TAMIL CLAIMS TO LAND: FACT AND

FICTION
By GAMINI IRIYAGOLLA
CONTENTS
Introduction
SRI LANKA
TAMIL CLAIMS TO LAND: FACT AND FICTION
Kings of Kandy Ruled Jaffna
Jaffnapatam and the Eastern Province
Tamils, Muslims and Catholics in Sinhalese
Territory
Who are the Tamils?
Dangerous Cry
State Land and the Peasantry
Church Support for Tamil Claims
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
INTRODUCTION
The newspaper "Island" carried an article by me under the
title "The Fiction
of Traditional Homelands and Land Use" in three
instalments on 3rd, 4th and
6th August 1984. It contained excerpts from an 88 page
memorandum given to
the late Mrs. Indira Gandhi, Prime Minister of India and
to Mr. J. R.
Jayewardene, President of Sri Lanka at New Delhi on the
eve of their talks
on 30th June 1984 on the 'ethnic' problems of Sri Lanka.
Some points were
amplified for the benefit of readers of the newspapers.
After the

publication of the article, several individuals and

groups suggested that it
be reprinted, so that the complex issues relating to the
concept of, and
claims to, separate traditional homelands for the
different communities in
the island of Sri Lanka might be better understood by
more people. This
booklet is a response to these suggestions. I have
changed the title, added
notes and made essential corrections to the article.
Most non-Tamil people in Sri Lanka are still not aware of
the basis of the
claim of Tamil extremists for a separate state. The claim
is not founded, as
many believe, on allegations of harassment and
discrimination by the
Sinhalese majority, but on an audacious falsification of
ancient and modern
Sri Lanka history. It may be briefly summarized as
follows :
Tamils had a Sovereign State in the Island from prehistoric times. Even
after the advent of the Sinhalese [N-1], there were Tamil
kings who ruled
the whole Island. Thereafter, for over a thousand years
Tamil kings ruled
the whole island at times and Sinhalese kings ruled it at
other times. Out
of this background of alternating fortunes, there emerged
at the beginning
of the 13th century, a separate Tamil kingdom, the
territory of which has
since been the exclusive homeland of Tamils [N-2]. The
territory of this
Tamil State stretched from Chilaw in the north-west to
the northern regions
and thence to the Kumbukkan Oya in the present Yala
Sanctuary in the

south-east, to include the northern half of the modern

Puttalam District,
the whole of the modern Northern Province and the whole
of the modern
Eastern Province [N-3]- one third of the territory of Sri
Lanka. The rest of
the island was "Sinhala land". Thus there were 2
countries in the island
till 1948. The Portuguese captured the Tamil State in
1619. Neither the
Sinhalese king nor the Sinhalese people offered any
assistance to the Tamil
king Sangili against the Portuguese as it was the view of
the Sinhalese that
they had nothing in common with the state of Tamil Eelam.
The Tamils want
the Sinhalese people to reiterate that now [N-4]. The
Portuguese, Dutch (who
captured the Tamil state in 1658) and the British (who
seized the Dutch
possessions in 1796) governed the conquered Tamil
territory (from Chilaw to
Kumbukkan Oya) as a separate state till 1833. In that
year, following the
Colebrooke-Cameron recommendations and in violation of
history, tradition
and psychology, the British brought the separate states
together under one
administration to suit their convenience [N-5]. This
unification laid the
foundation for the "Ethnic" conflict of the present
time6. In 1948, the
British granted independence to the Sinhalese state, and
handed over the
Tamil state to the Sinhalese who naturally converted it
into a colony of
theirs and exploited both Tamils and their country as
imperialists would.
Thus politically the Tamils are entitled to recover their
independence. The
old sovereignty of Tamil Eelam was revived in law as well
in 1972, when the

Queen of the United Kingdom ceased to be the repository

of sovereignty and a
Sinhalese Republican Government was forced on the Tamil
people [N-7]. All
the grievances the Tamil people now have are incidents of
Sinhalese colonial
rule since 1948. These grievances are as follows:
* Within 6 months of the transfer of political power
to the Sinhalese,
they enacted legislation depriving the Indian Tamils
of citizenship and
the franchise [N-8].
* Lakhs and lakhs of Sinhalese people were planted in
the homeland of the
Tamil nation once ruled by Tamil kings [N-9].
* In 1956, Sinhala was made the sole official
language. The republican
constitution of 1972 gave the Sinhala only Act
constitutional status.
The real intention of this SinhalaOnly Act was to
keep Tamils out of
government services [N-10].
* Buddhism has been given pre-eminence in the
constitution [N-11].
* The Tamils demanded balanced representation [N-12]
before the British
withdrew but this was refused.
* S. J. V. Chelvanayakam toiled for 25 years through
the Ilankai Tamil
Arasu Kadchi [N-13] to safeguard Tamil rights
through federalism but
this was denied. He entered into agreements with the
S.L.F.P. and the
U.N.P. to obtain regional autonomy but these were
abrogated because of
Sinhalese opposition.
The only alternative is to see that "Sinhalese
Imperialism .... Quit our
homeland," the independent state of Tamil Eelam
stretching from Pottuvil to

Puttalam will be established by peaceful means or by

armed struggle [N-14].
Such is the falsified history based upon which a worldwide political and
propaganda campaign has been launched. Inspired by the
same falsehoods that
are the foundation of the political claim, several
hundred young people have
become terrorists in a racist cause. One would expect Sri
Lanka historians
to discuss the alleged historical basis of Tamil claims,
expose the
falsehoods and endorse the truths (if any). They have
avoided the issue,
though some of them have become active in the politics of
the problem which
are outside the area of their knowledge [N-15].
A teacher of history called C.R. de Silva, however,
recently attempted a
discussion of historical writing in relation to
"ethnicity" with bizarre
results [N-16]. De Silva completely ignored the alleged
history which has
founded the present Tamil Eelam struggle and Tamil
terrorism, though the
title of his essay was "Ethnicity, Prejudice and the
Writing of History". He
compliments historians such as G. C. Mendis for "setting
a fine example" of
freedom from prejudice [N-17]. He then gently chides
Satchi Ponnambalam, a
reckless purveyor of Tamil communalist propaganda, for
"breezily ignoring
the work of numerous historians who preceded him" in
writing that
"Devanampiya Theesan, the Tamil Hindu king of Lanka at
that time accepted
the missionaries from Asoka and became converted to
Buddhism." [N-18] De

Silva not only implies that Ponnambalam is a historian

but also fails to say
that to make Devanampiyatissa a Tamil is a plain and
deliberate untruth
[N-19]. Then de Silva reaches the main point of his
Mendis Memorial Lecture
" ...... numerous instances of distortions of history can
be found among
Sinhalese writers as well. I have selected a recent
article by Gamini
Iriyagolla-an article which argues against the theory of
the traditional
homelands of the Tamils".De Silva then plucks out the
following paragraph
[N-20] (completely out of context) from my article which
is reprinted in
this booklet :
"Although for most of its duration as a political unit,
the "Kingdom" or
principality of Jaffna was de jure part of the dominions
of the Sinhalese
kings whether ruling at Gampola, Kotte, Sitawaka or
Kandy, during the course
of its existence from the end of the 13th century to the
beginning of the
17th century, there were periods in which the chieftain
of this remote
province asserted his independence of the Sinhalese
overlord. At the
beginning he was a feudatory of the South Indian
Vijayanagara Empire. At
other times the incumbent chieftain acknowledged the
suzerainty of the King
of Portugal.
Our historian opens his attack by conceding that "It is
possible that every
statement made by Iriyagolla in the above paragraphs is
true". De Silva's
complaint is that I have distorted history by omitting
important historical

facts which, if disclosed by me, would have shown that

the Arychakravarti
who ruled Jaffna in the mid-14th century was much more
powerful than I make
him out to be. His most damning criticism runs thus : "If
the ruler of the
North was merely a Chieftain at least from 1357 to the
early 1370s this
chieftain probably enjoyed suzerainty over the king of
Gampola". In the note
to this sentence, de Silva states, "This was the
conclusion of S.
Paranavithana, see University of Ceylon, History of
Ceylon, op. cit. at pp.
644-645" (published in 1960). Here C.R. de Silva tampers
with his evidence,
suppressing Paranavithana's conclusion based on the
Medawala inscription of
28th November 1359 [N-22] and presented in his major
article entitled "The
Arya Kingdom in North Ceylon" published in 1961 in the
Journal of the Ceylon
Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (New Series, Vol. VII
part 2 pp.
174-224). What is suppressed reads as follows :
"A noteworthy point in the Madavala inscription is that
Marttandam, the Arya
Chakravarti [N-22] is referred to as a perumal [N-23]
only, while
Vikramabahu [N-24] is styled Chakravarti Svamin [N-25].
This indicates that
the Arya Chakravarti, though he was powerful enough to
dictate terms to the
Gampola monarch, had not assumed regal titles. THE DE
JURE RIGHT OF
VIKRAMABAHU TO THE SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE WHOLE ISLAND IS
RECOGNIZED BY THE
TREATY". De Silva also says "However, what Iriyagolla
does not mention is
that in the mid-fourteenth century 'the chieftain of this
remote province'

was powerful enough to control the Western coast of Sri

Lanka almost upto
the Kelani river, and to force Vikramabahu III (1357-74)
king of Gampola to
accept his tax collectors in the Sinhalese king's
domains". The source cited
for this proposition is the Rajavaliya edited by A. V.
Suraweera [N-26].
This source yields the following information on this
point. "Subsequently,
as there were no kings in (of) Lanka, the Minister
Alakeswara lived in the
city of Raigama. King Parakrmabahu's nephew was at
Gampola. The
Aryachakravarti king was at Jaffnapatam. When, of these
kings, the
Aryachckravarti King's forces caused tribute to be
brought by force from the
hill country, the low country and the nine ports, [N-27]
one day Alakeswara
viewed his forces. . . . "
There is no mention here of Vikramabahu or of control of
the western coast
or of acceptance by a king of Gampola of
Aryachakravarti's tax collectors.
De Silva omits reference to the Medawala inscription,
according to the
currently accepted reading of which, Vikramabahu III
agreed to have the
Aryachakravarti's tax collectors [N-28] in some of the
hill country
districts, if he mentioned this inscription at all, he
would have had to
admit that according to it, in the mid-14th century, the
Sinhalese king was
de jure suzerain over the Aryachakravarti (as I have
said). The other
distortion of de Silva's is that 'Kotte was originally
founded not as a

