Ancient Jaffna in google books
Page 384
"That Jaffna was occupied by the Sinhalese earlier than by the Tamils is seen not only in the place names of Jaffna, but also in some of the habits and customs of the people. The system of branding cattle with the communal brand by which not only the caste but also the position and the family of the owner could be traced, was peculiarly Sinhalese. The very ancient way of wearing the hair in the form of a konde behind the head.....The women's fashion of dressing their cloth across their breasts and mens of wearing their tufts of hair on the side of the head, as was the custom in Jaffna, were introduced by the Malabar immigrants."
Page v (Foreward)
" Dr. S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar of the Madras University writing on 29.8.1926 the Foreword to Ancient Jaffna by Mudaliyar C. Rasanayagam says: "The attempt of the author to derive the name Ilam does not appeal to us as quite successful; Ilam to us seems to be directly derived from the Pali word Sihalam, which in Tamil would be Singalam or even Singanam, but a strict Tamilising would make it Ilam...." Ancient Jaffna-Mudaliyar C Rasanayagam (Foreword p. v.).
Page 382
" After the massacre of the Christians, Sankili's ( king of Jaffna) insane fury longed for more victims and he fell upon the Buddhists of Jaffna who were all Sinhalese. He expelled them beyond the limits of the country and destroyed their numerous places of worship. Most of them betook themselves to the Vanni's and the Kandyan territories (as per Yalpana Vaipava Malai by Mailvagana Pulavar translated by C Brito.), and those who were unable to do so became the slaves of the Tamil chieftains and are now known as 'Kovia', a corruption of the Sinhalese word ' Goviya' or 'Goiya' and that their original status was equal to that of the Vellalas can be inferred from customs which are still in Vogue in Jaffna. The 'Tanakaras' and the 'Nalavas' of Jaffna should also be considered Sinhalese remnants in spite of the fanciful derivation of the word 'Nalava' given by the author of the Vaipava Malai. The Nalavas were perhaps originally the Sinhalese climbers and received the Tamil name on account of their peculiar way of climbing trees. They too became the slaves of the Tamil chieftains. The Tanakaras were the ancient elephant keepers and those who supplied the necessary fodder to the stables of the king. ( Sinhalese: Tana=grass). They perhaps on account of the service rendered by them were not expelled from the country and later became inseparably mixed with the Tamils among whom they had to remain.........the fact that the Kovias, Tanakaras and Nalavas were originally Sinhalese can be seen from the peculiar dress of their women who wear the inner end of their cloth over the shoulders in a manner quite strange to the genuine Tamils."
Page 179
" Upon the introduction of copious Pali and Sanskrit works, a new language ( Sinhalese) came into existence, with a ground work of Elu ( language spoken by Yakkha,Naga) and Tamil and the superstructure of Pali and Sanskrit....In a similar manner were formed Malayalam and Telugu; from their copious vocabulary of Sanskritic words it is now almost impossible to trace their origin to dravidian dialects. While the process of forming the Sinhalese nation was going on by the continual mixture of the Yakkhas, the Nagas, the Tamils and the Kalingas(Vijaya), the Sinhalese language too was growing and expanding.....Thus it will be seen that the mixed population from Point Pedro ( in the north) to Dondra Head (in the South) known by the name Sinhalam.........during the early centuries of the Christian era, spoken one language. This propersition is further supported by most of the place names in Jaffna which have an Elu or semi-Sinhalese origin. They became divided only when the Vannis came in and intervened between them. From that time the people in the North became estranged from their brethren in the centre and the south and progressed altogether on Tamil lines, whereas the Sinhalese grew into a new nation absorbing into themselves even the millions of pure Tamils who remained in Central and Southern Ceylon after the Chola (Tamil invaders) power had declined....a process which can be witnessed even today in the western coast. The difference must have accentuated after the downfall of Buddhism in Southern India, and after a large number of new Tamil colonists began to settle down in Northern Ceylon, for we find that even from the 10th to the 15th centuryAD the Sinhalese eliment was so strong in the North that there were constant troubles between the Sinhalese and the Tamils in Jaffna. (as per Yalpana Vaipava Malai by Mailvagana Pulavar translated by C Brito.) "
Page 250
" Some others are of the opinion that 'Yalpanam' is the Tamil adaptation of the Sinhalese name 'Yapane', which like many other Sinhalese names of places in the district existed prior to the Tamil occupation......It is not at all surprising to see the name appearing in Sinhalese and Indian works earlier than in Tamil writings in Jaffna, for it appears that the application of the name for the whole district did not become popular among the inhabitants until the Portuguese period."
Page 37
"Now it is rather significant that Manarridal was the name given to Jaffna in the 'Yalpana Vaipava Malai', and that the name Veligama (sandy district), a Sinhalese name with the same meaning was given to a portion of Jaffna by the Sinhalese.(Valigama..Valigamam..Valikamam)"
Page 42
"The Mahabharatha, which mentions..........Vavravahan the son of Chitrangadai by Arjuna......It is also said that Vavravahan, while fighting against Arjuna, 'raised his standard which was decorated most beautifully, and which bore the device of a lion in gold' ..........This standard displaying a lion appears, therefore to have been the one used by the Naga kings of North Ceylon ( Naga and Yakkas...before arrival of Vijaya and later Tamils)......the standard of the lion, which appears to have been the emblem of the Nagas of North Ceylon, continued to be the flag of the Ceylon king till the Island was ceded to the British in 1815 AD."
Page 52
" But, according to a local tradition which still exists, and which has been embodied in the 'Yalpana Vaipava Malai', Vijaya landed on the northern coast of Jaffna and took up his residence at Kadiramalai....... It is said that Vijaya, who was undoubtedly a Hindu, built the temple called Tirutambalesvaram in the North of Ceylon. This temple must have been built near the present Kirimalai, as there are lands in the vicinity still going under the name of Tirutampalai. Tamba is the Sanskrit word for copper; and the Tambapanni of the Sinhalese chronicler can therefore quite conceivably be the 'Tirutambalesvaram' mentioned in the 'Yalpana Vaipava Malai' "
Page 5
"In the Mahabharatha the Nagas are frequently mentioned as living in various parts of India and Ceylon in a highly civilized state under their own kings.....Nagpur ( Nagapuram), Nagarjuna Kills, Nagarcoil, Nagarcot, Nargapattinum etc."
Page 59
"Waves of conquest and colonisation ....names of places translated into tongue of the invaders or settlers . Kadiramalai (Naga)... Kadiragoda(Sinhalese). ..Kandergoda.. ..Kandercudde.. ..Kantarrodai.. ..Odaikurichchi.. .Kantarodai (Tamil) ...The discovery of extensive Buddhistic archaelogical remains and large quantities of Indian and Roman coins affords ample testimony to its ancient greatness.......... The other Tamil name Katirkamam is the literal transformation of the Sinhalese name Kataragama and has no connection with the Tamil components ' Katir'(divine glory) and 'kamam' (love), a resemblance seen through religious fervor only. The tradition mentioned in the 'Yalpana Vaipava Malai' that Vijaya built a temple for 'Kadirai Andavar' might possibly have referred to the temple at Kataragama."
Page 332
" Bhuvaneka Bahu (Kotte) who caused the Jaffna Town and the Nalur temple to be built was known as Sri Sanghabodhi, a title borne by the Sinhalese kings....In the Kattiyam ( daily repeated at the Kandaswamy Temple) too he is referred to as Sri Sangabodhi Bhuvaneka Bahu."
Page 62
" Jambukola ( now Sambu turai in Jaffna) was the port of disembarkation of the Buddhist emigrants from Magadha during the time of Devanampiya Tissa. A great trunk road seem to have been in existence, leading from Jambukola and passing through Kantarodai and running parallel to the present central road to the northern gate of Anuradhapura. The remains of two stone bridges, one over the Malvatu oya......... The Ambassadors sent by Devanampiya Tissa to king Asoka of Magadha embarked at Jumbukola and reached Pataliputra in 14 days; and Asoka's ambassadors, sent to Ceylon landed at Jambukola and reached Anuradhapura in 12 days ( Mahavamsa).......Sangamitta and the Bo tree landed at Jambukola...of the first eight plants (Bo) raised out of the seed of the tree planted at Anuradhapura, one was planted at Jambukola Patuna on the spot where the Bo tree was deposited at disembarkation. The very old Bo tree standing by the side of the Paralay Kandaswamy temple at Chulipuram, about half a mile from the Port was perhaps the plant here referred to..... Devanampiya Tissa erected a vihare at the port of Jambukola in Nagadipa; likewise the Tissa maha vihare and the Pacina Vihare. The ruins of a dagoba and a vihare can still be seen close to the port; and the place called Tissa maluva about a hundred yards opposite to the Kandaswamy temple above mentioned, perhaps marks the site of Tissa maha vihare. The ancient broad road from Jambukola to Tissa maha vihare still exists but serves no useful purpose."
