Features
Sinhalese the result of a tidal wave of migration or long process of non-linear development
Ruminations on Sri Lanka’s ancient past – Part X
By Seneka Abeyratne
A distinguishing feature of the Early Historic Period, between 500 BCE and 300 CE, is the dramatic appearance of lithic Brahmi inscriptions, which indicates a ‘leap’ from protohistory to history, a kind of ‘explosive’ transformation accompanied by the widespread use of the proto-Sinhala language. Brahmi inscriptions represent the earliest extensive writings on The Island. In the 3rd Century BCE, superior iron tools for engraving these inscriptions on hard rock surfaces were developed.
Brahmi inscriptions
The majority of Brahmi inscriptions were engraved on the drip-ledges of caves in various parts of the dry zone. Since they are mainly in the form of donative inscriptions offered to forest-dwelling monks, they are a key source of information on Sri Lanka’s early historic communities in respect of economic activity, social structure, religious conditions, and political organisation (Senanayake, A.M.P. A Study on Social Identity Based on the Brahmi Inscriptions of the Early Historic Period in the North Western Province, 2017). Brahmi inscriptions are also to be found on rocks, slabs and pillars widely scattered in the dry zone.
As noted by Siran Deraniyagala (The Prehistory and Protohistory of Sri Lanka, 2007), it is the first appearance of Brahmi inscriptions on pottery at Anuradhapura (almost identical to the Asokan script some 200 years later) at ca 600 to 500 BCE that heralds the commencement of the Early Historic Period in Sri Lanka. These ancient inscriptions are in North-Indian Prakrit.
Archaeological evidence also reveals the following: “The settlement at Anuradhapura was over 10 ha in extent by ca 900 BCE and around 50 ha by ca 700-600 BCE. Thus it was already a ’town’. To date no other settlements of the Protohistoric Iron Age have been clearly identified in Sri Lanka though a rudimentary settlement may have existed in Aligala and another in Tissamaharama…In the time of Emperor Asoka in the third century BCE, the city of Anuradhapura was nearly 100 ha in extent…making it (on present estimates) the tenth largest city in India/Sri Lanka at that time and the largest south of Ujjain in northern India…” (Deraniyagala, S. 2007). It is, therefore, safe to assume that urban development in pre-modern Sri Lanka commenced in the Early Historic Period.
The scarcity of settlements in the Late Stone Age continued to persist in the Early Iron Age despite iron and farming technology. This scarcity ended with the Early Historic Period (500 BCE to 300 CE) when numerous settlements sprang up in the dry zone. The growth in the number of settlements seems to have accelerated during the Middle Historic Period (300 to 1200 CE). In addition to iron technology and farming, a third element appears to have entered the equation: “increasing medium- and long-distance trade leading to a corresponding increase in wealth which acted as the catalyst for an exponential increase in the density of settlements” (Deraniyagala, S. Pre- and Protohistoric Settlement in Sri Lanka, 1998).
The contribution the research community has made to our knowledge and understanding of the island’s pre- and protohistory is immeasurable. But as Deraniyagala (Deraniyagala, S. 2007) admits, there is still a great deal we do not know about the transition from prehistory (corresponding to the Mesolithic Balangoda culture) to protohistory (corresponding to the Megalithic Early Iron Age culture) in Sri Lanka. There are others who have expressed the same view as per the following quote: “Only in recent years have Sri Lankan archaeologists placed the investigation of the country’s relatively brief protohistoric period as an important item on the agenda of national research. This research, I must emphasise, is still at a very early and inconclusive stage. Unlike the subcontinent, we know almost nothing about the transitions and transformations of this period in Sri Lanka” (Bandaranayake, Senake. The Settlement Pattern of the Protohistoric-Early Historic Interface in Sri Lanka, 1989). Let us hope the present and future activities of the Archaeology Department and allied agencies (such as the universities and research institutes) will yield fruitful results in this regard.
The traditional view that in ancient times a tidal wave of migration of a linguistically homogeneous cultural group occurred in the island, is based largely on the fact that the language found in the early Brahmi inscriptions was remarkably homogeneous and that it was used extensively in areas where there were well-established agricultural settlements. A more radical interpretation offered by Bandaranayake views the emergence and widespread adoption of a proto-Sinhala language as the apex of several centuries of historical development which had its roots in the island’s protohistory.