capital city but as a frontier fort to defend the South

against inroads from
the North". The situation in which a fort is built for
purely defensive purposes is entirely different from that
in which a fort is
built in order to launch an offensive. According to de
Silva's source (the
Rajavaliya), Kotte was built (by Alakeshvara, whom our
'historian' fails to
mention) preparatory to launching an offensive against
the Aryachakravarti.
The last sentence quoted above from the Rajavaliya
continues thus ".... one
day Alakeshvara viewed his forces and thinking it is not
fitting to pay
tribute to a king, while there are such forces as these,
built the fortress
of Jayawardane, constructed dams and moats, collected
paddy, coconut and
salt to last several years and expelled the tax
collectors placed by the
Aryachakravarti king at various places'. According to the
Rajavaliya, the
Aryachakravarti imported mercenaries from the Chola
country, [N-29] and sent
a force by land to Matale and another by sea to
Dematagoda, via Panadura.
The Sinhalese army of the hill-country slaughtered the
Tamils at Matale, the
survivors fleeing all the way to Jaffna. Alakeshvara
routed the Tamils at
Dematagoda and destroyed their ships which lay off
Panadura. 'The Kotagama
and Madawela inscriptions" writes Paranavithana 'are thus
witnesses to the
utmost expansion of the Aryachakravartis of Jaffna".[N30] De Silva could
also have cited de Queyroz whom historians of his school
of history [N-31]
place a great value on : 'Of these (The 'kings' of
Jaffnapatam) the first

that tried to free himself from the subjection to the

king of Cota [N-32]
was Ariaxaca Varti [N-33] who being naturally proud and
not brooking
haughtiness of the officers of that king, took the life
of the one that
governed there, and the king of Ceylon preparing to
punish him, they say, he
went to meet him at Ceytavaca [N-34] and took him some
verses wherein he so
flattered him... that he left him completely vainglorious
and satisfied
...he not only made him desist from war, but also
obtained olas from him
(what we should call Provisions) and the title of king of
Jaffnapatam which
his successors preserved paying in acknowledgment only
some tribute, and
because this was the beginning of their greatness, his
descendants from the
name Aria, were called Ariavance, [N-35] which means, the
generation of Aira
[N-36]".
There is no worse sin an academic could commit than to
falsify the very
sources he claims to rely on. To do so in order
deliberately to attempt
discredit another writer is still worse. Its commission
in the particular
circumstances now prevailing in Sri Lanka is ominous. The
question that begs
an explanation, before all else, is why a teacher of
history should so risk
his standing with easily discoverable misdemeanors. One
must conclude that
the motivation or inducement must have been very great
indeed.
There is another point to be made. My article was
published in the

newspapers as excerpts of a memorandum. This should have

warned de Silva
that there was much else in the memorandum. Had he only
inquired, as he
should have, he would have found that in the very next
section of the
memorandum (which was, and still is, with the printer)
the following account
was written by me , 'Ibn Batuta, the traveler from
Tangier visited Ceylon in
1347 and found the contemporary Aryachakravarti the most
powerful potentate
in the country. This was a period of confusion in the
kingdom and the
Sinhalese king was too weak to control his chieftains.
The Arya Chakravarti
pushed his authority to the South, controlled some of the
West coast ports
and even levied taxes in his own right in places close to
Kotte. The king
Wickramabahu III (seat at Gampola) was weak but he had a
great Minister
Alakesvara whose seat of administration was Raigama
...... "
Our historian, after manipulating history, now strays
into an area beyond
his competence and outside his subject - the Tamil claim
for traditional
homelands. In the paragraph immediately following his
juggling with my
writing, de Silva turns 'briefly to the concept of the
'traditional
homelands'. In one sentence, he transforms the concept
into a "doctrine". In
the next paragraph it becomes a 'theory". This complex
subject is disposed
of by this 'professional' historian in two paragraphs. He
required only
three sentences to provide a footnote for future Tamil
claims to the

Northern and Eastern Provinces created by the British in

1874 : 'The early
(1951) [N-37] version of the 'traditional homelands'
theory has some support
from history. There is a (sic) little doubt that the
Jaffna Peninsula and
most of the present Northern Province has (sic) been a
Tamil majority area
since the 13th century. [N-38] Moreover there is evidence
of large scale
Tamil settlements on the eastern coast about the same
period and
subsequently. [N-39] There is therefore (sic) a region
where Tamils have
predominated for a number of centuries.' C.R. de Silva is
not a singular
phenomenon but a symptom of a much deeper disease that
has afflicted certain
layers of Sri Lanka society for several generations. G.C.
Mendis was one of
the earliest victims, who took to the study of history,
misled generations
of students in schools and in the University, and
inspired the
falsifications by Tamil politicians. Even Paranavithana
had his own
obsessive hypotheses. [N-40] The time has come for an
authentic history to
be written for the benefit of students and general
readers of today and
tomorrow.
NOTES
1. Circa 6th century B.C.
2. The authority cited for this segment of 'history'
is "the great work
of Sinhalese history - the Mahavansa" (The election
manifesto of the
Tamil United Liberation Front, 1977). The Mahavansa
however says none

of these things. According to this work the island

was a Sinhalese
kingdom during the entire period referred to. It was
ruled for most of
the period on the "one sovereignty" (literally "one
umbrella")
principle. There was not one local Tamil ruler.
Anuradhapura, the seat
of government (5th century B.C. to 11th century
A.D.) was seized just
four times in the 16 centuries by invaders from
South India who
temporarily held north-central and northern parts
(the Province of
Rajarata) and driven out. The longest occupation was
that of the Cholas
from 993 1070 A.D. The falsification of this history
to one of
alternating fort was necessary to make the emergence
of a Tamil kingdom
in the 13th century credible.
3. The source cited for inclusion of these regions
in a 13th century
Tamil kingdom is Cleghorn's Minute. The Tamil
extremists and their
supporters do not say what that Minute was nor when
it was prepared.
This document was prepared in 1799 by Cleghorn, a
British official,
describe the division by the Dutch of their coastal
possessions for
judicial and administrative purposes after the
Sinhalese - Dutch treaty
of 1766. It gives no indication of the hinterland
ruled by the Dutch
and has no relation either to any political division
of the 13th
century or to modern Northern and Eastern Provinces
created by the
British in 1874. Tamil Eelamists are now generously
prepared to give up

the Chilaw area.

4. Note that Tamil rancour is directed against the
Sinhalese as a
people, not just against a Government. But funds
generated by taxing
the Sinhalese poor have always been welcome for the
education, economic
development etc. of the Tamils and have never been
denied.
5. No lie could be so bold or so blatant.
Portuguese, Dutch and the
British ruled all their coastal possessions (in the
South and in the
North) as one political unit, under a Portuguese
Captain - General, a
Dutch Governor and a British Governor, respectively,
at Colombo. These
possessions called the "Maritime Provinces" by the
British were a
single Crown Colony from 1801. It was the territory
of the Sinhalese
kingdom Kandy, ceded in 1815, that was administered
as a separate unit
called "the Kandyan Provinces" under a Board of
Commissioners from 1815
to 1833. Consequent to the Rebellion of the Kandyan
Sinhalese (1817/18)
which nearly drove the British out, the British
amalgamated the
Maritime Provinces with the Kandyan Provinces in
1833 to strengthen the
British hold over the latter, in accordance with the
Colebrooke-Cameroon recommendations which are common
knowledge. By a
Proclamation in 1833, the united territories were
divided into 5
Provinces, parts of the Kandyan territory being
included in Northern,
Eastern, Western and Southern Provinces. Only the
Central Province was

constituted by wholly Kandyan districts.

6. Memorandum of the terrorist group called
Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam to the Summit meeting of Non-Aligned Nations,
March, 1983.
7. The alleged history has been accepted and the
legal claim based
thereon has been upheld by international
associations such as the
International Commission of Jurists. See "Report of
Mission to Sri
Lanka", June 1983 on behalf of the I.C.J., reprinted
August 1983. Most
people of Sri Lanka are quite unaware of these
developments. The few
among the western educated minority who are aware
suppress them but
hold seminars and publish writings advocating
regional autonomy as an
alternative to the claim for a separate state.
Acceptance of the main
case is implicit in the advocacy of a "viable
alternative."
8. Before independence all residents of Ceylon,
India and Pakistan were
British subjects. Citizenship of these states were a
new status created
by new laws enacted for the purpose in each country.
It was
acknowledged that each country had the right and
duty to prescribe the
qualifications for citizenship. The Indians in
Ceylon had only a
limited franchise even under British rule. They had
to prove five
years' continuous residence at the time of
registration as voters each
year, as well as an intention of living permanently
in the country.

Under the citizenship laws of independent Ceylon,

residents of Indian
and Pakistani origin had to prove only 7 years'
continuous residence in
the country prior to 1.1.1946. (10 years for
unmarried persons) and
thence to the date of application (the last date
being 5th August
1951), absence from island for a period not
exceeding 1 year on any one
occasion not being regarded as an interruption of
residence. Most of
the Indians in Sri Lanka were a floating population
and could not
satisfy these residential qualifications (In the
period 1923-38, 3,
145, 850 immigrants arrived in Sri Lanka from India
while 2, 821, 669
went back from this country to India - "Indians in
Sri Lanka" by H.
Chattopadhyaya, Calcutta 1979, p. 1 13) Both in
India and Ceylon
franchise is dependent on citizenship. A test of
residence is applied
in India and many other countries, for the grant of
citizenship. 9. See
text for the correct position.
10. Tamils can and do enter the public service and
the judiciary
without knowing a word of Sinhalese. They are given
generous terms to
acquire proficiency in the official language. See
article 343 of the
Constitution of India ; "Official Language of the
Union shall be Hindi
in the Devanagari script".
11. Article 5 of the Kandyan Convention (in the
Statute Book from 1815
to date) under which the Sinhalese kingdom was ceded
to the British in

1815 provides that "The Religion of the Boodhoo

professed by the Chiefs
and the Inhabitants of these Provinces, is declared
inviolable, and its
rites, Minister and Places of Worship are to be
maintained and
protected" (i.e. by the State). Under English
constitutional law, the
principles of which apply to this country in
appropriate cases,
articles of cession are binding on the crown and its
successors.
12. The demand for "balanced representation" as
conceived by the Tamil
political leadership in the 1930s in collusion with
British interests
was that in every legislature of independent Ceylon
"if the Sinhalese
(Low-country and Kandyan) have 50 % voting strength,
the minorities
(Ceylon Tamils, Europeans, Indian Tamils, Muslims)
jointly should have
50 % and it would not be denied that, of the 50 %
allowed to the
minorities jointly, the Tamils would be entitled to
a large share. . .
" (Memorandum of the All-Ceylon Tamil Conference,
1937). "For all
intents and purposes the more vociferous leaders of
communalism aim at
reducing the majority community to the position of a
minority ...."
(Memorandum of the Ceylon National Congress, 1938).
13. "flankai Tamil Arasu Kadchi" means "Ceylon Tamil
State Party". It
promised violence as far back as 1964. It was
deliberately misnamed
"Federal Party" in English by Chelvanayakam to
deceive non-Tamils -