Page 117
" Anoubingara (on Ptolomy's map) can be traced to Singai Nagar (in Jaffna) or Sinhapura, a town built and occupied by Kalinga colonists who accompanied Vijaya and who are said to have landed at Mahisadipa. It came into prominence and fame during the time of the later Jaffna kings called Arya Chakravartis and its extensive ruins can still be seen at Vallipuram near Point Pedro.( Singa Nagar was trans formed to Ana Singara and then Anubingara by foreign merchants.)"
Page 190
" In the early days when buddhism flourished in North Ceylon, the outlying islands off the coast of Jaffna contained important monasteries and viharas... "
Page 309
"Kings of Jaffna belonged to, claimed connection with or imitated the Eastern gangas ( Ganges) who went from Gangavadi and settled at Kalinga. If the earliest kings of Jaffna came from amongst them, it must have been Ugra Singan, for it was after this time that the kings ruling in the north were called Kalingas. Whether Ugra Singan was a member of the Eastern Gangas or not, he came down with a large army of Kalingas to secure the throne of Kadiramalai for himself. As it is said in the Vaipava Malai that he was 'a prince of a dynasty founded by King Vijaya's brother' it may be surmised that he was a member of one of the Kalinga families that came with Vijaya and settled at Singai Nagar (Sinhapura) near Vallipuram.
Page 370
The following is a list of kings who reigned at Singai Nagar (Sinhapura) Jaffna from the 13th to the middle of the 15 th century is adapted from the Vaipava Malai giving probable dates.
Vijaya Kulankai (Kalinga Magha)Segarajasekeran - c 1210 AD
Kulasekara Pararajasekeran - c 1246 AD
Kulottunga Segarajasekeran - c 1256 AD
Vikrama Pararajasekeran - c 1279 AD
Varotaya Segarajasekeran - c 1302 AD
Martanda Pararajasekeran - c 1325 AD
Gunapushana Segarajasekeran - c 1256 AD
Virotaya Pararajasekeran - c 1256 AD
Jayavira Segarajasekeran - c 1256 AD
Gunavira Pararajasekeran - c 1256 AD
Kanagasuriya Segarajasekeran - c 1256 AD
Bhuvaneka Bahu (of Kotte) - c 1256 AD
Jaffna kings used alternate names such as Pararajasekaran, Segarajasekaran etc... look at their real names ( first column).
Friday, July 17, 2009
Saturday, July 11, 2009
History of Jaffna
Jaffna is apart of Northern Sri Lanka. The word Jaffna a word derived from Yapanaya by Portuguese. The Northern Province which has Jaffna district is but creation by the Colonial British two centuries ago, to assist their administration. One of the biggest and highly controversial issues concerning this district is that, was it ever a separate Kingdom or a Tamil Kingdom.
The evidences of this is so scarce, that not a pottery shard belonging to this so Kingdom as
thus far been discovered.
The main source for this bogus ‘Kingdom’ is the Yalapana Vaipava Malai written in 1736 at the request of the Dutch governor. Dr. Pathmanathan says that this document is defective in Chronology and Genealogy eg No specific contributions any king is recorded in it. Of the ten kings who are said to have ruled till 1450, only 4 are known in sources other than in Yalpana Vaipava Malai but not as kings but as 'Perumal' or 'Sub-Ordinates. This is clearly seen from the Medavala inscription dated 1359, which describes Martanda Mudalis' of Jaffna as a 'Perumal' or 'Sub-Ordinate' ruler, while the Sinhala king at Gampola is described as 'Vikramabahu Chakravarti Svamin'. Thus ''THE DE JURE RIGHT OF VIKRAMABAHU TO THE SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE WHOLE ISLAND IS RECOGNIZED BY THE TREATY''.
Evidences
Thus far the oldest Tamil inscription found in Jaffna, is in Nagadipa by the Sinhala king Parakramabahu Raja, regarding ship wrecks and taxes on Urathota(Kayts). According to Dr. Karthigesu Indrapala, the editor of this inscription and the Professor of History of the University of Jaffna, "the fact that this edict was issued not by any subordinate official, but by the king himself shows that the monarch was in supreme control of the northern most region of the island".
The most detailed account of Jaffna during the periods of 1505-1636 by all historians is considered to be the eye witness accounts by the Portuguese Franciscan Friar Fernao De Queyroz, whose English translation according to the British Civil Servant W.Codrington, is second only to the Mahawamsa in importance.
List of the rulers according to certain Tamil historians.
However, the available historic evidences are not supportive of the list of rulers. “Yapa Patuna”, or the “Port of Yapanaya” (Port of Jaffna) in the extreme north of the country had been recorded as a port used by the Sinhala kings for thousands of years to conduct business with the countries located north of Sri Lanka, along with the other two prominent ports, namely, Mathota (Mannar) in north-west and Gokanna (Trincomalee) in north-east.
De Queyroz states that their are no populations in Jaffna and thus no agriculture, only a small population is found at Nallur. Until 1450, the Jaffna port area had been governed by the Vidanas and Mudalis (subordinate lower officers) of the Sinhala Kings. Some of these officers who later became powerful ignored the authority of Kotte Kingdom, and attempted to establish a separate rule over Jaffna. Subsequent to this unrest in the area, prince Sapumal, an adopted son and a general of King Parakramabahu VI of Kotte, conquered the entire Northern region in 1447-1450 and was later appointed by Kotte as the governor of the Jaffna region. Later, once Prince Sapumal ascended to the throne of Kotte as King Buvanekabahu VI, he appointed Arya Chkrawathi a nobleman of Gujarat origin as the ruler of Jaffna C1468-70.
List of rulers from Portuguese records.
Special notes
* Rajavaliya states that King Sri Parakrama Bahu of Kotte (father to Prince Sapumal), had in fact ruled over seven villages called "Makudam Kotta" in Soli country (Tamil Nadu).
* The Portuguese state quite clearly that Jaffna was under the rule of King Rajasinhe I - 1593.
* Also it is of interest, that when Sankili and Portuguese signed a peace treaty, this was written in Portuguese and Sinhala. If Jaffna was in fact a Tamil Kingdom, then why write such an important document in Sinhala??
* The Dutch National Archives, state that the boundary between their territory of Jaffna and the Sinhala kings, was Alimankada(Elephant Pass).
* The most famous of all these so called Jaffna rulers, is considered as Sankili. The Portuguese, who gives the accurate historical account of this period, state that his wife was a Buddhist. Could she have been a Sinhala?
* The emblem of the royal house of Jaffna was a lion, which is certainly not a Dravidian symbol but of an Aryan.
* The so called flag of the Jaffna Kingdom(As seen here), is fake. This has been produced by taking the artwork as represented by a bronze seal found in Padaviya belonging to the Nanadesis Traders, who arrived via the Cola invasion. This seal of the 13th Century and inscribed in Sanskrit grantha, is the only one of its kind found in Lanka.
The Bronze seal
These traders not only stayed after the expulsion of the Cola but integrated to the Sinhala society and this shown by inscriptions Vijaya Bahu, Gajabau and Queen Lilavati. During Gajabhu time South Indian Mercenaries known as the Velakkaras who spoke Malayalam arrived, again it can be assumed as their is no record of women arriving, that these peoples integrated and had in many cases become Buddhist, as a Vihara was built by a Velakkaras Commander, during the reign Queen Lilavati and most importantly was even given the honor of protecting the Tooth Relic.
Evidences-Cont...
