Let us All Go Back Home to Africa
April 12th, 2008
By: Dr. Rajasingham Narendran
“Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”-George Weber
V.Suryanarayanan, in his recent article in the Sri Lanka Guardian (4th April’08) cites a conversation narrated in the novel, ‘When Memory Dies’ by A.Sivanandan. Uncle Para tells Vijay,” When memory dies a people die”. Vijay asks Uncle Para, “But if we make false memories”? Uncle Para responds,” That’s worse, that is murder”. The Sinhala socio-political leadership in Sri Lanka have been aggressively involved for a long time in constructing a history for the Sinhala people, to prove they are a distinct people, the original inhabitants of the island, different from the Tamils, unique in their origins and ordained by Lord Buddha himself to be the inheritors of this island and be the custodians of Buddhism in its pristine form. The indigenous Tamils on the other hand have been forced to seek proof of their long presence in the Island stretching into the mists of antiquity and the Sinhalese as a people evolved from a proto-Tamil or Dravidian base. While the Tamil version of history enunciates common origins and inclusiveness, the Sinhala versions, which have been continuously burnished and manipulated, have sought to stress exclusivity. The concerted efforts made by various sinister elements in Sinhala society to erase traces and sometimes-substantial evidence of island-wide Tamil presence in ancient times, has been the most unsavoury aspect of the political and social evolution of independent Sri Lanka
Sinhala history which had considered Prince Vijaya and his 700 followers, who had arrived on the shores of Lanka in 543 BC from Bengal or northwest India (Gujarat-Punjab), as the progenitors of the Sinhala people until recently, has in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary, harked back much further to claim that King Ravana (of Ramayana fame) and his people were their progenitors. They have staked this claim following the discovery of skeletal remains and tools of the ‘Balangoda Man’, which indicated the island was inhabited from as early as 125,000 BC. Ravana, who had been seen until now as a Dravidian by the Tamils and hence their kin, is in the process of being Sinhalized. Ravana could have been the common ancestor of both the Sinhalese and Tamils, and this would reinforce the Tamil theory of common origins. However, according to some Sinhala versions of history being currently peddled, Tamil settlements began only in the 10th century A.D, following invasions from the Tamil heartland in South India. Some politically motivated Sinhala pseudo-historians even trace the origins of the Tamils of Sri Lanka to the colonial period that commenced in the 16th century A.D and the beginnings of the plantation economy. The indegenous Tamils of course vehemently refute this version of pseudo-history that is being constructed and embellished to serve the needs of Sinhala politicians, exclusivists and extremists of the present time.
Being a Tamil, convinced of my origins shrouded in the mist enveloping ancient Lanka’s history, proud of my heritage as a Tamil and vehement in my claims to co-ownership of the island, I have sought a rational explanation for my origins and those of my fellow citizens in Lanka, both on the basis of scientific facts and historical sources outside our island. The outcome should be considered the efforts of an inquisitive man, interested in the affairs of his land and her welfare. Being isolated for a large proportion of our known history in our small island, we have to a large extent become the proverbial ‘frog in the well’ that was unable to accept the realities in the world beyond its narrow confines and hence fought to death the much traveled frog that fell into his small well and told bewildering stories of a much wider world! It should be however remembered the coastal areas of Sri Lanka have been at the cross roads of world commerce and adventurers for several millennia and this would have had a significant impact on our national make-up. For instance, our president Mahinda Rajapakse and his brothers have the facial features typical of Malays! Being a scientist by training I also sought evidence from DNA studies that are the most current scientific tool available to trace human origins, population migrations and population intermingling. It should be noted that although DNA studies are valuable tools, their correct application and interpretation are yet difficult. It has been an exhilarating voyage of discovery that has reinforced the truth expounded in the following lines in a Tamil poem from the Purananuru (500 BC) which states, ” Let everyone know, to us all towns are ours, all men our kin—-”
The DNA in our chromosomes is an unbroken link to our ancestors, populations and relatives. Large-scale studies have demonstrated the gene pool is not a simple sum of genes, but is a dynamic system, which is hierarchically organized and which maintains the memory of past events in the history of populations. All genetic information has a historical, anthropological, geographical and statistical context. It is now well established that 95% of the nuclear genome-genes in the cellular nucleus- consist of unique or low copy sequences and moderate to highly repetitive nucleic acid sequences. The remaining 5% code for proteins. The non-coding genome, whose biological function is not clearly defined, is equally vulnerable to mutations and is a goldmine for anthropological and population genetic studies.
In population genetic studies involving DNA, genes that express characteristics such as the colour of hair, eyes, skin, etc, are studied. These genes, also called haplogroups, have been found to be present in sub-Saharan Africa and many occur only there. The haplogroups of populations living outside Africa are merely a subset of those existing in Africa. This is considered strong evidence for human origin in Africa and reinforces the long held anthropological theory on ‘out of Africa’ human evolution. On the basis of these findings it has been surmised that the differences between so-called ‘races’ are in fact to a large extent local genetic adaptations to environmental factors, acquired over dozens to hundreds of generations of residence. Race is now considered not a cultural construct, but a physical reality .Only the interpretation of some races as ‘lower or higher’, ‘more stupid or more intelligent’ and ‘better or worse’ is a cultural construct of those with a Nazi-like mentality. The example of German anthropologist Egon Freiherr von Eickstedt is noteworthy to exemplify this aspect of cultural constructs. He identified ‘primitive chimpanzoid type’ among the Andamanese Onge people and the ‘phylogenetically lowest type’ he knew among the Veddhoid Paniyer people of southern India. However, the same professor captioned a shapely Andamanese girl as ‘well proportioned, i.e. europiforme, shape’. The ‘Europiforme’ was no doubt, the professor’s own shape in his own opinion, according to the author of this citation.
