|
|
Buddhist monks given training to ensure peaceful co-existence in Sri Lanka
Full News Article
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
 4 Aug 2006 03:36:07 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha,
Muru has all the hallmarks a confused person. When Kula and Lula attempted to claim 'Autonomy for Tamils' on the basis of an historical Tamil Kingdom, this is what Muru slapped on Kula and Lula saying; (emphasize mine)
Page 65. -27 Jul 2006 15:38:51 GMT
GR the whole claim for federalism, autonomy and even separate state is *** NOT based on the existence of a separate Tamil kingdom *** that was present a few centuries ago!
Its based on the fact that the North-East after independence (and even many centuries before that) was inhabited almost exclusively by Tamil speaking people who regard themselves as a distinct group
Neither Kula nor Lula corrected Muru, so I knew even they don't read Muru's posts :-) :-)
With his innocent mind, he thinks a every race is entitled to a homeland even when they did not have an indepdent kingdom, provided they can show an area where the given race is a majority. So, Muslims in the East and Up Country Tamils are just another races that should enjoy autonomous rights, along with Wellawatte Tamil Autonomous region.
That is the reason I didn't worry about even reading his posts, for that matter, I know not many of us read Gaja's posts unless we have some time to waste ;-)
Anyway, thanks for responding to Muru on my behalf. You are also entitled to the Merit Karma amassed with this 'Punya Kriyawa'.
Edited By - GamaRaala - 4 Aug 2006 03:40:36 GMT |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
 4 Aug 2006 03:44:32 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Interesting reading
Quote from Dr. Vickramabahu Karunaratne
The word nation is loosely used to represent any group of people with a common language. But such a definition is not useful in understanding problems of nation in modern society. The identities Sinhala and Tamil were used in Lanka for a long period of time stretching as far back as 3rd century BC. But the entity represented by the term Tamil or Sinhala is very different at different times. For example, Sinhala was used in the Anuradhapura period to represent a Vansa, a clan of people associated with a particular agriculture based on a special irrigation system. These people were considered to be of Aryan descent. Aryans were the nomadic people who invaded India around 2000 BC and over-ran Dravidian clan societies clustered around the Indus valley and elsewhere. It is widely believed that around 500 BC some Aryan people came to Lanka and overpowered the Dravidian society that existed there. Thus there were Vansa clashes in that early period of history. These Vansa clashes continued until the end of Rajarata civilization and the emergence of semi- feudal society in the wet zone. In this society divisions were based more on trade caste groups.
When we look at the Kandyan kingdom before the takeover by the British, we see that the word Sinhala is used to represent the ruling elite. The Radala-Mudali elite referred to themselves as the Sinhala. In this scenario not only the other caste groups in the Kandyan areas were left out of the Sinhala identity, but also the entire community in the low country who spoke Sinhala as their mother tongue. At this stage caste was more important than any other clan identity. The word jatiya, the Sinhala word used in general today to represent a nation, was used widely at that stage to represent caste. Even today if one asks a Kandyan villager about his jatiya he may assume that as a reference to his caste. In any case at that time and until recently people in Lanka were more loyal to their caste group than any other form of community. Sinhala royalty always thought it is better to marry from Tamil royalty than to a lower caste person from the Sinhala kingdom. This thinking was not confined to the royalty but common to almost all caste groups. Even today, such thinking exists in spite of Sinhala vs.Tamil national clashes.
Edited By - Kulakottan - 4 Aug 2006 03:45:17 GMT |
Mucha-linda
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 3810
Member Profile
|
4 Aug 2006 04:00:01 GMT Report for Abuse
|
GAMAYA,
Thanks for clarification. I have not closely followed MURU except for the last few posts he made.
I am, in fact, not surprised to see confused little kids like him, when their adults themselves are confused. Some say that NAGAs mentioned in Mahavansa are the forefathers of modern day Tamils. Some others say that Tamils migrated to SL 500 years before the Vijayan migration. And there are some Tamils who argue that they are descended form Balangoda Manawaya. Interestingly, some others argue that SL Tamis are the descendents of a sunken land mass existed in Indian Ocean millions of years ago, by the name Lemuria!!.
When there are so many opinions like this, little kids obviously get confused.
BTW, do you know that the document made by Portuguese to take over the ultimate control of Peninsular Jaffna in 1619 has been drafted in Sinhalese.