With the establishment of archeology in Ceylon in late 1880's by H.C.P Bell, searching for lost cities and treasures of old began. It can be said that all parts of this isle have been scrutinized as much as Egypt or Greece. With more than 100years of archeology, yet NO proof of either a Tamil Kingdom nor the existence of Tamil populations in the North or East of Lanka, as envisaged by the Eelamists have been found.
Historically speaking about Jaffna, it was at the ancient port of Jambukola, the present Sambiliturai, in the Jaffna peninsula that the envoys of King Devanampiya Tissa embarked/disembarked to and from Ceylon on their mission to the court of Asoka. It was also at this port that the Theri Sanghamitta and her retinue had disembarked when they came from India with a branch of the Bodhi tree at Buddhagaya during the reign of Devanampiya Tissa. The Theri and her retinue were received by Devanampiya Tissa, who had come to Jambukola from Anuradhapura. King Devanampiya Tissa built three Buddhist shrines, namely the
Jambukola Vihara, the Tissamaha Vihara and the Pacina Vihara and planted a Bo sapling in the Jaffna peninsula. A gold plate inscription discovered at Vallipuram near point Pedro reveals that during the reign of Vasabha, Jaffna peninsula was governed by a minister of that king and that a Buddhist Vihara named Piyaguka Tissa had been built there by that Minister.
According to the Mahavamsa, Kanittha Tissa(167-186AD) during his reign at Anuradhapura repaired the cetiyaghara of the Tissamaha Vihara in the Jaffna peninsula and king Voharaka Tissa (209-231AD) during his reign effected improvements to that Vihara. The Culavamsa records that king Aggabodhi II(571-604) built a Relic House and a dwelling place named Unhaloma for the monks of the Rajayatana Vihara in Nagadipa and granted a village there for the provision of rice gruel to the monks living there.
Although, as said not even a single Tamil inscription belonging to any of those so-called Tamil rulers of Jaffna in and around the Jaffna District have been found, a few Sinhala, Tamil and Sanskrit inscriptions belonging to some Kings of Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa have been discovered from some sites in and around the Jaffna District indicating that the region was under their control and it was part of their kingdom as late as the 13th century. In addition to these two inscriptions found in the Jaffna District, two other Sinhala inscriptions of Dappula IV who ruled at Anuradhapura during the 10th century A.D. have come to light from that District; of these two, one was discovered at Kandarodai, the ancient Kadurugoda Vihara, a Buddhist
Temple in Uduvil and the other at Tunukai in the D.R.O.s, division of Punakar. A few more inscriptions belonging to some Sinhala kings have also been found at various places around the District of Jaffna; we may mention among them, the Tiriyaya Sanskrit inscription of Aggabodhi VI(733-772), the Tiruketisvaram Pillar inscription of Sena II(853-887), the Mannar Kacceri pillar inscription of Kassapa IV (898-914), a tenth century slab inscription at Kurundanmalai near Mulaitivu dated in the reign of a Sinhala king named Abhasalamevan, the Palmottai slab inscription of Vijayabahu (1055-1110) and the Kantalai stone seat inscription of
Nissankamalla (1187-1196).
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
The solution by Nalin De Silva
(June 10, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Finally what is the solution we offer to the so called ethnic problem? In order to have a solution it is necessary to have a problem. The so called ethnic problem is nothing but a problem due to the unwillingness of the English speaking Jaffna Vellala Tamils to recognise the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture, instigated by the British. The Vellalas inspired and instigated by the British wanted to become the leaders of the country by creating a mythical history going back to thousands of years. However, these Vellalas were brought to Sri Lanka by the Dutch for their tobacco cultivations only after 1650 and the Tamils in Sri Lanka do not have a continuous history going back to any time before that year. The Vellalas had been taken by the Dutch to South Africa at about the same time they were brought to Sri Lanka and are referred to as agricultural labourers in that country. In Sri Lanka the Vellalas have achieved a position in society that was not possible for them to realize in South Africa. Sri Lanka and South Africa have inherited Roman Dutch Law and the Vellalas as a result of the Dutch occupation.
Now let us look into the history of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. What is the origin of the present Tamil population in Sri Lanka and in Jaffna in particular? Before the Vellalas were brought by the Dutch who populated the Jaffna peninsula? Before the Dutch the Portuguese ruled this area who conquered it by the name of the Arya Chakravarthins. There is no evidence to show that the Arya Chakravarthins were Tamils as there had not been a Tamil ethnic community in the twelfth, thirteenth centuries in any part of the world. The use of Tamil as a language does not necessarily imply the existence of an ethnic community by that name whether in India or Sri Lanka or any other place. The pundits who take extra care to show that Aryan refers to a language group and not an ethnic community should take this into consideration. In Dambadiva or Bharath there were no ethnic communities as such and kingdoms were identified by the vansa of the kings. From ancient times we know of Sakya, Liccavi, Maurya, Chera, Pandya, Soli, and Pallava kings but not of ethnic communities. Also various languages and dialects have been used to identify groups of people but not their ethnicity. As a result Tamil speaking people have been ruled by Pandya, Soli, Pallava kings and conversely Pallavas and others have ruled over various other communities speaking different languages. The kings were not identified with the community ruled by them and there was no one to one correspondence between the vansa of the kings and their subjects. Even if the language spoken by the Arya Chakravarthins was Tamil there is no evidence to show that the people who lived in the Jaffna peninsula in the thirteenth century spoke Tamil let alone them being identified as a Tamil ethnic community.
In the case of the Sinhalas it had been different from the days of king Pandukabhaya. It was king Pandukabhaya who did away with the vansas of kings and gothras of peoples and established a nation that came to be called the Sinhalas who not only had a common language, a common culture, a common king who spoke the language of the people (unlike the earlier kings of England who spoke French) and a common way of life. There was a one to one correspondence between the king and his people and the large number of inscriptions by the kings found all over the island in Sinhala bear ample testimony to this fact. Perhaps there were only two nation states in whole of the ancient world that being the Sinhalas and the Chinese. How many inscriptions in Tamil can be found in the Jaffna peninsula? The absence of such inscriptions in general implies that either the kings did not speak Tamil or the people did not speak Tamil. In either case it is wrong to say that the kingdom of the Arya Chackravarthins was a Tamil kingdom.
The Sinhala people previously comprised of kings of different vansas and people of different gothras, and we may infer that the kings belonging to the SinhaVansa gave the name Sinhala to the new nation. We may conclude from all these and the story on Pandukabhaya that the king Pandukabhaya belonged to the Sinha Vansa but had the support of the yaksha gothra beside that of the nagas and the devas living in the country at that time. It is not necessary to give Pandukabhaya a yaksha birth as some people try to do in order to explain the origin of the Sinhala nation. It is very unlikely a yaksha king would have given the name Sinhala to the nation he established and those who talk of the yaksha beginnings of the king have had to resort to fancy interpretations to the word Sinhala in the process.
As Prof. Indrapala had noted before he became a "prisoner" of the Tamil terrorists, there were no permanent Tamil settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century meaning of course settlements of people who spoke Tamil as a language and not of an ethnic community as such. Tamils in this period even in India did not constitute an ethnic group but a group of people speaking the Tamil language. The population of the Jaffna peninsula when the Arya Chakravarthins came to Jaffna would have been Sinhala with some Velakkaras who spoke Malayalam. The Arya Chakravarthins would have established a Vassal state under the king of Sinhale that being the kingdom of the Sinhala people and the Sinhala king, and ruled over the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras. It is very likely that the Arya Chakravarthins followed the pattern of the Dambadiva or Bharat kings and established a Vansa kingdom though under the Sinhala king rather than a nation state or even a gothra state. There would not have been any one to one correspondence between the kings and the people and until the Dutch brought the Tamils for their tobacco cultivation there would not have been many Tamil speaking people in the Jaffna peninsula. When Vijaya and other kings of Sinha and other vansas came to Sri Lanka they also would have established their little kingdoms in the same manner most probably following a system that the Aryans began. It was this Bharat or Dambadiva tradition that all these rulers had brought to Sri Lanka at various times without taking into consideration that in Sri Lanka already gothra or national kingdoms (after king Pandukabhaya) had been established. In a gothra kingdom the king or the ruler belonged to the same gothra of the people whom he ruled and it was most probably this tradition that inspired king Pandukabhaya to establish a nation state after defeating some other princes who belonged either to the Sinha or the Sakya vansas. Pandukabhaya did not create a so called feudal kingdom uniting all the gothra kingdoms as some pundits who can look at the world only through the spectacles of the westerners claim, but established what we may call a nation state, though not on the western Christian modernity model, following the model of the gothra kingdoms which were in this part of the world before the Aryans and hence the Dravidians came to what is now known as South Asia.