"the party claiming in the Tamil language to

represent the ideal of a
Ceylon Tamil State ... while in English it
designated itself as the
Federal Freedom Party of the Tamil speaking
peoples". (A. J. Wilson,
"Racial Strife in Sri Lanka : The Role of an
Intermediary" published in
Conflict Quarterly.)
14. T.U.L.F. manifesto 1977 ; speech by the late S.
Kathiravelupillai,
M.P. for Kopay at the Roman Catholic Centre for
Society and Religion,
Colombo, May 1977. The irony is that "Eelam" means
"Sinhala country".
Prof. Krishnaswamy Aiyangar, in his Foreword to
Rasanayagam's "Ancient
Jaffna writes .. "Ilam to us seems to be directly
derived from the Pali
word Sihalam . . i.e. Sinhala.
15. K. M. de Silva, a professor of history is the
chairman of a limited
liability company styled "International Centre for
Ethnic Studies". It
is a recipient of foreign funds and promotes the
idea of regional
autonomy for minorities.
16. "Ethnicity, Prejudice and the Writing of
History", G. C. Mendis
Memorial Lecture, 1984.
17. G. C. Mendis was himself so biased by his
foreign training and
outlook that he saw the 2500 year history of Sri
Lanka as an extension
of the histories of foreign countries. The title of
one of his works,
which has disoriented generation of students,
including history

professors of today, is as follows :

"The Early History of Ceylon, or, the Indian Period
of Ceylon History".
Mendis divides the island story into, not periods of
Sri Lanka History,
but the North Indian Period (earliest times to 1017
A.D.), South Indian
period (1017 A.D, to 1505 A.D), Portuguese period,
Dutch Period and
British period ! "The British period is the most
important of all
periods of Ceylon History" ("Ceylon under the
British").
18. Sri Lanka : The National Question and the Tamil
Liberation Struggle
published by the Tamil Information Centre, London.
19. The first "Damilas" named in the Chronicles are
Sena and Guttaka.
Devanampiyatissa was the older brother of
Dutugemunu's paternal great
great grandfather (Mahavansa Ch. XXII). Thus
Dutugemunu's claim to the
throne. Ponnambalam is just malicious.
20. P. 20 of the main text, post.
21. The date is computed by Paranavithana in the
JRASCB article cited.
22. "Aryachakravarti" was an Indian title and not a
name.
23. i.e. lord.
24. Vickramabahu III (1357-74).
25. i.e. sovereign.

26. Rajavaliya means "Account of kings". Written in

the 17th century,
its language is colloquial.
27. "Navathotamunen". This could also mean "new
port".
28. It could bear a different meaning.
29. Rajavaliya cannot be correct about Chola
mercenaries. Chola power
was at an end in the 13th century. Alakeshwara
routed the
Aryachakravarti in the latter part of the 14th
century.
30. JRASCB Vol. VII (New Series) Part 2 p. 213.
31. The G. C. Mendis - S. G. Perera school, to whom
wars fought by the
Kandyan Sinhalese against invaders were "Kandyan
Wars" not British wars
; 19th Century British Imperialism meant "Rise of
the People" and a
"Period of Peace and Prosperity". K. M. de Silva has
published (1981) a
History of Sri Lanka, the text of which runs to 560
pages. The 20
centuries to the end of the 15th century are
dismissed in 92 pages. A
grossly inaccurate political map of "Sri Lanka in
the Seventeenth
Century"shows a small kingdom of Kandy and a smaller
kingdom of Jaffna
described as "Areas under the direct rule of the
Native Kings". (The
natives were not friendly). Sinhalese literature and
the Arts in the
19th and 20th centuries are discussed without any
mention of Munidasa
Cumaratunga, the most distinguished literary figure
of the period. 32.

Kotte.
33. Aryachakravarti.
34. Sitawaka.
35. Aryawansa, meaning, noble line.
36. "The Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of Ceylon"
by Father Fernao de
Queyroz, S.J. (Goa 1667) translated by Fr. S. G.
Perera S. J.
(1930) P-49. De Queyroz' account cannot be correct.
The
Aryachakravartis brought their title from South
India. Also incorrect
is de Queyroz' version that the Sinhalese prince
Sapumal Kumaraya was
the first ruler of Jaffna. He was governor of Jaffna
under
Parakramabahu VI for 17 to 20 years in the 15th
century.
37. Thus it appears that till 1951 the Tamils did
not think they had
traditional homelands.
38. A Northern Province was created for the first
time in 1833 in the
scheme of administration designed to break up the
Kandyan Sinhalese
Provinces. The present Anuradhapura District was
part of it till 1874.
The present Polonnaruwa District was part of the
Eastern Province from
1833-74. If the claim to the two provinces had been
made by the Tamils
in, say, 1850, the whole of the present North
Central Province would
have been included.

39. See text for historical data regarding the

Eastern Province. De
Silva makes these statements without any supporting
authority.
40. Such as his desire to impose a Malaysian history
in the teeth of
historical evidence.
SRI LANKA
TAMIL CLAIMS TO LAND: FACT AND FICTION
When the Portuguese arrived in Sri Lanka in the early
part of the 16th
century the seat of government of the island was at Kotte
near Colombo. De
Queyroz, a much quoted contemporary Portuguese historian,
writes in his
"Conquest of Ceylon" that "after the City of Cota (Kotte)
became the
metropolis there were in the island 15 kinglets subject
to the (Sinhalese)
King of Cota who therefore was considered to be Emperor,
and the same title
is in these days (i.e. after the Portuguese occupation of
Colombo) claimed
by the (Sinhalese) King of Candea. These Kinglets were of
Dinavaca, Uva,
Valave, Putalao (Puttalam), Mantota (near Mannar),
Tanagama, Muliauali,
Triquilimale, Cutiar (Koddlyar, the Bay of Trincomalee
and its hinterland),
Batecalao (Batticaloa), Paneva (Panama), Vintena
(Bintenna'), Orupula,
Mature, Candea and the point of the North, Jafnapatao
(Jaffnapatam or
Jaffna). . "1 As we shall see, foreign writers such as de
Queyroz who wrote
of the conditions of their times viewed local chieftains
subordinate to the

suzerainty of the sovereign as "Kinglets" or "Kings"

subject to an
"Emperor".
Right up to modern times it was the Indian tradition for
even owners of
large landholdings to call themselves 'Rajas" though they
had no temporal
power at all. What is relevant for the present argument
is that the
'Emperor" at Kotte was the suzerain of the entire
country. Kandy (Candea) in
the central hills became the seat of government in the
late 16th century,
after the death of King Rajasinghe 1 of Sitawaka who had
succeeded the kings
at Kotte as the principal ruler in the island2.
Kings of Kandy Ruled Jaffna
The Dutch priest Baldaeus, who was with the Dutch forces
which captured the
Portuguese coastal settlements with the assistance of and
on behalf of the
Sinhalese King, wrote an authoritative work entitled "A
true and exact
description of the Great Island of Ceylon" in 1672. He
records that on 18th
August 1613 King Senerat 3 summoned his Councillors from
the various parts
of his Kingdom to ensure the right of succession of his
eldest son.4 The
councillors who attended included amongst many others,
the "Kings" of
Cotiarum, Batecaloa, Panua, Palugam (which together
encompass. the present
Eastern Province) and one Namacar, the envoy of the
"King" of Jaffnapatam
(part of the present Northern Province).

The succession of the Crown Prince to Senerat being

agreed to by the
Council, Senerat issued a proclamation when the Council
reassembled on the
second day, part of which read as follows :
"Cenuwiraed (Senerat) by the Grace of God, Emperor of
Ceylon, King of Candy,
Setevaca (Sitawaka), Trinquenemale (Trincomalee),
Jaffnapatam, Settecorles
(Seven Korales), Manaer (Mannar), Chilaw, Chitaon Panua
(Panama), Batecaloa
(Batticaloa), Palugam (Palukamam) and Jaele (Yala),
Prince of Ove (Uva),
Denavaque (Denawaka), Pasdan Corle (Pasdum Korale),
Velaren (Wellassa),
Cotamale (Kotmale), Mewatre (Miwatura), and Ventane
(Bintenna), Duke of
Willagamme (Weligama on the Southern Coast), Gale
(Gaile), Ody (Udunuwara)
and Jattenore (Yatinuwara), Count of Quartercorle (Four
Korales), Harkepatte
(Harispattu), Odogodaskary (Udugoda Korale), Corwitty
(Kuruwita) and
Bategedre (Batugedera),5 Peace to all whom it may
concern.
'Whereas we lay sick in bed and not knowing the time of
dissolution we have
therefore assembled together all our principal officers
of state to consult
with them as to secure the tranquillity of our country
and to the well-being
of our beloved son Comara Singa Astana6 (who did not
eventually succeed
Senerat on the latter's death in 1635 but was passed over
in favour of
youngest son Maha Astana who was crowned as Rajasinghe
11)".
After appointing regents to rule the country till
Kumarasinghe came of age,

the Proclamation goes on thus "and we do further command

all kings and
princes, all dukes, counts, ecclesiastics, nobles,
governors, heads of all
lands and provinces, captains and presidents of all
councils, admirals,
chancellors5 and all other persons ... of every province,
town and village
jointly and severally that they acknowledge the aforesaid
princes, (i.e.,
the regents) as guardians and rulers of our Empire until
such time as the
hereditary prince shall come of age and for greater
security we have jointly
with the crown prince and all the assembled kings,
princes, nobles and
potentates affixed hereto our signature and confirmed it
with our seal of
office... Thus declared at the Imperial Palace at
Digelege7 this 19th day of
August 1613." It will be noted that one of the chieftains
who bound himself
was the "King" of Jaffnapatam through his representative
Namacar.
Although for most of its duration as a political unit the
"Kingdom" or
principality of Jaffna was de jure part of the dominions
of the Sinhalese
kings whether ruling at Gampola, Kotte, Sitawaka or
Kandy,8 during the
course of its existence from the end of the 13th century
to the beginning of
the 17th century, there were periods in which the
chieftain of this remote
province asserted his independence of the Sinhalese
overlord9.
Sometimes he pledged fealty to Portugal while
acknowledging the Sinhalese
king as his overlord.10 This precarious existence of the
"Kingdom of Jaffna"

ended in 1619 when a Portuguese general defeated the

"Ringlet" Sangili (who
was de jure a chieftain of Rajasinghe 11 of Kandy) at
Atchuvely in 1619.11
Sangili himself was a usurper. Jaffnapatam was thereafter
a Portuguese
settlement for 40 years till it was captured by the Dutch
in 1638. We are
here concerned with the boundaries of this "kingdom" of
Jaffnapatam12 which
alone might be claimed as 'the traditional homeland of
the Tamils' if such a
concept were to be acknowledged at all.
Jaffnapatam and the Eastern Province
Baidaeus, who accompanied the Dutch forces which took
Jaffnapatam in 1658,
lived and worked there as a missionary for eight years
till 1665. We are
fortunate to have his accurate and detailed description,
complete with a
map. "Jaffnapatam" says Baldaeus 'is divided into four
provinces and is very
thickly inhabited."
The four provinces were :
* Beligamme (Weligama at The time Sinhalese place
names were still in
use, now Valikamam),
* Tenmarache (Tenmaradchi),
* Waddemarache (Vadamaradchi) and
* Patchiarapalle (Pachchilaippali).
In addition the "adjacent isles" as well as the island of
Mannar (but no
part of modern mainland Mannar District) belonged to the
kingdom
Jaffnapatam. The "Isles" are Ourature (Modern Kayts),
Caradiva (modern Tamil

name Karaitivu), Pongardiva (now Pungidutivu), Analativa

(Analaitivu),
Nindundiva (Delft), Paletiva (Paletivu) and "some other
isles" i.e.,
Manditivu, Kachchativu, and other islets which are now
part of the territory
of Sri Lanka. According to Baldaeus, the "Province" of
Patchiarapalle
(modern Pachchilaippali) bordered on the Kingdom of Kandy
ruled by
Rajasinghe II. The Vanni (save a trip along the northern
and north west
coast) i.e., modern mainland Mannar District, most of
Kilinochchi District,
Vavuniya District, as well as Mulativu District (all in
the present Northern
Province) and the whole of the present Eastern Province
were part of the
dominions of the Sinhala king. Jaffnapatam was little
more than the Jaffna
Peninsula ("Jaffnapatam" being derived from the Sinhalese
"Yapa Patuna",
Yapa - High ranking official, Patuna-entrepot) plus the
adjacent islands and
the island of Mannar. The area of this territory is only
430 square miles.
The whole of the present Eastern Province was under the
direct rule of the
Sinhalese Kings at Kandy, the "Kings" referred to by
Baldaeus and de Queyroz
having been only Vanniyas (Chieftains) and Disaves
(provincial governors).
Though the Portuguese and the Dutch built forts at
Trincomalee, the huge bay
called Koddiar Bay was under the control of the King
(Emperor) at Kandy.
Robert Knox and his party were captured at Koddiar Bay by
King Rajasinghe's
men. De Queyroz states that Trincomalee, Koddiar,
"Tambalagama" and