The Negrito (little Negro in Spanish referring to the ‘Pygmy’) people in the Andaman Islands are now considered an ancient, if not the most ancient, component in the prehistoric peopling of Asia by anatomically modern humans. Many anthropologists believe humans migrated out of Africa in waves. More than a million years ago, Humanity’s primitive ancestors known as Homo erectus, walked out of Africa to colonize Europe, the Middle East and the rest of Asia. Several hundreds of thousands of years later a second wave of more sophisticated tool-using humans-Homo sapiens, migrated out of Africa and overwhelmed those earlier ancestors. Modern humans are descended from these tool-users. Genetic studies confirm the inhabitants of the Andaman Islands are the direct descendants of the first modern human to have inhabited Asia. Their physical features-short stature, dark skin, peppercorn hair and large buttocks are characteristics of African Pygmies. Although they look like they belong to Africa, they are currently in this island chain in the middle of the Indian ocean!
As the first humans evolved and spread out of Africa in various directions, they evolved into human types- of different colours, heights and other physical characteristics- to suit the environment in which they found themselves. The natural selection process favouring the most fit to survive in a given environment played its role in creating a divergence in physical characteristics. The original Homo sapien population was dark, and in this case, the ‘White’ (leucoderm) and the ‘Yellow ‘(xanthoderm) races resulted from depigmentation. Current genetic studies point to the likelihood that the Negritos were groups of people living in a large area of tropical Asia, tens of thousands of years ago, when new and more aggressive immigrants arrived to push the ancestral Negritos into remoter jungle areas. In such a scenario, the Negritos groups lost contact with each other, leaving us today with only widely separated population remnants. The surviving groups of people related to the Negritos are the Veddhas of Sri Lanka and the Veddhoid (Veddha-like people) living in tiny groups all over southern India and southeast Asia. Incidentally, the word Veddha seems to have been derived from the Tamil word ‘Verdhar’ used in reference to hunting tribes.
In 1288AD and again in 1293AD, the Venetian traveler Marco Polo visited the Pandian Kingdom and left a vivid description of the land and its people. Polo exclaimed, “The darkest man is here the most highly esteemed and considered better than the others who are not so dark. Let me add that in very truth these people portray and depict their gods and their idols black and their devils white as snow. For they say that god and all saints are black and their devils are all white.” Black was indeed beautiful in the Dravidian Tamil heartland of the Pandias. George Azario Moreno, the renowned anthropologist concluded the Dravidians may not have had a common origin. He asserts that both Ethiopia/ Africa in the west and Australoids and Melenesians from the east may figure in their origin. He says that the Dravidians did not come from any where in particular. They probably evolved continuously in-situ in the subcontinent from the population of Homo erectus that left Africa. There is unequivocal evidence of Homo erectus in Java (Indonesia). Clearly, Homo erectus must have passed through the subcontinent to get there. There is fossil evidence to back this, in the form of the Narmada find, which dates back 100,000 to 180,000 years and suggests the species could have spread continuously from Africa to East Asia. The Andaman Islanders are probably antecedent to Melenesians and Australoids. The reason why Dravidians have ‘finer’ features than Negritos ,Australoids and the Melenesians , is explained by him as due to new elements that entered the gene pool in the Indus Valley Civilization from Mesopotamia (the closest civilization at that time), or other nearby places (Somalia, Ethiopia and Egypt) thousands of years ago.
Dr. Clyde Winters has identified the Nagas as great seamen who ruled much of India, Sri Lanka and Burma. He deduces that the Naga probably came from Kush-Punt/ Ethiopia. According to Kebra Negast the Indian empire ruled by the Naga, corresponded to the Naga colonies in the Deccan and on the east coast between the Kaviri and Vaigai rivers. The major Naga tribes were the Maravar, Eyinar, Oliyar, Oviyar, Aru-Valur and Parathavar. The Nagas of Sri Lanka -also mentioned in the Mahavamsa- are said to have later become Dravidians as testified by the names of these people-Naganathan, Nagaratnam, Nagarajah, Nagendran, Nagalingam, Nagamma, etc. Dravidian literature indicates that the Naga may have introduced Kali, the serpent, Murugan, Spear/ Lance and the Sun or Krishna worship. It is interesting that a God called Murungu and the lance are worshipped by many people in East Africa. It is also fascinating that Krishna, meaning black, is analogous to the meaning of ‘Khous’ of the Kushites. The so-called Aryans perceived the Nagas as half men and snake. The Tamils knew them as warriors who used the bow and noose. William Jones a hundred years ago had pointed out that the ancient Ethiopic and Sanskrit writings are similar. The Naga or Ethiopians are supposed to have been defeated by Dravidians from Kumari Nadu. Kumari Nadu (Lemuria) is supposed to have been a large land mass, which connected India with East Africa. This land mass was subsequently submerged in an ancient cataclysm. Dr.Ketheesh Loganathan has noted that the linkage between the African and the Dravidian cannot be dismissed because anyone who sees the Ethiopians and Tamils could see a remarkable physical resemblance. To those outside Sri Lanka the Sinhalese and Tamils look alike. Hence, the Sinhalese cannot be excluded from these linkages. It has been also found that the Indian game of Pallankuli, seen in the Southern Deccan and Sri Lanka, resemble the game of Mancalal-called the African national game. This indicates that the progenitors of the Dravidians carried the game with them from Africa.