After the Arya Chakravarthins lost to the Portuguese nothing significant would have happened to the population pattern in the Jaffna peninsula until the Dutch brought the Tamil speaking Vellalas for the tobacco cultivation. There would have been a Sinhala population with Vellakaras and may be a few Tamil speaking people. The Vellalas in Sri Lanka managed to organise themselves as the leading cast among the population as farmers and not as agricultural labourers, sometime after they had permanently settled down in Jaffna. This itself is different from the caste system (Varna) in Bharath where Brahmins are the leading cast. It is clear that the Vellalas have been influenced by the Sinhala society after the Europeans especially the British came to this country in which goigama cast was given preference. Also I am told that the Tamil spoken by the Tamils in Jaffna is not very much different from that spoken in Tamil Nadu and the separation of the two languages does not differ by more than three hundred and fifty years. The Thesavalamai was codified by the Dutch in 1707 to prevent the agricultural labourers going back to India after the harvest and together with Prof. Indrapala’s earlier observation that there were no permanent Tamil (speaking) settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century it is not difficult to argue that the origin of the Tamils in Sri Lanka is very much closer to the twentieth century than many people try to figure out. After the Vellalas settled down permanently, with their majority in Jaffna they would have established a Tamil speaking community with the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras who had been living there becoming different casts of the Tamil speaking community. It may be that they formed into an "ethnic community" of some sort and not only a population speaking Tamil language following the Sinhala people who had by that time lived as a nation for more than two thousand years, during the British period. In any event it was the British who created the Tamil ethnic group by identifying them as a nation. The British first considered the Sinhalas and Tamils as the two majority nations to undermine the Sinhalas but when they realised that it was ridiculous to call the Tamils a majority nation they created the concepts of majority and minority nations and called the Tamils a minority. In any event it was the British who introduced the concept of ethnicity to people other than the Sinhalas, in Sri Lanka as well as in India and the only people who had been conscious of the fact of being a nation before the British introduced this concept in the region were the Sinhalas.
Now let us look into the history of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. What is the origin of the present Tamil population in Sri Lanka and in Jaffna in particular? Before the Vellalas were brought by the Dutch who populated the Jaffna peninsula? Before the Dutch the Portuguese ruled this area who conquered it by the name of the Arya Chakravarthins. There is no evidence to show that the Arya Chakravarthins were Tamils as there had not been a Tamil ethnic community in the twelfth, thirteenth centuries in any part of the world. The use of Tamil as a language does not necessarily imply the existence of an ethnic community by that name whether in India or Sri Lanka or any other place. The pundits who take extra care to show that Aryan refers to a language group and not an ethnic community should take this into consideration. In Dambadiva or Bharath there were no ethnic communities as such and kingdoms were identified by the vansa of the kings. From ancient times we know of Sakya, Liccavi, Maurya, Chera, Pandya, Soli, and Pallava kings but not of ethnic communities. Also various languages and dialects have been used to identify groups of people but not their ethnicity. As a result Tamil speaking people have been ruled by Pandya, Soli, Pallava kings and conversely Pallavas and others have ruled over various other communities speaking different languages. The kings were not identified with the community ruled by them and there was no one to one correspondence between the vansa of the kings and their subjects. Even if the language spoken by the Arya Chakravarthins was Tamil there is no evidence to show that the people who lived in the Jaffna peninsula in the thirteenth century spoke Tamil let alone them being identified as a Tamil ethnic community.
In the case of the Sinhalas it had been different from the days of king Pandukabhaya. It was king Pandukabhaya who did away with the vansas of kings and gothras of peoples and established a nation that came to be called the Sinhalas who not only had a common language, a common culture, a common king who spoke the language of the people (unlike the earlier kings of England who spoke French) and a common way of life. There was a one to one correspondence between the king and his people and the large number of inscriptions by the kings found all over the island in Sinhala bear ample testimony to this fact. Perhaps there were only two nation states in whole of the ancient world that being the Sinhalas and the Chinese. How many inscriptions in Tamil can be found in the Jaffna peninsula? The absence of such inscriptions in general implies that either the kings did not speak Tamil or the people did not speak Tamil. In either case it is wrong to say that the kingdom of the Arya Chackravarthins was a Tamil kingdom.
The Sinhala people previously comprised of kings of different vansas and people of different gothras, and we may infer that the kings belonging to the SinhaVansa gave the name Sinhala to the new nation. We may conclude from all these and the story on Pandukabhaya that the king Pandukabhaya belonged to the Sinha Vansa but had the support of the yaksha gothra beside that of the nagas and the devas living in the country at that time. It is not necessary to give Pandukabhaya a yaksha birth as some people try to do in order to explain the origin of the Sinhala nation. It is very unlikely a yaksha king would have given the name Sinhala to the nation he established and those who talk of the yaksha beginnings of the king have had to resort to fancy interpretations to the word Sinhala in the process.
As Prof. Indrapala had noted before he became a "prisoner" of the Tamil terrorists, there were no permanent Tamil settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century meaning of course settlements of people who spoke Tamil as a language and not of an ethnic community as such. Tamils in this period even in India did not constitute an ethnic group but a group of people speaking the Tamil language. The population of the Jaffna peninsula when the Arya Chakravarthins came to Jaffna would have been Sinhala with some Velakkaras who spoke Malayalam. The Arya Chakravarthins would have established a Vassal state under the king of Sinhale that being the kingdom of the Sinhala people and the Sinhala king, and ruled over the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras. It is very likely that the Arya Chakravarthins followed the pattern of the Dambadiva or Bharat kings and established a Vansa kingdom though under the Sinhala king rather than a nation state or even a gothra state. There would not have been any one to one correspondence between the kings and the people and until the Dutch brought the Tamils for their tobacco cultivation there would not have been many Tamil speaking people in the Jaffna peninsula. When Vijaya and other kings of Sinha and other vansas came to Sri Lanka they also would have established their little kingdoms in the same manner most probably following a system that the Aryans began. It was this Bharat or Dambadiva tradition that all these rulers had brought to Sri Lanka at various times without taking into consideration that in Sri Lanka already gothra or national kingdoms (after king Pandukabhaya) had been established. In a gothra kingdom the king or the ruler belonged to the same gothra of the people whom he ruled and it was most probably this tradition that inspired king Pandukabhaya to establish a nation state after defeating some other princes who belonged either to the Sinha or the Sakya vansas. Pandukabhaya did not create a so called feudal kingdom uniting all the gothra kingdoms as some pundits who can look at the world only through the spectacles of the westerners claim, but established what we may call a nation state, though not on the western Christian modernity model, following the model of the gothra kingdoms which were in this part of the world before the Aryans and hence the Dravidians came to what is now known as South Asia.
After the Arya Chakravarthins lost to the Portuguese nothing significant would have happened to the population pattern in the Jaffna peninsula until the Dutch brought the Tamil speaking Vellalas for the tobacco cultivation. There would have been a Sinhala population with Vellakaras and may be a few Tamil speaking people. The Vellalas in Sri Lanka managed to organise themselves as the leading cast among the population as farmers and not as agricultural labourers, sometime after they had permanently settled down in Jaffna. This itself is different from the caste system (Varna) in Bharath where Brahmins are the leading cast. It is clear that the Vellalas have been influenced by the Sinhala society after the Europeans especially the British came to this country in which goigama cast was given preference. Also I am told that the Tamil spoken by the Tamils in Jaffna is not very much different from that spoken in Tamil Nadu and the separation of the two languages does not differ by more than three hundred and fifty years. The Thesavalamai was codified by the Dutch in 1707 to prevent the agricultural labourers going back to India after the harvest and together with Prof. Indrapala’s earlier observation that there were no permanent Tamil (speaking) settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century it is not difficult to argue that the origin of the Tamils in Sri Lanka is very much closer to the twentieth century than many people try to figure out. After the Vellalas settled down permanently, with their majority in Jaffna they would have established a Tamil speaking community with the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras who had been living there becoming different casts of the Tamil speaking community. It may be that they formed into an "ethnic community" of some sort and not only a population speaking Tamil language following the Sinhala people who had by that time lived as a nation for more than two thousand years, during the British period. In any event it was the British who created the Tamil ethnic group by identifying them as a nation. The British first considered the Sinhalas and Tamils as the two majority nations to undermine the Sinhalas but when they realised that it was ridiculous to call the Tamils a majority nation they created the concepts of majority and minority nations and called the Tamils a minority. In any event it was the British who introduced the concept of ethnicity to people other than the Sinhalas, in Sri Lanka as well as in India and the only people who had been conscious of the fact of being a nation before the British introduced this concept in the region were the Sinhalas.
