Features
Melody in the military : A brief history of military bands
By Uditha Devapriya
udakdev1@gmail.com
On the field and onstage, military bands play a decorative function today. Originally formed to accompany armies to their battles, they flourished in the West after the 17th century. A number of factors, including the rise of trade, industry, literacy, and imperialism, combined to popularise it in Europe and the United States. Yet the history of military and cadet bands goes beyond the West. Though they bear Western insignia now, these troupes are no more Western than are artillery, mathematics, even science. Indeed, they were as much at home among Europeans of the 18th century as they were in Sri Lanka of the 15th.
Military bands emerged when the crescent met the cross, or literally when the Europeans met the Saracens and the Turks during the Crusades. By then the division of the world into West and East had been complete. Yet the writing of music, which military bands obviously depended on, long predates this division: the first written sources on the subject come to us from southern Iraq, or Mesopotamia. The cuneiform script materialised in Ancient Sumer in 3000 BC. Nearly four centuries later, we hear of harps and lyres, used on their own but also as accompaniments to various functions and ceremonies.
Civilisation flourished at roughly the same time in Sumer and Egypt. Archaeologists have unearthed remains of clappers, scrapers, rattlers, clarinets, and oboes in these territories. Sometimes they appear in both places at once, but often they emerge in the one before the other: the clarinet, for instance, is missing in Mesopotamia, but was indigenised in Egypt by 2700 BC. What we can gather is that these instruments acquired a rhythm and pattern of their own, in line with the material conditions of their societies.
Louis XIV
From the early period to the Crusades, there is a long historical development. In the second millennium BC the cuneiform script spread to Anatolia. As with Mesopotamia and Egypt, a musical culture soon evolved. Yet unlike in those two societies, in Anatolia or Turkey music served a different function, more ritualistic; this explains the horn, which was never popular in Mesopotamia, but was indispensable for the Turks. During the Middle Ages the Ottoman Empire emerged as a formidable power and made inroads to Western civilisation. The fall of Constantinople in 1453 thus ensured that, for the next 500 years, “all things Turkish” would intrude on the Western consciousness. These included the military band.
The Ottoman Turks divided the world between what was and what was not theirs. They internalised this dichotomy, at home, by means of a division between believers and non-believers, granting the latter a status of protected persons they referred to as dhimmi. On the other hand, identity being a fluid construct, the State had the right to strip persons of such status and compel them to conform to the dominant Muslim culture. Yet the historian Fernand Braudel has noted that while non-believers wanted to convert, the Ottoman State felt it in their interests not to accommodate them, since converting them meant depriving the Treasury of the taxes it collected from non-believers.
In certain cases, however, the Ottoman State reserved its prerogative to convert. One such prerogative was the right to conscript Christian subjects from the Balkan regions. During the reign of Sultan Orkun (1326-1361) these conscripts were raised to form the most formidable contingent in the Middle Ages, the Janissaries (or “new troops”). The Janissaries then raised their own band, which they called the mehter: the forerunner of today’s military and cadet bands. At first the mehter consisted, among other instruments, of trumpets, kettledrums, bass drums, cymbals, shawms, and Turkish crescents, the latter a percussion stick (known as the “Jingling Johnny”) largely neglected today. Performed together, these instruments often “shrieked in unison” and emphasised “the ruler’s overwhelming might.”
Militaristic though its function was, the mehter played in peacetime as well, especially for the Sultan: on mornings before prayers, and on evenings after prayers. European diplomats in Turkey obviously could not escape these influences. Returning from the Crusades, kings and nobles brought with them their ideas for military contingents, based on what they had seen on “the other side.” Until then the horn and the trumpet had been the mainstay of the European band. The Ottomans were more varied: one chronicler lists clarions, horns, pipes, drums, and cymbals among their instruments, played “to excite their spirit and courage.” As for drums and kettledrums, these were “unknown” and largely alien to European militaries. At the siege of Damietta in 1249, for example, the Ottomans’ use of the kettledrums is said to have had a “frightening impact” on European soldiers.