-Muchalinda
PS: You have apparently made a mistake in your last post. It should be MATTAKKALAPPU, not Mada Kalapuwa. Mattakkalappu has an original meaning in Tamil :)
. |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
4 Aug 2006 04:12:54 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha,
BTW, do you know that the document made by Portuguese to take over the ultimate control of Peninsular Jaffna in 1619 has been drafted in Sinhalese.
I have heard of this, but I don't know of any realiable source to verify this. Someone told me a copy of this must be available in the National Archives of Sri Lanka.
PS: You have apparently made a mistake in your last post. It should be MATTAKKALAPPU, not Mada Kalapuwa. Mattakkalappu has an original meaning in Tamil :)
Thank you for correcting me, Mucha. Now I remember, 'Mada Kalapuwa' has no Sinhalese meaning, it rather derives from the original Tamil word 'Mattakalappu' that has a very meaningful Tamil meaning. |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2358
Member Profile
|
 4 Aug 2006 05:06:52 GMT Report for Abuse
|
GamaRaala,
1. Prince Sapumal, on behalf of King Parakramabahu VI, chased away illegitimate rulers of Jaffna Kingdom and ruled Jaffna between 1412-1467.
Senpahap Perumal the adopted son of Parakramaa Bahu invaded Jaffna and took over the legitimate Tamil Kingdom. After 22 years, he was chased away.
2. Illegitimate Jaffna Kingdom surrendered to the Portuguese in 1619. That was the end of it...
Legitimate Tamil Kingdom fell like all other kingdoms (except Kandy), it was attacked by the Portuguese forces under the command of Filipe De Oliveriya.
After defeating Sankli Kumaran?s forces, they took over.
No Jaffna kingdom lasted until 1831 as you falsely claim!
This is what I said,
From 12 CAD, until 1831, the Sri Lankan kingdoms were federal in nature, and the Tamils had much more autonomy during that period along with their own kingdom.
Here, what I emphasized was the federal nature and autonomy of Tamils between 12 CAD and 1831, before the country became unitary in nature under the British. I know the last date of the Tamil kingdom, sorry if you misunderstood by wording.
Illegitimate Jaffna Kingdom
This is a fabrication by the Sinhala Buddhist chauvinists. |
Mucha-linda
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 3810
Member Profile
|
4 Aug 2006 05:46:23 GMT Report for Abuse
|
GAMAYA,
'De Queyroz gives the text of the terms agreed to by the 'king' of Jaffnapatnam with the Portuguese viceroy in 1561. These terms were written in Portuguese and Sinhala'. (Conquest of Ceylon, Father. S.G. Perera, vol. 1, p. 371), emphasis NOT mine
-Muchalinda
PS: Some other thing I found while searching for this in my Armoury- not related, but interesting. This is what Robert Knox has said in his celebrated work.
'But I am to speak only of the natural proper People of the Island , which they call Chingulays' (An Historical Relation of the Island Ceylon, 2nd ed., 1695, p. 187)
'Malabars are strangers and derive themselves from another Countrey' (ibid p. 442)
. |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
4 Aug 2006 05:47:54 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Lula,
1. Sinhalese Kings ruled whole of SL including Jaffna from 5-6 CBC until 13 CAD. This is the only legitimate kingdom. Any subsequent foreign invasions are ILLEGITIMATE.
There was NO independent (illegitimate or otherwise) Jaffna Kingdom till 13CAD.
2. In the 13th century, Magha of Kalinga invaded North Sri Lanka. This was an illegitimate kingdom.
3. Maga of Kalinga was chased away by 1262, but Arya Cakravartis of Madura susequently invaded Jaffna. This is a foreign invasion thus an illegitimate kingdom. It is to this foreign invasion that you are trying to attribute legitimacy :-) According to Lula, Arya Cakravartis of Madura in India are the legitimate rulers of Jaffna :-)
4. Prince Sapumal, on behalf of King Parakramabahu VI, chased away Arya Cakravartis, illegitimate rulers of Jaffna Kingdom.
5. After him, Arya Cakravartis invaded again but fell to Portuguese, another foreign invasion.
6. Only lunatics can claim Trincomalee or Mattakalappu for a Tamil homeland, based on a so called a Jaffna Kingdom that never even ruled Trincomalee or Mattakalappu ;-) :-)
Edited By - GamaRaala - 4 Aug 2006 06:33:24 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
4 Aug 2006 06:49:39 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Mucha, (and Lula),
Thanks for the information. I found on the web the following. De Queyroz in his 'Conquest of Ceylon' says;
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).