The solution by Nalin De Silva
(June 10, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Finally what is the solution we offer to the so called ethnic problem? In order to have a solution it is necessary to have a problem. The so called ethnic problem is nothing but a problem due to the unwillingness of the English speaking Jaffna Vellala Tamils to recognise the significance of the Sinhala Buddhist culture, instigated by the British. The Vellalas inspired and instigated by the British wanted to become the leaders of the country by creating a mythical history going back to thousands of years. However, these Vellalas were brought to Sri Lanka by the Dutch for their tobacco cultivations only after 1650 and the Tamils in Sri Lanka do not have a continuous history going back to any time before that year. The Vellalas had been taken by the Dutch to South Africa at about the same time they were brought to Sri Lanka and are referred to as agricultural labourers in that country. In Sri Lanka the Vellalas have achieved a position in society that was not possible for them to realize in South Africa. Sri Lanka and South Africa have inherited Roman Dutch Law and the Vellalas as a result of the Dutch occupation.
Now let us look into the history of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. What is the origin of the present Tamil population in Sri Lanka and in Jaffna in particular? Before the Vellalas were brought by the Dutch who populated the Jaffna peninsula? Before the Dutch the Portuguese ruled this area who conquered it by the name of the Arya Chakravarthins. There is no evidence to show that the Arya Chakravarthins were Tamils as there had not been a Tamil ethnic community in the twelfth, thirteenth centuries in any part of the world. The use of Tamil as a language does not necessarily imply the existence of an ethnic community by that name whether in India or Sri Lanka or any other place. The pundits who take extra care to show that Aryan refers to a language group and not an ethnic community should take this into consideration. In Dambadiva or Bharath there were no ethnic communities as such and kingdoms were identified by the vansa of the kings. From ancient times we know of Sakya, Liccavi, Maurya, Chera, Pandya, Soli, and Pallava kings but not of ethnic communities. Also various languages and dialects have been used to identify groups of people but not their ethnicity. As a result Tamil speaking people have been ruled by Pandya, Soli, Pallava kings and conversely Pallavas and others have ruled over various other communities speaking different languages. The kings were not identified with the community ruled by them and there was no one to one correspondence between the vansa of the kings and their subjects. Even if the language spoken by the Arya Chakravarthins was Tamil there is no evidence to show that the people who lived in the Jaffna peninsula in the thirteenth century spoke Tamil let alone them being identified as a Tamil ethnic community.
In the case of the Sinhalas it had been different from the days of king Pandukabhaya. It was king Pandukabhaya who did away with the vansas of kings and gothras of peoples and established a nation that came to be called the Sinhalas who not only had a common language, a common culture, a common king who spoke the language of the people (unlike the earlier kings of England who spoke French) and a common way of life. There was a one to one correspondence between the king and his people and the large number of inscriptions by the kings found all over the island in Sinhala bear ample testimony to this fact. Perhaps there were only two nation states in whole of the ancient world that being the Sinhalas and the Chinese. How many inscriptions in Tamil can be found in the Jaffna peninsula? The absence of such inscriptions in general implies that either the kings did not speak Tamil or the people did not speak Tamil. In either case it is wrong to say that the kingdom of the Arya Chackravarthins was a Tamil kingdom.
The Sinhala people previously comprised of kings of different vansas and people of different gothras, and we may infer that the kings belonging to the SinhaVansa gave the name Sinhala to the new nation. We may conclude from all these and the story on Pandukabhaya that the king Pandukabhaya belonged to the Sinha Vansa but had the support of the yaksha gothra beside that of the nagas and the devas living in the country at that time. It is not necessary to give Pandukabhaya a yaksha birth as some people try to do in order to explain the origin of the Sinhala nation. It is very unlikely a yaksha king would have given the name Sinhala to the nation he established and those who talk of the yaksha beginnings of the king have had to resort to fancy interpretations to the word Sinhala in the process.
As Prof. Indrapala had noted before he became a "prisoner" of the Tamil terrorists, there were no permanent Tamil settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century meaning of course settlements of people who spoke Tamil as a language and not of an ethnic community as such. Tamils in this period even in India did not constitute an ethnic group but a group of people speaking the Tamil language. The population of the Jaffna peninsula when the Arya Chakravarthins came to Jaffna would have been Sinhala with some Velakkaras who spoke Malayalam. The Arya Chakravarthins would have established a Vassal state under the king of Sinhale that being the kingdom of the Sinhala people and the Sinhala king, and ruled over the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras. It is very likely that the Arya Chakravarthins followed the pattern of the Dambadiva or Bharat kings and established a Vansa kingdom though under the Sinhala king rather than a nation state or even a gothra state. There would not have been any one to one correspondence between the kings and the people and until the Dutch brought the Tamils for their tobacco cultivation there would not have been many Tamil speaking people in the Jaffna peninsula. When Vijaya and other kings of Sinha and other vansas came to Sri Lanka they also would have established their little kingdoms in the same manner most probably following a system that the Aryans began. It was this Bharat or Dambadiva tradition that all these rulers had brought to Sri Lanka at various times without taking into consideration that in Sri Lanka already gothra or national kingdoms (after king Pandukabhaya) had been established. In a gothra kingdom the king or the ruler belonged to the same gothra of the people whom he ruled and it was most probably this tradition that inspired king Pandukabhaya to establish a nation state after defeating some other princes who belonged either to the Sinha or the Sakya vansas. Pandukabhaya did not create a so called feudal kingdom uniting all the gothra kingdoms as some pundits who can look at the world only through the spectacles of the westerners claim, but established what we may call a nation state, though not on the western Christian modernity model, following the model of the gothra kingdoms which were in this part of the world before the Aryans and hence the Dravidians came to what is now known as South Asia.
After the Arya Chakravarthins lost to the Portuguese nothing significant would have happened to the population pattern in the Jaffna peninsula until the Dutch brought the Tamil speaking Vellalas for the tobacco cultivation. There would have been a Sinhala population with Vellakaras and may be a few Tamil speaking people. The Vellalas in Sri Lanka managed to organise themselves as the leading cast among the population as farmers and not as agricultural labourers, sometime after they had permanently settled down in Jaffna. This itself is different from the caste system (Varna) in Bharath where Brahmins are the leading cast. It is clear that the Vellalas have been influenced by the Sinhala society after the Europeans especially the British came to this country in which goigama cast was given preference. Also I am told that the Tamil spoken by the Tamils in Jaffna is not very much different from that spoken in Tamil Nadu and the separation of the two languages does not differ by more than three hundred and fifty years. The Thesavalamai was codified by the Dutch in 1707 to prevent the agricultural labourers going back to India after the harvest and together with Prof. Indrapala’s earlier observation that there were no permanent Tamil (speaking) settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century it is not difficult to argue that the origin of the Tamils in Sri Lanka is very much closer to the twentieth century than many people try to figure out. After the Vellalas settled down permanently, with their majority in Jaffna they would have established a Tamil speaking community with the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras who had been living there becoming different casts of the Tamil speaking community. It may be that they formed into an "ethnic community" of some sort and not only a population speaking Tamil language following the Sinhala people who had by that time lived as a nation for more than two thousand years, during the British period. In any event it was the British who created the Tamil ethnic group by identifying them as a nation. The British first considered the Sinhalas and Tamils as the two majority nations to undermine the Sinhalas but when they realised that it was ridiculous to call the Tamils a majority nation they created the concepts of majority and minority nations and called the Tamils a minority. In any event it was the British who introduced the concept of ethnicity to people other than the Sinhalas, in Sri Lanka as well as in India and the only people who had been conscious of the fact of being a nation before the British introduced this concept in the region were the Sinhalas.