"Gantale" were some of the teritories of the Kingdom of

Kandy.
Koddiar, Batticaloa and Puttalam were the main ports of
the Sinhalese Kings
who ruled in Kandy when the Portuguese, the Dutch and the
British were
successively in occupation of settlements on the
northern, south western and
southern coasts. The Dutch Governor Ryckloff van Goens
(Snr) reported in
December 1663 (at a time when the Dutch, having broken
their treaty with
Rajasinghe II entered into in 1638, were attempting to
establish title even
to Rajasinghe's dominions) that "The country between the
Waluwe (Walawe
River in the modern Southern province) and Trinquemale
(Trincomalee) mostly
stretches east and east north-east as far as Jale (Yala,
now a wild life
sanctuary), turns to the north and north-west upto
Trinquenemale. I have
been been able to visit this district as it is entirely
inhabited by the
King's (i.e. Rajasinghe's) people."
Tamils, Muslims and Catholics in Sinhalese Territory
When the Portuguese persecuted the Arabs,13 Sinhalese
Buddhist Kings invited
them to settle in their dominions. This was the origin of
the large muslim
population in the Eastern Province at the present time.
They also settled
down on invitation in the Central Province and even inthe
North Central
Vanni (Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa districts) where
traditional Sinhalese
villages now have as their neighbours traditional Muslim
villages, all

dependent on agriculture under irrigation from village

tanks. In 1762,
Pybus, the British Ambassador from Madras to the Court at
Kandy, was
received by the King's officers at Mutur on the southern
beach of Koddiar
(Trincomalee) Bay on 5th, May, conducted in State through
modern
Trincomalee, Polonnaruwa and Matale Districts to Kandy
and taken back to
Mutur on 2nd July14
The district of Mutur had 64 villages under "3 Headmen
who have the
management for the General to whose Government it
belongs, who (i.e., the
General) resides at Candia (Kandy)" states Pybus in the
diary of his
journey.14 The King's Disava (Provincial Administrator)
is called "General"
by Pybus. He is called "King" by de Queyroz and by
Baladeus. In 1766 the
Dutch Governor Falck, with an army behind him, forced
King Kirti Sri
Rajasinghe of Kandy to sign a treaty ceding 15 to the
Dutch a coastal strip
4 miles in breadth along the whole of the coastline of
modern Eastern
Province (as well as part of the western coast). Kirt Sri
later refused to
be bound by the treaty as it was signed under duress. But
there could be no
better proof that the whole of the present Eastern
Province was
acknowledgedly a Sinhalese domain till 1766, so that
there is no question of
this Province ever having been part of an independent
Tamil Ealam or of
"traditional homelands" of the Tamils. Tamils, Muslims,
Mukkuvars
(fisherfolk from the Malabar or Kerala coast in India)
and Sinhalese lived

under Sinhalese rule without discrimination. The private

rights of each race
were governed by customary laws. It is an outrage that
the historical
tolerance and hospitality of the Sinhalese are now
exploited with the lie of
Tamil "traditional home-lands" to deprive the Sinhalese
of benefits of
national investment on public land in a sparsely
populated region which was,
till the Sinhalese ceded15 the coastal strip to the Dutch
in 1766 and the
interior to the British in 1815, 16 part of the Sinhalese
dominions.
When the Portugese persecuted the Muslims in the
settlements occupied by the
former, the Sinhalese Buddhist Kings settled the latter
in the modern
Eastern Province and the Central Province. When the Dutch
persecuted the
Catholics, the Sinhalese Buddhist kings who had their
seat at Kandy settled
them too within their dominions. This is how there is a
large Catholic
settlement at Wahacotte, Matale District, in the heart of
the country. In
1658 the Dutch issued a proclamation making the
harbouring or giving of
protection to a Roman Catholic priest a capital offence.
Father Joseph Vaz,
a hero of Roman Catholic history in this country, owed
his life to the
intercession and protection of a Sinhalese Buddhist King.
According to Professor Sinnappa Arasaratnam the Dutch
wished to conclude a
new treaty with the Sinhalese King Wimaladharmasuriya II
(1687 - 1707), as
under their treaties with his predecessor Rajasinghe II
(1635 - 1687) they

held the settlements captured from Portugese only as a

form of security for
repayment to them of the expenses incurred in fighting
the Portugese (which
was undertaken on behalf of the treaty which provided for
continued
occupation of the former Portugese territories until
their expenses were
paid, or, in the alternative, for the cession of the
coastal strip between
the Walawe Ganga and the Kalu Ganga, the small island of
Pulliyantivu on
which the Batticaloa Fort had been erected, and the inner
bay of Trincomalee
harbour. King Wimaladharmasuriya II rejected these
propsals. The Sinhalese
Kings throughout considered the Dutch as a security force
employed for the
protection of the coastal belts of the island
("Wimaladharmasuriya II (1687
- 1707) and his relations with the Dutch" by S.
Arasaratnam published in the
Ceylon Journal of Historical andn Social Studies VOL. 6
No. 1.)
Who are the Tamils?
The modern Nothern Province (3352 square miles) is also
sparsely populated
with the exception of Jaffna Peninsula (approx. 430
square miles) even
today. We have seen that only Jaffna Peninsula could for
historical or
demographic reasons be considered a traditional homeland
of the modern Sri
Lanka Tamils if such a concept were to be entertained.
Even here the history
of Tamil settlement is comparatively recent considering
the antiquity of the
history of Sri Lanka. "The colonisation of Jaffna by the
Tamils cannot be of

extreme antiquity" writes H.W. Codrington in his work

"Ancient Land Tenure
and Revenue in Ceylon" (1938). "Such Sinhalese place
names as exist, and
they are not a few, are not pre-medival, and the
Vaipavanmalai (Yalpana
Vaipavanmalai composed in 1736 A.D., by Mailvagna
Puravar, an inhabitant of
Jaffna Peninsula on the isntructions of the contemporary
Dutch administrator
of Jaffna, and added to in British times) though
unreliable as serious
history, records the presence of the Sinhalese in the
peninsula in the 15th
Century". K. Balasingham, the eminent Tamil lawyer,
politician and scholar
writes that "There is no proper history of Jaffna prior
to the Arya
Chakravartis" (i.s., before the latter part of the 13th
century).[N-17]
THERE IS A HISTORY BUT NOT OF THE TAMILS. EVEN C.
RASANAYAGAM IN HIS HEAVILY
TAMIL-BIASED ("WHAT FEELINGS OF JUST PRIDE AND PATRIOTISM
WOULD SWELL IN THE
HEART OF EVERY TRUE SON OF JAFFNA, IF HE COULD BUT PEEP
INTO THE GLORIES OF
HER PAST!") "ANCIENT JAFFNA" (1926) ADMITS "THAT JAFFNA
WA 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
evidence is that the people indentified in modern times
as Sri Lanka Tamils
are mostly descendents of Malayalees from the Malabar or
Kerala coast (Magha
of Kalinga-modern Orissa and part of Andhra Pradesh invaded the country in
the 13th century with an army from Kerala), Tamils from
the Coromandel coast

who came with the advent of the Arya Chakravarti

chieftains from the 13th
Century onwards, Malays from the armies of the Javaka
invader Chandrabhanu
(13th century), the Sinhalese who were original settlers
as well as migrants
from the Vanni when the Dry Zone irrigation systems
collapsed, the
comparatively few ancient Tamil invaders and nonmilitary
immigrants who
would have been both original settlers in the Peninsula
as well as
immigrants from the Vanni after the collapse of the
irrigation systems,
Paravars (the Bharatha community) who came in Portugese
and Dutch times as
pearl divers, soldiers and fishermen, Kalingas (from
modern Orissa and
Andhra Pradesh), Mukkuvars from the Malabar coast, Arabs,
Moors from South
India, and Portugese who were given land grants and
settled in Jaffna from
1619 to 1658.18 Most of the descendents of old Tamil
invaders and traders
who came from time to time from the 3rd Century B.C. to
the 11th Century
A.D., must have settled down in areas now predominantly
Sinhalese and got
absorbed into the modern Sinhalese population.19 They
could not be among the
Tamil population of today.
The ancestry of the Sri Lanka Tamils of the present time
therefore is not
clear. This has been an ambarassment to modern day Tamil
historians, lawyers
and politicians. Hindu law has no application to Hindu
Tamils (most of them
Saivite) in this country. The Tamils of the Northern
Province are governed
with respect to certain subjects by customary rules of
the licality known as

Thesavalamai (codified by the Dutch in 1707) i.e.,

customs of the region.
The Thesavalamai applied according to the codifiers to
"the Malabar
Inhabitants of the Province of Jaffna". The Malabar coast
is in Kerala. One
of the principal features of the Thesavalamai, the right
of pre-emption
among co-owners, is derived from Muslim customary law
personal to
Mohammedans in India and unknown to Hindu customary law
(The three T.U.L.F.
leaders, all lawyers, attending the Round Table
Conference did not know
this).
The Tamils of the Eastern Province are not governed by
the Thesavalamai.
They are subject to the Roman-Dutch law. The Mukkuvars of
the Eastern
Province are governed by their own Mukkuva law. Whether
they are Malaalees
who later adopted the Tamil language or were originally
Tamils is a moot
point. Some Paravars are Tamil speaking, while others are
Sinhalese speaking
and even bilingual. That the descendants of such
disparate forebears have
welded themselves by the unifying force of Saivism and
the Tamil language
into a racial group wiht a distinct and distinguished
culture, though
divided by caste, is a remarkable cultural achievement.
But such a racial
group has no "historic or "traditional" homelands. This
is why when its
leaders struggled for places at the top of Lanka society
they had to find an
absurd claim for their followers.
Dangerous Cry

