With reference to ancient South India, Korkai, Poompuhar and Muchiri were well known as

States a pattern/example that Korkai is 'believed to have been' an early capital and port of the Pandyas, showing ancient ports could also be early capitals.

A student could compare this claim with other sources (inscriptions, Sangam classics, archaeological reports) or maps of Pandya polity to test whether Korkai functioned as a capital.

Identifies Korkai as an ancient port mentioned in Sangam and Greek texts, suggesting literary and foreign sources record its prominence (a clue to possible capital status).

Look up Sangam/Greek references and archaeological findings to see if administrative or royal features are reported for Korkai.

Gives a general rule: many ancient cities in India were the capitals of kings, with central palaces and official functions.

Use this general pattern to treat any prominent ancient city (like Poompuhar or Muchiri) as candidate capitals and seek specific evidence (palaces, inscriptions) for confirmation.

Notes that ports on the coasts were 'vibrant centres of trade' and that cities began emerging in southern regions from about 400 BCE, implying coastal urban centers could gain political importance.

Combine this with a map of southern ports to evaluate whether coastal towns (e.g., Poompuhar) were likely administrative centres or capitals.

Shows a pattern that dynasties (e.g., Sātavāhanas) had different capital cities at different times, implying capital locations could shift and that multiple towns might have served as capitals historically.

Apply this idea to southern dynasties (Pandyas, Cholas, Cheras) to consider whether places like Muchiri/Poompuhar might have been capitals during particular periods and then moved.