With these few facts to guide us, we turn to the chronicles of Nuniz and Firishtah, trying in vain to obtain some points of contact between them as to the origin of the second dynasty -- some clue which will enable us to reconcile differences and arrive at the real truth. If we are to be guided purely by probabilities, it would seem that the history given by Nuniz is likely to be the more accurate of the two. His chronicle was written about the year 1535, during the reign of Achyuta; he lived at the Hindu capital itself, and he gained his information from Hindu sources not long subsequent to the events related. Firishtah did not write till about A.D. 1607, was not in any sense a contemporary recorder, and did not live amongst the Hindus, but at the court of Nizam Shah at Ahmadnagar. The lengths of reigns, however, as given by Nuniz do not tally with the dates which we obtain from sources undoubtedly reliable. Nuniz has it that Virupaksha's son "Padearao," the last of the old line, fled from the capital when the usurper Narasimha seized the throne; that the latter reigned forty-four years, and died leaving two sons. These youths being too young to govern, the dying king intrusted the kingdom to his minister, Narasa Naik, and both the princes were murdered. Narasa seized the throne, and held it till his death. The length of his reign is not given. His son, "Busbalrao" (? Basava Raya), succeeded, and reigned six years, being succeeded by his brother, the great Krishna Deva Raya. Now we know that Krishna Deva Raya began to reign in A.D. 1509. This gives 1503 for the date of the accession of his predecessor, "Busbal." If we allow five years for the reign of Narasa -- a pure guess -- we have his accession in 1498 A.D., and the forty-four years of Narasimha would begin in A.D. 1454; but this would apparently coincide with the reign of Mallikarjuna, son of Deva Raya II. It is perhaps possible that in after years the usurper Narasimha's reign was measured by the Hindus from the time when he began to attain power as minister or as a great noble, and not from the date when he actually became king; but this is pure conjecture. Firishtah mentions a certain "Sewaroy" as being raya of Vijayanagar in 1482, shortly before the death of Muhammad Shah Bahmani. Speaking of the new sovereign of Bijapur, the first of the Adil Shahs, in 1489, the historian tells us that the Adil's rival, Kasim Barid, asked the then minister of Vijayanagar for aid against the rising power of his enemy;[171] and that "the Roy being a child, his minister, Heemraaje,[172] sent an army" and seized the country as far as Mudkal and Raichur. This occurred in A.H. 895, which embraces the period from November 1489 to November 1490. "HEEMraaje," therefore, is probably for SIMHA or Narasimha Raja, or perhaps for Narasa, otherwise called Vira Narasimha.