The cry of "traditional homelands" is dangerous as well

as absurd. The
hillcountry districts of Ceylon have been peopled by the
Sinhalese for
centuries. The seat of the last kings was Kandy in these
territories. From
the 16th Century to the 19th, the Kings fought the
Portugese, the Dutch and
the British for the independence of the country. The
British administered
the coastal possessions (including Jaffna) taken from the
Dutch in 1796 and
ceded to them by the Treaty of Amiens, as a Crown Colony
from 1801, calling
them "the Maritime Provinces". In 1815, after obtaining
the cession of the
Kandyan Kingdom they administered the Maritime Provinces
as one unit and the
Kandyan Provinces as a separte unit in terms of the
treaty of cession which
is still on the statute book.
The territory which comprised the "Kingdom of Jaffna" was
naver administered
as a separate political entity by the British, the Dutch
or the Portugese.
The Kandyan Provinces and the Maritime Provinces were
brought under one
administration in 1833 consequent to the ColebrookeCameron reforms and the
entire island was divided in that year into 5 provinces.
The Sinhalese of
the Kandyan Provinces have been designated Kandyan
Sinhalese from 1815 to
date. If any peasantry could be described as "down
trodden" it is admittedly
the Kandyan peasantry. The Kandyan rebellion of 1818
which nearly drove the
British out of the island was put down with a ferocity
unparalled in British

colonialist annals. The country was pillaged, villages

were burnt down,
males over 14 years of age were murdered as a matter of
policy, and fields
devastated. The Chieftains were executed and exiled and
families which
betrayed the Rebellion were elevated to positions of
social and economic
power to keep the country safe for the British. ("The
rich Province of
Dumbara... will not be reduced to good order till severe
examples are made
in it affecting both lives and Property...". Governor
Brownrigg to Lord
Bathurst, Secretary of State, 19.2.1818). The Kandyan
population was subject
to deliberate neglect through the whole period of British
rule, in pursuance
of a strategy never to permit another formidable rising.
Table I illustrates
the political debilitation of the Kandyans in the early
20th century, when
"racial" or "communal" representation was a recognized
principle20.
TABLE - 1
REPRESENTATION OF TERRITORIAL ELECTORATES IN THE
LEGISLATIVE CONCIL 1921 1924
Electorate
Name & race of

Total
Pop. In

Total No.
Majority race & Of voters

1921

No.

on Ltd.

Member elected
Franchise
A.C.G.
Central
Wijekone
Province
Low-Country

Kandyan
717,739

Sinhalese

2,427

316,142
Sinhalese
Low-Country
James Peiris
Colombo Town
Low-Country

244,163

Sinhalese

4,325

110,470
Sinhalese
Eastern

Ceylon

E.R.
Province
Thambimuttu

192,821

Tamils101,880

806

Ceylon Tamil
North-Central

Kandyan

S.D.
Province
Krishnaratne

96,525

Sinhalese

385

66,912
Ceylon Tamil
North-Western
C.E. Corea
Province
Low-Country

Kandyan
492,181

Sinhalese

4,813

254,984
Sinhalese
Northern
Province
W.Duraisamy
Ceylon
Tamil
Rev. W.E.
Sabaragamuwa
Boteju
Province
Low-Country

374,829

Ceylon Tamils

13,937

352,322

Kandyan
471,814

Sinhalese
302,900

1,344

Sinhalese
C.W.W.
Southern
Kannangara
Province
Low-Country

Low-Country
671,234

Sinhalese

4,123

630,851
Sinhalese
(1923)
Kandyan
D.H.
Uva Province
Kotalawela

233,864

Sinhalese

633

124,983
Low-Country
Sinhalese
Western
W.M. Rajapakse
Province
Low-Country

Low-country
1,246,847 Sinhalese

A' Div.
6,785

Sinhalese
B' Div.
E.W. Perera
9,526
Low-Country
Sinhalese
The result of those policies is that even today the
Kandyan peasantry are
indigent, landless and exploited. In the 19th century,
when it was realised
by the British that the hill-country lands could be most
suitable for

exploitation by British capital, these lands, the

"traditional homelands" of
the Kandyan Sinhalese, were expropriated and transferred
to British
plantation companies and individual capitalists. Nearly
one million acres
were given to British capitalists in the period 1836-86.
Thousands of South
Indian Tamils were brought in and settled on these
homelands to provide
labor for British capital. What if the Kandyan Sinhalese
now demand the
expulsion of the Tamils of recent Indian origin from the
hill country
districts on the gound that their traditional homelands
have been violated?
But neither the Kandyan Sinhalese nor the Low country
Sinhalese have raised
this issue of "traditional homelands", which is peculiar
to the Tamils
[N-21].
By contrast this is how the Tamils formulate their
fantastic demand: "The
aggression against Tamil Eelam by planned colonisation by
Sinhalese
governments has been drastic and grave. Beginningn with
the government of
the United National Party and those of the Mahajana
Eksath Peramuna (a
coalition formed in 1955 and not the M.E.P. of today) and
Sri Lanka Freedom
Party that followed, in turn put into operation (sic)
planned and
state-aided colonisation schemes by which lakhs and lakhs
of Sinhalese
people were planted in the homeland of the Tamil nation
..... Sinhalese
people were put in occupation', at state expense, of
extensive tracts of the
Eastern Province [N-22] at Pattipola Aru (i.e. Gal Oya),
Allai Kantalai 23

(both in Trincomalee District), Padavikulam known only as

Padaviya never by
this Tamilised form), etc...... the Eastern Province
where when the British
left in 1948, there were hardly a 10,000 Sinhalese, is
now flooded with some
180,000 Sinhalese people....The Tamil nation is
.....being thus destroyed in
its own homeland all over Tamil Eelam. The nation
realises the need to
liberate this land24 to save itself from
annihilation...."
State Land and the Peasantry
If schemes of devolution of power are considered without
reference to
issues, and, if under any such scheme, control of public
land in sparsely
populated areas is devolved on a Tamil administration the
result would be a
disaster. In India, the States Reorganization Commission
realized as far
bacj as 1955 that the concept of communal or historic
"homelands" was a
threat to the integrity of the country. In its report
published on 10th
October, 1955 the Commission firmly rejected this concept
as it "offended
against" the very basis of the Indian Constitution. The
theory of "one
language, one state" was also rejected. Premier Rajiv
Gandhi and his
advisers would no doubt appreciate how much more
dangerous, more absurd and
less valid such claimsmare in the Sri Lanka situation.
It would be relevant to observe at this stage the
population figures for the
modern Northern and Eastern Provinces at the time of
attainment of

independence. The result of the first post-war Census in

1946 revealed that
there were just 13,746 persons living in the 534 square
miles of Jaffna
District situated in the mainland south of the Peninsula.
Mannar District,
exclusive of Mannar Island, was 887 square miles in
extent but had only
15,124 people. The population of Vavuniya, which had
within its 1946
boundaries 1466 square miles, was 23,246. The whole of
the mainland Northern
Province (the Northern Vanni of the Sinhalese dominions)
had a population of
52,116 souls (0.78% of the population of the country)
yielding a density of
18 persons per square mile [N-25]. How could any policy
or proposal which
has as one of its objectives the exclusion of the
majority community from
lands developed in this area with public funds (of which
naturally the
biggest share comes from the majority) be anything but a
subversion of the
integrity of the country? Under secret agreements entered
into by successive
governments, in and since 1957 with racist Tamil parties
to woo their
support, the Sinhalese peasantry have actually been
excluded from all
benefits under major projects in this area since 1957.
This has been the
case though every such project has been the restoration
of an old irrigation
work constructed by a Sinhalese King (and the development
of land rendered
irrigable by such restoration).
Trincomalee District is no different. There was in 1946,
a population of
36,323 in the approximately 1,000 square miles situated
outside Trincomalee

town. Batticaloa, the other district in the Eastern

Province (where most of
the lands developed later under the massive Gal Oya
project is situated),
had an area of 2,792 square miles and a Sri Lanka Tamil
population of
101,061. The 85,375 Sri Lanka Muslims were descendants of
the Arabs settled
in the territory by the Sinhalese King to save them from
persecution by the
Portugese in the western coastal areas. By contrast,
Nuwara Eliya District
in the Central Province in the heartland of the Kandyan
Provinces, had a
population of 268,121 in an area of 473 square miles,
yielding a density of
567 persons per square mile ! As a result of British
sponsored immigration
of Tamils from South india and illicit immigration,
Indian Tamils
outnumbered the Sinhalese 153,694 (57.3%) to 101,270
(37.8%). Between 1921
and 1946 the Indian Tamils had increased their numbers by
51.3%. In Kandy
District in the Central Province, the population was
711,449 in an area of
913 square miles (a density of 779 persons to the square
mile). The Kandyan
Sinhalese were 47.7% of the population while the Indian
Tamils were 29.2%.
Table II gives a fair idea of pressure of population on
land in the various
areas of our predominantly agricultural country. How much
a Sinhala majority
country Sri Lanka is may be judged from Table III.
TABLE II
Density of
Rural
Population

District
than Estate
Colombo1
Gampaha1
Kalutara
Kandy
Matale
Nuwara Eliya
Galle
Matara
Hambantota
Jaffna2
Kilinochchi3
Mannar
Vavuniya
Mullaitivu
Batticaloa
Ampara
Trincomalee
Kurunegala
Puttlam
Anuradhapura
Polonnaruwa
Badulla
Moneragala
Ratnapura
Kegalle

Land (Square

population

Other

miles)

per sq. mile

(1981)
6,848
2,583
1,334
1,233
466
1,101
1,261
1,339
424
1,718
203
141
94
127
348
337
254
658
429
214
200
591
102
637
1,063

%
25.2
72.1
73.2
75.3
80.9
32.9
76.8
85.8
89.9
65.5
83.3
85.8
82.7
90.6
75.9
86.2
66.1
95.5
86.9
92.7
91.4
66.9
94.8
79.1
83.0

248
538
620
913
767
474
646
481
1,001
430
452
758
1,020
610
951
1,152
1,010
1,842
1,149
2,752
1,314
1,088
2,754
1,250
642

1 - Approximate: Gampaha, Mullaitivu, Kilinochchi

districts were created
betwen the Census of 1971 and 1981.
2 - Jaffna Peninsula
3 - Formerly mainland Jaffna
TABLE III
1981 CENSUS OF POPULATION
Religion
Ethnicity