Now let us look into the history of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. What is the origin of the present Tamil population in Sri Lanka and in Jaffna in particular? Before the Vellalas were brought by the Dutch who populated the Jaffna peninsula? Before the Dutch the Portuguese ruled this area who conquered it by the name of the Arya Chakravarthins. There is no evidence to show that the Arya Chakravarthins were Tamils as there had not been a Tamil ethnic community in the twelfth, thirteenth centuries in any part of the world. The use of Tamil as a language does not necessarily imply the existence of an ethnic community by that name whether in India or Sri Lanka or any other place. The pundits who take extra care to show that Aryan refers to a language group and not an ethnic community should take this into consideration. In Dambadiva or Bharath there were no ethnic communities as such and kingdoms were identified by the vansa of the kings. From ancient times we know of Sakya, Liccavi, Maurya, Chera, Pandya, Soli, and Pallava kings but not of ethnic communities. Also various languages and dialects have been used to identify groups of people but not their ethnicity. As a result Tamil speaking people have been ruled by Pandya, Soli, Pallava kings and conversely Pallavas and others have ruled over various other communities speaking different languages. The kings were not identified with the community ruled by them and there was no one to one correspondence between the vansa of the kings and their subjects. Even if the language spoken by the Arya Chakravarthins was Tamil there is no evidence to show that the people who lived in the Jaffna peninsula in the thirteenth century spoke Tamil let alone them being identified as a Tamil ethnic community.
In the case of the Sinhalas it had been different from the days of king Pandukabhaya. It was king Pandukabhaya who did away with the vansas of kings and gothras of peoples and established a nation that came to be called the Sinhalas who not only had a common language, a common culture, a common king who spoke the language of the people (unlike the earlier kings of England who spoke French) and a common way of life. There was a one to one correspondence between the king and his people and the large number of inscriptions by the kings found all over the island in Sinhala bear ample testimony to this fact. Perhaps there were only two nation states in whole of the ancient world that being the Sinhalas and the Chinese. How many inscriptions in Tamil can be found in the Jaffna peninsula? The absence of such inscriptions in general implies that either the kings did not speak Tamil or the people did not speak Tamil. In either case it is wrong to say that the kingdom of the Arya Chackravarthins was a Tamil kingdom.
The Sinhala people previously comprised of kings of different vansas and people of different gothras, and we may infer that the kings belonging to the SinhaVansa gave the name Sinhala to the new nation. We may conclude from all these and the story on Pandukabhaya that the king Pandukabhaya belonged to the Sinha Vansa but had the support of the yaksha gothra beside that of the nagas and the devas living in the country at that time. It is not necessary to give Pandukabhaya a yaksha birth as some people try to do in order to explain the origin of the Sinhala nation. It is very unlikely a yaksha king would have given the name Sinhala to the nation he established and those who talk of the yaksha beginnings of the king have had to resort to fancy interpretations to the word Sinhala in the process.
As Prof. Indrapala had noted before he became a "prisoner" of the Tamil terrorists, there were no permanent Tamil settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century meaning of course settlements of people who spoke Tamil as a language and not of an ethnic community as such. Tamils in this period even in India did not constitute an ethnic group but a group of people speaking the Tamil language. The population of the Jaffna peninsula when the Arya Chakravarthins came to Jaffna would have been Sinhala with some Velakkaras who spoke Malayalam. The Arya Chakravarthins would have established a Vassal state under the king of Sinhale that being the kingdom of the Sinhala people and the Sinhala king, and ruled over the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras. It is very likely that the Arya Chakravarthins followed the pattern of the Dambadiva or Bharat kings and established a Vansa kingdom though under the Sinhala king rather than a nation state or even a gothra state. There would not have been any one to one correspondence between the kings and the people and until the Dutch brought the Tamils for their tobacco cultivation there would not have been many Tamil speaking people in the Jaffna peninsula. When Vijaya and other kings of Sinha and other vansas came to Sri Lanka they also would have established their little kingdoms in the same manner most probably following a system that the Aryans began. It was this Bharat or Dambadiva tradition that all these rulers had brought to Sri Lanka at various times without taking into consideration that in Sri Lanka already gothra or national kingdoms (after king Pandukabhaya) had been established. In a gothra kingdom the king or the ruler belonged to the same gothra of the people whom he ruled and it was most probably this tradition that inspired king Pandukabhaya to establish a nation state after defeating some other princes who belonged either to the Sinha or the Sakya vansas. Pandukabhaya did not create a so called feudal kingdom uniting all the gothra kingdoms as some pundits who can look at the world only through the spectacles of the westerners claim, but established what we may call a nation state, though not on the western Christian modernity model, following the model of the gothra kingdoms which were in this part of the world before the Aryans and hence the Dravidians came to what is now known as South Asia.
After the Arya Chakravarthins lost to the Portuguese nothing significant would have happened to the population pattern in the Jaffna peninsula until the Dutch brought the Tamil speaking Vellalas for the tobacco cultivation. There would have been a Sinhala population with Vellakaras and may be a few Tamil speaking people. The Vellalas in Sri Lanka managed to organise themselves as the leading cast among the population as farmers and not as agricultural labourers, sometime after they had permanently settled down in Jaffna. This itself is different from the caste system (Varna) in Bharath where Brahmins are the leading cast. It is clear that the Vellalas have been influenced by the Sinhala society after the Europeans especially the British came to this country in which goigama cast was given preference. Also I am told that the Tamil spoken by the Tamils in Jaffna is not very much different from that spoken in Tamil Nadu and the separation of the two languages does not differ by more than three hundred and fifty years. The Thesavalamai was codified by the Dutch in 1707 to prevent the agricultural labourers going back to India after the harvest and together with Prof. Indrapala’s earlier observation that there were no permanent Tamil (speaking) settlements in Sri Lanka before the twelfth century it is not difficult to argue that the origin of the Tamils in Sri Lanka is very much closer to the twentieth century than many people try to figure out. After the Vellalas settled down permanently, with their majority in Jaffna they would have established a Tamil speaking community with the Sinhalas and the Velakkaras who had been living there becoming different casts of the Tamil speaking community. It may be that they formed into an "ethnic community" of some sort and not only a population speaking Tamil language following the Sinhala people who had by that time lived as a nation for more than two thousand years, during the British period. In any event it was the British who created the Tamil ethnic group by identifying them as a nation. The British first considered the Sinhalas and Tamils as the two majority nations to undermine the Sinhalas but when they realised that it was ridiculous to call the Tamils a majority nation they created the concepts of majority and minority nations and called the Tamils a minority. In any event it was the British who introduced the concept of ethnicity to people other than the Sinhalas, in Sri Lanka as well as in India and the only people who had been conscious of the fact of being a nation before the British introduced this concept in the region were the Sinhalas.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Why separate state in Sri Lanka is an Impractical goal
The Embassy of Sri Lanka, responding to an extensive disinformation campaign regarding the history of Sri Lanka, being carried out by the separatist lobby in the US and elsewhere, has developed a PowerPoint program, with authentic historical information on pertinent issues.
For instance:
* According to the “Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of Ceylon”, Portuguese Historian De Queyros (Book I; page 101), by the early 16th Century, the island was divided into 5 sub-kingdoms; “that of Cota (Kotte) to which all others were tributary (subordinate) acknowledging the King as Emperor.” One such Sub-Kingdom with a Sub-Ruler was Jaffnapatnam.
* Rev. Phillipus Baldeus, the Dutch historian, who lived in Jaffna for many years around 1658 A.D., stated that the ruler of Jaffna had jurisdiction over a limited area in the north, including Jaffnapattnam, the adjacent isles and the island of Mannar.
* Robert Knox, the Englishman, who landed in Kottiyar in the Trincomalee District in 1659 A.D., was apprehended by the Dissawa of Tambalegam (Tambalagama or Tampalakamam), and was produced before the King in Kandy.