The Rev.(Dr) D.J.Kanagaratnam in his book titled ‘ Tamils and cultural pluralism in ancient Sri Lanka’ states, “The Naga and Yaksha people are not only ethnologically linked to the Sinhalese and Tamil people, but have also left their cultural marks on them.—– Hindu and Buddhist iconography with Naga and Yaksha motifs is so vast and numerous. They obviously show the influence of Naga and Yaksha beliefs and cults. The large number of Buddha statues with the protective Naga, the Naga guard stones near Dagobas and shrines and the Buddha statue found along with the Naga and lingam emblems on the banks of ancient tanks have a long story to tell of the Buddhist-Naga interaction and cultural fusion from ancient times.—- The cults of the Siva-Lingam and Nagathambiran and the fertility cults taken over by certain Hindu deities such as Murugan (Skanda), Indra, Pillyar (Ganesha) and Kali bring out vividly the Naga-Hindu interaction.” Samuel Livingston in his book ‘ The Sinhalese of Ceylon and Aryan theory’, states that the emblem of the Nagas was the cobra, sometimes with five heads and that the second visit of Lord Buddha to the island (as described in the Mahavamsa) was to Nagadipa (Jaffna peninsula), where he settled a dispute between the Naga princes, Mahodara and Culodara. He also says the Nagas were in possession of a very advanced civilization, which is reflected in the Tamil words ‘Naharikam’ ( Civilization) and Naharam (Town or City). Livingstone identifies the Yakkas as a Tamil-speaking people, who lived in Sri Lanka at the time of Prince Vijaya’s arrival.
Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (1st century BCE) recorded,” From Ethiopia he (Osiris) passed through Arabia, bordering upon the Red Sea as far as India—-he built many cities in India, one of which he called Nysa, willing to have remembrance of that (Nysa) in Egypt, where he was brought up.” There is also the possibility that there was a reverse migration from India to Africa. Apollonius of Tyrana, who visited India at the end of the first century C.E, was convinced that the “Ethiopians are the colonists sent from India, who follow their forefathers in matters of wisdom.” An early Christian writer Eusebius recorded that, ” In the reign of Amenophis 111 (the mighty Dynasty XV111 Egyptian King) a body of Ethiopians migrated from the country about the Indus and settled in the valley of the Nile.” Another document from ancient times, says, ” India, taken as a whole, beginning from the north and embracing what of it is subject to Persia, is continuation of Egypt and the Ethiopians.”
The Indus Valley Civilization centered in Harrappa and Mohenjadaro (in the present Pakistan) discovered along the Indus river in 1920 is considered one of the three great civilizations that arose in the late fourth and third millennia BC along the Tigris-Euphrates, Nile and Indus rivers. The Indus Valley Civilization was at its peak from about 2200 BC to 1700 BC. It has been now proved that the Indus Valley Civilization was of the Dravidians and that their culture had developed a highly sophisticated way of life. The existence of the Brahui tribe in Baluchistan, to the west of the Indus, who speak a Dravidian language like south Indian Tamils indicates that a migration of people or culture did occur. Brahui is spoken today by large number of people in Baluchistan and the adjoining areas in Afghanistan and Iran. Asko Parpola a scholar on the Indus Valley Civilization concluded Brahui represents remnants of the Dravidian language spoken in the area by descendants of the Harrappan population. Parpola points out several place names in the northwestern region of the present Pakistan, like nagara, palli and pattna have good Dravidian etymologies.
Runoko Rashidi wrote recently that when he was asked about the African presence in Sri Lanka he had said, ” It all depends on what you mean by African. The majority Sinhalese population of Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon) is itself very dark. Then, you have the Tamils from South India residing in Sri Lanka. They also are a very dark people. They are Dravidians with some of them being quite black. These are the Blacks currently fighting the Sinhalese Sri Lankan government for independence or at least a greater degree of autonomy.” He also says the original people of Sri Lanka are generally called Veddhas or Veddhoids and have a strong resemblance to aboriginal Australians. He concludes by stating that in respect to phenotype (Physical appearance) all of these populations are Black.
Many researchers have attempted to untangle the mystery of the origins of the Sinhalese as they seem to have genome contributions from many areas of India. In one study the overall allele frequencies were comparable to Indian populations, but significant differences were also observed. The overall pattern of genetic relationships pointed towards substantial Bengali contribution. The Bengali contribution was 57.49 %, compared to 42.51 of Tamils. There were also pointers to possible North-Western Indian contribution to the Sinhala genome, reducing the Tamil contribution to around 20 %. A subsequent study indicated that the present- day Sinhalese and Tamils of Sri Lanka are closer to Indian Tamils and South Indian Muslims. They are furthest from the Veddhas and quite distant from Gujaratis and Punjabis of northwest India and Bengalis of northeast India. The study of genetic admixture revealed that the Sinhalese have a higher contribution from the Tamils of southern India (69.86%) compared with the Bengalis (25.41%). Whereas the Tamils of Sri Lanka have received a higher contribution from the Sinhalese( 55.2%), compared with the Tamils of India. In may be concluded that if prince Vijaya and his companions were of northwest Indian (Gujarathi and Punjabi) origin, the traces of this decent have been erased by the contributions from Bengal and Tamil Nadu. Similarly the Tamils of Sri Lanka are closer to the Sinhalese because of their proximity historically, linguistically and culturally. A third study involving blood genetic markers, did not reveal any genetic evidence that the Sinhalese population was distinct from those of Tamils of Sri Lanka. It was concluded genetic evidence linking the legendary origin of the Sinhalese to Prince Vijaya and his followers is lacking. Despite the minor differences in the results of these studies, the Sri Lankan Tamil perception that the Sinhalese and Tamils are of common origin stands vindicated.