District
Total No. Buddhist
Hindu
Muslim
Roman
Other
Oth
ers Sinhala
Sri LankaIndian Sri Lanka Burgher Malay
Others
Of Persons
Catholic Christians
Tamil
Tamil
Moor
Sri Lanka
14,850,001 10,292,586 2,295,858
1,134,5561,009,577 102,159
15,
265 10,985,66 1,871,535825,233 1,056,972 38,236
43,37829,931
Colombo
1,693,322 1,201,775 129,664
168,956
155,168
38,853
3,9
06 1,322,658 165,952 21,504 140,461
18,997
20,0418,709
Kalutara
827,189
698,789
36,902
62,781
26,254
2,249
214
722,075
8,601
33,510 61,706
330
712
255
Kandy
1,126,296 837,684
134,347
125,646
18,984
7,261
2,3
74 844,325
55,675
104,840 112,052
2,402
2,648
4,354
Matale
357,441
281,179
41,337
26,603
7,196
1,066
60
285,514
20,936
24,084 25,836
250
514
307
Nuwara Eliya522,219
184,796
290,345
15,791
25,805
5,054
428
187,280
70,471
247,131 14,668
602
1,113
954
Galle
814,579
766,840
14,753
26,359
3,247
1,283
2,0

97 768,928
6,093
11,069 25,896
216
158
2,219
Matara
644,231
609,131
15,366
16,853
1,916
755
210
609,367
3,918
13,931 16,457
254
61
243
Hambantota 424,102
412,510
1,535
9,333
448
148
128
412,965
1,553
308
4,732
63
4,380
101
Jaffna
831,112
4,068
708,004
14,169
95,566
9,144
161
4,615
792,246 20,001 13,757
350
46
97
Mannar
106,940
3,224
28,500
30,079
44,003
995
139
8,710
54,106
14,072 28,464
41
23
1,524
Vavuniya
95,904
15,807
66,424
6,764
6,183
704
22
15,876
54,541
18,592 6,640
21
31
203
Batticaloa 330,899
8,864
219,343
79,662
19,113
3,612
305
10,646
234,348 3,868
79,317
2,300
49
371
Ampara
388,786
144,778
74,328
161,754
5,516
2,149
261
146,371
78,315
1,410
161,481
643
179
387
Trincomalee 256,790
83,143
81,684
75,761
14,169
1,194
839
86,341
86,743
6,767
74,403
1,211
735
590
Kurunegala 1,212,755 1,095,710 13,373
64,213
35,608
3,310

541
1,128,548 13,438
6,427
61,342
605
1,201
1,194
Puttalam
493,344
234,519
20,458
50,246
185,559
2,146
416
407,453
33,218
2,964
47,959
444
882
424
Anuradhapura587,822
530,383
5,985
43,801
6,443
776
434
536,899
7,113
785
41,833
280
266
646
Polonnaruwa 262,753
236,126
5,245
17,621
3,154
255
352
238,803
5,875
205
17,091
57
132
590
Badulla
642,893
439,141
160,695
28,759
11,072
2,916
310
440,245
36,585
135,795 26,808
641
1,300
1,519
Moneragala 297,743
259,665
12,845
5,750
1,140
268
75
259,825
5,023
9,164
5,322
80
152
177
Ratnapura
796,468
673,200
95,004
15,441
10,587
1,977
259
674,657
17,979
88,429 13,531
450
410
1,012
Kegalle
682,411
581,723
52,575
36,548
8,031
3,284
247
588,675
14,095
43,879 34,832
164
251
515
Gampaha
1,389,490 988,543
26,480
47,850
312,818
12,317
1,4
82 1,280,942 45,807
5,732
38,607
7,742
8,077
2,583

Mullaitivu 77,512
11,597
440
3,948
58,904

988
05
10,766

60,666
3,777

93

3,816
17

07

In 1840 the British enacted legislation that enabled them

to appropriate as
Crown Land "all forest, waste and unoccupied land". Hena
land or land
cultivated regularly, but at intervals, which belonged to
every village
community was included in the definition of forest and
waste. The Kandyan
peasantry lost most of the land hitherto available to
them for expansion,
for use as sources of water, for conservation of hill
sides and for
carefully planned hena cultivation. In the sparsely
populated Eastern,
North-Central and Northern provinces the principal effect
was to nationalise
hundreds of thousands of acres of land and make them
available for future
development on a planned basis, though this was hardly
the intention.
These latter areas were in the dry zone where a
remarkable irrigation
civilization flourished under Sinhalese kings (invaders
from South India
destroyed irrigation works though I do not believe this
caused a collapse of
the irrigation systems - the invasions being sporadic,
the longest
occupation lasting only 77 years from 993 to 1070 A.D.).
This agro-economic
system failed due to reaons I have set out in a technical
note in 1978, in
"Truth about the Mahaweli". The lands reverted to forest
and not till the
British Governor Sir Henry Ward's efforts in the 19th
Century was the

restoration of the irrigation systems seriously

considered.
The Land Commission of 1927 adopted the concept that the
Crown, the biggest
landowner, held these lands in trusteeship for all the
people. It also
recommended a systematic programme of land use planning
that included
"mapping out" of village lands and of vast extents in
forest for village
expansion on the one hand and for agriculture development
by settlement
(colonisation) of peasant farmers on the other. Forest
land was to be
rendered scientifically cultivable by the restoration of
the irrigation
works of the ancient Sinhalese. Sri Lanka was to be the
granary of the East
once again. D.S. Senanayake, a member of the Commission,
later Minister of
Agriculture and Lands (1931-47), inspired by outstanding
British public
servants such as C.V. Brayne (who experimented with a
"peasant propretor
system" in the Eastern Province), and fired a by sense of
patriotism that
was truly national, dedicated himself to the upliftment
of a miserable
peasantry by the development of "colonisation schemes"
which were large
scale projects benefiting the agricultural population in
general (without
heed to race, religion or caste) and village expansion
schemes which, as the
term implies, were to benefit only the particular
villages in which
development was undertaken.27
There was an overall social policy of building up a
strong, independent

farming society and racial considerations were not

contemplated; so much so
that not till the nineteen forties were the special
circumstances of misery
historically imposed on the Kandyan peasantry given
particular
consideration.
The British plantation interests, however, were, opposed
to the expenditure
of public funds on projects that would benefit the
indigenous peasantry.
They would rather have priority in public investment
continue to be given to
the plantation and mercantile sectors. Mr. D.S.
Senanayake had a struggle
before he succeeded in obtaining public funds for
irrigation developement.
The contention was not whether the Sinhalese or the
Tamils were to be
benefit but whether investment on a big scale should be
made on the
peasantry of the country instead of on foreign plantation
interests.28
The Land Development Ordinance enacted as a consequence
of the
recommendations of the Land Commission 1929 was pposed by
the European
Association, the Tamil members of the State Council and
by Indian interests,
though the final reading of the bill in 1934 went through
without a
division. C.V. Brayne, the first Land Commissioner
commented thus on this
bill in his last Administration Report (1934): "The most
important problem
before the Government of Ceylon concerns THE WELFARE OF
THE PEASANTS, their
establishment upon the land, the developement of markets
for their produce,

the improvement of their methods of production and the

raising of their
standard of living.
"As far as the development of Crown land is concerned,
provision for the
peasants' needs in all future alienations is now secured.
The new bill is in
this respect their Magna Carta...Could the wide available
spaces of the Dry
Zone be thrown upon to this teemiing population and
developed successfully
in small farms, annually tilled with the plough and
harrow, it would be a
great step forward in a general raising of the standard
of living of the
peasantry of the whole Island".
This Englishman had no means of anticipating the extremes
to which Tamil
communalism could go or the support that communalism
could receive from
local non-Tamil groups aligned to other interests and
from thoroughly
irresponsible foreign elements. When the Tamil political
leaders in alliance
with the European interests (which were a power in the
country in the
1930's) opposed the grant of independence, they (the
Tamils) made wild
charges of preference by the Sinhala Ministers towards
the Sinhalese in the
allocation of public revenus.
The All Ceylon Tamil Congress furnished the British with
"data" purporting
to support thsi charge. According to these, between the
beginning of the
century and 1931 i.e., when the colonial regime was all
powerful, nearly 8
million rupees, or 50% of the total expenditure on major
irrigation works,

were invested in the "Tamil" areas i.e., the Northern and

Eastern Provinces
which had a population of about 10% of the total
population of the Island;
but, when a high degree of self-rule was granted in 1931
and Sinhalese
Ministers elected on universal adult suffrage had power,
only about 2
million rupees out of total expenditure of 11.5 million
rupees i.e. about
19% were spent on major construction works in the
Northern and Eastern
provinces. In the period 1931 - 1943, most of the acreage
rendered irrigable
was in the Central and North Central provinces where the
Sinhalese were in a
majority.
This was serious discrimination, the result of self-rulw.
Aprt from the
patent absurdity of these charges, the fact that 8,000
acres in the Northern
Province and 20,000 acres in the Eastern Province
provided with irrigation
had not yet been cultivated was suppressed. The complaint
illustrates the
aberration or racist attitudes as well as the loyalty of
the Tamil
leadership to the imperialist regime. What about the
present situation? Of
the 513,144 acres of paddy land under major irrigation in
the country in the
Maha season 1979/80, 20% was in the Districts of Jaffna,
Vavuniya, Mannar,
Mullaitivu and Batticaloa and farmed, except in
Batticaloa, exclusively by
Sri Lanka Tamils. The population of Sri Lanka Tamils in
these districts was
only 8% of the total population of the country. By
comparison, Kurunegala
and Kandy Districts with a Sinhalese population that was
13.3% of the total

national population had only 6% of the total acreage

under major irrigation.
37% of the paddy acreage in the "Tamil" districts named
above was served by
major works whereas in Kurunegala District the proportion
was 17.5% and in
Kandy 20%. Mannar and Vavuniya combined, with a
population (of all races) of
202,844 have 32,000 acres under major works, while
Kurunegala District
(population 1,212,755) has only 30,510 acres in major
schemes out of a total
paddy acreage of 174,224; approximately 75,000 acres in
the latter District
are uncultivated in the Yala season every year for lack
of water.
Every ancient major irrigation work in the Northern and
Eastern Provinces,
is according to R.L. Brohier, 29 the work of Sinhalese
Kings and Sinhalese
engineers. All the irrigation development in these
districts except Gal Oya
was based on the restoration of ancient works. According
to the Tamil
demand, when a work of the Sinhalese is restored as a
national investment,
Tamils only must get the benefits; and so it has happened
in the Northern
and Eastern Provinces for the 27 years past, as a result
of secret
agreements. In 1962, when 245 allotments were to be
alienated in Morawewa
Scheme in Trincomalee District, rules were bent to
restrict the area of
selection to that District only and to exclude land
hungry Sinhalese even in
that District. The result was that there were only 225
applicant for 245
allotments developed and irrigated at high cost. There is
no landlessness

amongst the Tamil agriculturusts in the Northern and

Eastern Provinces,
except in the Peninsula of Jaffna, even today.
High cost major schemes in this poor country cannot be
reduced to village
projects in allocating benefits. This is a waste of
public funds and an
injustice to the entire nation. Articulate Tamils make
frenzied allegations
of Sinhalese aggression by colonisation; and encourage
organized illegal
settlement by Indians on state land held in trusteeship
for the nation.
Various othe rlocal andn foreign interests support this
subversion of a
"Third World" country.
Church Support for Tamil Claims
This subversive attitude is supported by some Roman
Catholic authorities
(not at all by Roman Catholics at large) presumably in
accordance with some
political strategy. "The policy of colonisation or
settlement of families in
the North Central and Eastern regions of the country
continued during the
decades from 1931 onwards. This benefited mainly the
Sinhala people from the
more densely populated south. The Tamils feared that this
policy would
convert their traditional homelands to ones with an
increasing Sinhala
proportions in Amparai andn Trincolamee". (Fr. Tissa
Balasuriya, O.M.I.
Director of the Centre for Society and Religion,
"Catastrophe July 1983"
page 20).