NOTE: Explanation within brackets are from Gamini Iriyagolla
According to De Queyroz, Jaffnapatam was simply one the kinglets that was subject to the EMPEROR the King of Candea(Kandy), not an independent kingdom. Perhaps our Lula is more erudite historian than De Queyroz ;-) At this rate, I am not surprised if Lula resorts to his usual hiding place; 'Jaffna was an Independent Tamil Kingdom because Eelamist Tamils believe what they want to believe'.
Edited By - GamaRaala - 4 Aug 2006 06:54:30 GMT |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2358
Member Profile
|
4 Aug 2006 07:50:21 GMT Report for Abuse
|
GamaRaala,
but Arya Cakravartis of Madura susequently invaded Jaffna. This is a foreign invasion thus an illegitimate kingdom. It is to this foreign invasion that you are trying to attribute legitimacy :-) According to Lula, Arya Cakravartis of Madura in India are the legitimate rulers of Jaffna
The Nayakers of Madura who ruled the Kandyan Kingdom were not invaders but invitees. Kannasamy aka SRI VIKRAMA RAJA SINGHA was a legitimate ruler of the Kandyan Kingdom.
The Arya Cakravartis of Madura who ruled the JAffna Kingdom were also invitees and NOT invaders. SANKILI KUMARAN II was a legitimate ruler of Jaffna Kingdom.
European writers had no doubt shown an interest in the history of the island from the time the Portuguese began their rule in the 16 CAD. The Portuguese priest, Fernao de Queyroz, was among the first to write a notable history of Sri Lanka. Joao Ribeiro was another Portuguese historian who wrote the history of the island.
A similar interest in the history of the island was shown by some Dutch writers. Notable among them was Philippus Baldaeus.
Prof. Hugh Cleghorn, Robert Knox, Humphry William Codrington, and Sir James Emerson Tennent were another few.
These people wrote what they heard as well as what they saw. what all of them clearly saw and experienced during their period was that, there were two different ethnic groups having two different languages, religions, cultures, and living in two well defined and clearly and naturally (jungles, lakes, etc) demarcated land areas with their own kingdoms (or Kinglets or whatever) within their traditional lands.
In the 17th centuries, when Robert Knox, the English prisoner in the Kingdom of Kandy made his escape through Anuradhapura into the Dutch occupied Northwest, he found that, fluent though he was in Sinhala, he could not converse with the inhabitants of the Anuradhapura region as the people there spoke the Malabar language (Tamil).
When he managed to communicate to them through sign language about his plight, they exclaimed, 'Tombrane'(Tamil, tampirane, meaning 'Oh,God'), with amazement. Even the rendering of the name Anuradhapura by Knox as Anarodgburro. is obviously from the colloquial Tamil form Anra'japuram/Anracapuram, still used among SL Tamils.
Knox, in fact, clearly states that the territory of Anarodgburro is inhabited by Tamils;
It is a vast great plain, the like I never saw in all that Island....This plain is encompassed round with woods, and small towns among them on every side, inhabited by Malabars, a distinct people from the Chingulayes.(pg.276,KI's book).
They called them Chingulays and Malabars (because they spoke a language similar to Malayalam/Tamil), but how can they decide or come to conclusions on who is the natural proper People of the Island and who are from another Country.
That is why Prof. Indrapala says,
It was in these early colonial writings, largely based on the uncritical acceptance of the local chronicles, that a new perspective of the ancient history of the island began to develop.
The view that the Sinhalese were the 'proper inhabitants' of the island in ancient times and that the Tamils were invaders came to dominate colonial historical writings.
Edited By - LuLa - 5 Aug 2006 06:22:32 GMT |
LuLa
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2358
Member Profile
|
4 Aug 2006 08:36:23 GMT Report for Abuse
|
An Interesting reading,
Genetic affinities of Sri Lankan populations
Human Biology, Dec 1995 by Kshatriya, Gautam Kumar
The population of Sri Lanka is heterogeneous and is composed of diverse ethnic groups (Table 1). (Table omitted) It is evident that the Sinhalese are numerically dominant, accounting for 72% of the total population. Next in order of preponderance are the Tamils, who constitute approximately 20% of the total population. Among other groups that inhabit Sri Lanka are the Burghers, Christians, Moors, and Malays--the descendants of culturally, religiously, and ethnically diverse groups who colonized the island from time to time (Table 2). (Table omitted) Finally, there are the Veddahs, the original inhabitants of Sri Lanka, who constitute less than 1% of the total population.