Samuel Livingston had said, ” Sinhalese were Tamils up to the time Buddhism came to Ceylon, and thereafter these very Tamils became Sinhalese gradually. To put it mildly, the Sinhalese are not Aryans, but have been Dravidians from the beginning to the present day, and their language too has been Dravidian.” The fact that there are significant proportions of light-skinned Sinhalese and Tamils in Sri Lanka, points to the process of natural selection favouring the lighter skin. Fair skinned girls are preferred by very dark men and with time the skin colour has tended to become fairer. The years of colonial rule may have introduced the gene for light colour into the general population, as the colonial rulers sowed their seeds diligently and quite widely! White Man’s rule during the colonial era and his achievements in the world have made us believe Black is no longer beautiful and we are consciously introducing an element of deliberate selection through preferring the lighter colouration and sharper features.
I wonder why the Sinhalese should be ashamed of their Dravidian or Tamil ancestry, if indeed it is true. On the other hand, if the Tamils are proven to have Sinhala ancestry, I am sure most Tamils will accept it as a fact of their history. However, for the Sinhalese to deny the Tamils their rightful claims to this island is a travesty of justice, negation of truth and a criminal act considering the facts emerging about our respective origins. Ultimately, both the Sinhalese and Tamils originally came out of Africa and resemble the Ethiopians and Somalis to a considerable extent. If Sri Lanka is not accepted as the land of the Tamils too, it cannot be the land of the Sinhalese either. We were both migrants from Africa, who traveled through India over thousands of years and should go back there together. The Sinhalese have no right to ask the Tamils to go back to India either. The Tamils will then have the same right to ask them to go back there too. Incidentally, the President of the Small Farmers Association of Sri Lanka, a Sinhalese farming ‘one eighth of one acre’ of land, who participated in the BBC debate on Agriculture last week in Rome, whilst seated amidst a north Indian, a Nigerian and others of European descent, looked distinctly Ethiopian / Eritrean/ Somali in his features, though not as dark as they are. I should take this opportunity to congratulate this gentleman on his performance in this debate and the insightful contribution he made. He made me proud as a Sri Lankan and reminded me of where I had originally come from. He is my kin!
At this juncture in our history, academics and scholars of the caliber of Gananath Obeysekara, Lesley Gunawardena, Indrapala, Pathmanathan, Michael Roberts, Ralph Deriniyagala and others not named here should step forward to educate the general public- Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims, about known and proven facts of our history and origins. This would leave no room for charlatans (I may also be called one) to fill the void. This would be a critical component in the nation building exercise we have to embark now. We are at present a people who are reacting to the effects of conflict, but are blind to what is seeding it. What is seeding it is the ‘Madness and Viciousness’ in some people that are being dispensed quite generously in the absence of any resistance from the sensible and rational. It is time our academics- of the honest and objective kind- came forward to hold the lights of knowledge to counter the darkness that is overwhelming us.
(As this article is written for the public, citations are minimal and scientific jargon has been avoided where possible. Sentences have been borrowed from the source material, when found appropriate and more expressive.)
-Was also published in the Colombo Post of 8th April’08-
Entry Filed under: Federalidea
16 Comments Add your own
1. Ram the 2nd | April 13th, 2008 at 9:08 am
What is interesting is,
Sinhalese be they are a distinct people, the original inhabitants of the island, different from the Tamils, unique in their origins and ordained by Lord Buddha himself to be the inheritors of this island and be the custodians of Buddhism in its pristine form.
OR
not,
sinhalese are not fighting to establish a mono ethnic eelam in this island.
2. M.Thiru | April 13th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
I do not know when Ram the 2nd was born. But Sinhala Buddhist majority got the power to do whatever they wanted after British passed the country to them including the sovereignty . Many minority leaders including some Tamils trusted the Sinhalese leaders went along with them and even supported the government with citizenship act, land colonisation etc so that the Sinhalese margin of majority is increased or maintained.
In fact with every constitutional change the Sinhalese majority has consolidated their language, culture, religion, political economical power and what not. Even they got rid of the provisions that safeguarded the minority rights using democratic power. They used state terror and organised violence on people living out side their homelands and then sent those affected to their homeland, when the Tamils were using democratic no violent struggle to get Federal state ( not mono ethnic as Ram the 2nd claim).
Because the state player has the power and support of other countries because of the world order and because of 9/11, the GOSL is making use of the power to deny even the homeland concept to the Tamils.
Sadly this MR regime has gone further in totally abrogating the CFA ( whatever its short coming from sections of the Sinhalese & Tamils and Muslims perspective ), ignoring the majority of the IC and waged an unjust war to conquer the homelands of the Tamil speaking people with the intention of colonising these areas to increase the Sinhalese population with the warped arguements like majority of the Tamils live outside the North and East. In fact the Tamils have left on their own from NE because of economic under development before 1948 , state discrimination since 1948, and violence or state terror every now and then after 1956. The population of NE has been purposefully reduced so that Tamils become minority in their homeland which gave them security and refuge.
In essence Sinhalese wants to own whole od Srilanka under their own terms and conditions. They are succeeding because they have the State power, they have the full support of the world order ( UN Charter is just in paper ) including India and the support of para military parties & other minority parties who are satisfied with crumbs in the form of concessions like a Minister post or Chief Minister post.
Therefore as Ram the 2nd claim Sinhalese are not fighting for mono ethnic Sinhalese Buddhist state because it is already there since 1972 except conquering the North as East has already been done through dividing the Tamil speaking people into different factions.
3. Reggie, | April 13th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
This is funny coming from a Tamil,
Tamils especially those in this forum will write long winded essays berating the Sinhalese for being Hodge podge of everything from Bengalis to Chinese all the while claiming they are pure as the driven snow and talking up their elaborate (third rate unfounded) theories of how Tamil Nadu is the cradle of civilisation etc.
