dravidian settlements in ceylon and the beginnings of the kingdom of jaffna by karthigesu indrapala...
TRANSCRIPT
MAP SHOWING SITES
c_•M•
N 4HE E?tQp.p
.
\PIC)ACHAEOLOGcL
(
tNDCTfNI)ECE
/••L
WERESETTLEMENTS
IE
\ A c;ns
\ :
f+Ih
.
.\ d,—
\
0
. 4 . - -
\- a '
'
.*.. .+. \ \
\; --..
?tCQ —S
\ '\ I -
\
, ®_ 'I
JI ,
I: - - b —,x ' ' , ' ' N
k
( ;___ " , -\
\
4 -- --v-v]"\' - ,
w'\
+ k \\ \ b
\ 1 t \\k
\\A
\ITH - cNTT
T R V N1 -
- AI
A
\
* :'I \'
- a'
®
4
:
1 +
-
1
'
I-, I
p-
I
k
,*
7
--
'%
— ?_I
-- -
' +
.t_I
a
I
a
a
N,—
I
4;
II
)4
*
+
4'
'
4
A
1
+
1
DRAVID IAN ZETTLENEITS IN CETI)N
AND
TEE BEGI1NI1GS OF THE KIIDOM OF JAFFNA
by
Karthigesu Indrapala
Thesis subziitted for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
University of London
1965
2ABSTRACT
This thesis is a study of the settlements founded
by Dravidian-speakers from South India, chiefly the Tamile,
in Ceylon before the end of the thirteenth century. Although
any notable Dravidian settlement was not established in the
island until after the conquest of the Caa at the turn of
the tenth century, we have included in this study the sporadic
and scattered settlements of earlier times as well. The first
chapter deals with these earliest settlements and analyses
some of the theories put forward by earlier writers on the
subject. The main section of the thesis, comprising the second,
third, fourth and fifth capters, deals with the settlements
established in the northern and north-eastern parts of Ceylon
in the period between the beginning of the eleventh and the
end of the thirteenth century.
This study ends with an examination of the
circumstances under which an independent kingdom, controlled by
Dravidians, emerged in northern Ceylon. The sixth chapter deals
with the events of the first half of the thirteenth century
which directly led to the foundation of the kingdom, while the
last chapter is concerned with the establishment of the dynaety
of Iryacakravartins, from South In ia, ho consolidated the
position of the new kingdo
3
ACKNOWLEDGENENS
I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Dr.J.G.de
Cas aris, Reader in the History of South an South-east Asia
at the School of Oriental and African Studies, who has su ervised
the whole of this work and given me invaluable advice and
guidance.
I am thankful to Nr.W.J.F.LaBrooy, Reader in History,
University of Ceylon, for his as i tance in choosin the subject
and in obtaining budy leave from the University of Ceylon,
which enabled me to undertake this work.
I owe a particular debt to Nrs.Indranee Kan iah
for her help in re aring the p.
My thanks are also due to Mr.H.Somadasa, Librarian,
University of Ceylon Library, Mr.Lyn de Fonseka, Librari n,
National Mu eum Library, do bo and Nr.S.Tha biaii, Librarian,
Jaffna College Library, V ddukoddai (Ceylon) as well as the
staffs of the S. .A. . Library, ritish Museum Library and
enate ou e Library for th ir help in connection with this
work.
4
COTES
Page
2
3
5
6
25
Abstract . .
Acknowledgements .
Abbreviations . . .
Introduction . .
Chapter I The Beginnings of Dravidian Settlements
Chapter II Settlements in the Period of Ca
Occupation .
Chapter III Settlements in the Late Eleventh and
the Twelfth Century
Chapter IV Settlements in the Thirteenth Century
I - The Jaffna District •
Chapter V Settlements in the Thirteenth Century
II - Vanni Districts .
Chapter TI The Beginnings of the Kingdom of
Jaffna-I
Chapter VII The Beginnings of the Kingdom of
8k
133
26
306
399
Jaffna-'II • Lf77
Conclusion • • • • • . • 542
A Select Bibliography • . • • • 549
Map . . • • endpocket.
