that the word Kadal, if not a misprint, must be traceable to very careless translation. That word in Tamil means the sea (being synonimous with Samudra in Sanscrit) whereas Cural is the title of the poem, denoting a particular species of Tamil versification.
I shall add no further observation as to the more modern portion of the sketch except it be to remark that, throughout in the subordinate running notice of the Setu pati and the Maravas, there seems to me to be some confusion or repetition; some anachronisms and errors: for example, the Setu pati, was at no time independent of the Nayak-dynasty of Madura; but was merely the chief feudatory. So much however at different times has been written by me regarding that principality that I need not add more.
To me the most striking portion of the whole sketch, is a note attached to para. 7. The account in that para. of Malaya Dhwaja might have been enlarged; but at present I have to do with the note. It if therein said that "the traditions of the south make him a more important character, and consider him as the father of Chitraganda the wife of Arjuna." The visit of Arjuna to Madura and his marriage there with the king's daughter is very fully recorded in my copy of the Tamil Bàratham, an abstract or prose-version of the Mahabharata; but whether to be borne out, or not, by the collated Sanscrit work, I cannot tell. However, there is not the slightest mention made of Malaya Dhwaja. The only question with me is, how did the Professor come at "the traditions of the South." Not by personal intercourse it need not be said, neither by manuscript authority, for that is not tradition, nor yet from Col. Mackenzie's assistants, for such of them as were at Calcutta were Telugu Brahmans, who never went very far south of Madras, and besides Professor Wilson has somewhat indignantly rejected the idea of trusting to verbal information from them. I know not where else to look for the traditions except in the first vol. of Or. H. MSS. where the conjecture is thrown out, and occasionally again and again referred to, as merely my own conjecture, arising from a notion produced, as I was going on with my work, that possibly the entire origin of the whole superstitious fable, in which a marriage is so conspicuous, might turn on the asserted visit of Arjuna to Madura. I certainly never heard it from any one, nor copied it from any book; and in the face of considerable difficulties I still think it plausible if not probable. Had not the Professor carefully barred out the idea of his having made any use of my assistance in his sketch, I should have thought that he had done so, my first volume of translations having reached England at the close of 1835. A doubt arose on the subject in various places, while reading that sketch; but especially in reference to this particular note. However, I may mistake; and will not be positive.
