i 



1844.}' Account of Mamallalpur. 45 



few data on which the denial of any encroachment of the Sea 

 is founded, as quite inconclusive ; though this does not seem 

 to be the place for their discussion, nor yet for the statement 

 of contrary facts and arguments. It is a point on which I ap- 

 prehend Dr. Babington to be at issue with truth : but beyond 

 this mere expression of an opinion, it does not seem impor • 

 tant further to pursue the subject, in these very cursory 

 annotations. 



Having had an opportunity of reading over these remarks 

 after an interval of more than a year and a half, and having 

 seen, in the interim, copies of two inscriptions from the 

 neighbourhood of Mavalivaram, in the Tamil language and 

 old Tamil character, I find that the spelling therein is Ma- 

 mallaipur, with two Vs. The language is not the pure old 

 Tamil; but the orthography is so generally correct, thpjfc 

 the two Vs cannot be an orthographical error ;and if not, then 

 the word does not mean hill. The language is comparatively 

 modern Tamil ; being much mixed with Sanscrit derivatives, 

 which is not the case with very old •> Tamil. The name of 

 Deva-raya appears ; and an opinion seems to have been 

 formed that it meant a Chola king. I cannot positively de- 

 ny such an inference ; nor yet another inference that simila- 

 rity of character in neighbouring inscriptions, must argue 

 identity of origin. The subject is confessedly open to varia- 

 tion of opinion ; and inquiry would seem to be requisite before 

 a decision can be positively made. 