This must be sacrilegious type of writing for Tamils, they seem to prefer to live like mushrooms believing they are the purest race on the planet while all others are inferior.
4. Siva | April 13th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Lets send LTTE back to Africa (Eritrea has been mooted) and the rest of Sri Lanka can keep going forward, without that fat monkey and his offspring.
5. AP | April 14th, 2008 at 8:13 am
What are you trying to prove? Sinhalese, whether they are of Bengali, Gujarati or Dravidian origin are a distinct race. The percentage contribution from various ethnic groups in India towards making the present Sinhala race is irrelevant. On the other hand Tamils in Sri Lanka are also a distinct race whose presence in Sri Lanaka as a distinct race can only be traced back to the 12th Century or around. Just take their language which is very much similar to the Tmil spoken in India. Whereas Sinhala language has independently evolved over the centuries Tamil spoken in Sri Lanka has not. There is no point in making a futile attempt to create a fabricated history for Sri Lankan Tamils. There is not an iota of evidence to support such a claim.
Having said that I believe that Tamils in Sri Lanka have an equal right as Sinhalese to the country we call home. One of the reasons preventing finding a solution to the problem we have is the chauvanistic attitude of majority of Tamils created by these false claims of distorted history.
6. Athos | April 15th, 2008 at 3:01 am
A peaceful nation deprived of development and prosperity. 30 years 70,000 deaths and unimaginable destruction based on a fallacy concocted by a Tamil.
Sigh! I have seen smarter doorknobs.
7. Sam Thambipillai | April 15th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Political agreements are workable only amongst honest and credible peoples. People who unilateraly abrogate agreements can never be trusted. Any thinking on co-existence as one country in Sri Lanka (SL) is therefore wasteful and rhetoric.
History cannot be unlived but the unwise decide to live its wrenching pain again.
A few months ago, Kosovo became an independent sovereign state because of the “oppressive unilateralism” by the Serbians against the legitimate rights and freedoms of the people in Kosovo. Although the lessons of others are there, the Sinhala nation (SN) refuses to learn that their unilateral repression against the Tamil nation (TN) will gradually but surely lead to a “Kosovo” in the island.
The historical combat between two kings; Ellalan from the TN and Dutugemunu from the SN is taught to every child in SL. But when Sinhalese become adults, they refuse to accept the nationhood of Tamils. It is funny but true. Britain colonsed these two nations at different times with a gap of a few years, later joined the two countries as one country and named it Ceylon. But to this day SN refuses to recognise constituionally, the nationhood of Tamils. Sound reasoning appears to disappear into a cloud of unilateralist repression in adulthood !!
The SN declared UDR- Unilateral Declaration of Republic- in 1972 and annexed North East (NE) illegally into its terrirtory, when Ceylon was still a dominion under the queen of England. Britain should have called a constituent assembly in the NE and granted independence separately. But Britain failed to do justice though it faced UDI in Rhodhesia in 1966 and reacted with non recognition of the UDI regime and economic sanctions.
An unjust Britain and a defiant rebel state forced the TN to seek independence. The Tamil leader SJV Chelvanayakam, seeing the rugged journey ahead said ” God only can save Tamils”. He commenced a gradualist approach and his vision was “if we do not see the promised land our children should definitely see it”.
Realising that the constitution of the rebel state of SL provided muscle for subjugation, oppression and occupation of NE, the elected representatives of NE assembled and resolved at Vaddukoddai in 1976, to establish an independent state called Tamil Eelam (TE). Following this event, TULF as a political front, used the election process in 1977 as a self referendum, to receive peoples’ mandate. Never were a people so patient and democratic, but Britain was stone silent and SL became defiant and oppressive.
Still adhereing to the best democratic principles, TULF representatives assembled with armed freedom movements at Thimpu, India, in 1980’s, to work out a strategy to realise the 1977 mandate to liberate NE. The assembly at Thimpu was similar to the gathering of representatives of any territory aspiring for independence. After much deliberation and thought, “Thimpu declaration” calling for the self determination of the people of NE was made.
Logically, legally and democratically, the next step would have been to ask the UN to decolonise TE and finish the job unfinished by Britain, obligated by the UN. Self determination for NE would have been speedily achieved.
But, with the intent to solve the problem regionally without international intervention, India intervened and finalised the Indo Lanka Accord (ILA) with some dgree of self rule for NE. Tamil leaders predicted the abrogation of ILA but could not prevent compliance.
Tamil leaders were right. After a shelf life of 20 years, ILA now remains abrogated with the demerger of NE.
Based on Thimpu Declaration, now, the people of NE could stand tall and justifiably and sucsessfully plea for self determination of the people of NE before the UN, request countries to recognise TE and seek justification from the International Court of Justice. “Kosovo” in the island would be then soon be born.
Wise thinking should therefore be, as to how the two countries TE and SL could be at peace and develop together in the island peacefully.
8. Siva | April 16th, 2008 at 1:20 am
The author must be medical doctor or fairy tale authur like Dr Seus
9. Devinda Fernando | April 17th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Tamils who DONT want to be Sri Lankan should go back to Tamil Nadu… End of Story.
10. jeff | April 18th, 2008 at 9:07 am
well, tamils are the original and indigenous inhabitants of this island.{not srilanka as it is sinhala name.}
sinhalese will be chased to east india,and lttethe saviour of tamils will do the job.we will cleanse this pure tamil island of unwanted invaders {sinhalas}
11. Deva | April 22nd, 2008 at 4:11 am
In post 5, AP says
****On the other hand Tamils in Sri Lanka are also a distinct race whose presence in Sri Lanaka as a distinct race can only be traced back to the 12th Century or around. ****
Not only the Sri Lankan Tamils but also the Sinhalese as a distinct race can only be traced back to the 12th Century or around.
