By Nalliah Thayabharan

Eelam is mentioned in the very oldest Babylonian inscriptions. Southern Elam was known as Anshan from the earliest times to the days of the Persian empire. Long before the rise of the city of Babylon the old city-states of Accad and Lagash held for a time part of the Eelamitic territory, and border warfare was very frequent. In the 23rd century BC, Eelamites conquered the city of Ellasar (Larsa) and the whole of Babylonia. Eelam offered prolonged resistance to the Assyrians in the 8th and 7th centuries BC. Assurbanipal crushed and annexed Babylonia, put an end to the independence of Eelam itself by taking the capital Susa in 645 BC and making the whole country one of his many provinces. After the downfall of Assyria, northern Eelam became subject to the victorious Medes, and later southern Eelam was occupied by the Persians.

According to the Tamil Dictionary published by University of Madras, Eelam is a Pali word – not a Dravidian word!!! Eelam has the same meaning as Hela and Sinhala!!!!

Sihala is attested for the first time in present day Andhra Pradesh to refer to a Buddhist temple meant for monks from Sri Lanka in the 3rd century AD. Hela is a derivation of Eela that was Prakritized as Sihala and eventually Sanskritized as Simhala in the 5th century AD.

Not only Eezham, Eelam, Cilam, Chilam, Eelavar, Eela, I’la, Lemuria, E’lu, He’la, Seeha’la, Simha’la and Sinhala cognates, but so are the Greek Salai” and Seiladiba”; the Arab Serendib”; Portuguese Ceilao” and the colonial Ceylon” cognates.

Also Eelam is a word used exclusively for toddy beginning from the common era up until the medieval period. Eelavar in South Indian medieval inscriptions refer to the caste or function of toddy-drawers. Eelavar is a caste of toddy tappers in the southern parts of present Kerala.

Until the 9th century AD, with the exception of the megalithic remains of Pomparippu and the possible exception of those of Kathiraveli, there is no definite evidence regarding a Dravidian settlement in our country.
It is possible that there were some Tamil settlers in the Batticaloa district from the 13 century AD onwards.

Several writers on the history of Jaffna, basing their studies on the traditional legends found in the late Tamil chronicles, have put forward certain theories claiming the establishment of Tamil settlements in Jaffna in the period of the Anuradhapura rulers. These theories are not accepted by serious students of history as they are not based on trustworthy data. Many of these have been convincingly dismissed by scholars in recent years.

According to the Pali chronicle the port of Jambukola (Camputturai), on the eastern coast of the peninsula, was the main port of embarkation to Tamralipti in Eastern India from at least the time of King Devanampiyatissa (250-210 BC). The two embassies from the island to the court of Ashoka embarked on their voyage from Jambukola. Sangamitta arrived with the Bo-sapling at this port.

The Samudda-panna-sala, commemorating the arrival of the Bo sapling, and the Jambukola Vihara were built there by Devanampriya Tissa. The northernmost part of the island was under the suzerainty of the Anuradhapura king in the 3rd century BC and that Buddhism had begun to spread by that time in that part of the island as in the other parts.

The language of the gold plate inscription from Vallipuram, the earliest epigraphic record discovered in the Jaffna peninsula, is the early form of Sinhalese, in which inscriptions of the time in other parts of the island were written. Sinhalese were settled in the Jaffna peninsula, or in some parts at least, in the second century AD. There were Tamil speaking traders in the port of Jambukola but there is no evidence that points to Tamil settlements in the peninsula at that time

The gold plate from Vallipuram reveals that there were Buddhists in that part of the peninsula in the 2nd century AD. At the site of this inscription the foundations are in the premises of a modern Vishnu temple. There is little doubt that the Vishnu temple was the original Buddhist monument converted into a Vaishnava establishment at a later date when Tamils settled in the area.
Such conversion of Buddhist establishments into Saiva and Vaishnava temples was a common phenomenon in the Jaffna peninsula after it was settled by Dravidians.

In the premises of another Vishnu temple at Moolai were discovered some ‘vestiges of ancient remains of walls’ and a broken sedent Buddha image. Again in a Saiva temple at Mahiyapitti a Buddha image was found under a stone step in the temple tank. A lime-stone Buddha image and the remains of an ancient dagaba were unearthed at Nilavarai, in Navakiri.