5
ABBREVLMIONS
A.B.I.A. - Annual Bibliography of Indian Archaeology, Leyden.A.I. - Ancient India (Bulletin of the Arch. Survey of India).A.S.C.A.R. - Anchaeological Survey of Ceylon Annual Report.C.A.L.R. - Ceylon Antiquary an Literary Register, Colombo.C.J.Sc. (G) - Ceylon Journal of Science, Section G, Colombo.Cc in. - Cekarca-ckara-mlaiC.H.J. - Cey1n Historical Journal, Colombo.Cv. - CilavasaDv. - DTpavasaB.C. - Epigraphia Carnatica
- Epigraphia IndicaElu-ay . - ju-attanagalvai
- Epigr p ia ZeyalanicaGk. - GreekHvv. - Hatthavanagalla-vi .ra-vasal.A. - In ian AntiquaryJ.A.S. - Journ 1 of ian tudiesJ.R.A.S.(C.B.)Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (Ceylon Branch)
N.S. - New SeriesBk. - car-kalveçuKm. - KaiIyamlaiL. - LatinM.E.R. - Madras Epi raphical Reports (Annual Report on epigraphy
Southern Circle,adras Government.Mm. - M4akk4appu-zn iyam
- NahvaN.I.A. - New In ian Antiquaryks. - Nikya-saipgrahaya
Port. - PortuguesePy . - PjvalipaRv. - Rjvaliya5.1.1. South In ian InscriptionsSixth. - SinhaleseSkt. - SanskritT.A.S. - Trava core Arc ae logical Series
- ak*ia- i1ca-purain_. - Tirikcala-purrnU.C. .C. • University of Ceylon History of CeylonU.C.R. - University of Ceylon Review
- Vaiyp1
VT. - versesTYrn. - ia-V ipava-nlai
6
INIRODUCT ION
In this work we have attempted a study of the early
settlements established by the Dravidians, notably the Tamila,
in Ceylon and of the beginnings of the Tamil kingdom in the
northern part of the island. This aspect of the history of
Ceylon has been neglected for a long time. The seriousness of
this gap could be appreciated by anyone who reads the comprehensive
history of the island recently published by the University of
Ceylon Our subject has not been dealt with at all in this
authoritative work. The chapter on the northern kingdom begins
abruptly with the rule of the Xryacakravartins and nothing is
stated about the beginnings of this kingdom.
Until about the thirteenth century A.D., the history
of Ceylon was the history of the Sinhalese people. But from
about the middle of the thirteenth century, it has been the
history of the SinhaleBe and Tamil people in the island. From
that time for over three centuries, the majority of the Tamils
were concentrated in a kingdom of their own in the northern
part of the island. In 1620, the last of the Taml-1 rulers was
executed by the Portuguese conquerors who brought the Tamil areas
1. University of Ceylon History of Ceylon, editor-in-chief R.C.Ray,
I , pt.l (1959), pt.2 (1960), Colombo.
7
under their direct rule. Like the Sinhalese in the maritime
provinces of southern Ceylon, the Tamils passed through a
period of colonial rule, first under the Portuguese and then
under the Dutch. Under these two European powers the Tamil
areas of northern Ceylon were administered separately from
the other areas. In the nineteenth century, after the British
took over from the Dutch, the whole country was politically
unified and the administration was centralised. This enabled
the Tainils and Sinhalese to work together in the national
politica and government. During the period of British rule
a further wave of Tamil immigrants went to the island as workers
in the newly-opened plantations. The descendants of these
recent immigrants, whose numbers exceed that of the descendants
of earlier Tamil settlers, play a vita], role in the economy of
modern Ceylon. These Tmils are officially designated Indian
Tamils while the descendants of earlier settlers are called
Ceylon Tainils. The Tamils, who comprise nearly twenty-five
per cent of the island's population, are now concentrated
mainly in the Northern, Eastern and Central Provinces.