Note that "Traditional Homelands" of the Tamils are

recognized and it is
specifically suggested that colonisation from 1931
onwards (unfairly)
benefited mainly the Sinhala people.
The organized encroachment on State land with a view to
settlement of
stateless persons to pre-empt planned development of
these areas by the
government and populating the borderland of "Tamil Eelam"
are presented by
Fr. Balasuriya in these terms: "In any case a consequence
of this violence
(in 1977, 1981, 1983) has been that several tens of
thousands of Tamils of
recent Indian origin.... have gone to more hospitable
surroundings in the
North and East or to India.
"The very migration to the North has created further
problems ...... as
Sinhala people may resent their presence or be wary of
the agencies set up
to receive and support them". He goes on to support
another totally false
claim; "It is claimed that 180,000 plantation workers
have been uprooted due
to communal violence in 1983. They have fled mainly to
the North and East of
Sri Lanka (contrast, tens of thousands' mentioned
earlier". This is an
immense human trageyd unparalleled in recent centuries".
The good Father is not mearly taking a "line" but also
attempting to justify
the illegal activities and the immoral foreign funding of
the agencies
organising settlements as several of these are Roman
Catholic though
unsupported by the Roman Catholic public in Sri Lanka.
These settlements

also provide training grounds for young Tamil terrorists

whom the Father
calls "freedom fighters", the term the terrorists apply
to themselves.
Encouragement of illegal settlement and of terrorism by
certain interests
only add to problems and are a distraction from the main
issue in this
country which is the raising of the standard of living of
the millions who
live in poverty. The debates and seminars concern only a
minority of the
privileged.
NOTES TO THE TEXT
1. De Queyroz, op. Cit. P. 32. See also pp. 101 and
528. "Rata",
"Rajja", "Rajya" could mean in Sinhalese, "state",
"country",
"province" or "district". The "kinglets" were
chieftains. See note 30
below.
2. De Queyroz, op. cit. P. 469: "On the death of
Raju (1593) whom the
whole of Ceylon including Jafanapatao and the
furthest of the Highlands
obeyed .....".
3. King of Kandy, 1604 - 1635. He was taken ill in
1613 and did not
expect to survive. See n. 11 below for reference to
Baldaeus' work.
4. Kumarasinghe.
5. Baldaeus gives the Europeanisedforms of Sinhalese
titles.

6. Kumarasinghe.
7. Diyatilaka. For the full text, see Baldaeus, op.
Cit. Ch. 14.
8. See Paranavithana, de Queyroz and Baldaeus, op.
Cit. And the
Introduction.
9. See Introduction.
10. De Queyroz, op. Cit. P. 371. The terms the
"King" of Jaffnapatam
settled with the Portugese viceroy in 1561 were
written in Portugese
and Sinhalese !
11. Phillipus Baldaeus, "A true and Exact
Description of the Great
Island of Ceylon", translated into English by Pieter
Brohier published
as Vol. VIII of the Ceylon Historical Journal. For
the Portugese
conquest of Jaffna, see p. 316.
12. Historians are confused and in turn confuse
others about the
"Kingdom" of Jaffna.
According to G.C. Mendis, "The Tamil Kingdom
came into existence
with the rule of Magha of Kalinga (who invaded
Sri Lanka about
1215 A.D.), and Parakrama Bahu II (1236 - 1270)
never ruled over
the modern (i.e. post 1874) Northern Province
which continued to
be occupied by the successors of Magha. Mendis
forgets that Magha
was not a Tamil but a Kalinga (Kalinga is
modern Orissa) and that

his army was Kerala (Malayalee). Magha and his

forces were crushed
in a battle near kalawewa about 1250 A.D.
The Chulavansa is emphatic that after Parakrama
Bahu II defeated
Magha of Kalinga and the Malay invader
Chandrabhanu, he united the
country under one sovereignty. Prasasti'
(valedictiry)
inscriptions of two Pandyan kings of South
India refer to
victories in Sri Lanka about this period. In
order to explain
these our historians guess that a separate
kingdom must have been
established in the northern extremity of the
Island (which is not
the whole of the present Northern Province). If
the Pandyan
valedictory inscriptions are accepted, the
whole of the
sub-continentnof India, China, Malaya, Burma
and Sri Lanka were
totally sonquered !
K.M. de Silva states, without any supporting
source:
"Parakramabahu's forces defeated Chandrabhanu
who fled to the
Jaffna, then under Magha. There he succeeded in
securing the
throne for himself (how de did so we do not
know for certain) and
was the ruler in Jaffna at the time of the
Pandyan invasion". (A
History of Sri Lanka, p.67). Further guesswork
follows, presented
as history.
Paranavithana makes a Malayan out of Magha of
Orissa, makes him

the founder of a kingdom in the North which

passes afterwards by
marriage to a line of Chieftains called Arya
Chakravartis of
Gujerati origin. This is also guesswork
fortified by a strong bias
towards Malayan connections with Sri Lanka,
unsupported by facts.
Nilakantha Sastri, the authority on South
Indian history,
effectively demolishes Paranavithana's attempts
to turn hypotheses
into history where the Malay connections are
concerned. As for the
Arya Chakravarti rulers of Jaffna, Nilakanta
Sastri says
".....Paranavithana quotes Queyroz to give a
Gujerat origin for
the Arya Chakravarti of Jaffna, but we have
contemporary Tamil
accounts directly deriving them from the rulers
of Kalinga
(Orissa) in India". ("Ceylon and Sri Vijaya",
JRASCB, New Series
Vol. VIII Part 2, p. 138, 1962). If this be
correct the Arya
Chakravartis were not of Tamil or other
Dravidian origin.
Chapter V Book V of the University of Ceylon
History of Ceylon on
"The Northern Kingdom" is written by S. Natesan
who condesses that
"our main source for the history of this
kingdom upto the end of
the 15th centurt is the Yalpana Vaipava-malai".
(U.C.H.C. Vol. 1
Part II p. 692).
The Yalpana Vaipava-malai was composed in 1736
by a Tamil resident

of Jaffna on the instructions of Class Isaakz,

the Dutch Dissava
of the district. It is regarded by historians
as being completely
unreliable as a history and could be dismissed
as fiction or
legend. Yet the very historians who so evaluate
it, use it as a
source. As a result Chapter V of Book V of the
U.C.H.C. is mostly
fiction. It would appear that confusion is
amongst the historians
rather than in history.
13. The Portugese expelled the Moors' from
their terrotories in
1626. Senerat, King of Kandy settled them in
his kingdom. 4000
were settled in Batticaloa alone by the
"Idolatrous King" (de
Queyroz, op. Cit., p. 745).
14. "Diary of Mr. Pybus's Journey to and from
the city of Candia,
the capital of the Island of Ceylon and place
of Residence of the
Emperor". Edited by R. Raven - Hart and
published under the title
"The Pybus Embassy to Kandy, 1762", Colombo
1958.
15. I read the Treaty in the original Sinhalese
after the text of this
article was published. There was no cession.
Possession only of the
coastal strip was handed over to the Dutch East
India Company. All
taxes collected within the territory handed over
were to be remitted to
the King of Kandy, who retained sovereignty over it.
See Appendix B.

16. Under the Kandyan Convention, 2nd March 1815.

See also Appendix A.
17. K. Balasingham, "The Laws of Ceylon" Vol. I the
Law of Persons,
1929, p. 165.
18. Yet C.R. de Silva's assertion that "By 1645
Portugese settlers had
become the chief village holders in Jaffna" ("The
Portugese in Ceylon
1617 - 1638 - p. 217) cannot be accepted without
evidence more
convincing than his single footnote.
19. The Sinhalese of tiday appear to consist of an
amalgam of the first
Aryan colonists who came in the 6th century B.C.,
Tamil immigrants
peaceful and warlike (from ancient times to the
Chola invasion of the
10th century), Kalingas from modern Orissa, Malays
who came with
Chandrabhanu, Malayalees whose arrivals are referred
to in the Vitti
Pot or Books of Events, South Indians who came to
the south western and
central parts of the country as mercenaries,
traders, artisans, as well
as retainers of the Nayakkar Kings of Kandy, some
Portuguese and a
scattering of even other Europeans, However, the
modern Sinhalese and
Tamils are two groups distinct from each other with
respect to
languafe, script, religion and numbers.
20. Even when representation was on a communal
basis, the Kandyan
Sinhalese were not represented as the franchise was
limited to the

affluent. The majority of whom are Sinhalese. The

real national issues
relate to the betterment of the poor of all races.
The Tamil communal
issue is really a competition between the privileged
few of all races
as to how privileges should be shared, and
completely ignores the real
issues. It, therefore, in the final analysis,
cynically disregards the
poverty of the masses in general. The protagonists
and their supporters
must be judged accordingly.
21. The Sinhalese view is that the entire country is
the homeland of
all. The statements by foreign reporters that the
Sinhalese Buddhists
regard the country as their exclusive homeland are
false and perverse.
Whether these are founded on ignorance or inspired
by inducement could
be determined by further investigation. At the same
time, the Sinhalese
view is that, if a label is to attached to the
country, Sri Lanka would
be called a "Sinhalese Buddhist" land just as much
as a "West European"
country would be described as "Christian" or
"Catholic".
22. Part of the Sinhalese dominions till the cession
to the British in
1815.
23. Identified by even in the time of British
occupation by the
Sinhalese name "Gantalawa".
24. Which was Sinhalese territory in which nonSinhalese people were
given hospitality and equality of treatment.