Among the debris were two sculptured fragments of shaped coral stones with a stone railing design. The dagaba can be dated at least to the 10th century AD. Near these ruins are the foundations of an ancient building and in the middle of the thesis a modern Shiva temple. The old foundations are those of the vihara attached to the ancient dagaba.

Buddha images have also been discovered in Uduvil, Kantharodai and Jaffna town. Kantarodai has yielded a very important Buddhist establishment in the region in early times. Such artifacts as the glazed tiles and the circular discs discovered here have helped to connect the finds with those of Anuradhapura.

The Sinhala Nampota, dated in its present form to the 14th or 15th century, preserved the names of some of the places of Buddhist worship in the Jaffna peninsula, Kantarodai is mentioned among these places. The others are Nagakovila (Nakarkovil), Telipola (Tellipalai), Mallagama (Mallakam), Minuwangomu Viharaya (Vimankamam). Tanji Divaina (Thana-tivu or kayts), Nagadivayina (Nakathivu or Nayinathivu). Puvangudivayina (Punkudu-thivu) and Kradivayina (Karaitivu). Of the Buddhist establishments in these places only the vihara and Dagabo at Nakativu have survived to this day. It is justifiable to assume that the Nampotalist dates back to the time when the Buddhist establishments of these places were well known centres of worship. This was probably before the 13th century, for after this date the people of the Jaffna peninsula were mainly Saivas.

In the Anuradhapura period, and possibly till about the 12th century AD, there were Buddhists in the Jaffna peninsula.

Although it may appear reasonable to presume that these Buddhists were Sinhalese like those in other parts of the island, some have tried to argue that they were Tamils. While it is true that there were Tamil Buddhists in South India and Ceylon before the 12th century AD and possibly even later, there is evidence to show that the Buddhists who occupied the Jaffna peninsula in the Anuradhapura period were Sinhalese.

The toponymic evidence unmistakably points to the presence of Sinhala settlers in the peninsula before Tamils settled there. In an area of less than 2,500 sq km covered by Jaffna peninsula, there occur over a thousand Sinhalese place names which have survived in a Tamil garb. The Yalppana-vaipava-malai, the Tamil chronicle of Jaffna, confirms this when it states that there were Sinhalese people in Jaffna at the time of the first Tamil colonisation of the area.

The survival of Sinhalese elements on the local nomenclature indicates a slow and peaceful penetration of Tamils in the area rather than violent occupation. This is in contrast with the evidence of the place names of the North Central Province, where Sinhalese names have been largely replaced by Tamil names. The large percentage of Sinhalese elements and the occurrence of Sinhala and Tamil compounds in the place names of Jaffna point to a long survival of the Sinhala population and an intimate intercourse between them and the Tamils.

This is also, borne out by the retention of some territorial names, like Valikamam (Sinhala- Weligama) and Maratchi (Maracci-rata), which points to the retention of the old territorial divisions and tell strongly against wholesale extermination or displacement of the Sinhalese population.

In the 9th and 10th centuries some villages in Rajaratta accommodated Tamil settlers but these were by no means numerous. There were many Tamil settlers in the Jaffna peninsula or in any part of the island other than the major ports and the capital city before the 10th century. The earliest evidence regarding the presence of Tamils in the Jaffna peninsula is from the Tamil inscription of Parakramabahu I (1153 – 1186) from Nainativu. Evidences also point to minor settlements of Tamils in important ports as Mahatitha (Mannar) and Gokanna(Trincomalee) as well as in Anuradhapura There were Tamil traders in the ports of Jambukola and Uratota, in the Jaffna peninsula.

The Sanskrit inscription from Trincomalee, discovered among the ruins of the Koneswaram temple, refers to a personage named Cadaganga (Kulakkottan) who went to Ceylon in 1223. The inscription is fragmentary and is engraved on a part of a stone door jamb. Among the decipherable words is the name Gokarna, the ancient name of Trincomalee and the root from which the name of the temple is derived (Gokarnesvara).

In the Tamil Vanni districts only a few Dravidian style Saiva temples of the 13th century have been found. Among these the temples at Tirukkovil, Kapuralla, and Nallathanni-irakkam and the Saiva remains at Uruththirapuram and Kuruntanurare notable. These certainly indicate the existence or Tamil settlements in those places in the 13th century.