The chronology and early history of the T-m-i1s of
Ceylon have not yet been systematically and scientifically
studied, A few works have been written, mainly in Tamil, on
the history of the Taniil kingdom u.t many of these could hardly
be described as scientific histories. Among the earliest writings
8
on this subject is Simon Casie Chetty's paper' 'On the History
of Jaffna, from the Earliest Period to the Dutch conquest',
read at a meeting of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic
Society in 18k7 and published in the journal of that society
In this short paper, the author has based his account of the
early history of Jaffna on the references to gas in the Mahvasa
and on the Tenr(1 chronicles, Kailyaxnlai and a-vaipava-
mlai. It is by no means a critical work. This was foUowed by
a few Tamil works, almost entirely based on the T-mi1 chronicles
and floating traditions. The earliest of these is S.Jobn's
pa-carittiram (History of Jaffna), published in l879
In 188k, V.V.Cataciva Pillai published his a-vaipavam
( A Narrative of Events in Jaffna) It was followed by A.Muttu-
tampi-pillai's pa-carittiram (History of Jaffna), which
was published in 19l2 These, too, are uncritical narratives
embodying almost the entire contents of the Tamil chronicles,
with all their mythical and legendary elements. The sections
dealing with the period of British rule are useful as source
materials for that period since these are contemporary and near-
1. J.R.A.S. (C.B.), I, No.3, l8k7-k8, pp . 69-79.2. American Ceylon Mission Press, Jafmna 1879. Second edition 1882.
Revised edition 1929.
3. Madras, 188k.
4. Jaffna, 1912.
9
contemporary accounts. In this respect, K.Veluppillai's compilation,
p$a_vaipavakaunniti, is a valuable work Its sections on
the administration of Jaffna by British Government agents and
on the leading families of Jaffna in the nineteenth century are
useful sources for the modern period of the history of Jafmna,
Equally important is the section on the place-names of Jaffna,
in which the Sithalese origins of over a tbouáand names are dealt
with This section, despite the fact that it is not&scientifiC
study of the place-names, is a useful contribution to the topographic
study of Jaffna, which is of utmost value for a work like ours.
Almost all the works mentioned above are concerned with the history
of Jaffna after the establishment of the Tamil kingdom and do not
deal with the history of the Tmila who were settled outside the
Jaffna kingdom or with the early Tamil settlements. This is
chiefly due to the fact that they are narratives based on the
Jaffna chronicles, which deal with the history of the Tamil kingdom
only.
Nudaliyar C . Rasanayagani' a Ancient Jaffna, published
in 1926, marks the first attempt at a critical history of Jafmna.
1. Vasvir, Jaffna 1918. Two sections of this work have been
written by S,Kumaracuvami and S .Katiraverpillai.
2. S.Kamaracuvami, 'Taa-nikatt$a Cila Ia Peyark4i Varalu'.
10
Unlike the earlier works, Ancient Jaffna is the result of an
attempt to trace the history of the Tmi1 of Ceylon from the
earliest times to the sixteenth century. It has been based on
a wider variety of sources and much effort has gone into it.
For the first time the Sixthalese sources as well as the South
Indian inscriptions were consulted. It marks a leap forward in
the research into the history of the Tamils of Ceylon. But
despite its distinct merits,Rasahayagam's work suffers front
several serious defects. The work has been marred by an earnest
attempt to prove the thesis that the Tamils were settled in
Ceylon from pre-Christian times and that there was an independent1ç
in northern Ceylon which existed front about the fifteenth century B.C.
to the seventeenth century A.D. In his attempt to prove this
thesis, Rasanayagam has used methods which are questionable
and materials that are totally unrelated to the history of the
Tamils in Ceylon. These have been briefly pointed put in our
work.