According to Prof. R. A. L. H. (Leslie) Gunawardana, a historian/archeologist at the Peradeniya University, there NEVER was a Sinhala race/ethnic group or a Sinhala Kingdom before the 12th CAD. What existed was ONLY a Sinhala dynasty, a ruling linage group. There is NO evidence whatsoever to prove that an ethnic group/race or a kingdom by the name Sinhala existed in Sri Lanka before the 12th CAD. The concept that the Sinhalas were indigenous people or the first to arrive in the island originated only during the colonial and post-colonial period.
In his publication ‘The People of the Lion: The Sinhala Identity and Ideology in History and Historiography’, Prof. Leslie Gunawardana says,
Sinhala was a name adopted by a ruling linage group for whose origin the lion myth had been created. He says, contrary to popular belief, in ancient times the Sinhala identity was associated primarily with the dynasty which ruled Anuradapura. He goes even further by saying that, not only the Sinhala kingdom but also the Sinhala ethnic identity (race) in Sri Lanka emerged only after the 12th Century AD. Before that, there never was a Sinhala race or a Sinhala Kingdom, but only a Sinhala royal family (dynasty).
It was only after the 12th Century AD that the two communities Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils emerged as two distinct ethnic groups/races (by assimilating with various tribal, linguistic and ethnic communities including the invaders) with distinct territories - the Tamils identified with the North and the East, and the Sinhalas with the rest of the island and with distinct language, religion, and culture.
12. Deva | April 22nd, 2008 at 4:23 am
ARE THE SINHALESE ARYANS?
Even the people of Bengal and Orissa from where the Sinhala forefathers are believed to have come from are not Aryans.
It was the Europeans who introduced this Aryan myth to the Sinhalese. Even the Mahavamsa was discovered during the colonial period and was first translated by a European pali scholar.
It was only in the 19th century AD, the British discovered the Mahavamsa. The first printed edition and English translation of the Mahavansha was published in 1837 by George Turnour, an historian and officer of the Ceylon Civil Service. A German translation of Mahavansha was completed by Wilhelm Geiger in 1912. This was then translated into English by Mabel Haynes Bode, and the English translation was revised by Geiger.
Prof. K. Indrapala says in his book, ‘The evolution of an Ethnic Identity: The Tamils in Sri Lanka C. 300 BCE to C. 1200 CE’, it was in the nineteenth century, under the British rule, that the British officials adopted a keen interest in the history of the island. The European discovery of the Pali and Sinhala chronicles, the publication of early translations of the Mahavamsa and the acquisition of information relating to the ancient ruins lead to the first serious British attempt to write the early history of Sri Lanka in the middle of the nineteenth century.
It was in these early colonial writings, largely based on the uncritical acceptance of the local chronicles, that a new perspective of the ancient history of the island began to develop.
The view that the Sinhalese were the ‘proper inhabitants’ of the island in ancient times and that the Tamils were invaders came to dominate colonial historical writings.
Before long, the Sinhalese were identified with the ‘Aryans’ and the Tamils with the ‘Dravidians’.
In recent years, several anthropologists and historians have shown how this perspective came to be developed in the colonial writings.
It was only in the 19th century AD, the Sinhalese started to believe the myth that they are Aryans from North India and the proper inhabitants of Sri Lanka where as the Tamils are Dravidians and outsiders.
The most influential figure in this field was the great German Indologist, Max Muller. According to Prof. Leslie Gunawardana, scholars in late 19th century Sri Lanka took up Max Muller’s theories and injected a RACIALIST content into Sinhala nationalist thinking.
One such scholar, a dirty Sinhala racist who was known as the Father of Racism in Sri Lanka was the great Sinhala Lion Anagarika Dharmapala.
Don David Hewavitarana better known as Anagarika Dharmapala, the son of Mr. Don Carolis (carpenter/ furniture dealer) and Mrs. Mallika Hewavitarne was born in 1864 and received his early education at Christian schools. He founded the Maha Bodhi Society in 1891 to spread Buddhism. He died in 1933 at the age of 69.
He was the God father of Sinhala Buddhist racism in Sri Lanka. Through his racist publications such as the ‘Sinhala Bauddhaya’, ‘Sinhala Jatiya’, and the ‘Mahabodhi Journal’ during the period between 1909 to 1915, he propagated the Mahavamsa as the Orthodox Theravada Buddhist doctrine of the Sinhala Buddhists.
His anti-Tamil and anti-Muslim propaganda during that time was the beginning of the Sinhala Buddhist racism in Sri Lanka.
His virulent attacks on Muslims and Tamils led to his internment in Calcutta by the British in 1915.
He called the Sinhala Buddhists as the only unique race (Arya-Sinhala) with a pure Aryan blood. He was such strong racist like the Nazi German Hitler. It was due to him, and his followers including the Maha Sangha are the main cause for the death and destruction of our people and our country today.
Today, the Maha Sangha and the Sinhala-Buddhist monks are NOT the disciples of Buddha, they are the disciples of Anagarika Dharmapala who believes in the Mahavamsa as an Orthodox Theravada Buddhist doctrine of the Sinhala Buddhists.
Due to the influence of the mahavamsa, a Sinhala-Buddhist Bikkhu is at liberty to engage in racist politics and promote war and hatred as we see today.
In other words the Buddhism followed in Sri Lanka is unique which can be termed as either Mahavamsa Buddhism or Sinhala Buddhism.