Materials from Buddhist structures were used in the building of Saiva and Vaishnava temples. Monumental remains of a different type attest to the destruction wrought by the invaders and the conversion of Buddhist institutions into places of Saiva worship by the new settlers. The many scattered ruins of Buddhist monasteries and temples all over the Vanni region preserve the memory of the Sinhalese Buddhist settlements that once covered these parts.

Several of the pilima-ges (image houses) attached to the monasteries in places like Kovilkadu, Malikai, Omanthai, Kanakarayan kulam, Irasenthiran kulam, Chinnappuvarasan kulam and Madukanda were converted into Saiva tempels, often dedicated to Ganesha. Buddha images or inscribed slabs from the Buddhist structures were used to make the Ganesha statues. A number of small Saiva shrines have been found in association with Buddhist remains. The destruction of several of the Buddhist edifices and the conversion of pilima-ges into Saiva temples may have begun at the time of Magha. In the North Central Province on Minneriya Road, close to Polonnaruwa, were discovered a few Saiva edifies which were built of materials from Buddhist structures.

A door jamb from one of the Saiva shrines there was found to bear part of an inscription of Parakramabahu 1. A broken pillar shaft with Sinhalese writing of the tenth century was recovered from the enclosing wall of another shrine. In one of the Vishnu temples of Polonnaruwa, fragments of Nissankamalla’s stone inscriptions were found. In the same place, two fragments of a broken pillar with Sinhalese writing about the 10 century AD served as steps of one of the Vaishnava shrines. A pillar in the mandapa of Shiva Devale # 5 at Polonnaruwa was discovered with a Sinhala inscription of the 11th century AD on it. In Shiva Devale # 7 a square stone asana with an inscription of Nissankamalla was used as a base for a Lingam”. Another of the Saiva shrines unearthed at Polonnaruwa yielded a pillar with a Sinhalese inscription of Jayabahu 1.

The invasion of Kalinga Magha with the help of Kerala and Tamil mercenaries was far more violent than the earlier invasions. Its chief importance lies in the fact that it led to the permanent dislodgement of Sinhalese power from northern Ceylon, the confiscation by Tamils and Keralas of lands and properties belonging to the Sinhalese and the consequent migration of the official class and many of the common people to the south western regions.

Tamil Nadu boasted of outstanding Buddhist monks, who had made remarkable contributions to Buddhism thought and learning. Three of the greatest Pali scholars of this period were Buddhaghosa, Buddhadatta, and Dhammapala and all three of them were associated with Buddhist establishments in the Tamil kingdoms.

Buddhadatta or Thera Buddhaatta as he is called lived during the time of Accyutarikkanta, the Kalabra ruler of the Chola-Nadu. He was a senior contemporary of Buddhaghosa. He was born in the Chola kingdom and lived in the 5th Century AD. Under the patronage of this ruler, Buddhadatta wrote many books. Among his best known Pali writings are the VINAYA-VINICCHAYA, the UTTARA-VINICCHAYA and the JINALANKARA-KAVYA. Among the commentaries written by him are the MADHURATTHA-VILASINI and the ABHIDHAMMAVATARA. In the Abhidhamma Ratara he gives a glowing account at Kaveripattinam, Uragapuram, Bhutamangalam and Kanchipuram and the Mahavihara at Sri Lanka. While he was at Sri Lanka, he composed many Buddhist works such as Uttara-viniccaya Ruparupa Vibhaga Jinalankara etc. Buddhaghosha, contemporary of Buddhadatta, also composed many Buddhist commentaries.

Buddhaghosha is a Tamil monk, who made a remarkable contribution to Buddhism in Sri Lanka. He stayed and studied Buddhist precepts at Mahavihara in Anuradhapura. The Visuddhimagga was the first work of Buddhaghosha which was written while he was in Sri Lanka.

After Buddhaghosha, the important Theravada monk from Tamil Nadu was Dhammapala. Dhammapala lived in the Mahavihara at Anuradhapura. He composed paramattha dipani which was a commentary on Buddhaghosha s work on Khuddaka Nikaya and Paramathamanjusa, which was a commentary on Buddhaghosha’s Visuddhimagga. A close study of the three Buddhist monks viz Buddhadatta, Buddhaghosha and Dhammapala shows that Tamil Buddhists were closely associated with the Sri Lankan Buddhists around the 5th century AD.