A more critical and, in many respects, a better
work on the history of Jaffna is Fr.Gnanapragasar's 1a-
Yaipava-viinarca (A Critical History of Jaffna), published in
l928 It stands in great contrast to the disappointing articles
of the same author published posthumously in the Tarnil Culture,
1. Accuvli, Jaffna 1928.
11
in l952 It may be reckoned as the most valuable study of the
early history of Jaffna in Tmil. Besides the South Indian
inscriptions and the Sinhalese sources Ganapragasar has made
use of place-name materials also for his study. The same author's
Kings of Jaffna, published after the Taml-1 work, deals exclusively
with the history of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
Among the other works published around the same
time and a little later are K.Matiyaparanazn's a-p1rv!ka
vaipavam2and Civanantan's __am These two &lso
fall under the category of the earlier uncritical works.
Two other works of recent years, which also fall under the
same category, are K. Kanapathi Pillai' s Ilakai-v-Tami
Vara] and C.S.Navaratnani's Tamils and Ceylon
The University of Ceylon History of Ceylon has &
chapter on the kingdom og Jaffna, entitled 'The Northern
Kingdom', by S.Natesan As mentioned earlier, this section
1. 'Ceylon Originally a Land of Dravidians', T.C., I, No.1, Feb.1952;
'The Taniils turn Sinhalese', T.C., I, No.2, June 1952;
'Beginnings of Tamil Rule in Ceylon', T.C., I, No.3, Sept. 1952.
2. K.Matiyaparanam, pp;a-prvjka-vaipavam, Jaffna 1927.
3. Kuala Lumpur, 1933.
k. Peradeniya, 1956.
5. Jaffna 1958.
6. U.C.H.CI, I, pt. 2, pp. 691-702.
12
begins abruptly with the reign of the iryacakravartins. It is
stated that the earlier part of the chapter was deleted by the
editor. As a result, this chapter falls outside the period and
subject matter dealt with in our work.
The latest and among the most critical of the
contributions to the history of the Jaffna kingdom is the article
by S.Paranavitana in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,
(Ceylon Branch), l96l in which the theories put forward by
Rasan&yagam and other writers are analysed. In this penetrating
an@ysis th. author has made use of new evidence as well. But
some of his arguments have been marred by his attempt to give
a Jvaka origin to the founders of the Jaffna kingdom. We have
discussed these arguments in our work.
Only the history of the Jaffna kingdom forms the
subject of almost all the works mentioned above. These do not
deal with the history of the Tamil settlements that preceded
the foundation of the kingdom. This reason, above all others,
has recommended itself to us for undertaking a study of this
nature. The major part of our work, five out of the seven chapters,
is exclusively devoted to a study of the Dravidian settlements
that were founded in Ceylon between about the ninth and the end
of the thirteenth century. This section serves as a background
1. J.R.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., VII, pt. 2, 1961, pp. 17k-22k.
13
to the rise of the Tamil kingdom of Jaffna, in northern Ceylon,
which forms the subject of the last two chapters.
The term Dravidian is used in this work to mean the
different communities of South India speaking the Draviian
family of languages, chiefly Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Nalayalam.
Although the only Dravidian-speakixig community to be found in
the island now are the Tamils, there were settlers from the
Kannada, Kerala and Telugu countries, who were ultimately
assimilated into the major Dravidian group or into the Sinhalese
population. The kingdom of Jaffna in this work refers to the
Tamil kingdom of northern Ceylon which was founded in the
middle of the thirteenth century and ceased to exist in 1620.
A historical study of the early Dravidian settlements
in Ceylon, like that of early settlements in any country,
presents a number of problems that cannot be s4ved pirely
with the help of such materials as chronicles and inscriptions.
Other branches of studies such as archaeology, physical
anthropology, historical geography and historical linguistics
have an impoitant part to play in the solution of these problems.
These problems would include among others the determining of
the original home of the settlers, the causes of their migration,
the routes of migration, the areas of settlement and the extent
14
of the survival of earlier inhabitants. The evidence of archaeology
is very helpful in tracing the routes of migration and locating
the areas of settlement. The historical linguist has an
important contribution to make by his analysis of the place-name
evidence, which helpd a good deal in the understanding of the
social conditions under which the settlements took place and
the institutional ties which first bound the settlers together
as well as in the location of early habitation sites Place-names
also help to an extent in the inquiry into the survival of
earlier inhabitants. The historical geographer could help in
the understanding of the influence of such factors as physique
and defence on the location, and sometimes on the form, of the
settlements. Sometimes the contribution of physical anthropologists
is also valuable. In Britain attempts have been made, though
not with much success, to use the evidence derived from cephalic
indices and tables of nigrescence in the study of the Anglo-Saxon
settlements.