The Ottoman influence spread to Britain and France. The serpent and the trombone became the first two major additions to the British military band. The oboe is reported to have made its first appearance in 1678 AD, during the reign of Charles II. The cleric Thoinot Arbeau, in his record of Renaissance life, Orchésographie, lists down the war instruments used by the French army; the oboe is not among them. By 1825, though, the French infantry had among its inventory of 36 instruments four oboes and two trombones.
The disbanding of military contingents after the Crusades elevated the role of music in the armies of Europe. We are told of minstrels accompanying the King of France to Calais in 1347, during the Hundred Years’ War, at a not unreasonable pay of “12 pence per diem.” Once at home, these minstrels formed guilds from which military bands would later fill their ranks. This set the foundation for the Europeanisation of Turkish music, a process which culminated with the French Revolution, Napoleon’s expedition to Egypt, and the Treaty of Paris, not to mention the disbanding of the Janissary troops in 1826 AD. The Treaty of Paris, which “sealed 40 years of peace” between France and Britain, no doubt gave the militaries of both countries some space to absorb and add to these influences.
Janissary troops, an inescapable feature of cultural life in Europe at this time, had long caught the attention of ambassadors, artists, rulers, and even naturalists, who had noted their formations, instruments, their ranks and their hierarchies. It wasn’t only what was played, but how it was played that entranced these Westerners: one writer in 1891, for instance, refers to soldiers speaking of Turks “throwing up a bass drumstick into the air after the beat and catching it with the other hand in time for the next.” These had a profound influence on military band formations, as much then as today.
Starting with the Calvinist-Lutheran states of central and north Germany and extending later to Austria-Hungary, pseudo-Turkish music became a feature of court music; right until the mid-18th century, when a rift developed between popular and elite culture, these festivities entranced ruler and ruled alike. It was a time of mass artistic plagiarism: popular tunes, for instance, “borrowed from folk songs, theatre songs, patriotic songs, and new compositions”, while Bach (“Symphonies for Wind Instruments”), Mozart (“Serenades K. 375 and 388”), and Beethoven (“Octet in E-flat Major”) found favour with and became “familiar to the officers and wealthier classes of the fighting men within the various regiments.”
Military bands thrived on the whims of rulers, and on social and political change. Louis XIV, the “Sun King”, played a not insignificant part in the popularisation of their music, after he entrusted their training to the composer Jean Baptiste-Lully. Following Austria’s wars with the Turks, Frederick the Great played an equally pivotal role in shaping military music as an expression of the growing tide of European nationalism. When Mahmud II disbanded the Janissaries in 1826, after more than 135,000 of them revolted against him, it was left to European states to fill the resulting lacuna. These developments marked the beginning of the Europeanisation, and Westernisation, of an Oriental artistic form.
Meanwhile, in the United States, the War of Independence did for military bands what the Crusades had done for their European counterparts five centuries earlier. There the drum and the fife became the most sought-after instruments. Curiously enough, however, it was not until the arrival of a Prussian nobleman, Baron Friedrich von Steuben, invited by none less than Benjamin Franklin, that the US Continental Army began turning into a professional body. We are told that music was soon regarded so highly that “a subordinate inspector was appointed for its standardisation.” Not surprisingly, sales of books and staff papers soared at this time, signalling the importance of band contingents.
However, not until the late 19th century did these contingents gain the respect and esteem they are held in today. By 1912 they had commanded enough respect to warrant their own tournaments: a “grand international contest” held in France that year, for instance, offered a sum of £500, equivalent to £57,000 or Rs. 26 million today.
Buttressing all this was another development: the formation of school cadet corps across Western Europe. These corps spread wide and far, taking what had been an Oriental art form to the East and teaching it along Western lines. By now, thanks to the rigidity with which imperialism imposed its culture on its colonies, the Ottoman origins of the military band had been forgotten; it hence wouldn’t be long until, as with mathematics and music, science and art, the Oriental roots of yet another subject would fade away.
The writer is an international relations analyst, researcher, and columnist
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