These, among other authentic historical facts, prove that the statement in the Vadukkodai Resolution of 1976 that Tamils were in possession of the northern and eastern provinces from the dawn of history, is a myth.
These facts prove that the East was never a part of a Tamil Kingdom, as the separatist lobby falsely claims.
The PowerPoint program presents a better understanding of the history of the island and the myths surrounding the conflict.
http://www.slembassyusa.org/features/2008/why_a_separate_27jun08.pdf
For instance:
* According to the “Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of Ceylon”, Portuguese Historian De Queyros (Book I; page 101), by the early 16th Century, the island was divided into 5 sub-kingdoms; “that of Cota (Kotte) to which all others were tributary (subordinate) acknowledging the King as Emperor.” One such Sub-Kingdom with a Sub-Ruler was Jaffnapatnam.
* Rev. Phillipus Baldeus, the Dutch historian, who lived in Jaffna for many years around 1658 A.D., stated that the ruler of Jaffna had jurisdiction over a limited area in the north, including Jaffnapattnam, the adjacent isles and the island of Mannar.
* Robert Knox, the Englishman, who landed in Kottiyar in the Trincomalee District in 1659 A.D., was apprehended by the Dissawa of Tambalegam (Tambalagama or Tampalakamam), and was produced before the King in Kandy.
These, among other authentic historical facts, prove that the statement in the Vadukkodai Resolution of 1976 that Tamils were in possession of the northern and eastern provinces from the dawn of history, is a myth.
These facts prove that the East was never a part of a Tamil Kingdom, as the separatist lobby falsely claims.
The PowerPoint program presents a better understanding of the history of the island and the myths surrounding the conflict.
http://www.slembassyusa.org/features/2008/why_a_separate_27jun08.pdf
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Obituary - Tamil Eelam (1922-2009)
Obituary - Tamil Eelam (1922-2009)
Sep 29th, 2008
By 2009 Tamil Elam would have survived for 87 long, miserable years and died. The mythical state that was built on myths, deception, lies, terror and rubbish would have ended the promise of a modern day Chola kingdom for many Tamil racist elements around the world. This is an ideal opportunity to look back at the history of the mythical state not because it has anything of note, but rather because its evolution into a large terroristan may be emulated by many other separatist groups.
Tamil Eelam was conceived in the mind of the great scholar Sir Ponnambalam Arunachalam in 1922. He unveiled his brainchild in 1922 at the gathering of his Ceylon Tamil League. He stated in no uncertain terms that Tamil Eelam must be achieved by Tamil people. “We should keep alive and propagate these ideals throughout Ceylon and promote the union and solidarity of what we have been proud to call Tamil Eelam.”(source:Tamilnation.org; http://www.tamilnation.org/selfdetermination/tamileelam/2200arunachalam.htm).
Unfortunately for the movement, he died two years later. However, his movement survived. It merged with the other racist current that was forming at that time. In 1918 Tamil leaders headed by The Jaffna Association demanded a race-based representation from the British to be established in Sri Lanka instead of a territorial representation system. They wanted equal representation by Tamils as the Sinhalese although their population percentage was just a fraction of the Sinhala population. This came into prominence as the 50/50 demand.
Each of these ultra racist demands complimented the other and they started a long journey towards Tamil Eelam. Aggression of Tamil race-based political parties increased from 1947 to 1977 and culminated in 1977 when the TULF unashamedly advocated violence as the only viable means of achieving Tamil Eelam. By that time the first shots have already been fired by the LTTE. Since then it was a rickety ascend for the LTTE. From stalemate to stalemate, the LTTE survived and increased its fighting capability. LTTE’s journey towards Tamil Eelam received an unprecedented uplift in 2002 when the Sri Lankan government accepted the existence of a de facto state in parts of the North and the East where the LTTE wielded its cruel control. In 2006 this nation commenced its planned response to LTTE aggression.
The present one is undoubtedly the longest sustained military campaign which is not over yet. Operations started in 1983 took a big step backwards in 1985 when military plans were redrawn following a halt for Thimpu talks. Conflict resumed thereafter only to be halted in mid 1987. IPKF was active from late 1987 to 1989 after which they had to pack-up and leave. Operations started in mid 1990 were of very short duration and by late 1992 a stalemate had set in. Offensive operations commenced again in late 1993 that ended in early 1994. After a period of honeymoon the CBK administration recommenced operations in mid 1995 that ended by January next year until the historical Mulaitivu attack restarted operations in mid 1996. Amidst large-scale reversals these operations continued till late 1999. When accounted for reversals, the length of success of security forces is much shortened.
Unlike past operations, the present operation is not ‘fatigued’. In fact the opposite is true; the offensive capabilities and firepower had steadily increased along with aggression. Fatigue on the part of a conventional army is something all guerrilla groups look out for. If it is not forthcoming within a reasonable time within which the guerrilla group can sustain itself, things look bleak for them. Sri Lankan war witnessed a classic stalemate by late 1999 that eventually ended up in the Norwegian brokered CFA (Ceasefire Agreement) in 2002.
What are purported as military victories catalyst public support for war on one hand and on the other public support instigate more and more military victories. This rhythm or the vicious cycle as some call it has been the biggest invention of this government. That has been the key driver behind their political and military success. It had a major impact on other political parties as well. UNP split into two groups of heavyweights and the remaining UNP took a militaristic stand at the last election. A similar thing happened to the JVP. Although it’s Marxist hardcore want to disperse the war in favour of public welfare, it is torn between the war and workers’ short term welfare.
At the same time the government managed to promote its regional allies in the North and the East against traditional political parties (and their residue) in these areas. Without a doubt these parties will yield enormous clout at future national elections.
The demise of the LTTE is the collective outcome of all these interconnected developments.
Those who preached that there is no military resolution to the conflict quietly swallowed their own words. The war is not over yet; it will not end with the liberation of Kilinochchi, but the ability to find a lasting solution is far greater today than ever before mainly through military means.
Tamil Elam is near its end and there is little doubt that its death would be a violent one. However, the myth of Tamil Eelam will continue to live in the minds of Tamil racist elements throughout the world like a monster in a horror movie that emerges from part to part. Following the war, there should be a political solution that can dissolve all possibilities of Tamil Eelam. The political solution should not be a one that can provide breeding grounds for Tamil Eelam; instead it should be something that necessitates the complete breakdown of Tamil Eelam for the development of Sri Lanka. If Tamil nationality, Tamil sovereignty and Tamil right of self-determination are the aspirations towards Tamil Elam, a successful political solution should destroy each and every one of these aspirations completely. That will be the burial of Tamil Eelam.
by Dilrook Kannangara
source:Lankaweb
Sep 29th, 2008
By 2009 Tamil Elam would have survived for 87 long, miserable years and died. The mythical state that was built on myths, deception, lies, terror and rubbish would have ended the promise of a modern day Chola kingdom for many Tamil racist elements around the world. This is an ideal opportunity to look back at the history of the mythical state not because it has anything of note, but rather because its evolution into a large terroristan may be emulated by many other separatist groups.
Tamil Eelam was conceived in the mind of the great scholar Sir Ponnambalam Arunachalam in 1922. He unveiled his brainchild in 1922 at the gathering of his Ceylon Tamil League. He stated in no uncertain terms that Tamil Eelam must be achieved by Tamil people. “We should keep alive and propagate these ideals throughout Ceylon and promote the union and solidarity of what we have been proud to call Tamil Eelam.”(source:Tamilnation.org; http://www.tamilnation.org/selfdetermination/tamileelam/2200arunachalam.htm).
Unfortunately for the movement, he died two years later. However, his movement survived. It merged with the other racist current that was forming at that time. In 1918 Tamil leaders headed by The Jaffna Association demanded a race-based representation from the British to be established in Sri Lanka instead of a territorial representation system. They wanted equal representation by Tamils as the Sinhalese although their population percentage was just a fraction of the Sinhala population. This came into prominence as the 50/50 demand.
