ There are brief glimpses beyond this woeful chain of wars. Kanisetti&#39;s prose glistens when he speaks of the construction of Ellora temples, and you can feel his passion. But three pages later, we&#39;re back to the same-old. ↵</p>

<p>13/ Mostly, this would appear to be because of a very weak historical record. A lot of what Kanisetti recounts here is based on the royals&#39; own legacy stories, which serve only to glorify them, not (honestly and usefully) relate the lives of their subjects. ↵</p>

<p>12/ There is very, very little about anything *other* than these dynastic combats and successions, with the exception of the aforementioned discussion of language and religion. How did people live? What did they do? How was life? What was their culture? There&#39;s almost nothing. ↵</p>

<p>11/ The biggest is that it&#39;s mainly an account of one damned king after another: the title is FAR too accurate. A small group will gain power, rise, go to war, proclaim themselves kings-of-kings, rule for a generation or two, then lose…rinse and repeat with their victors. ↵</p>

<p>10/ So in all these regards, the book is an absolutely essential work of history. But it also has some real flaws. ↵</p>

<p>9/ The most surprising thing about the book is probably the rise and strength of Kannada culture. The Cholas are documented well, but how many people there were inscriptions in Kannada all the way in Jabalpur in Madhya Pradesh? ↵</p>

<p>8/ The other is language. I learned about the strong Sanskritic culture in the South, but also the rise, especially, of Kannada (often treated like Tamil&#39;s poor cousin) from a vernacular to courtly language. ↵</p>

<p>7/ Along the way, he discusses two major cultural changes. One is the growth of Hinduism generally, and Shaivism specifically. But again, it is not a linear progression, and while the Buddhists mostly exit, the Jains do not. (Remember Shravanabelagola?) ↵</p>