In this study of the Dravidian settlements, the use
of evidence from sources other than inscriptions and literary
1. In this respect the place-name evidence in Britain has been
of immense help to the historians of(Anglo-Saxon settlement.
See A.wer and F.M.Stenton, An Introduction to the Study of
English Place-names, pt.l, (Camb. Englaiid), 1929.
15
works has been rendered difficult. Even the inscriptions aiid
literary works that we have used have proved to be inadequate
in the reconstruction of a satisfactory history of the settle-
merits and in the solution of many iiiportant problems. 1hile
the Pli and Sinhalese chronicles of the island provide very
reliable, fairly adequate and surprisingly continuous information
regarding the political, and to an extent the religious, history
of Ceylon, their contribution to our inquiry is very little.
The activities of the Dravidians in Ceylon find mention in
the chronicles only when these affected the political and
religious affairs of the country. No evidence relating to the
Dravidian settlements is available in these sources. We have
made use of these sources mainly in the discussion of the
circumstances under which the settlements were established
arid the northern kingdom emerged into existence.
On the Tamil side, the chronicles that are extant
are those written nea1ly three centuries after the foundation
of the Tamil kingdom. These are the ICailyamlai, Vaiypal,
Vaiy, a-vaipava-mlai and the Maakk4appu-mmiyam.
The chronicle Ircamura, mentioned in the Ciappuppyiraiu
(preface) of the pa-vaipava-mlai, is not extant now.
With the possible exception of the
the other works cannot be dated exactly. But, as we shall see
presently, certain references in these works make it clear that
16
these were all writtem after the fifteenth century.
The Vaiypal is probably the earliest of these
chronicles The mention of Parafiki (Portu uese) as well as the
occurrence of certain Portuguese words in this work suggest
that it was composed after the arrival of the Portuguese in
the island (A.D. i5O5) Only one clumsy manuscript of this
work, full of orthographic mistakes, has survived. 1n its present
state, it is very confused and at times unintelligible.
Fortunately, an old prose rendering of this chronicle has
survived and it is with the help of this work that we are in
a position to understand the Vaiyal. This paraphrase is
known as Vaiy The early part of this chronicle is based on
the Pxnyaa, the popular versions of the Viaya legend and
on the popular etymology of some of the place-names of Jaffna.
The sections dealing with the Dravidian settlements of the
thirteenth century and later appear to have been based on
certain genuine traditions which were current in a confuaed
1. Vaiypuri £iyar, Vaiypal, ed. J.W.Arutpirakacaia, Jaffna 1921.
2. Parafdd. 1= L. Franci) is the Timi1 name for the Portuguese.
The occurrence of the names Parafiki (v.3k) and Piippa (Philip
v.58) and such words as ayutanti (Port. adjutante) and
puravar3taiyar (Port. provedor) may not all be due to
interpolations.
3. Vaiy, ed. Z.Gnanapragasar, Jaffna 1921.
1?
form when this work was written. According to tradition, Vaiypuri
Aiyar, the author of this chronicle, was the court poet of one
of the kings of Jaffna who bore the consecration name Cekarca-
ck.ara As Gnanapragasar is inclined to believe, 'it would
seem that the Vaiy was composed during the times of the last
Jaffna kings' The contents of this work have been critically
analysed and used with caution in our work.
The Kailyamlai, a chronicle of the Kailyantar
temple in Jaffua, contains an eulogistic account of the kings
o Jaffna and. appears to have been composed at the beginning
of the seventeenth century. It mentions the letupatis of 1?Rmnad,
the first of whom began his rule around l6O1 ^ Some sections of
this work have been based on the Vaiypal. Perhaps the most
useful section is that dealing with the settlement in Jaffna
of certain families from the Tamil country.
