|
|
Buddhist monks given training to ensure peaceful co-existence in Sri Lanka
Full News Article
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
 8 Aug 2006 12:44:38 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Of Course Gamarala.
Every possible details of them including photographs.
BTW I know Prof Indrapala personally since 1974 and he had been my mentor and I did admire him then as much as now.
It is not a new found admiration.
Edited By - Kulakottan - 8 Aug 2006 12:45:27 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
 8 Aug 2006 12:59:57 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Kula,
From KI-1965
We refer to the toponymic evidence which UNMISTAKABLY points to the presence if Sinhala settlers in the peninsula before Tamils settled there. In an area of only about nine hundred square miles covered by this peninsula, there occur over a thousand Sinhalese place names which have survived in a Tamil garb.
If you have some time, please let us know which discoveries made after 1965 cause the above UNMISTAKBLE toponymic evidence to be rejected. |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
8 Aug 2006 13:12:35 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Gamaraala,
I want you to be aware that arguing in support of the fact that Tamil Kingdoms existed in the North and Tamils too lived in ancient Sri Lanka does not necessarily mean that one supports the notion of a seperate state.
The ancient Lanka was a melting pot of the two communities. As much as the Sinhalese could have lived in the North there are evidences of Tamil settlements in the Anuradhapura region and other regions.
The Anaikkottai discovery of a Dravidian Chieftan.
The coins and other numismatic evidences found in the North
The excavations done in Poonagary, Kantarodai and Pampiruppu.
All these and more were found much later than 1965. In 1965, the descipline of history and archelogy themsleves were in their relatively infant stages. Most papers were based on earlier works available such as Mahavamsa and other liererary and archelogical findings.
If you beleive, Prof. Pranvitarana, who was not strictly a Acadamician in the descipline of History was the first Ceylones Professor of History at the university of Ceylon.
You must read the whole book to get the essence of it. I have quoted before only a little parts of it. Much more available in the book.
Kula
Edited By - Kulakottan - 8 Aug 2006 13:16:40 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
8 Aug 2006 13:17:33 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Kula,
The Anaikkottai discovery of a Dravidian Chieftan.
The coins and other numismatic evidences found in the North
The excavations done in Poonagary, Kantarodai and Pampiruppu.
All these and more were found much later than 1965
Does any of the above discoveries reject the UNMISTAKBLE toponymic evidence that the place names of Jaffna was originally Sinhalese, as KI said in 1965? |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
8 Aug 2006 13:25:53 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Dear Gamaraala,
I will not comment on his thesis until I have read the whole of it and I have not.
We do not know when Sinhala names of places initially appeard in Jaffna.
On the same token there are Tamil names in the South. It would only prove that Sinhalese too lived in the North and so did the Tamils in the South -.
For example, there was a reference in Mahavamsa to a very ancient port city called 'Jambukoalpatna' in the North. That is supposed to be the port city from which ancient Lankans dpearted to East India. 'patna' is the prakritised name of 'Pattinam'.
'Pattinam' is the name given to a port city in classical Tamil. What does that mean except that it could have been a Tamil city. Does it prove anything more other than that it would have been populated by Tamils.
Kottai is a Tamil name for a Fort.
What is the realtion 'Kotte' has to do with Kottai?
The names of cities alone does not mean much.
We can keep on adding to this list both Sinhala and Tamil names.
Most of the records of names of ancient cities are in their prskritised forms as the ancient 'linguo franco' of the administration and elite was Prakrit. They may not really give a lot of clues to what we want to prove.
Do you know that the old name of 'Pollannaruwa' was 'Pollannaaru'. Aaru in Tamil also means river.
So what?
Though it was a capital of the Cholas, what more can we say about it??
Can we say it was a Tamil city and therefore ?????
Malaya rata was the name given to the Hill Kingdom which was outside the control of the Anuradhapura Kingdom.
Malai means hill in Tamil.
Does it mean anything more?? No idea!!
Kula
Edited By - Kulakottan - 8 Aug 2006 13:35:05 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
8 Aug 2006 13:31:20 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Kula,
Dear Gamaraala, I will not comment on his thesis until I have read the whole of it and I have not.
I might not have made myself clear, I was asking you how the new evidence, surfaced AFTER 1965, (with photos or otherwise) in KI's 2005 book rejects the 'UNMISTAKABLE toponymic evidence' that the place names of Jaffna was originally Sinhalese?
Edited By - GamaRaala - 8 Aug 2006 13:37:30 GMT |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
8 Aug 2006 13:39:27 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Gamarala,
I have answered that question in my edited post.
I do not have more evidence to reject what you are saying.
Without reading the whole chapter or a page of a particular document, you would not know under what context that sentence was written.
Just commenting on a phrase without knowing under what context it was written would only lead to confusion and contradiction and I do not do that.
Kula
Edited By - Kulakottan - 8 Aug 2006 13:46:40 GMT |
GamaRaala
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1006
Member Profile
|
8 Aug 2006 13:43:07 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Kula,
I do understand that you do not advocate separatism. Howmuchever it is damaging to all communities, I have nothing against Tamils completely separating provided they have a right to do so. If there were an indepdent historical Tamil Kingdom in parralel to the Sinhalese Kingdom, I have nothing against Tamil separating with their kingdom.
But the fact remains that there was no such legitimate indepdent Tamil Kingdom in parralel to the Sinhalese Kingdom. Therefore, Tamils as a race do not have exclusive or superior rights to the land in the N&E to claim autonomy or semi-autonomy or federal state powers.
I do know that you claim there was an indepdent historical Tamil Kingdom. This claim has no place in the books of historians like KI or Paranavithana. |
shan
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2260
Member Profile
|
 8 Aug 2006 13:50:36 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Ladies and Gentlemen:
These are some of the recent twists and some glorification I noted, good try but no real stuff.
Secondly, if you say that the PhD Thesis Prof. KI submitted to University of London in 1965, which earned him a DOCTORATE, carries a *load of TRASH not worth reading*, it raises serious doubts about the standard of University of London and that of the DOCTORATEs it offer. Not only that, it also raises the question 'Why should we believe what someone says after 40 years while condemning what he/ she originally said, especially when the Doctorate he/ she has earned was from a third grade university (Like University of London) for a Thesis not worth reading'?.
One time accepted theories and believes have been disproved we can quote many examples to this. Some time the corrections are done by the same person and at times by others.
Recently a Professor - Roy Meadow -8211;Paediatrics -8211;Medicine
Many medications have been withdrawn after going through vigorous testing after been on the market for considerable time.
Millions worth of bottled water is withdrawn and the plant was shut down by famous coco-cola company.
Batch of BMW and Ford cars were taken back.
Some experts say less than 1/10 of the steal could have done the same job used in the Tower Bridge.
So forget about London and Oxford. All are bound to mistakes, Prof IK's initial work was dismissed by the common man on the street. We should have an open mind than obsession.
When south Indian domination ceased Tamils chose their own destiny and this has never changed till British brought under one umbrella.
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)
SL people had been ruled by several chieftains than kings. People are trying to portrait these chieftains as emperors . Any one who sailed in accidentally or kicked out of their country was able to land here and ruled the country without much resistance. Only few chieftains (kings) were able to resist these invaders, majority made deals with invaders.
There was no Sinhala king (emperor) to capture region at least like Chola and had effective maritime forces to my updated SL history knowledge.
Sinhala Tamil problem started since BC. If you can kick out Tamils now what stopped then?
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!!.
This is science and there was some evdence. It is not a fictional story by SJV.
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.
Interesting, there was another story I recently came across. Then Kandy king send 10,000 troops to defend Jaffna. Was it signed in Jaffna govt agent's office?
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.
I think all other kingdoms existed other than A'pura were ILLegitimate according to 2500 years old constitution. Do you mean the present govt in J'Pura as well.
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 ;-) :-)
Veddas from the east differed from the south veddhas because they spoke in Tamil. It is the ethnicity and the origin we are talking as a homeland. Has Karuna changed his name as Karunanayakka? Tamil homeland is where Tamils lived for generations.
To clarify further
Only lunatics will claim the whole Srilankans were speaking in Dutch and then in English when they were ruled by Dutch an English.
This extra feed is to Munch (Punnakku) till Lula come from vacation.
Lots of fun, we will make this thread to 100 pages. |
Kulakottan
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2773
Member Profile
|
8 Aug 2006 14:12:15 GMT Report for Abuse
|
Gamaraala,
I do understand that you do not advocate separatism. Howmuchever it is damaging to all communities, I have nothing against Tamils completely separating provided they have a right to do so. If there were an indepdent historical Tamil Kingdom in parralel to the Sinhalese Kingdom, I have nothing against Tamil separating with their kingdom.
If we start separating countries just because they were independent ancient kingdoms or at some stage in the history or the other, then half of the contemporary countries will not be there or they have to be divided into many countries. I do not believe that our small country should be divided for any reason. I firmly and whole-heartedly believe that we should find a way to live as equal citizen of one country.
What is legitimacy?
We are only looking the ancient history thorough our present context.
If that is the case Sri Lanka was not one country until it was brought together in the early part of history.
Then they were separated again.
Was it legitimate?
If you look at the ancient history of countries, you cannot find any legitimacy in today's context. Emperor Asoka who is considered as one of the fairest of all, annexed small countries to his empire through WAR.
Is it legitimate in today's context?
Federalism should be viewed as a way of keeping the country together and addressing the issues at hand.
I do not support any notion that any part of the country should be an exclusive territory for any race. No federal concept envisages such exclusivity. I think it is totally a misunderstood phenomenon even though some might claim so.
Gamaraala,
Historical and archeological evidences appear from time to time and make certain interpretation that was valid before to be obsolete. Therefore we should not fix our interpretations based on findings of yester years alone. This is true in every country. I have quoted Prof. Paranvitana before, in support of the same theories. His interpretations before may not be valid today. He is a respected archeologist of yester years and that is where I would stop.
Archeological finds do not change with time; but, with new finds, their interpretations do.
Kula
Edited By - Kulakottan - 8 Aug 2006 14:19:59 GMT |
|
Search All News and Discussions