public records or works of authority made in support of the theory as to the existence of a caste of Sāmantas who are not Nāyars, and are classed under Kshatriyas, and above the Vaisyas. The following account is given by the author of the Kēeralavakhsha Kramam of the origin of the Sāmantas. Some Kshatriyas who, being afraid of Parasu Rāma, were wandering in foreign parts, and not observing caste rules, came to Malabar, visited Chēraman Perumāl, and asked for his protection. On this Chēraman Perumāl, with the sanction of the Brāhmans, and in pursuance of the rules laid down by the Maharājas who had preceded him, classed these people as members of the Sāmantra caste. "That this book," the Judge observed, "can be looked on as being in any way an authority on difficult and obscure historical questions, or that the story can be classed as more than a myth, there are no grounds for supposing." No linguistic work of recognised authority was produced in support of the derivation of the word Sāmantan from Sāmantran, meaning without mantrams.
One exhibit in the case above referred to was an extract from the report of a commission appointed to inspect the state and condition of the province of Malabar. It is dated 11th October, 1793, and in it allusion is made to the 'Tichera Tiroopaar' who is described as a chief Nāyar of Nilambūr in the southern division of the country. Evidence was given to show that Tichera Tiroopaar is the Nilambūr Tirumulpād. And, in a letter from the Supervisor of Malabar, dated 15th November, 1793, allusion is made to Tichera Tiroopaar as a Nāyar. Two extracts from Buchanan's wellknown work on Mysore, Canara and Malabar, were also filed as exhibits. In one Buchanan relates what was told him by the Brāhmans of the history of 'Malayāla'.