The Y pa-vaipava-mlai is a prose chronicle of
the Jaffna kingdom and was written, as stated in its preface,
when the Dutch Conimsindant Ian Maccara (Mkka.1a) was administering
Jaffna (A.D. 1736). As admitted in the preface, the author has
1. title page.
2. 'Sources for the Study of the History of Jaffna', T.C., II,
Nos. 3&k, p. 3]Lf, fn.18.t1f%mts I93i
3. Mutturca Kavircar, Kailyamlai, ed, C.V. Jampulinkazu Pillai,,.<
C.Rasanaagam'a ForewGrd, ibid., p. lf ; J. .A.S. (C.B.), N.S.,
VII, pt. 2, p. 176.
S •
18
based his work on the Vaiypal, Kailyamlai and the two
non-extant works Ircamur and Pararca-ckaraul The
sections dealing with the period beore the Portuguese rule
reproduce almost entirely the contents pf the Kailyam1ai
and the Vaiypal.
The 4akaappu-mmiyam is a chronicle of the
Batticaloa district of the Eastern Province of Ceylon Its
existence is not known to many writers on Ceylon history. This
prose chronicle, in its present form, appears to have been
written in the eighteenth century, for, it deals with the
Dutch rule in Ceylon. Though a late work, it embodies many
genuine traditions of earlier times which are remarkably
corroborated by the P].i and Sizihalese sources. It is the only
Tamil chronicle that preserves any memory of the very early
times. It is also the only Tamil chronicle that mentions Ngha
by name and des with his activities in Ceylo4. We have
discussed these merits in our work. It main use for our work
has been in the reconstruction of the history of Dravidian
settlements in the Eastern Province and the rise of Vanni
chieftaincies there. The traditional historical poems relating
to Batticaloa, appended to the Mafakk4appu-mmiyam, have
P1o.yslv.iQbed. LCapanatan, Colombo 1953 ;
Eng. tr. C,Brito, Colombo 1879.
2. Maaidc4appu_mniyam, ed. F.X.CNataraca, Coloinbo 1962.
19
also been useful in this respect.
Besides these chronicles, a few other Tamil works
of Ceylon containing valuable historical information have also
remained extant. Among these, the
T ir-kc ala-puram Kc ar-kalve Cekarc a-cëkar a-nilai1
and the Cekarca-ckaram have been of some use in rour work.
The first three are chronicles of the temple of E5ttvaram, in
Trincomalee. The exact date of these works cannot be erxnined.
The Takiia-kailca-puram, written in the reign of a king of
Jaffna who bore the consecration name Cekarca-ckata is
probably a work of the fifteenth or sixteenth century. The
Kcar-kalvetu and the Tiri-kcala-purtam are later works.
The Cekarca-ckara-mlai is an astrological work composed in
the time of an Iryacakravartin named Vartaya who had the
consecration name Cekarca-ckara According to the ia-
vaipava-mlai, this ruler was the father of ?rttaa whom
Paranavitana has identified with ?rttam Peruxn jun of the
1. Ed. P.P.Vayittilinka Tecikar, Point Pedro, Jaffua, 1916.
2. Ed. A.Canmukarattina Aiyar, Jaffna 1909.
4. Ed. I.S.Irakunata Aiyar, Kokkuvil, Jaffna 1942.
3. Appended to Takia-kailca-puriam.
. , 7:116.
6. Ccm., v.158.
20
Ndav4a inscription, dated in the third year of VikramabThu III
(l36o) If the identification is correct and if the statement
of the is to be accepted, the Cekarca-
ckara-nilai may be dated to the first half of the fourteenth
century. Some are inclined to date this to the fifteenth century
The Cekarca-ckaram is a medical work, the date of which cannot
be determined easily The historical information, relevant to
our studs, contained in all these works is incidental and very
meagre. None of the Tamil works mentioned above contains any
reliable information concerning the Dravidian settlernena in
Ceylon prior to the thirteenth century. These have not been,
therefore, made use of in the major part ofour work. Even for
the period after the thirteenth century, these sources are
full of legendary material that it has b L been difficult
to make much use of their evidence.