Each of these ultra racist demands complimented the other and they started a long journey towards Tamil Eelam. Aggression of Tamil race-based political parties increased from 1947 to 1977 and culminated in 1977 when the TULF unashamedly advocated violence as the only viable means of achieving Tamil Eelam. By that time the first shots have already been fired by the LTTE. Since then it was a rickety ascend for the LTTE. From stalemate to stalemate, the LTTE survived and increased its fighting capability. LTTE’s journey towards Tamil Eelam received an unprecedented uplift in 2002 when the Sri Lankan government accepted the existence of a de facto state in parts of the North and the East where the LTTE wielded its cruel control. In 2006 this nation commenced its planned response to LTTE aggression.
The present one is undoubtedly the longest sustained military campaign which is not over yet. Operations started in 1983 took a big step backwards in 1985 when military plans were redrawn following a halt for Thimpu talks. Conflict resumed thereafter only to be halted in mid 1987. IPKF was active from late 1987 to 1989 after which they had to pack-up and leave. Operations started in mid 1990 were of very short duration and by late 1992 a stalemate had set in. Offensive operations commenced again in late 1993 that ended in early 1994. After a period of honeymoon the CBK administration recommenced operations in mid 1995 that ended by January next year until the historical Mulaitivu attack restarted operations in mid 1996. Amidst large-scale reversals these operations continued till late 1999. When accounted for reversals, the length of success of security forces is much shortened.
Unlike past operations, the present operation is not ‘fatigued’. In fact the opposite is true; the offensive capabilities and firepower had steadily increased along with aggression. Fatigue on the part of a conventional army is something all guerrilla groups look out for. If it is not forthcoming within a reasonable time within which the guerrilla group can sustain itself, things look bleak for them. Sri Lankan war witnessed a classic stalemate by late 1999 that eventually ended up in the Norwegian brokered CFA (Ceasefire Agreement) in 2002.
What are purported as military victories catalyst public support for war on one hand and on the other public support instigate more and more military victories. This rhythm or the vicious cycle as some call it has been the biggest invention of this government. That has been the key driver behind their political and military success. It had a major impact on other political parties as well. UNP split into two groups of heavyweights and the remaining UNP took a militaristic stand at the last election. A similar thing happened to the JVP. Although it’s Marxist hardcore want to disperse the war in favour of public welfare, it is torn between the war and workers’ short term welfare.
At the same time the government managed to promote its regional allies in the North and the East against traditional political parties (and their residue) in these areas. Without a doubt these parties will yield enormous clout at future national elections.
The demise of the LTTE is the collective outcome of all these interconnected developments.
Those who preached that there is no military resolution to the conflict quietly swallowed their own words. The war is not over yet; it will not end with the liberation of Kilinochchi, but the ability to find a lasting solution is far greater today than ever before mainly through military means.
Tamil Elam is near its end and there is little doubt that its death would be a violent one. However, the myth of Tamil Eelam will continue to live in the minds of Tamil racist elements throughout the world like a monster in a horror movie that emerges from part to part. Following the war, there should be a political solution that can dissolve all possibilities of Tamil Eelam. The political solution should not be a one that can provide breeding grounds for Tamil Eelam; instead it should be something that necessitates the complete breakdown of Tamil Eelam for the development of Sri Lanka. If Tamil nationality, Tamil sovereignty and Tamil right of self-determination are the aspirations towards Tamil Elam, a successful political solution should destroy each and every one of these aspirations completely. That will be the burial of Tamil Eelam.
by Dilrook Kannangara
source:Lankaweb
Eelam history had to be fabricated – Why?
Left: Map of the Kingdom of Jaffnapatnum by Phillipus Baldaeus 1672 AD
Right: Map by Sieur Sansen 1652 AD showing nine principalities including Imperio de Cota (Imperial Kotte)
Kingdom of Jaffnapatnum
"Traditional Homelands" The Verdict of Cartographic History
The following is an extract from an article published by A. Denis. N. Fernando, Fellow of the National Academy of Sciences and Recipient of the 11th RAS medal.
The idea of "traditional homelands of the Tamil speaking people" is based on the argument that the Northern Province and Eastern Province in their entireties were occupied by Tamil people for very long periods, if not throughout history: and that therefore these areas are theirs by right and that they had a distinct and separate political identity from the rest of the country. This concept is being repeated so often, and even the newspapers have ceased to refer to a "Northern Province" and an "Eastern Province" and now talk of a "North East"; that by such repetition they are tending to be accepted as incontestable facts. Goebells was the master of the art of repeating lies often enough to have them eventually accepted as truths CYPRIANO SANCHEZ (c 1560 AD) rendered during the Portuguese era indicates that there were nine principalities in Sri Lanka with only one of them indicated as "emperor"- Imperio de Cota or Emperor of Kotte. These nine principalities were; Imperio de Cota (Imperial King of Kotte), Reino de Ceitaabaca (Ruler of Sitawaka), Reino de Candea (Ruler of Kandy), Reino de Jaffnapatnum (Ruler of Jaffna), Reino de Setra Coralas (Ruler of Seven Korales), Chilao Reino (Ruler of Chilaw), Reino de Triquilemale (Ruler of Trincomalee), Reino de Baticalou (Ruler of Batticaloa, Reino de Yala (Ruler of Yala).
Map by Sieur Sansen 1652 AD showing nine principalities including Imperio de Cota (Imperial Kotte)
This map is supported by the French Cartographer Sieur Sansen's map of 1652. Reference is also made to the writings of Joannes Hugo Linschoten of Netherlands (c 1750) who relates his voyage to the portuguese Indies with the Bishop of Goa where he too states that there were nine principalities in Ceylon, the most powerful king being Cota (Kotte) to which annual tribute was paid by the others who are named as Janasapitan (Jaffna), Trinquinamale, Batecalon, Villassen (Wellassa), Tenanaka (Denawaka), Laula (Yala), Cande and Galle.
The first detailed map of Jaffna Principality and adjacent islands was that of Rev. Phillipus Baldeas (1672) (first map shown at begining) is clear that the Kingdom of Jaffna did not extend to the mainland, but was confined to the Peninsula and the islands.
Peninsular Jaffna came into prominence with the break up of the Vijayanagara Empire, especially after the downfall of the Polonnaruwa Kingdom. Remnants of the armies of the South Indian invaders settled down in Jaffna and the Vavunia area in particular.
With the introduction of Tobacco by the Portuguese, economic prosperity came to the North. The encouragement given by the Portuguese and the Dutch to small holders to grow tobacco brought in large numbers of entrepreneurs, who mainly came from the Coromandel coast and settled in Peninsular Jaffna. They brought with them their familiar technology of the well and the shadaff, using slaves to draw water into the fields. This was the time when the population of Jaffna grew rapidly. It has been recorded by Percival (1805) in his book "An account of the island of Ceylon" and by others that there were more foreigners in Jaffna than the people who were native to Jaffna. These "foreigners" were those who came from the Coromandel to grow tobacco. The legacy of the tobacco boom in Jaffna is reflected in the 80,000 odd wells that have been used and are still being used for irrigation.
Dutch Admiral Jois van Spilberge landed at Batticaloa in 1602 and he had to visit the Court of Kandy through Mahiyangana and Madamahanuwara to meet King Wimala Dharma Suriya to discuss political relationships. He did not go to the court of Jaffna even if there was one then. Likewise a few years later Robert Knox who landed at Koddiyar Bay (Trincomalee) was taken prisoner by the dissawa of Tambulegam (who was under the suzeeiainty of Kandy) and brought to the court of Kandy.
Another mission that landed at Trincomalee was that of the French under Admiral de la Haige in March, 1672, when the French envoy Capt. Nanclair de Lanerolle was sent to Kandy, who was clapped in jail by the King for being arrogant in the Kings presence and who later settled down in Kandy.
The British mission of John Pybus went from Trincomalee to the court of Kandy in 1762.
All this and other evidence proves that it was the Kingdom of Kandy that ruled over the Eastern Province and that the Kingdom of Jaffnapatnum was restricted to the Jaffna peninsula and the islands, and paid tribute to the more powerful rulers of Kotte and then Kandy.
The territorial claims of the Tamil Terrorist's to parts of the East and West have no historical basis. Therefore they say that parts of the East and the West are" Home Lands" because Tamil speaking people live in these areas. This definition would also include the Tamil suburbs of Colombo, London, Paris etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)