The author of NETTIPAKARANA is another Dhammapala who was a resident of a monastery in Nagapattinam. One more example is the Chola monk Kassapa, in his Pali work, VIMATTI-VINODANI, this Tamil monk provides interesting information about the rise of heretical views in the Chola Sangha and the consequent purification that took place.

There are so many other Tamil monks who are attributed to the Pali works some of them were resident at Mayura-rupa-pattana (Mylapore) along with Buddhagosha. The well known Tamil Buddhist epics, on the other hand, were MANIMEKALAI and KUNDALAKESI.

The 6th century Tamil Buddhist work Manimekalai by Sattanar, is perhaps the most famous of the work done in Tamil Nadu. It is a work expounding the doctrines and propagating the values of Buddhism. The interaction between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lankan monks finds mention in Manimekalai, which is set in the Tamil towns of Kaveripoompattinam, Kanchi, and Vanchi.

There is mention of the presence of monks of Sri Lanka in Vanchi, which was the capital of the Chera Kings of Tamil Nadu. The Chinese traveller, Tsuan Tsang, wrote that there were around 300 Sri Lankan monks in the monastery at the Southern sector of Kanchipuram.

As Buddhism was one of the dominant religions in both Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka, naturally there were very close relations between the two regions. The monks from Sri Lanka, too, went across to the Tamil kingdom and stayed in the monasteries.

From the 13th century when migration of Vellalar to Jaffna took place, Tamil Nadu has seen a decline in the traditional power of Vellalar. Successive colonial powers in Sri Lanka found Vellalar useful where Brahmins were not forthcoming. The Vellalar were not only cultivators, but a section of them which had developed scribal skills, provided the local officials, interpreters and accountants. Vellalar took advantage of the situation and submitted themselves as slaves to the colonials and in return colonials were more kind towards their loyal servants. That is how Vellalar became the civil service force to help rule the colonies.

In 1847, Kandar Arumukampillai(aka Arumuga Navalar) left the Jaffna Central College where he was a teacher because a ‘low caste’ Tamil student from the Nalavar caste was admitted to the school by the principal Peter Percival. Three decades later when a famine hit Northern Sri Lanka Kandar Arumukampillai worked tirelessly to provide food and medicine to Vellalar only.

The lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lnakans were treated as stray dogs by Vellalar. Caste system among Tamil speaking Sri Lankans has given rise to serious social evils. It denied certain civil rights to a large number of people and let to the oppressions and exploitations by Vellalar, which paved a constant source of discontent or unrest.

Vellalar were the founders of the fascist culture in Jaffna. Despite the civilized veneer presented to the outside world Vellalar ran a fascistic regime reducing the depressed lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankans to slaves. Vellalar’s cruel caste system has no other parallel in any other part of Sri Lanka. Vellalar virtually had a free run of the Jaffna peninsula because the colonial rulers turned a blind eye to the subhuman Vellalar’s culture of violence. Thesavalamai legitimized slavery and the Vellalar ruled the land with an iron fist, with the colonial administrators often refusing to interfere in the laws and customs of the Vellalar.

In 1871, Caste clashes erupted between Vellalar, Dhoby caste and Barber caste in Maviddapuram when Dhoby caste people refused to wash the clothes of Barber caste people. Vellalar were blamed for the violence.

September 1923 in Suthumalai, Vellalar attacked lower caste people who had hired drummers for a funeral alleging that lower caste people had no right to employ drummers for their funerals as they were ‘low caste’. In 1931 a similar violent riot took place in Chankanai where Pallar were attacked by Vellalar people for hiring drummers for a funeral.