Sri Lankan populations and the legendary origin of the Sinhalese have generated considerable interest among anthropologists to study and examine mythological and historical records in light of genetic evidence.
Kirk (1976) and Saha (1988) studied the genetic composition of the population of Sri Lanka to determine the validity of Ceylonese mythology regarding the legendary origin of the Sinhalese people. Although Kirk (1976) found the Sinhalese to be genetically closer to Bengalis and to Indian Tamils to a lesser extent, Saha (1988) failed to recognize any genetic characteristics in the present-day Sinhalese population that are distinct from those of Sri Lankan Tamils. Later, however, Tay and Saha (1989) undertook a more detailed study on gene differentiation and genetic admixture among the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils and found that the Sinhalese have a stronger genetic contribution from the Bengalis of India than from the Sri Lankan Tamils.
These earlier studies, which focused mainly on the Sinhalese and Tamil population, have oversimplified the historical and mythological records of Sri Lanka. Therefore the degree and the magnitude of foreign admixture might have been compromised. In light of this, the genetic affinities of the Sri Lankan population have been studied after considering a detailed ethnohistorical account of Sri Lanka.
Materials and Methods
The present-day Sinhalese, Sri Lankan Tamil, and Veddah populations are considered admixed populations. A number of population groups from northwestern, eastern, and southern India have contributed genes in varying proportions to the contemporary Sri Lankan populations. In addition, many more populations, such as Arabs, Persians, Portuguese, Dutch, and English, enroute along seaways or from India, have also admixed with the local populations at different periods of time. The available information on genetic data of these most likely contributory gene pools is presented in Table 3. (Table omitted) The selection of the populations was made in light of the mythological and ethnohistorical background of Sri Lanka.
After careful scrutiny two data sets were selected, and a genetic distance analysis was performed: first, on the basis of 11 population groups
Sinhalese, Sri Lankan Tamils, Veddahs, Indian Tamils, South Indian Muslims (Andhra Pradesh, Kerala), Gujaratis, Punjabis, West Indian Muslims (Gujarat, Bombay), Bengalis, populations of the Middle East (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, and Iran), and populations of Europe (United Kingdom, Holland, Denmark) with 40 alleles controlled by 13 polymorphic loci and, second, on the basis of 8 population groups (Sinhalese, Veddahs, Indian Tamils, South Indian Muslims, Gujaratis, Punjabis, West Indian Muslims, and Bengalis) with 43 alleles controlled by 15 polymorphic loci.
Genetic distances among these populations were computed by Nei's standard genetic distances (Nei 1972) and their standard errors (SE) using Nei and Roychoudhury's (1974) method. To determine the significance of genetic distances among the different populations, I compared the gene frequency data pairwise using the chi-square statistic (Nei and Roychoudhury 1974). The distance matrix was then used to construct a phylogenetic tree based on the unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA) (Li, personal communication, 1988).
The contribution (%) of ancestral populations to the hybrid populations (Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils) was calculated using the method of Chakraborty (1985, 1986), with each population considered the product of admixture of three parental populations. The parental populations for the Sinhalese have been considered to be the Bengalis, the Indian Tamils, and the Veddahs of Sri Lanka, and the parental populations for the Tamils are considered to be the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka, the Bengalis, and the Indian Tamils.
Results and Discussion
Table 4 shows the allelic frequencies of 40 alleles in 11 populations and 43 alleles in 8 populations. (Table omitted)
Average heterozygosity and genetic differences along with their standard errors among the 11 population groups were estimated using Nei's standard genetic distance among all pairs of populations (Table 5). (Table omitted) The average heterozygosity varies between 27.4% (Bengalis) and 32.6% (Veddahs). The genetic distances show no significant differentiation, as examined pairwise by the chi-square statistics (Table 6). (Table omitted) However, the dendrogram generated from the genetic distance matrix (Figure 2) reveals an absorbing pattern of clustering. (Figure omitted) It can be seen that the Sinhalese, the Sri Lankan and Indian Tamils, and the South Indian Muslims form one cluster, whereas the Gujaratis, the Punjabis, and the west Indian Muslims form another cluster. These two clusters are distinct and do not show much affinity with the Bengalis, the Veddahs, or the populations of the Middle East and Europe. In fact, the Veddahs are far apart from all the populations.