We may note, in passing, that the proto-Sinhala language underwent local adaptation and eventually lost its Indian character and identity. Though a large number of dialects are spoken in India, none of them resemble the Sinhala language. The three main languages spoken in Sri Lanka today are Sinhala, Tamil, and English.
The current population of the island is 21.9 million of which around 74 percent are Sinhalese. To quote Samanti Kulatilake (The Peopling of Sri Lanka from Prehistoric to Historic Times: Biological and Archaeological Evidence, 2016): “Sixteen million Sri Lankans speak Sinhala, or Sinhalese, as a first language. It is an Indo-European language (associated with the north Indian Prakrit branch) that evolved from the foundational Sinhala Prakrit (which was in use until the third century CE), to Proto-Sinhala (until the seventh century CE), medieval Sinhala (twelfth century CE), and modern Sinhala (twelfth century CE to the present).” We can assume therefore that the starting point for writing in modern Sinhala is the 12th century CE. All the ancient Brahmi inscriptions found on the island are in Prakrit. The earliest Brahmi cave inscriptions have been traced back to the 3rd century BCE.
Emergence of the Sinhalese
At what stage in our history did the Sinhala language assume a common Sinhala identity? We shall turn to Leslie Gunawardana (The People of the Lion: The Sinhala Identity and Ideology in History and Historiography, 1979) for an answer: “It is only by about the 12 th century that the Sinhala grouping could have been considered identical with the linguistic grouping. The relationship between the Sinhala and the Buddhist identities was even more complex. There is a close association between the two identities, but at no period do they appear to have coincided exactly to denote the self-same group of people.” In his assessment, Anagarika Dharmapala was probably the first to use the term “Sinhalese Buddhist” in the early twentieth century to define a distinct ethno-religious group on the island (Gunawardana, L. 1979).
The early Sinhalese did not consider themselves a distinct ethnic group as the concept of race to denote a group of people sharing a common identity in respect of physical features as well as biological or genetic characteristics did not exist in ancient times. Gunawardana cogently explains that “the social group brought together by the Sinhala consciousness does not appear to have coincided with a linguistic grouping in the island or to have represented a single physical type, and that it is only after about the seventh century that it could have been linked with a religious grouping. It is the social and political criteria which clearly stand out in an examination of the factors that united the Sihalas.”
To return to the megalithic people of the dry zone, it seems very likely that their culture, which was locally adapted and ‘indigenised’, resulted from a creative synthesis of the indigenous culture with the South Indian megalithic culture. The distinctive features of this culture included burial sites, pottery, and iron technology. In the same way it could be reasoned that the emergence of a distinctive Sinhala culture and civilisation was the result of a similar creative synthesis that occurred during the early historic and later periods, a process initiated by the arrival of the northern Indian settlers on the island. But had not the indigenous population already attained a high level of internal development and dynamism, it is doubtful whether the island would have surged from protohistory into early history in the way it did.
Therefore, according to the radical view (pioneered by Senake Bandaranayake), the emergence of the Sinhalese as a distinctive ethnic group in The Island was the culmination of a long process of non-linear development dating back to our prehistory and not the product of a single, linear historical period associated with a sudden wave of migration. The evidence indicates that even in recent times this synthesis has played a significant role in shaping the evolving character of the Sinhala-speaking people and the culture associated with them.
What is true of the Sinhalese is also true of the two largest minority ethnic groups, the Tamils and Moslems. The distinctive culture and ethnos of each of these groups could also be viewed as the product of an exotic ‘blending’ of exogenous and endogenous elements. It is reasonable to assume that the ethnic composition of the Tamils and Moslems, like that of the Sinhalese, is also the result of a complex non-linear process that began in the past and will surely continue into the future.
But one thing is for certain. The island is not, and has never been, despite its geographical location, a cultural extension of South India. Sri Lanka has borrowed a great deal from India, yet it is not quite India. There is something else that gives the island its distinctiveness and special charm. The discerning foreigner may call it, as Carl Gustav Jung did when he visited Sri Lanka in 1937, “a touch of the South Seas … and a touch of paradise …” (Memories, Dreams, Reflections, 1989).
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