Do Tamil speaking Sri Lankans need to be reminded that they did not allow low castes to enter any place that Vellalar frequented? In June 1929 caste riots broke out again in Jaffna in response to the ‘equal seating directive’ of the government which was applicable to grant-aided schools. Under this directive ‘low caste’ students were allowed to sit on the bench. Until then they sat either on the floor or outside the classroom. This was how Tamil speaking Sri Lankans treated their own! Resultant riots burnt a large number of houses mainly of low caste Tamils. Their children en masse were stopped from attending schools. Repeated petitions were made to the government by Vellalar begging to cancel the directive! Ponnambalam Ramanathan went to request the Colonial Office in London to encode caste into legislative enactments. Ponnambalam Ramanathan led the opposition to democratization by opposing universal franchise proposed by the Donoughmore reformers in the 1920′ on the ground that it would give the lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankans the right to vote.

When Vellalar initiated their extremist demands it was the British who rejected them and not the Sinhalese. The British cultivated Vellalar as subservient and pliant agents of their regime. But this protection given to the privileges of the Vellalar was beginning to erode under the relentless invasions of modernity. The arrogant Vellalar reacted convulsively when the encroachments of modernity began to undermine Vellalar’s feudal and colonial privileges. Vellalar were reluctant to challenge the British whose patronage had made them the most privileged community in British Ceylon. Vellalar preferred to go along with the British colonialists, covertly aiding their white masters as complying agents in the legislature and in the administration. This political ploy was a common tactic, both under the Dutch and the British, to win a nudge-and-wink from the colonial masters to siphon off a disproportionate share of the state’s resources to Vellalar. The Dutch records categorically identify the need to win the Vellalar’s consent to be in command of Jaffna. In 1931 the Vellalar attacked the lower castes for hiring drummers for funerals. The message of the Vellalar was clear – no low castes could hire drummers for funerals!

Even after Independence, the Sinhala speaking Sri Lankans hardly knew of the existence of the low caste Tamil speaking Sri lankans. As far as the Sinhala speaking Sri Lankan leaders were concerned the Tamil speaking Sri Lankans whom they met in Colombo, the leaders of Tamil Congress and the Federal Party, the Tamil speaking professionals and academics, and the Tamil speaking public servants were the real Tamil speaking Sri Lankans, indeed they were only Vellalar!

G.G.Ponnambalam succeeded in burying the aristocracy” of the old guard led by Arunachalam Mahadeva with his 50-50″ demand. Veluppillai Chelvanayakam buried G.G.Ponnambalam by taking 50-50″ to the next stage of separatism. And from the grave of Appapillai Amirthalingam rose Thiruvengadam Velupillai Prabhakaran. Each death was a milestone in escalating racism. No other community has pursued and injected racism into an electorate as the Vellalar fighting for their survival, with Jaffna as their base.

It was S.W.R.D Bandaranaike who opened the doors for lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankans to attend schools and temples – places that were taboo to them by their own Tamil speaking brethren.

The Social Disabilities Act No. 21 was passed in the parliament in 1957 giving lower caste of Tamil speaking Sri Lankans the right to attend schools & temples as the part of S.W.R.D Bandaranaike’s plan was to penetrate into the low caste” votes of Tamil speaking Sri Lankans. Lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankan children could attend school regularly only after this act. A reawakening happened in the north among previously marginalised lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankans.

No sooner Vellalar realized the dangers of the SLFP government led by S.W.R.D Bandaranaike courting the low caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankans, Vellalar devised their response. It was to create the best division possible. A rift between the Tamil speaking Sri Lankans and Sinhala speaking Sri Lankans which would strike better success than low caste – Vellalar divisions among Tamil speaking Sri Lankans. It is important to note that the satyagrahas, the tarring of Sinhala letter SRI” instead of English letters on vehicle licence plates launched by the Veluppilai Chelvanayagam led Federal Party and G.G Ponnambalam led Tamil Congress – both Vellala high class political parties happened a year after making Sinhala the official language. Why did the Federal Party and Tamil Congress not cry foul over the Sinhala Only Act in 1956 but oppose the Social Disabilities Act in 1957 with such venom? It is because Tamil speaking Sri Lankans wanted to deprive their own.

Wijeyananda Dahanayake who was the Minister of Education in 1957, gave teaching appointments to many lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankans who had three credit passes in the S.S.C Exam (G.C.E O/L). Appapillai Amirthalingam who was a Federal Party MP then, opposed this move under the pretext that it would bring down educational standards.