Ven. Mahanama, the author of Mahavamsa has created an imaginary link between the three elements, Country-Race-Religion and made it into one unit similar to the Holy Trinity, whereby Sri Lanka (Dhamma Deepa), Buddha’s chosen people (Sinhalese), and Buddhism (Buddha Sasana) should be protected for 5000 years. This is known as the Jathika chintanaya or the Mahavamsa mindset and one of its outcomes is the unitary state. Therefore, for the next 2500 years a Sinhala Buddhist will never allow a federal state in Sri Lanka.
From a very young age, the innocent Sinhala Buddhist children who attend the Sunday schools in the Buddhist temples are brainwashed by engraving the Mahavamsa Buddhism and Sinhala Buddhist racism into their sub-conscious minds.
They are taught to believe that the Non Sinhala Buddhists (Tamils) are invaders, they don’t belong to Sri Lanka, all the Tamils should be chased away to Tamil Nadu just the way their ancient Kings Dutugemunu, Parakarama bahu and Sapumal kumara did. The country, Sinhala race and Buddhism should be protected from the Tamils.
It is not worth spending your precious time in trying to penetrate into their heads which are already engraved with the Mahavamsa mindset. It is also not worth wasting our time in going for Peace talks with them. There will never be peace in Sri Lanka for the next 2500 years.
We Tamils have no other alternatives. As SJV Chelvanayagam said, only God can save the Sri Lankan Tamils from the Sinhalese. This is where the importance of the LTTE is felt.
13. Deva | April 22nd, 2008 at 9:36 am
Even though Mahavamsa is the only ancient written document available, its author did not write Mahavamsa as the complete history of Sri Lanka. It was written only to praise Buddhism and the Buddhist kings.
According to the Mahavamsa, there were Tamils in Anurahadpura not as traders but as rulers even in the 1st century A.D. Dutta Gemunu had to conquer not one Tamil king but 32 Tamil Kinglets (Chieftains) around the Anuradhapura principality alone. How could there be 32 Tamil chieftains in the area of Anuradhapura alone, if there were no Tamil settlements? How many more Tamil Kinglets (Chieftains) would have been existing in other parts of the country which were not mentioned anywhere.
WAS DUTUGAMUNU A SINHALA KING?
Where on earth, I mean in which historical document/structure is it mentioned that King Dutugamunu was a Sinhala?
The Mahavamsa says that the young Buddhist prince Gamini worshipped the Katharagama God before going to War with the old Hindu king Elara.
Why did he worship a Hindu God instead of Buddha?
Let us see who this Dutugamunu or Dutha-Gamini is.
In the above article, the author has described about the ancient tribe Nagas very well. The Nagas who were living in both South India and North Sri Lanka (Nagapuram, Nagarkovil, Nagarcot, Nargapattinum, Nagakulam, Nagadivpa, etc) were considered as the natives (Ila/Eela/Hela), the ancient Elu speaking inhabitants of the region.. During the Early Historical Period, South India and Sri Lanka were not considered as two different places. The Nagas not only occupied both South India and North Sri Lanka but they were also moving back and forth between Sri Lanka and South India.
According to the Pali chronicles and the early Brahmi inscriptions, not only Nagas, but there were Damedas/Damelas/Damilas from the Chola Dynasty (believed to be Dravidians who immigrated from west Asia and settled in South India as per the historians) and there were also Pandu/Pandyans (some historians believe they are Aryans who settled during the same time as the Dravidians). During the Early Historical Period, all these people were moving back and forth between Sri Lanka and South India. The Tamils of South India-Sri Lanka are the decedents of these three groups of people.
Even though Prof. S. Paranavitana was a Sinhala-Buddhist whose research was fully biased, there were times when even he could not deny, so here I must quote Prof. S. Paranavitana who says, the vast majority of the people who today speak Sinhalese or Tamil must be ultimately be descended from those autochthonous people of whom we know next to nothing.
In other words, both Tamils and Sinhalese descend from those Nagas even though they later mixed with the so called *Aryans, Dravidians, North Indians, South Indians, etc*
Now, let us look into Dutugamunu family.
The kings belonging to the Tissa and Lambakarana dynasties that ruled the ancient Buddhist kingdom of Anuradhapura were Nagas. Dutugemunu, the national hero of Sri Lanka, was a Naga king belonging to the Tissa dynasty. His mother Vihara Maha Devi was the daughter of the Naga king of Keleniya, and his father Kavan Tissa, was the great grandson of Maha Naga, who established a kingdom in Mahagama (modern Tissamaharama) in Rohana (ancient south Lanka). Maha Naga’s older brother, Devanampiya Tissa, a contemporary of Emperor Asoka, was the first king of the Tissa dynasty.
Some of the Tissa kings who proudly bore Naga clan names Khallata Naga (Dutugemunu’s nephew), Cora Naga, who was one of the many victims poisoned to death by the amorous Queen Anula, Mahadathika Maha Naga and Ila Naga. Ila Naga’s son Candamuka Siva married Damila Devi, a Tamil princes from South India. Yasa Lalaka Tissa was the last king of the first dynasty that ruled the Anurdhapura kingdom.
Naga poets from Eelam (ancient Sri Lanka) are known to have participated in the activities of literary academies of ancient Tamil Nadu. These academies, which are known as the three Tamil Sangams flourished in the pre-Christian and early-Christian eras. A few known names of the Naga poets of Eelam who contributed to ancient Tamil literature are Eelaththu Poothan Thevanar whose compositions are included in anthologies known as Nattrinai, Kurunthokai and Puranaanooru Mudingarayar, Musiri Asiriyar, Neelakandanar and Eela Nagar. Whether this latter name refers to King Ila Naga whose son married Damila Devi, the South Indian Tamil princess is not certain.