25. A vast territory so thinly populated must be

regarded as
depopulated or unpopulated. It cannot be regarded as
being populated by
a majority of such and such people. The density of
population in the
present Northern and Eastern provinces was even less
in the 19th
century (See Table II). The movement (of Tamils)
towards the Vanni
(from Jaffna Peninsula) is a 20th century
phenomenon, caused both by
the increasing pressure on land in the heavily
populated villages (in
the Peninsula) and the government's initiatives in
the reclamation of
tanks and in land colonization (Professor Sinnappah
Arasaratnam,
"Historical Foundation of the Economy of the Tamils
of North Sri
Lanka", Chelvanayakam Memorial Lectures 1982). Every
major tank
restored was, of course, a work of a Sinhalese King
(R.L. Brohier,
"Ancient Irrigation Works of Ceylon 1934 - 1935").
26. George W. Spencer, "The Politics of Expansion The Chola Conquest
of Sri Lanka and Sri Vijaya", Madras, 1981.
27. The areas taken up for development were malaria
infested forests.
Those who now claim on a racist basis the benefits
of the herioc
pioneering seem to have no idea of the sufferings of
the pioneers.
Peasant farmers and officials were reluctant to risk
their lives and
fortunes in these areas. Tamils in particular were
quite unwilling to

leave the Jaffna Peninsula and risk malaria and

privation in settlement
projects till about 30 years ago. Even today peasant
holdings are let
or sold to richer entrepreneurs.
28. The Tamil leadership then and now had and have
no serious objection
to foreign imperialist rule and therefore have not
been able to
apreciate the principles that should govern the
development of our
major resources, land and water.
29. R.L. Brohier, "Ancient Irrigation Works of
Ceylon", 2 Vols. 1934 35.
APPENDIX A
The following extract from Appendix H at pp. 618-619 of
Paul E. Peiris'
"Sinhale and the Patriots" furnishes further evidence
that the whole of the
modern Eastern Province and at least part of the modern
Northern Province
belonged to the Sinhalese domains even at the beginning
of the 19th Century:
"Among the Johnston Mss. No. 43 at the Colombo Museum is
this fragment on a
sheet with the watermark 1808 .....
The Taxes which the Courtiers are to contribute after the
Singalese New Year
to the King consists of the following in cash (by which
is not calculated
goods of Gold and Silver, Stones, Cloths, Chinaware,
etc.) To wit
The Dessave of the 3 and 4 Corles 12,000 laryns

7 Corles
Oewa
Mau(ta)le
Saffregam
Oedoepalate
The Ratterale of Yattinoewere
Oeodenoewere
Toenpaneha
Haresiejepattoo
Doembere
Hewahette
The Dessave of Putlam
Baticaloa
Wanny Noewerekalawe

12,000 laryns
12,500 laryns
4,000 laryns
5,000 laryns
400 laryns
400 laryns
500 laryns
300 laryns
400 laryns
500 laryns
600 laryns
5,000 laryns
6,000 laryns
1,000 laryns

Each laryn at the rate of 24 stivers.

The Dessaves of Tamblegam, Cottiar, Tammankaduve,
Trincomale, Poentje
collampattoo, Wellasse, Bintenne and Panauwe each to
contribute a proportion
according to their Revenue.
>From the villages which are given free to the offer
houses the King receives
nothing nor from the Inhabitants. The revenues of the
Royal dispens villages
goes to the King's Treasury excepting those of the
dispens villages
belonging to the Queens which remain for themselves.
The courtiers cannot make use of any honour when they
pass the King's
dispens villages.
The offer houses of Katteregam and Saffregam were erected
by the King's
Doettoegammoenuu. The offer house at Calanie is built by
the King
Jataaletissa and that at Moel Kirrigalle by the King
Wallekanbahoe. The

above four offer houses in this Island of Ceylon are

governed by the Idols
Wisnoe, Saman, Katteregam and Tjakkeredieuwe Raja.
The priests in Candy live as follows. Early in the
morning they take for
their nourishment a little Conje made of rice and coconut
milk. About ten
o'clock they go out with a metal bason and a fan to cover
their faces, to
prevent anything improper falling in their sight, a
begging, and on
receiving some prepared meal they returned home and eat
it about 12 o'clock,
and this is all the nourishment they take for a whole
day. In the evening
they commonly use a little sugar".
APPENDIX B
THE FIRST SEVEN ARTICLES OF THE TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN
THE KING OF KANDY
AND THE DUTCH, 1766.
TEXT
The ordinance sent to you the Resident-General at
Batavia, great in wisdom,
boundless most trustworthy and pure in loyalty, shows as
follows:
The terms of treaty drawn up by the Governor, on the
occasion when nobles
were despatched to Colombo to bring about a settlement
between the two
parties as the conflict resulting from the break in good
relations which had
prevailed for a long time between the Great Court and the
Company had caused
much harm and loss to both parties over a period of
several years, having

been approved, confusion has been resolved and peace

prevails. The nobles
now coming are sent to acquaint you with several
particulars thereof. It
would be good if you would make an appropriate response
after making
inquiries from these persons who are coming.
May the mutual confidence and friendship prevailing
between the Great Court
and the Company be kept unbroken as long as the sun and
the moon endure.
The Ordinance upon which the charter was despatched from
Senkhandashila
Shriwardenapura this eleventh day of waning moon in the
month of Medin in
the year one thousand six hundred and eighty eight - and
that order - is the
same (being) the Message of His Imperial Majesty King
Kirthi Sri Rajasinghe,
Lord of Sri Lanka.
Know all men: The Lords of the States-General of the Free
United Provinces
of Holland and the illustrious, powerful Company of
Hollanders in the East
for the one part: the illustrious powerful, noble king of
kings, His
Imperial Majesty Kirthi Sri Rajasinghe, Emperor of Lanka
and the leading
very honourable members of the council of Ministers of
the Great Court for
the other part; terminating the hostilities between the
two powerful
parties:
It is agreed by the two parties to restore peace and
friendship between
themselves:

With a view to the permanent establishment of the new

treaty of peace and to
securing the inviolability of friendly relations, the
Articles hereunder
detailed were proposed with the mutual consent of the two
parties, and
adopted by the authorized officers of the two parties,
and adopted by the
authorized officers of the two parties, to wit, by His
Excellency the
Governor and Director Heer Iman Willem Flack and by the
honourable judicial
functionaries in the island of Lanka, in the honoured
name of lords of the
illustrious and powerful States-General of the Free
United Provinces,
(acting) by the illustrious and powerful company: and by
very honourable
members of the Council of Ministers of the Great Court,
specially deputed
for this purpose, on behalf of His Imperial Majesty, the
powerful and
illustrious Emperor of Lanka, to wit, their lordships
Migastenne Wijayaratne
Wasala Mudiyanse, the Disave of Kiri Oruwe Bogambara
Kuruwa, of the Maha
Madige, of Tavankada, of Nuwara Kalaviya and of Matale:
Pilimatalawe
Wijayasundara Rajapaksha Pandita Mudiyanse, Disave of
Sabaragamuwa including
Gilimale Bambarabotuwa, Patharata Bulathgama, and the
Three Korales, who is
also the Wannaku Nilame, of the Treasury and Haluwadana
Nilame: Angammana
Divakara Rajapaksha Wasala Mudiyanse, Disave of
Udapalatha including
Dolosbage; Meewature Wijayakoon Maha Mudiyanse, the Chief
Security Mora
Gammana Wijayakoon Mudiyanse, Head of the Kuruwa, and the
Madige of the Four
Korales and Muhandiram of the Nanayakkara Lekam
Department.

First Article
His Imperial Majesty the emperor of Lanka, the noble
members of the council
of Ministers and other subjects on the one part; the
lords of the noble,
powerful and illustrious States-General of the Free
United Provinces of
Holand and the most powerful Dutch Company and its
subjects on the other;
there shall be uninterrupted confidence and friendship
between these two
parties in the future.
Second Article
His Imperial Majesty the Emperor and the principal
honourable members of the
Great Council of Minister of the Great Court of His
Imperial Majesty
recognize the lords of the illustrious and most powerful
States-General of
the United Provinces of Holland and the powerful Dutch
company as the sole
and independent noble lords of those districts of this
island of Lanka which
the company possessed before the war, which is now ended,
to wit, Yapa
Pattanama and the districts included therein; the Disava
of Colombo; the
Galle Korale; the Matara Disava; Puliyanduwa;
Trincomalee; and the lands
included in these places. Moreover, the Supreme Lord and
the Principal
Officers of the Great court relinquish the government
they had over, or
their claims to, the districts mentioned above.
Third Article

Apart from these, the entire sea board round the island
of Lanka not
possessed by the Company before the war now being ended
will be wholly given
up to the exalted owbership of the company by the
Principal Officers of the
Great Court. That is to say, from Kammala in the West to
the governing
limits of Yapa Pattanama, in the East from all governing
limits of Japa
Pattanama to the Walagiyaganga; Moreover, the sea board
thus given up is a
distance of one Sinhalese Gauwwa more or less, provided
(however) that the
demarcation (of the boundary) may be suitably carried out
according to the
rivers and mountains that fall into line.
Fourth Article
Commissioners from both sides will be appointed for the
purpose of defining
more accurately, the boundaries of the districts given
up. Further, the
survey will commence from the actual sea shore, exclusing
Navikara,
Karaduwa, Puliyanduwa, and other similar islands.
Moreover the company
hereby undertakes to pay to His Majesty annually so much
income as is
derived from the sea board now given up to the Company in
order to
compensate his Majesty for losses incurred - to ensure
that the dues and
revenues should not accure to the company. With this
object in view, the
Commissioners appointed to define the boundaries will
make the necessary
arrangements regarding the collection of revenue.
Fifth Article

On the other hand, the illustrious company recognize the

supreme rule of His
Majesty in the other districts of this island of Lanka
not subject (to these
provisions) and accepts the noble Kingdom. Sixth Article
The several districts which the illustrious company has
taken by force of
arms in this war will be restored to the Dominions (of
His Majesty) by the
Company from its love of peace and unsullied good will,
excepting places,
district and sundry coastline within two hours, peyas'
(Sinhalese hours)
walk from the sea ahore, to which the company is entitled
in terms of the
Third Article.
Seventh Article
All servants subjects, high and low, of His Majesty are
allowed to remove as
much salt as they deem necessary from the levayas and
other salterns on the
east (coast) and from Chilaw and Puttlam on the west
(coast) without any
payment to the Company or anybody elase on its behalf.
Notes
1. Translated from the Sinhalese text copied from Dutch
Records Colombo, and
printed in Vol. XVI (Old Series) of the Journal of the
Royal Asiatic Society
(Ceylon Branch) p. 62 at seq. According to a note
appended to the Dutch
translation, the original document was engraved on a gold
plate, shaped like
an ola and bore the (Sinhalese) royal sign manual. The
dating is according
to the Sinhalese Saka Era. The year according to the
Christian Era was 1762.

2. Dutch East India Company.

3. The Governor's Terms.
4. Provinces are called Rajja'.
5. Kuruwa' was the Elephant Department.
6. Madige' was Transport or Bullock Department.
7. Probably Tamankaduwa, approximately the area of the
present Polonnaruwa
District. Part of the Eastern Province from 1833 to 1874.
8. Approximately area of the present Anuradhapura
District. Part of the
Northern Province from 1833 to 1874. In 1874 NorthCentral Province was
created for the area covered now by Anuradhapura and
Polonnaruwa Districts.
9. The island of Mannar.
10. Kalpitiya is a headland located on the west of
Puttlam lagoon. Puttlam
itself was a major port of the Kings of Kandy.
11. Province, District. "Disava" is also the designation
of the
administrator.
12. Korale is an administrative division smaller than a
disavani.
13. The Dutch had a fort at Trincomalee on the Northern
shore of Codiar Bay
but were not rulers of the area. Codiar Bay and the
hinterland were part of
the Kandyan Kingdom. After the Treaty the Dutch had a
fort at Kodiyar
itself.

14. A few miles north of Negombo.

15. Walawe Ganga.
16. Traditional unit of measurement of distance equal to
about 3 kilometres.
http://infolanka.com/org/srilanka/issues/gamini.html