Similarly, when the Sirimavo R.D.Bandaranaike led SLFP Government introduced university standardization in 1973 those that opposed were those who were against equitable distribution. The schools in thirteen out of twenty two districts did not produce a single engineering or medicine student until 1974. Students from Colombo and Jaffna who had been privy to education opposed opportunities that would be enjoyed by students from Mannar, Monaragala, Vavuniya, Ampara, Kilinochchi & other less developed districts. While the composition of the ethnicity did not change entrance, for Tamil speaking Sri Lankans it meant not only the Vellalar but lower caste Tamil speaking Sri Lankans too would gain university entrance. This was why Vellalar opposed the 1973 university standardization introduced by the Srimavo Bandaranaike led SLFP Government.

Though Jaffna Tamils claim to be the heartland of Tamil culture, it has yet to produce something significant, or classical, to stand out from the other varieties of Tamil, either local or abroad. It has yet to produce masterpieces of value to be recognized as the fountain of Tamil arts, architecture, music, literature and other creative activities. If Jaffna Tamils put to the test and asked to cite one piece of literature, drama, poetry, music, architecture etc that could match either the Tamil culture of South India or the Sinhala-Buddhist culture of the south they would withdraw into a stunned silence like the thuththiri creeper. In other words, they have come to believe that they have a great culture with nothing to back up their claim.The failure to produce a significant Tamil culture debunks the mythology which leads them to believe that they are the creators and owners of Sri Lanka — at least a part of it.

Unlike the Sinhala-Buddhist they, obviously, had no sense of belonging to the land , or sense of destiny tied to the land.  The historical fact is that while the Sinhalese settled down as the inheritors of the good earth from the pre-Christian era the Tamils decided to settle down as permanent inhabitants only in the 12 – 13th centuries. If they had settled down from the time they claimed to have arrived — i.e, the pre- Buddhist era — and dedicated themselves to make the island theirs they would not have been passing the Vaddukoddai Resolution in 1976 making spurious historical claims to a land which belongs to all communities. It is after the Sinhala-Buddhists transformed the natural wilderness into a glorious civilization that they set out to grab a share of it claiming that they were founding fathers of Sri Lanka.

Ceylon Lion – Panthera leo sinhaleyus is only known from two teeth found in deposits at Kuruwita in Ratnapura District. Based on these two teeth, a well known naturalist Mr P.E.P.Deraniyagala erected Panthera leo sinhaleyus in 1939. Mr Deraniyagala did not explain explicitly how he diagnosed the holotype of this prehistoric subspecies as belonging to a lion, though he justified its allocation to a distinct prehistoric subspecies of lion by its being narrower and more elongate” than those of recent lions in the British Natural History Museum collection. According to Mr Deraniyagala, Panthera leo sinhaleyus was endemic to Sri Lanka, and became extinct prior to the arrival of culturally modern humans about 40,000 years ago. There is insufficient information to determine how it might differ from other subspecies of lion. Further studies would be necessary because it is extremely difficult to differentiate a canine tooth of similar species of animals. Even the Ratnapura rainforest habitat is more suited for tigers than lions.

In 1982 a sub-fossil right middle phalanx was found in a 17,000 years old prehistoric midden at Batadoma in Ratnapura District and tentatively considered to be of a tiger. Tigers arrived in Sri Lanka during a pluvial period during which sea levels were depressed, evidently prior to the last glacial maximum about 20,000 years ago. Since Sri Lanka was separated from the Indian subcontinent by rising sea levels in the early Holocene, now there are no tigers in Sri Lanka.

A leopard subspecies – Panthera Pardus Kotiya is native to Sri Lanka and it is the country’s TOP predator. The correct Sinhala term for leopard is Kotiyā .

The term Diviyā was in use for centuries in Sri Lanka to refer to smaller wild species of the cat family such as Handun Diviyā or Kola Diviyā. The correct Sinhala word for tiger is Viyagraya. Mistakenly we started to use Kotiyā to mean tiger and Diviyā to mean leopard. To complicate and confuse the matters, Tigers led by Velupillai Prabhakaran who were also known as Koti (the plural form of Kotiyā) – once ranged widely across Northern and Eastern Sri Lanka, now extirpated from Sri Lanka. Since we do not have lions or tigers in Sri Lanka we should have Kotiyā in our national flag and not lion or tiger.

The truth hurts….