Some corroboration of the supposition that the Tanjore ports were those frequented by Chinese trade may be found in the fact that a remarkable Pagoda of uncemented brickwork, about a mile to the north-west of Negapatam, popularly bears (or bore) the name of the Chinese Pagoda.  I do not mean to imply that the building was Chinese, but that the application of that name to a ruin of strange character pointed to some tradition of Chinese visitors.[7] Sir Walter Elliot, to whom I am indebted for the sketch of it given here, states that this building differed essentially from any type of Hindu architecture with which he was acquainted, but being without inscription or sculpture it was impossible to assign to it any authentic origin.  Negapatam was, however, celebrated as a seat of Buddhist worship, and this may have been a remnant of their work.  In 1846 it consisted of three stories divided by cornices of stepped brickwork.  The interior was open to the top, and showed the marks of a floor about 20 feet from the ground.  Its general appearance is shown by the cut.  This interesting building was reported in 1859 to be in too dilapidated a state for repair, and now exists no longer.  Sir W. Elliot also tells me that collectors employed by him picked up in the sand, at several stations on this coast, numerous Byzantine and Chinese as well as Hindu coins.[8] The brickwork of the pagoda, as described by him, very fine and closely fitted but without cement, corresponds to that of the Burmese and Ceylonese mediaeval Buddhist buildings.  The architecture has a slight resemblance to that of Pollanarua in Ceylon (see Fergusson, II. p. 512). (Abulf. in Gildemeister, p. 185; Nelson, Pt.  II. p. 27 seqq.; Taylor’s Catalogue Raisonne, III. 386-389.)

Ma’bar is mentioned (Ma-pa-’rh) in the Chinese Annals as one of the foreign kingdoms which sent tribute to Kublai in 1286 (supra, p. 296); and Pauthier has given some very curious and novel extracts from Chinese sources regarding the diplomatic intercourse with Ma’bar in 1280 and the following years.  Among other points these mention the “five brothers who were Sultans” (Suantan), an envoy Chamalating (Jumaluddin) who had been sent from Ma’bar to the Mongol Court, etc. (See pp. 603 seqq.)

NOTE 2.—­Marco’s account of the pearl-fishery is still substantially correct. Bettelar, the rendezvous of the fishery, was, I imagine, PATLAM on the coast of Ceylon, called by Ibn Batuta Batthala.  Though the centre of the pearl-fishery is now at Aripo and Kondachi further north, its site has varied sometimes as low as Chilaw, the name of which is a corruption of that given by the Tamuls, Salabham, which means “the Diving,” i.e. the Pearl-fishery.  Tennent gives the meaning erroneously as “the Sea of Gain.”  I owe the correction to Dr. Caldwell. (Ceylon, I. 440; Pridham, 409; Ibn Bat. IV. 166; Ribeyro, ed.  Columbo, 1847, App. p. 196.)