The results of a more detailed analysis on the basis of 43 alleles in 8 population groups for average heterozygosity and the genetic distance among all the pairs of populations together with their standard errors are presented in Table 7. (Table omitted) The average heterozygosity varies between 27.9% (Sinhalese) and 32.2% (Veddahs). The genetic distances do not reveal significant differentiation, as examined pairwise by the chi-square statistic (Table 8). (Table omitted) Nevertheless, the dendrogram produced from the genetic distance matrix (Figure 3) and the clustering obtained further strengthen earlier observations. (Figure omitted) It can be seen that the Sinhalese, the Indian Tamils, and the South Indian Muslims form one cluster, whereas the Gujaratis, the Punjabis, and the west Indian Muslims form another, an almost identical clustering to the one observed in Figure 2. Here, too, the Bengalis and the Veddahs are farthest from the Sinhalese.
Both dendrograms reveal close similarities between the Sinhalese and the Sri Lankan Tamils, between the Sinhalese and the Indian Tamils, and between the Sri Lankan Tamils and the Indian Tamils.
Genetic Admixture.
Table 9 presents the estimated values of admixture for the two hybrid populations (the Sinhalese and the Tamils) based on 13 polymorphic loci, fitting a trihybrid model using the ancestral frequencies shown in Table 10. (Tables 9 and 10 omitted)
The Bengalis, the Tamils, and the Veddahs are considered parental populations for the Sinhalese. The Bengali contribution is 25.41%, the Tamil (India) contribution is 69.86%, and the Veddah contribution is only 4.73%. Thus the Sinhalese have a predominantly Tamil (India) contribution followed by the Bengalis and the Veddahs. The fusion of the Veddahs and the Sinhalese was recorded in the ancient chronicles of Sri Lanka (Dipavamsa and Mahavamsa) as early as 543 B.C., but the Veddahs were subsequently pushed to the inhospitable dry zone for a long period of time under pressure from early colonizers.
By studying the Sri Lankan Tamils, one can see that the Sinhalese, the Bengalis, and the Indian Tamils can be considered ancestral populations. The contribution of the Sinhalese to the Sri Lankan Tamils is 55.20%. Similarly, the Bengali contribution is 28.17% and that of the Indian Tamils is 16.63%. The results indicate a predominant influence of the Sinhalese (who already have a high contribution from the Indian Tamils) and the Bengalis to a lesser extent.
In conclusion, the original inhabitants of Sri Lanka were the Veddahs, who have had little admixture with the Sinhalese and possibly none with the Tamils. The Veddahs are distinct because they were confined to inhospitable dry zones and were hardly influenced by the neighboring inhabitants. Furthermore, the Sinhalese and the Sri Lankan Tamils are an admixed population genetically. The Sinhalese, who first came from northwest India under the leadership of Prince Vijaya in 543 B.C., have received and exchanged a substantial amount of their genes with the populations of northeastern and southern India. The Sinhalese and the Tamils have no contribution from the population groups of northwest India. In fact, the contribution made by Prince Vijaya and his small band of 700 companions to the original pool of the Sinhalese must have been eliminated by the long-standing contribution (over 2000 years) of the population groups of northeastern and southern India.
Furthermore, although there is a noteworthy contribution from the Bengalis (northeast India) to the present-day Sinhalese, the Tamil (South India) contribution predominates. The contribution from the populations of northeast India were diluted, probably because the Indian influence on the Sinhalese after the eighth century A.D. became predominantly South Indian (Raghavan 1964). Thus the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka are genetically more similar to the Tamils of Sri Lanka and India, who were always in close proximity with each other historically, linguistically, geographically, and culturally.
Acknowledgments I am extremely grateful to Ranajit Chakraborty (University of Texas, Houston), who inspired me to take up this problem and analyze it in a more meaningful way against the backdrop of mythological and other ethnohistorical facts of Sri Lanka.
(http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_199512/ai_n8732666) |
|
Search All News and Discussions