During the Early Historical Period, the Cholas, Pandyans and the Nagas were fighting each other to capture a larger territory, to expand their kingdom. This phenomenon was very common throughout the ancient world.
According to the Mahavamsa, King Elara was a Damila from the Chola Dynasty. From the above we see that King Dutugemunu was a Naga from the Tissa Dynasty.
The account of the armed conflict between the *Sinhala* hero, Duttagamini, and the Damila prince, Elara, in the Mahawamsa, has formed the basis of 20th century perception of the relations between the Sinhalas and the Tamils in ancient Sri Lanka.
But the modern historians consider this interpretation invalid.
They point out that the Mahawamsa had portrayed Elara as a just ruler who was admired greatly by Duttagamini.
The latter had noted that Elara was a protector of Buddhism, and admired him for being just to friend and foe alike.
Duttagamini even built a memorial for Elara and asked everybody to worship at it.
It should be noted that the Tissa Dynasty started with king Tissa (307-267 BC) who was given the title Devanampiya by the Indian emperor (Devanampriya) Asoka for accepting Buddhism.
Before Buddhism, prince Tissa was the second Son of King Muta Siva (367-307 BC) and brother of king Maha Siva (257-247 BC).
Muta Siva (367-307 BC) was the Son of King Pandu kabaya, and Pandu kabaya (437-367 BC) was the son-in-law of Giri Kanda Siva and Grandson of King Pandu Vasudeva (504-474 BC).
Another King whom the Sinhalese praise is King Parakramabahu who was a grandson of a TAMIL prince.
King Vijaya Bahu married a princess from Kalinga Royal Family as his second Mahesi, and from her he had a son named Vikrama Bahu and a daughter named Ratnavali. Vijaya Bahu’s sister, Mitta, was given in marriage to a Pandya Prince, who had three sons. The eldest of whom named Manabharana, became the husband of King Vijaya Bahu’s daughter Ratnavali. Their son was Parakrama Bahu I (1140-1173 AD), Grandson of Vijaya Bahu I, Prince of Royal Blood, Pandyan descent, son of Manabharana and Vijaya Bahu’s sister, Mitta whose husband was a Tamil prince.
When will these people wake up and overcome their ignorance? May be not till the Dooms day when poor Lanka will be erased from the world map.
14. Deva | April 23rd, 2008 at 3:45 am
The Sinhalese and Tamils did not have any problems in Sri Lanka till the late 19th century. It is not a surprise that half the Sinhala aristocracy signed the Kandyan Convention in Tamil.
Not only the last King of Jaffna but also the last king of Kandy was a Tamil by the name Kannasamy (son of Venkata Perumal) from the Nayakkar Dynasty of Madurai, South India. In fact, the last four Kings of Kandy were Tamils from the Nayakkar Dynasty of Madurai and the Sinhalese did not have any problem in appointing them as their rulers.
The problems started only in the 19th century AD after the uncritical acceptance of the Mahavamsa by the British who discovered it and then a few Sinhala nationalists such as Anagarika Dharmapala injecting a racialist content into it.
A low country Sinhala man and a son of a carpenter Don David Hewavitarana AKA Anagarika Dharmapala became famous for creating a new religion in Sri Lanka by linking the Mahavamsa (written in Pali) with the Theravada Buddhist scriptures (Tripitika, also written in Pali) and creating a religion known as Sinhala-Buddhism which is only unique to Sri Lanka. A Tamil Buddhist will not be allowed to ordain as a monk by the Buddhist Maha Sangha of Sri Lanka.
Another group of Sinhalese has formed an organization known as Hela Havula founded by Munidasa Cumaratunga. Today they are in the process of creating a new History for Sri Lanka which is different from what is said in the Mahavamsa.
Then there is another Jathika Chinthanaya group founded by Gunadasa Amarasekera which is not only misinterpreting and abusing the history but also creating a new meaning to the existing history. Prof. Nalin de Silva comes under this group. He is a Maths Professor who has FAILED to excel in math and therefore was never recognised by his peers.
Such people move into more *popular* areas (cheap polemics) where people (not necessarily academic, but society) might treat them as *scholars* even if they are not. They are very dangerous to the society. These people brainwashes younger generation and creates racists, ultra-nationalists and extremists which is detrimental to the country and should be stopped at any cost.
15. Deva | April 23rd, 2008 at 11:24 am
Now, after having said what has to be said, it will not be fair if I do not reply to my half Sinhala-half Portuguese friend Devinda Fernando.
*****Tamils who DONT want to be Sri Lankan should go back to Tamil Nadu End of Story.*****
Man, if Tamils have a problem or if they DONT want to be in Sri Lankan, or due to some reason if they are forced to move out of Tamil Eelam, still I am sure their father land Tamil Nadu will take them but unfortunately if the Sinhalese have a problem or if they DONT want to be in Sri Lankan, or due to some reason if they are forced to move out of Sri Lanka I do not think their father land Bengal/Bangladesh (from where their forefather Vijaya came) will ever take them back. For you, the only alternative is to jump in the sea.
16. Devinda Fernando | May 2nd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
*** Now, after having said what has to be said, it will not be fair if I do not reply to my half Sinhala-half Portuguese friend Devinda Fernando. ***
Whatever you THINK I am, Portuguese, Sinhala, Buddhist, whatever… I am Sri Lankan. So call me what you want and wherever my blood line can be traced I have no problem admitting I am a Sri Lankan. That is the country I was born into and that is my allegiance. You don’t insult me, you only make yourself look stupid and highlight to other Sri Lankans my exact point about what it means to be Sri Lankan over being a Communalist.
Leave a Comment
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed