26 September, 2020

Blog

Theory Countering Tamil Homeland Concept Placed Before UNHRC By Channa Jayasumana – A Response

By P. Soma Palan –

P. Soma Palan

I refer to the news Report in the front page of the Daily Mirror of 20th September, under the above heading. The redeeming factor is that, it is only a “Theory “of Prof. Channa Jayasumana (CJ), based on his controverted facts of Lankan history, presented before the forum of the UNHRC, on behalf of the “World Patriotic Lankan Forum”, countering the Tamil Homeland Concept. The historical falsehoods stated by the Prof. CJ prompted me to respond to his views. His speech before the UNHRC forum may go passively with the western audience,as they are not conversant with our ancient history.

I must, at the outset, clearly declare that I do so, as an independent, “free thinker”. I have no interest in Tamil politics or in Sinhala politics. My interest is purely an academic one, of our country’s history, and nothing more and nothing less. When history is controverted with falsehoods to serve the parochial ethnic interest of a community, whether it is Tamil or Sinhala, there is a compelling urge to reveal the falsehood, and state the factual truths based on my knowledge of history. My comments are restricted to the news Report only, as I have not accessed the full speech delivered by Prof. CJ at the UNHRC.

Concept of a Traditional Tamil Homeland

Is the Tamil“Homeland Concept” a violation of a Human Right to be canvassed before the Forum of the UNHRC? Does it violate the Human Right of another ethnic community? On the contrary, I would say it is, itself, a Human Right of a Community of people, to have an Homeland for themselves, provided  it fulfills the necessary ingredients for Self-determination as outlined by the International World Body, the United Nations Organization. The requirements to be fulfilled are:

1. A distinct Population

2. A distinct demarcated territory

3. A common socio-cultural cohesion

The above conditions are satisfied by the Tamil people of the North Eastern region of Lanka.

Thus the concept of a traditional Homeland of the Tamils is based on a principle of legitimacy, acceptable by UN standards. Therefore, how can the Homeland Concept violate the Human Right of the Sinhala ethnic community? Prof. CJ states that a “mythical  history had been created by racists in Sri Lanka leading to the violation of Human right of all Lankans.” The qualifying word is all (my emphasis) which has been decidedly used to make it appear democratic and inclusive. Once the Tamils and the Tamil speaking Muslims are taken out of “all Sri Lankans”, what remains is only the Sinhalese. In other words, what Prof. CJ says is that The Homeland Concept, violates the Human Right of the Sinhalese. The Sinhalese community constitutes 75% of the population and spread over ¾ of the land area of the country. The Tamil community may be about 10 or 12 % of the population and confined to about ¼ of the land area of the country, where they are the preponderant majority. How could this be a threat or violate the human right of the Sinhalese community? It is preposterous.  What is implied is that the Sinhalese are claiming the whole country, belongs to them , and the Tamils are aliens. Conversely, it is the majority Sinhalese who by denial and non-recognition of a Tamil homeland, violating the human right of the Tamils. In the light of the ancient or pre-history of the Island nation, the Tamils are also original inhabitants of the country. There was no separate, independent country called Lanka around 9000 years B.C. It was part of the Sub-continent of India with a mix of South Indian Dravidians of various ethnicities, such as Tamils, Telugu, Malayalees, Kannada etc. There were no inhabitants, called Sinhalese then. Due to a Geological upheaval, the present Lanka, being a part of the Continental mass, separated from India . Without delving into the ancient prehistory of the island, I will confine myself to the specific views expressed by Prof. CJ.

1. Prof. CJ states that “when the Portuguese arrived in Sri Lanka, Sinhalese people were the majority in the Jaffna Penensula”. This is just an assumed generalization. This is not backed by any Census statistics, because there was no official census compiled at that time. I don’t know how this was ascertained by him. At least, he could have estimated the number of the Sinhalese and Tamils in the population.

2. Prof. CJ says that “the Dutch who occupied the coastal areas of the country around 1650 A.D. brought the Vellalar Tamils from the present Tamil Nadu for their tobacco plantations”. Prof.CJ has with deliberate intention has qualified the Tamils as “Vellalars” to match the present preponderant Jaffna Tamils, who are high Caste vellalars. Prof.CJ is twisting this fact by adding the Vellalar description to it, to establish that the Jaffna Tamils were of recent origin during the Dutch period. Prof.CJ is innocent of fact that high Caste Vellalars will never venture out of their country to work as menial laborers, in the first place. Moreover, Prof.CJ seems to be ignorant of the fact that the Portuguese preceded the Dutch occupation of the country. When the Portuguese arrived, the Kingdom of Jaffna was already in existence and was ruled by the King, Sangili. There cannot be a kingdom without the Tamil people to rule. The absurdity of the contentious argument of Prof.CJ is revealed, if I say, that the British also brought the Vellalar Tamils from Tamil Nadu to work in their Tea plantations and the present Estate Tamils are all Vellalars. One can see how ludicrous is Prof. CJ’s view.

3. Prof. CJ says that scholars like Prof. Karthigesu Indrapala (I wonder he is a Tamil or Sinhala?) has pointed out (my emphasis) that there were no permanent Tamil settlements in Sri Lanka,before  13thcentury A.D”. It is noteworthy that no verbatim quote is reproduced of the said scholar. Therefore, the veracity of statement attributed to him is of a dubious nature. On the contrary, I quote a positive, stronger and affirmative statement of a renown historian of Lanka, Dr. Paul E. Peris, which is diametrically opposite to the so-called point of view of Prof. Karthugesu Indrapala- I quote “Following excavations of Kanthrodai, the ancient capital of Kings of Jaffna, I believe North Ceylon was a flourishing settlement long before Vijaya was born”- unquote. In terms of chronology of time, this refers to a period before 500 B.C, which is when Vijaya  is supposed to have arrived in Sri Lanka. This makes the statement that there were no Tamil settlements before 13 century A.D, a joke, to say the least. I think, it is more pertinent for the learned Prof. CJ to engage in countering the above authentic truth before the UNHRC forum, than with his fictitious new theory countering the concept of the Tamil Homeland.

4. Moreover, the view that there were no Tamil settlements in Lanka before 13th century A.D. would make the reign of the Chola King, Ellalan for 44 years in the 1st century B.C and his defeat by the national hero, Dutugemunu, a nullity and a non-event. Surely, King Ellalan couldn’t have ruled an empty land without his Tamil subjects for 44 years.

5. The most astonishing  and gigantic falsehood of history is the statement of the Prof. CJ  that “Tamil speaking people who constituted around 10% of the population with a history not going back to more than two hundred years”. As stated by historian Dr. Paul E. Peris at (3) above, Tamil Jaffna kingdoms existed 500 B.C. and beyond. If the pre-history of Lanka is taken into consideration,that is, from the period Lanka’s separation from the mainland sub-continent, India, around 9000 years B.C. King Pulasthi, ruled from the city Pulasthinagar (later called Polonaruwa) who was King Ravana’s grandfather, was followed by his brother Kumbakarnan, King Moothsiva and his son, King Devanambiya tissan. Could the Prof.CJ enlighten us, who these Kings are? Were they Sinhalese and Buddhists?  What was the religion of King Devanambiya tissan, before his conversion to Buddhism? These are the unanswered questions of our ancient history, by scholars and Professors like Channa Jayasumana. I would argue that they were all Hindu Dravidians, Tamil or Telugu or both. There was no Sinhalese or Buddhism during this pre-historic ancient period.

6. One may ask, if all the people of that ancient period were Dravidian Hindus, why is that the majority of the people (75 %) of the population today are Sinhalese? It is a valid question, yes. The simple answer to this question is the introduction of Buddhism to the country in 247 B.C. by Emperor Ashoka”s son , Arahat Mahendra. The ruling King Devanambiya tissan, being a Hindu, accepted Buddhism. This was a major turning point in the history of Lanka. The people too followed the King, and accepted Buddhism. However, people did not, overnight, renounce their Hindu faith, but continued with their worship of Hindu deities and observance of rituals and customs, side by side with the observance of Buddhist tenets, the Four Noble Truths and the Eight- fold path. This, resulted in a Schism in Buddhism, as in India. There were two schools of Buddhism, called the Mahayana  and Theravada Buddhism. The latter being the pure orthodox Buddhism and the former a hybrid form of Hinduism and Buddhism. This division of Buddhism prevails even today, with some countries practicing Mahayana, and Lanka following the Theravada doctrine of pure Buddhism. Even today, most of the Buddhist temples have a Devalaya of Hindu deities. Nobody can deny this palpable truth. Secondly, the evolutionary creation of the Sinhalese language, first orally in the spoken language, using modified Tamil words and later in the 7th century A.D in the written language, which was created on the basis of the Tamil Alphabet and the Tamil Grammar, Virasolium. This is even affirmed by Dr.C.E. Godakumbura. Thus, the Sinhala language arrived, based on Tamil and Sanskrit languages. Rev. Gnanapragasam says there are more than 3000 Tamil words in the Sinhala language.

Thus, the two main elements necessary for a particular identity of a people, Religion and Language, became a reality. The large scale conversion of the people to Buddhism and the adoption of a separate language, spread over a period of 1300 or 1400 years, with their biological increase, gave the Sinhalese a dominant Majority, today. The ratio of difference between the residual  Tamils/ other Dravidians, and the Sinhalese would have been more or less same  around 1st century A.D, that is 25% and 75%, respectively, when the population would have been about say  ½ a million. Today after a period of 20 centuries, with the additional inputs to population, the Muslims, Tamils of Indian origin, Burghers, Malays and other minor ethnic groups, the percentage of Tamils dwindled, in the composite population of 20 million, to about 10-12%. Therefore, the reason for the disparity between Tamils and Sinhalese, that is 10/12 % and 75% respectively, is the primeval conversion of the Dravidian Hindus to Buddhism and the adoption of an artificially created language, which gave rise to the Sinhalese identity. Prof. CJ brags about, saying that  “75% of the population with a history of more than two thousand years and Tamils speaking people who constitute around 10% of the population with a history not going back to more than two hundred years”. Prof CJ is impervious to the knowledge that Tamils and their religion, Hinduism, has an un-datable history of ten millennia and beyond, making 2000 years history of the 75% of the Sinhala population, chronologically speaking, to  insignificance.

7. Rather than countering the Homeland concept of the Tamils by claiming a fictitious violation of the Human Rights of the Sinhalese, it is more desirable that the Prof.CJ and the like-minded intellectuals and the Sri Lankan State, counter the specific UNHRC resolution 30/1, alleging violation of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law, and the War Crimes charges brought against the country, during the Civil War against the Tamil militants.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 8
    11

    Shankaran, Native Veddah, rajesh, Ajith, Rohan, and all racists thugs,

    All those bickering ended up on the banks of Nanthikadal on May 2009 by annihilating LTTE TERRORISTS MILITARILY.
    Therefore, Howsoever loudly you all talk about elam, it will never be achieved in any form separate country or federal or any other.
    If LTTE failed militarily, do you all think that you all get that on platter as gift. if you all think so, you all in definite fantasy as same as you fanciful and whimsical description of the Sri Lankan history.
    Rather than being insane, think positively to work together as a nation in line with the yearning of Tamil masses of Sri Lanka and that is the only way forward here and any other is a wasting of time.
    Since 1933, so called Tamil leaders deceived Tamill masses with their whimsical and fanciful elam , Ethnic problems and other matters whereas today and in the future the Tamil masses never buy those fancies and whims anymore.
    We are sure that you all can understand this reality.

    • 7
      3

      Nimal Tissa Wijethunga: during periodic race riots organised and inflicted on the Tamils, in the South in particular, the Sinhala thugs used to scream in filth at me and my parents “go home to your Jaffna” (by Jaffna they meant the NE).

      The Sinhala politicians instructed the thugs to scream such filth and hard facts.
      They recognised then that the Tamils have a homeland in the NE.

      Now this is not something I am fabricating this is the hard facts

      • 6
        3

        Rajash!
        Why go beyond our time. Go back to the time when we got the so called FREEDOM in 1948, what was the percentage of Sinhalese in theEast. Not even 3%. Thanks to DS.Senayake’s colonization policy followed by other successors, to day it s almost 35%. It must be stated that Tamils are not against individual Sinhalese coming to live in the North /East on their own”but they are against the state aided colonization, so as to change the texture of the population” and make the Tamils a Microscopic minority in their homeland depriving them of adequate representation.

        • 2
          4

          There is no such thing as ‘state aided colonisation’. That is a term used by racist Tamils to keep the N & NE for themselves. The Government has every right to help and encourage Sinhalese to settle anywhere in the country, especially in the N & NE. The more the races are mixed, the more they will understand each other.

          In the Sixties the US had a deliberate policy of transporting Black school children to all white schools to redress racial segregation. SL governments have just extended that policy to prevent racist and caste-ridden Tamils from creating enclaves for themselves alone.

          • 5
            0

            Paul

            “There is no such thing as ‘state aided colonisation. That is a term used by racist Tamils to keep the N & NE for themselves.”

            What do you call them?
            A state sponsored terrorism?

            Why wasn’t those who living in North East given priority to get land from state hand out?

            ” The Government has every right to help and encourage Sinhalese to settle anywhere in the country, especially in the N & NE. “

            What right the state/government has in helping only a section of the landless peasant who live hundreds of miles away get free state lands whereas those landless peasants who live close to the same land don’t. What do you call such blatant discriminatory treatment? Where did the state/government get it rights to discriminate people on the basis of race, religion, region, ……………?

            I do not doubt your credentials. You are honest and open about it. I congratulate you for being a honest racist land thief.

            If you are so keen on integration as you say “The more the races are mixed, the more they will understand each other” could you also support completely abandoning immigration/emigration policies and regulation and abolish the department and let foreigners come to this island, settle down and allowed to buy land wherever they want to live, …………………………..?

            Don’t be a jerk.

            Who do you think you are to decide races should mix?

      • 5
        3

        Just look at the faces of the nonplussed foreigners listening!
        If this incoherent racist is representative of the Sinhalese “intelligentsia”, it won’t be long before some outside power takes over again. This Jayasumana is also a live wire in the Natha deviyo cabal that promotes “organic” farming. If merit was any criterion in the award of degrees, this idiot wouldn’t be good enough to be a lab cleaner.

      • 7
        2

        You are correct. At Royal college we were told by some Sinhala teachers and Students when they get angry, “Go to Jaffna” and never did they say “Go to India”

    • 8
      2

      From the day the Sri Lankan Tamils lost their rights to the Sinhalese (via British in 1948) they had been asking for a federal state (that existed until the British removed it in 1833) in a non-violent/peaceful manner for more than 30 years. The Sinhalese came up with several pacts and promises but finally gave nothing to the Tamils other than cheating them and unleashing violence on their non-violent/peaceful campaigns. This forced the Tamils to seek for separation to form a separate country for Tamils which ended up in a war 30 years war. See how much the country lost. At independence in 1948 Sri Lanka was the second best economy in Asia, today it is one of the worst. All because of the foolishness of the Sinhalese in not giving the Tamils their rights.

      The Tamils cannot continue within a unitary state anymore. They need to get back to their original federal state as it was before the British united it. The Tamils may have lost the war but they have not lost their rights to federalism or self-determination. Federalism is NOT separation and it is the rights of North & East Tamils who live as a majority in a separate Tamil speaking territory. The principle and fundamental right of self-determination is firmly established under international law and during the past several years, the Tamils’ right to self-determination has received recognition at sessions of the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva.

      Even after the war ended, the Sinhalese are not willing to give the Tamils their rights. The Sinhalese by doing so has totally lost the trust of the SL Tamils. The Tamils should NEVER negotiate for a federal style devolution with the Sinhalese anymore without involving the UN as the mediator.

    • 7
      2

      Only Sri Lankan Tamils can claim for the north and the east as the homeland of Tamils. The Tamils have lived in a contiguous territory in the Northeast as the predominant inhabitants for more than a period of 2000 years. They had developed a mode of production, cleared the jungles, created fields, constructed sources of water supply and developed agriculture, industry and trade in the region.

      In the traditional system of administration this area was deemed as historical habitation of the Tamils by the kings of southern Sri Lanka. When Sapumal Kumara conquered Jaffna it was not annexed to the kingdom of Kotte. It was governed as a separate Kingdom. According to Tamil tradition, Sapumal constructed the Kanthaswamy temple as a temple of royal court at Nallur. He had also issued coins in the name of the God.

      Until the mid-20th century no one contested the fact that North-East was the homeland of the Tamils. It is confirmed by archival records and census reports. When they submitted memoranda to two Constitutional Commissions the Kandyans had argued for a federal system of government with three units, one of which was the north-eastern region inhabited by Sri Lankan Tamils.

    • 5
      3

      thanks nimal for proving our point from the beginning, that sinhalese were never sincere with their negotiations. they just wanted to militarily defeat ltte. they went around doing propaganda work everywhere to justify their war when they had no ground to stand on.

  • 6
    11

    Soma Palan,

    Tamil History in Sri Lanka is that they have come here as Captured during invasions by Chola and Pandiyan invasions, plunderers, smugglers, Kallathonies who brave the high seas to come over here to seek greener pastures and British brought to work in Tea Estates as slaves.

    In view of the comments about the history in this discussion, I am not at all surprised that after some years, these idiot liers like Soma Palan may say that there is Tamil Home land in the up country areas and there are ancient Tamil villages.

    Whatever it is, all these bickering were militarily annihilated and no more in existence. if you want to see the genuine benefits to your community, you need to get rid of this insane thinking and work together as a nation and that is the only way forward.
    In this country, there was not a single archeological fact to-date to prove that tamils are natives of this land. The whole world knows this fact very well.

    • 8
      2

      The Sinhala history is that a lion had sex with a desperate woman and hey presto ….

    • 9
      3

      In this country Sri Lanka, there was not a single archeological fact to-date to prove that Sinhalese are natives of this land. Even the Mahavamsa does not say so. The whole world knows this fact very well.

      • 2
        7

        How do you prove a certain community is native to that land from archaeology? I would like to know the methodology.

    • 8
      3

      The One and Only One invader from India (the so called father of the Sinhala race) was Vijay who came with 700 thugs. Sri Lanka was connected with Tamil Nadu by the Rama’s bridge and was a part of the Tamil kingdom. The Tamils had all the legal rights to rule Sri Lanka. Ven. Mahanama concocted a fairy tale to create a Sinhala race to protect Buddhism, and called all the non-Buddhists as INVADERS.

  • 5
    6

    P. Soma Palan,

    //When the Portuguese arrived, the Kingdom of Jaffna was already in existence and was ruled by the King, Sangili. There cannot be a kingdom without the Tamil people to rule. The absurdity of the contentious argument of Prof.CJ is revealed//

    Then how come Tamil kings such as Sri Wikramarajasinghe ruled almost entirely Sinhalese kingdom during the Kandyan era?

    • 7
      2

      S*****
      The Sinhala rulers spent most of their time cutting each other’s throats.

    • 8
      2

      Shenal,

      Nice point.
      Nevertheless, if the Tamils were invaders and terrorists then how come they were invited over by the Kandyans to rule over them?

      • 4
        6

        Keynes!

        Kandyan Nayaks were not from North or East of Sri Lanka. They came from Madurai region.

        FYI Sinhalese had a strong relationship with Tamils of India from ancient times. It can be compared with the relationship between English and French. Many Sinhalese kings kept Tamil mercenaries or had marriage alliances with ancient Tamil kingdoms of South India. There are no records of such to imply that Tamils lived independently in the N-E provinces in Sri Lanka until much later times when Sinhalese slowly migrated Southwards.

        • 6
          4

          There is lots of records of Tamils living independently in the north and east and there is no record of Sinhalese packing up their bags and leaving the north and east and Tamils from India moving in. The irony is most of the present day Sinhalese are descended from recently migrated Tamil immigrants from South India, both low and high born ( You are one) but have the audacity now to revise history and call the native Tamils who are largely descended from the Naga and in parts of North East and East from the Vedah, that they do not belong and should go South India , from the very land the ancestors of most of the present day Sinhalese originated from a few centuries ago.

          • 0
            5

            Tamil squatters (kallathonis) lived independently on humane grounds as Sinhalese had the influence of Buddhism.

      • 5
        2

        Keynes the so called Kandyan Sinhalese aristocracy that it self was more or less of Naicker origin rebelled against the King of Kandy as he was a Tamil Naicker and plotted with the British to overthrow the king. Nothing like this happened in Jaffna because the king and the population were Tamils. The Portuguese employed thousands of Sinhalese lascars from the former Sinhalese kingdom of Kotte , which did not put up a fight , to fight against the Tamil kingdom of Jaffna. These people are talking garbage and trying to revise history, as they are now ruling. It was only the Tamil kingdom of Jaffna that put up a fight against European colonisation and lost , however the Tamil Chieftain Pandara Vanniyan ruled the Vanni until the early 1800s. The Sinhalese tried to make him a Sinhalese and call him Vanni Bandara and this failed/ For your information the Sinhalese armed forces desecrated and destroyed his tomb in 2009 stating that he is a symbol of Tamil independence. Bothe the Sinhalese kingdoms fell without a fight. Kotte they just surrendered and Kandy through treachery
        .
        This is from an Indian site
        https://www.livehistoryindia.com/snapshort-histories/2017/11/06/vellores-sri-lanka-connection
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandara_Vanniyan

      • 1
        3

        Jaffna Tamils were squatters (kallathoni) @ first & they were let live there on humane grounds; like what happened for Rohingya people in Myanmar.

        Time to time Pandya & Chola invaded the island & brave Sinhala kings chased them back but some of their descendants settled in arid lands of North & selected to live with kallathonis, in spite of cast difference.

        • 3
          1

          Neither the Mahavamsa nor the stone inscriptions give any evidence to any Sinhala kingdom or any Sinhala kings. After Vijay, right from the Tamil Pandyan king PANDUVASUDEV (504 BC) to KASSAPA VII (1045 AD), all the kings of Anuradapura were either Dravidian Nagas, native Tamils, Pandyans or Cholas. There is no evidence what so ever to prove that any of them were Sinhalese. Most of them got converted to Buddhism (due to Asoka’s influence) but Buddhist kings does not mean Sinhalese.

          Time to time the Chola invaded the island & Pandya kings of Lanka (not Sinhala) chased them back because Pandya & Chola were always at war.

    • 6
      3

      Chingkallams were always ruled by Tamizh kings and South Indian dynasties and even 90% of your so called Chingkallam aristocrats and many Chingkalam upper castes have a South Indian origin. Largely Tamizh, a few Telugu or Kalinga. Only thing is these Thamizh kings and aristocrats when ruling Chingkallams nominally stated that they were Buddhist. Tamilzh before 1948 were never ruled by Chingkallams. Even your so called Sapumal Kumaraya or Chenpaka Perumal was a Thamizh. You are not Chingkallam but a Karaiyar/Mukuva /Paravan or Thimalar woman from South India. Go and visit your Vaduga relatives from southern Andhra or Northern Tamil Nadu, instead spreading lies and hatred here and in Lanka Lies

    • 7
      2

      Shenal

      Elara ruled the Northern kingdom of Anuradapura for 44 years. During the same period, Dutugemunu’s father King Kavantissa ruled the Southern kingdom of Rohana. Both these kingdoms were separated by the river. If you read the Mahavamsa carefully, Dutugemunu’s father King Kavantissa warns Dutugemunu not to invade (Rajarata) the land of the Demelas. He also says, Rohana the region on this side of the river (Southern territory) has enough land.

      During the war, Dutugemunu had to conquer not just one Tamil king (Elara) but 32 Tamil Chieftains around the Northern Kingdom. Mahavamsa also says, around sixty thousand Tamils died in the war. How can there be a kingdom with a Tamil king and so many Tamil Chieftains with thousands of Tamil people if there were no Tamil settlements in the Northern kingdom?

      • 3
        5

        Elara was first mentioned in Deepavamsa which was the source for Mahavamsa. In Deepavamsa Elara was not called a Damelas (which means South Indian) and it was Mahanama thero who added ‘Damelas’ to the version in Mahavamsa.
        You have to read more into history dude.

        • 3
          0

          sach

          Let me add to your point.

          Let us take the Elara/Dutugemunu episode. In the Deepavamsa there are only 10 lines/verses about Elara/Dutugemunu but in the Mahavamsa there are 11 complete chapters about Elara/Dutugemunu.

          Do you think Mahanama Thero has written all bull crap by blowing up 10 lines into 11 chapters (may be after smoking Cannabis)?

          Another example is, the Mahavamsa calls the king who ruled the island during the period 504-474 BC as Pandu Vasudeva. The Deepavamsa calls him Pandu Vasa. Pandu is the Pali equivalent of Pandya, Vasa means where he lived (his origin). In other words, Pandu Vasa meaning one from the Pandya country i.e., A Pandyan by his nationality.

          So what is your opinion, you think Deepavamsa is more accurate?

    • 7
      2

      Shenal, I pity your ignorance due to your brain being clouded by racism. Tamils form India were invited to rule Kandyan kingdom by their chieftains when they could not get a suitable successor. This is how Kandyan Kingdom was ruled by Tamil kings. It is now clear that Sinhalese do not have a suitable person to rule Sri Lanka at present and why not go back to the age old practice and invite a Tamil from India to rule you. I am sure that joker Subramaniyaswamy will be acceptable to Mahinda and Ranil.

    • 3
      0

      How can Tamil kings rule a Sinhalese kingdom? The answer is there you mad racist woman. Despite Tamil kings ruling the kingdom of Kandy was called Sinhalese because the population was predominantly Sinhalese, despite large amounts of Tamil subjects living in the outlying areas. Similarly the despite kings of Tamil origin ruling Kotte, the kingdom was again called Sinhalese again due to population of the kingdom. This is why the kingdom of Jaffna was called Tamil, as 99% of its subjects were Tamil and the eastern Vannmai cheifdoms were called Tamil , as again more than 99% of its subjects were Tamils a again until Tamil Muslims arrived in these regions begging for refuge and were given. The only difference is unlike in the so called Sinhalese kingdoms, where a Tamil king and a largely Tamil origin aristocracy nominally calling themselves Buddhists were ruling the Sinhalese, in the Tamil areas Tamil Hindu kings and chieftains were ruling a Tamil Hindu population. Got it , Now runaway and stop trying to distort history. First they stated there were no Tamils . Now they cannot get away with the historical fact that there was Tamil kingdom of Jaffna ruling the entire north , the north west coast and the east north of the Mahaveli and Tamil eastern chiefdoms, so have changed the story , that these Tamil kings and chiefs were ruling a Sinhalese population or some Muslims nut cases stating , no not Sinhalese but Muslims. The reality is in the so called Sinhalese kingdoms of Kandy and Kotte Tamil kings were ruling a largely Sinhalese population and in the Tamil areas Tamil kings and chiefs were ruling a Tamil population . This is why these areas/kingdom and chiefdoms were called Tamil. Because the people or subjects were Tamil, or Sinhalese ,irrespective of the ethnicity of the king or the rulng aristocracy

  • 5
    5

    Bodin
    No one has so far replied the HISTORICAL FACTS recorded by Captain Percival who lived in Jaffna from 1800 to 1820 when He documented in detail that the MAJORITY of inhabitants were Muslims, the second group were Sinhalese and tamils, the latter being mostly Tamils brought down by the Dutch to work the Tobacco fields.
    So, when Ceylon became a crown colony, 1802, the Jaffna Peninsula was mostly in the hands of the Muslims. If the tamils are talking of justice, then, when the British left, the North should go to the Muslim majority and the demographic balance there should be RESTORED.
    As for the East, the Sinhala king Senerath bestowed much land to the MUslims.
    The reports of British govwernment agents like C. S. Lewis, Denham show that the Taim,s were a small minority in the East, living in coastal towns, with the Sinhalese as the Majority, even into the late 19th century.
    So the tail claim of being in the North and the East is POPPYCOCK. NO historical evidence except for mythical claims to the times before Vijaya, when even the Vijaya story may well be a MYTH, with all its stories of KLions conceiving with humans.
    The Tamils claim that the Mahawamsa is nonsense, but then, they distort the Sinhala-Pali names like Deva-Nam-Piyatissa (a name even recored in Asoka Inscriptions), by giving them nionsensicval Tamil Names not recoreded in ANY inscription.
    The Tamils were a Bbaric race until the Chankam period which was from about 2nd century upwards, as stated by the Indian Epigraphist Mahadevan.
    The North should rightfully be given to the Muslims as they were the major residents when the British made Sri labnka a crown colony.
    As a Muslim I call upon our leaders to respect or rights, usurped by the racist Tamils who massacred our people even when in prayer – they are barbarians.

    • 6
      2

      Who is PERCIVAL? Is it Mahendra PERCIVAL Rajapakse (Son of GEORGE Rajapakse), our former President?

      • 5
        5

        This is the level of history knowledge of Tamil commentators here.

    • 6
      1

      The Chief Justice in the British Government, Sir Alexander Johnston wrote on 01.07.1827 to the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland as follows:

      ‘I think it may safely be concluded both from them and all the different histories which I have in my possession, that the race of people who inhabited the whole of the Northern and Eastern Provinces of the Island of Ceylon, at the period of their greatest agricultural prosperity spoke the same language, used the same written character, and had the same origin, religion, castes, laws and manners, as the race of people who at the same period inhabited the southern peninsula of India.’

      The census of Ceylon conducted in 1881 also indicate that the two Tamil provinces (North & East) were inhabited almost exclusively by Tamils in the late nineteenth century (Census of Ceylon, 1881). The Sinhalese population constituted only 1.8% of the total population of the two Tamil provinces in 1881; Sinhalese accounted for only 0.51% of the total population of the Northern Province, and 4.2% of the Eastern Province. This administrative attitude of the British make it clearly evident that to them although the whole of Sri Lanka was under their complete control, the people of the Sinhalese areas and the people of the Sri Lankan Tamil areas were two distinct elements of the same island’s population. The recognition of the Tamil identity of these North Eastern provinces by the British is also confirmed by the successive census taken in these regions starting from 1827, 1881, 1891, 1901, 1911, 1921, to 1946. The recognition of such a distinction by the British authorities grew even clearer when they began to introduce gradually political or constitutional innovations in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and even later.

    • 3
      1

      Bodin

      If you read the books/articles written by the colonial writers/historians, the Dutch Predikant, Philippus Baldaeus who was in the Island during the mid-17th century, the Dutch Governor Rjklof Van Goen’s account dated 1675, first British Governor of Sri Lanka, namely Frederick North in 1799, the Colonial Secretary Hugh Cleghorn, Jacob Burnand, a Swiss soldier in the service of the Dutch and later the English (was the governor of Batticaloa), and many others; out of all the statements these gentlemen made, only one thing is very clear, what all of them clearly saw and experienced during their period was that, there were two different Nations (Sinhalese & Tamils) in the Island having two different languages, religions, cultures, and living in two well defined and clearly and naturally demarcated land areas and both were majorities in their traditional areas (Homelands).

    • 3
      0

      We know that you are some Salafist Islamic Muslim opportunist and like a typical Sri Lankan Muslim trying gain advantage for you low caste converted immigrant community from South India , that only arrived in the island a few centuries ago. South Indian origin immigrant Dravidian Muslims like you were only a miniscule minority in the north . It was around 60000 the most , when the LTTE chased them away due to treachery and spying for the Sinhalese armed forces. 90% of them were dirt poor and did not own any land . In the east Tamils were the outright majority even as far is 1948 and they were the majority everywhere and are still the largest community , despite all the killings and large scale ethnic cleansing and settlement of Sinhalese and Muslim. Muslims only arrived in the east as refugees first fleeing Portuguese persecution along the west coast and then Sinhalese persecution in the Kandyan areas, to where they fled first. I desperation king Senarath of Kandy requested the Tamil Vannmai chiefs in the east , parts of which he had loose control to provide, asylum/refuge to these Tamil Muslims , fleeing Portuguese persecution, as the Sinhalese do not want them any more of them. They reluctantly allowed them to settle in the east and gave them lands away from the native Tamil Hindu villages and Mukkuva Tamil Hindu women to start families, as most these Muslim refugees were young men. However they were not allowed to own any large scale lands and had to lease these lands from the Tamils. This was until the late 19Th century. Everything ancient or old in the east is Tamil and Saivite , Now all these low caste immigrant converts from Tamil Nadu be they be Sinhalese or Muslims are trying to create stories to steal the land of the Native Tamils( Naga) and the Tamilised Veddah.

  • 2
    6

    Kumar,

    //King Kavantissa warns Dutugemunu not to invade (Rajarata) the land of the Demelas.//

    This doesn’t mean that Tamils lived exclusively in North and East independently. Rajarata was the ancient seat of the Sinhalese and it might well had been captured by a Tamil adventurer hence the term “Tamil Country”.

    • 4
      1

      “Rajarata was the ancient seat of the Sinhalese”

      Where is evidence to prove that it was the ancient seat of the Sinhalese?

    • 3
      2

      Shenal

      “Rajarata was the ancient seat of the Sinhalese”

      What evidence do you have to prove? Stone inscriptions? Mahavamsa?

      “it might well had been captured by a Tamil adventurer”

      Tamil adventurer or Tamil native?

      Buddhism in Sri Lanka was actually a North Indian conspiracy organized by the North Indian Emperor Asoka and his son Mahinda with the support from the local stooge Tissa (second son of Saivaite King Muta Siva) who seized the Anuradapura throne (with Asoka’s support) which rightly belonged to his elder brother Abhaya (Apayan).

      However, after his conversion to Buddhism, Devanampiya Tissa’s proclamation that he was the Maharajah of Sri Lanka (with Asoka’s blessing and support) and his efforts to force the people of the country to accept Buddhism was rejected by the Vanni Chieftains. They were strong devotees of Lord Siva who refused to accept Devanampiya Tissa as their overlord and resisted his effort to impose Buddhism on them. Saivaite Dravidian rivalry against Buddhism began in 177 BC during the reign of his youngest brother Sura Tissa. Two native Saivaite Tamils, Sena and Kuttaka (Damila horse merchant’s sons, none of the Pali chronicles describe them as invaders) defeated Sura Tissa in battle and conquered Anuradhapura and ruled it for 22 years.

      Eight Saivaite Tamil kings ruled Anuradhapura for a total of 82 years during that period. The Mahavamsa does not call any of them invaders (other than Elara). The history scholars who studied/analyzed the Pali chronicles and the historical records in Tamil Nadu for any reference to any invasion (either Chola or Pandyan) during the same period failed to find any evidence. They feel that these rulers were native Saivaite Dravidian/Tamil Vanni chieftains who rebelled against the imposition of Buddhism. Even though Mahavamsa says that Elara was a Chola Prince, the folk drama popular among the native Tamils ‘Ellalan Koothu’ says that he was the son of Sena, one of the first native Tamil rulers of Anuradhapura.

      • 0
        0

        K
        “Vanni Chieftains”
        Can you name a few that who refer to?
        *
        From where did you dig out the story about Asoka’s blessings.
        Asoka’s influence did not stretch into what was mostly Tamil territory nor did it cross the sea.

  • 6
    2

    at least we tamils can proudly say who our forefathers are, unlike the myth that suggests a race born out of copulation with a lion. it seems every tom and dick who set foot in sri lanka fathered sinhalese. it is time for mr. channa jayasumana to check out who his forefathers were – maybe it was a tamil.!

  • 4
    2

    History of Sri Lanka has now become ‘HIS STORY’ i.e any one can right His Story and call it History.

  • 1
    3

    Here is what Indrapala said in one of his papers. This statement does not mean Tamils have not lived in the North before thirteenth century.

    “After the drift of Sinhalese political power to the south-western
    parts of Ceylon and the emergence of the Jaffna kingdom in the
    northernmost region of the island (which processes took place in
    the middle third of the thirteenth century)”

    THE ORIGIN OF THE TAMIL VANNI CHIEFTAINCIES OF
    CEYLON
    K. Indrapala Ceylon Journal of the Humanities, 1970

    • 4
      1

      Rajan

      Historicity changes all the time with new digs.
      According to Genetics, the stupid Tamils and stupid Sinhalese share their genetics closely with their Stupid cousins in South India.
      A leading internationally renowned Sinhalese Archeologist/Historian confided in his students if you dig wider you find Sinhala civilisation and deeper you will find Tamil/South Indian civilisation.

      Despite the Sinhala/Buddhist fascists’t sham claim the evidence exist that proves almost everything that Sinhala/Tamil are proud of were either copied or brought to this island from North/South India, including language, religion, culture, music, kinship, caste, genetics, architecture, art, literature, artisans, …………………….. fighting men (mercenaries – Vellaikkara Padei) ……….. Brahmins, at times kings, ………..

    • 0
      0

      Rajan
      There is a fuller account of the History of Tamils in the island in Indrapala’s ‘The Evolution of An Ethnic Identity’ (2005).
      It is based on a wealth of archaeological findings since 1970.

  • 3
    3

    This man Jayasumana has embarrassed Sinhala Historians past and present with his stupid notion of the Islands History.

  • 1
    2

    According to Archeological evidences available entire Indian subcontinant including lanka occupied by tribal population belong to various groups as per their own classifications.They all might have been australoid. They had their own languages evolved within themselves.Time to times there might have been fighting between tribal clans lived very near. but that was for their source of foods only. No weaponary needed. They had separated Areas for their activities for living. but latter another sets of peoples arrived there with more sophisticated tools and captured some areas taking local as slaves. It was from Iran and central Asian regions.They had sophisticated tools specially made for fighting. They had their own languages.They were bit advance than tribal gangs lived in Indian subcontinant. As such since then those people started dominating subcontinant. People called north-Iranians or Ariyans and South west Iranians or Darvadians were some of them .They had their own languages, religion practices and bit advance culture.They got India divided among them.South part by darvadians and north part by Ariyans. As an Island Lanka was escaped from this complict for time being. But latter Darvadian influences started coming here. as most of south Indian tribes came here for shelter as Darvadians were brutaly killing them and taking young as slaves.
    Latter Darvadians put their finger into this Island as well and got some of tribal leaders to obey their orders and act accordingly.Those tribes specially NAGAS obeyed south Indian occupiers orders. but others defied it and kept their independancy and started having cordial relationships with north Indians for their servival. Converting to Buddhism marked Its hightest point.Earlier they were nature worshippers or animists.
    Sinhalese is a derivative of language evolved among tribal gangs called ELU but Tamil is derivative of Language brought by Darvadians who occupied south part of India.

    • 4
      1

      Ranjith(SPRRW)

      Both Tamils and Sinhalese are the descendants of Kallathonies from South India. Most converted to Sinhala/Buddhism are the zealous adherents of racism, bigotry, ………… thievery, ………..

      I am sorry if I have offended you with history because you are one of them.

      • 0
        1

        OK. Native Vedda

        No issue. when we are on forum like this anything can happen. apology is not needed. Anyway tell me Something. How do you say Tamils and Sinhalese are the descendants of Kallathonies. Tell me your facts. and ages of both Tamil and sinhala Languages.. As per Ramayanaya book I red,No tamil or kerala or telegu or Karnataka race existed at the time of book was written.if you go through it you can see it for yourself. But existence some race called Yakka in lanka mentioned there.but not race called Naga. That means some kind of communication system between each other should have been exited. I mean language.If I claim It was Elu or proto Sinhalese what would be your respond ??? You may say Ramayanaya is a epic but to compile Epic you have to have some kind of base. Arthur C clerc did same kind of things due to his Sceincetific knowledge. Greeks did Deva katha base on Stars seen in the sky. Tell me base for your statement. Mr. Native Vedda. If I say that ELU or proto Sinhala is older than Tamil.and that was the language used by yakka people mentioned in Ramayanaya. what would be your response.???.

  • 1
    3

    Holy cow, I have completely forgotten about this article.
    I think I should first reply to the writer, P. Soma Palan before replying to the descendants of Kallathonis at the 1st page.

    • 4
      4

      First of all, Prof.Channa Jayasumana didn’t talk about a “theory.” On the contrary within 2 minutes (I myself read out his statement which took 1 minute+50 seconds) he negated the bogus claim of Tamil Homeland with facts!
      .
      1) SomaPalan asks: “Is the Tamil“Homeland Concept” a violation of a HumanRight to be canvassed before the UNHRC?”
      I like your wording “concept.” Let’s see the difference between facts and a concept. “Facts” are memorized or passed from generation to generation whereas “ a concept” is understood. “Facts” are true information which is verifiable while a “concept” is a generalized idea which is not necessarily to be true.
      The fake Tamil Homeland idea is a violation of human rights of ALL Sri Lankans, most importantly the “first inhabitants” of Sri Lanka who are Sinhalese.
      Seeking a demarcated territory based on a “concept” is also a violation of freedom of movement of the descendants of such inhabitants.
      .
      2. SomaPalana says: “…. itself, a Human Right of a Community of people, to have a Homeland for themselves, provided it fulfills the necessary ingredients for Self-determination as outlined by the UN.”
      The list of your requirements aren’t applicable to Tamils in Sri Lanka AT ALL.
      “A distinct population?????”
      Tamils in Sri Lanka are NOT a distinct population. There are Tamils all over the world who have various origins such as; Tamil Nadu Tamils, Malaysian Tamils, Singaporean Tamils, Indian Tamils, Telangu Tamils, Malayalam Tamils, Brahui Tamils, Gond Tamils, Kannada Tamils and Hampi Tamils while Sinhalese are a population ONLY distinctive to Sri Lanka.
      Sinhalese have no other origins like Tamils and they speak only ONE LANGUAGE which is only spoken in Sri Lanka whereas Tamils speak various dialects, over 26 in number, deriving from “a mother-tongue called Dravidian” which is distinctive to TAMIL-NADU (not Sri Lanka.)
      CONTINUED……

      • 4
        4

        CONTINUED–2
        .
        3).“A distinct demarcated territory????”
        Where? Show me, Soma!
        In the North/East regions there is no DISTINCT demarcated territory!!!!
        Tamils are predominantly residing in the North purely because they migrated from Tamil Nadu.
        South Indian invaders captured the Northern Sri Lanka as it was situated closely to South India.
        There are archaeological evidence in abundance in the North/East regions to prove that there was a Sinhalese Civilization before South Indian pirate Kalinga Magha’s invasion in 1215 AD, a first of such.
        The first inhabitants of Sri Lanka were NEITHER Tamils NOR Aryans (Vijaya Hora).
        The first inhabitants were mainly Yakkhas who are connected to Sinhalese along with two other extincted tribes called Naga and Deva and some other small tribes such as EeYaka (Vedda tribe.) Before Vijaya Hora’s arrival, “Lanka” was ruled by a large number of Yakkha dynasties starting from Ravana I&II.
        The legend that King Ravana having Ten-Heads proves that Yakkhas had supernormal powers who could transmute themselves into various forms.
        Moreover, the history says, when Prince Pandukabhaya, who was hidden in a basket, was about to get caught to his uncles who were on a hunting expedition, two Yakkha Commanding Chiefs Chitraraja and Kalawila had transformed themselves to wild-boars to divert their attention to protect Pandukabhaya.
        In the Tamil Homeland “concept” there is no proof whatsoever that Tamils have any connection to Lanka’s first inhabitants Yakkhas, Nagas, Devas or EeYakas while there are all the evidence that Sinhalese are descendants of Yakkhas.
        Eventhough Mahawamsa writer, who seemed to have Indian influence, tried to assert that Sinhalese are descendants of Vijaya Hora, his “part mention” of Kuveni, the Commanding Chief of Yakkha King Maha Kaala Sena, is proof that the first inhabitants of Sri Lanka were Yakkhas, i.e. ancestors of Sinhalese.
        CONTINUED….

        • 1
          4

          CONTINUED….3
          .
          As mentioned, there is evidence of Yakkha rulers in ancient Lanka. They were humans. The only difference was them having supernormal powers.
          The inhabitants of Lanka were called Yakkhas not Sinhalese. Though Vijaya Hora massacred the last Yakkha King Maha Kaala Sena+his subjects by deceiving Kuveni, the Yakkha tribe didn’t end there, though Naga and Deva extinct. They have been existed even King Devanampitatissa’s period as apparently, according to the history, when the King saw Arhat Mahinda on Ambastalaawa, he had first thought it was a Yakkha who transformed himself into a Buddhist monk.
          .
          5). SomaPalan says” “There was no separate, independent country called Lanka around 9000 years B.C. It was part of the Subcontinent of India with a mix of South Indian Dravidians of various ethnicities…..”
          Sri Lanka had never been a part of India. Around 9000 years BC?????? Really? – That “Continental Mass” mentioned by you is the mythical “KumariNadu.”
          Tell me, how could an entire Continent submerged under the sea only leaving a tiny island called Lanka on the surface?????? There was no chance of Lanka to survive if it was a part of the Indian subcontinent/KumariNadu.
          The evidence of “Balangoda Maanawaya” proves that there was human habitation in Lanka 38,000 years ago.
          If Lanka was a part of the Subcontinent of India, why there was no mention of “Balangoda Manawaya” in anywhere of the Indian history?
          There was a mention of our Yakkha King Rawana and his country “Lanka” in the Indian history, but there was no mention of “Balangoda Manawaya” which is proof that although Lanka had its own inhabitants 38,000 years before, there was NO HUMAN EXISTENCE IN INDIA DURING THE SAME PERIOD!!!! Don’t talk about a fabricated history about which you have no evidence to prove.
          CONTINUED….

          • 3
            1

            What Champa is talking about is nothing but 100% Mythology.

          • 1
            1

            There is plenty of evidence of pre-historic mankind in Sri Lanka (Fa Hien-lena near Bulathsinhala, Batadomba-lena near Kuruwita, Beli-lena at Kitulgala, Alu-lena at Attanagoda and so on). People lived in many countries in the world from times immemorial. There would have been many ancient tribes and civilizations in the South Asian region (India and Sri Lanka) very similar to other countries like Africa, China and so on but most of them disappeared over time. The last of them in Sri Lanka are the Veddas but however, they have very little to do with the present day majority (Sinhalese) in Sri Lanka. In other words, the present day Sinhalese and Tamils are NOT the offsprings of the pre-historic generation of Sri Lanka. The present day population (Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims) are migrants and their ancestry is in India (the latest genetic study on Sri Lankan population proves it). Only the Veddas are the original natives of Sri Lanka who descend from the pre-historic people of Sri Lanka. Why there is no Sinhala in the present day India is because it must be one of the many lost tribes/civilizations of North India.

            • 0
              0

              Chanakya
              I am not sure whether your comment is a reply to mine.
              I didn’t say the present day Sinhalese are direct “off springs” of pre-historic generation which is practically impossible.
              What I said was, the original inhabitants of Lanka had nothing to do with Tamils or Indo-Aryans.
              Moreover, there is evidence that Yakkha blood was passed onto to Sinhalese. Eg: King Pandukhabhaya was believed to have mixed blood from a relative of Vijaya and Yakkha both and as a result, according to the history, he managed to end constant fights between the descendants of Vijaya clan and local Yakkha community, by reconciling them.
              Vedda tribe didn’t start with Kuveni’s children. Though not very significant, they have been existed during the same period that of Yakkha, Naga and Deva who were called “EeYaka” meaning “Yakas” carrying “heeya” (bow and arrow).

          • 3
            1

            Champa do not be stupid. It is not only Sri Lanka but Maldive Islands and Lakdive Islands have become isolated due to sea upheaval. Recently in Tamil Nadu, they discovered skeletal remains of humans of over 200,000 years old. For your information the stone and iron tools found in Balangoda were similar to stone and iron tools found in Africa, suggesting migration of African man to Sri Lanka. Genetic material of Balangoda man resembles Veddhas and not Sinhalese whose core genetic material is South Indian. Please remember that Ravana is depicted in Ramayana as a Dravidian Siva worshipper. Ramayana is glorifying north Indians and calls South Indians as monkeys and Sri Lankans as rakshasas or devils.

            • 0
              0

              Dr. Gnana Sankaralingam
              If an African man migrated to “Balangoda”, why didn’t any African man migrate to India, during the same period, a country very much bigger than Sri Lanka?
              I have lot more to counter in Soma Palan’s article about Vellalar influx and Sinhalese Civilization in North during Portuguese era, but now that this article has disappeared, I would wait for a similar article.

  • 3
    2

    It is very much true that Vellalas are discriminating ordinary Tamil masses and this was expereinced by me during my tenure in Eastern Province and also through the experiences of associating Tamils from Jaffna. Incidentally, this was the main contributory factor of my prediction of a split of Karun Amman as early as 1982 and it happened years later. When I mentioned that at that time people around me looked at me as an insane person. But, it happened and the rest is history.
    Besides, it is very clear that there is no Homeland for tamils or Ethnic problems or any discrimination towards another ethnic group to ask for Elam or Separate state or federal system as those are in the mythology and started due to insane nature of a few racists in these forums and so called Tamil political leaders since 1933.
    However, One thing is very clear as well and Tamil masses in this country deceived enough not to buy those whims and fancies.
    Another matter is that almost all the words and names of the places in the Eastern and Norther provinces are of Sinhala words translated in later years to Tamil to change very fabrication of the country specially happened during colonial period.
    Whatever it is, today the majority is Sinhalese and majority religion is Buddhism and everybody has to accept this reality and to work together as a Sri Lankan nation rather than challenging the reality, which may lead to conflicts naturally.
    Nothing is going to happen to a particular race and even 13th amendment will be repealed very soon as it is a pure waste of tax payers money and this country does not require as strong central government can resolve all the issues which are of Economic in nature and nothing more and nothing less.

  • 3
    0

    sach;”How do you prove a certain community is native to that land from archaeology? I would like to know the methodology.”

    Sach – ask the Sinhala army and theros in the NE. They are burying sinhala artifacts in the NE and then “accidentally” discovering them. And then shouting eureka! Sinhalease lived in the NE before the Tamils

  • 2
    2

    Rajash,

    Do not argue that theros and Army bury artifacts and suddenly find as archelogical evidence. It is well known matter that every inch of this land has artifacts connected to Sinhalese and Buddhism. To destroy those evidences only that some people try to bulldoze those ancient locations.
    Trying to destroy those give more evidence for the very fabrication of Sri Lanka in ancient times and currently as well.
    Hope that you are more prudent in your comments than depicting mythology in an insane manner. Similarly, the provincial borders are on the maps only for administrative purposes created mainly by British and those borders are not on the ground and never to be and Sri Lanka is a single land only.

  • 0
    1

    this chap channa jayasumana is a fraud. His science is fraud. he does not even know proper medicine everyone in his university become professor by just applying. When Portuguese came there were 15 Tamil schools in Kotte kingdom. When Portuguese destroyed Buddhism in Kotte area Singhalase use to go to Jaffna to worship in Tamil Mahayana Bhuddist temples in Jaffna. This jayasumma efellow needs to study history first than teamimg up with racist bastards like sarath weerasekara
    s

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.