For the major part of our work, we have depended
mainly on epigraphic and archaeological materials. Though the
evidence of these materials has been far more encouraging than
that of the literary sources, it has been by no means adequate.
1. Yvm., p. 37 ; S .Paranavitana, 'The rya Kingdom in North Ceylon',
J.P.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., VII, pt. 2, p. 197.
2. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. 691 ; C.A.L.R., V, p. 175 ;
J. .A.S. (c. .), N.S., VIII, pt.2, p. 372.
3. The verses of this work used here are those quoted in the
introduction to the Ccm.
21
Excavation work is still an undeveloped branch of archaeological
research in Ceylon. As long as excavation work remains undone,
much that is relevant to our study will be wanting. For the
period prior to about the third century A.D., we may reasonably
expect a few sepulchral and other remains, which are invaluable
for a study of settlements, to be brought to light. The only
burials relating to Dravidian settlements in the island, namely
those of Pomparippu, were discovered by chance and today, nearly
forty years after the discovery, the sire still awaits a proper
scientific excavation. For the period after the third century,
it is aiva and Vaiava temples and icons as well as Tanill
inscriptions that will help us in our inquiry. Here, too, owing
to the lack of excavation work, we have to depend solely on
surface finds. Archaeologists have not helped us so far to know
something of the earliest aiva temples, such as the Tiru-ktTvaram
temple at Mahtittha, referred to in the literary sources. No
surface remains of these exist now and only an excavation of
the sites is likely to yield something of value. The fer ancient
temples so far unearthed have been èf immense value in locating
and dating some of the earliest settlements of the Dravidians.
Of greater value for our work are the Tamul inscriptions.
More than a hundred of them have been discovered in the island
and nearly half of them are unpublished. These epigraphic records1
most of them belonging to the eleventh and twelfth centuries,
have helped us a good deal in the location, dating and the
22
determination of the nature of some of the settlements. The
material for the first three chapters is mainly derived from
these inscriptions.
We have not been able to make use of the evidence
of physical anthropology, historical geography and place-name
studies for the simple reason that no work has been done in
these fields so as to be of any help to us. A preliminary survey
of the place-name material shows that much valuable information
could be gleaned from it for our study. For instance, the
earlier Sinhalese occupation of the Jaffna peninsula, the long
survival of the Sinhalese there and the Taniil occupation of the
North-central Province before the Sinhalese resettled there are
unmistakably indicated by the place-names. The collection and
analysis of these toponyms require a proper linguistic training
Besides, the establishment of sound-pecligrees with the help of
earlier forms and the analysis of sound and word substitution
and Sinhalese-Tamil compounds are beyond the scope of our work.
But wherever possible, place-name material has also been used
though never as an independent evidence.
Some attemptá have been made by certain physical
anthropologists to analyse the physical characteristics of the
people of Ceylon. Their surveys are neither exhaustive nor
23
complete and the results are not of any help to us Perhaps not
much could be expected from physical anthropologists even in
the future owing to the complex nature of the problem. It ma
be difficult to contend that differences between human communities
are easily recognizable in differences of physical structure.
Distinctions based on physical characteristics may be unreliable
in the present state of knowledge. Even if these were reliable
neither the Sinhalese nor the Tamils of Ceylon can be regarded,
in view of their previous history, as a sufficiently homogeneous
group to enable any superficial distinctions to be used with
confidence in their difUrentiation.
In view of these limitations and difficulties, while
we may claim to have added something to our knowledge of the
history of the Tanmils of Ceylon, the account presented here
is inevitably incomplete and not always definite. We have often
been led to state our conclusions in hypothetical terms. As one
Indologist has remarked, 'they are better than no conclusions
at all or than categorical assertions based on inadequate evidence'.
1. N.D.Wijesekera, People of Ceylon, Colombo 1951.
P.I.Chanmugamn, 'Anthropometry of Sinhalese and Ceylon T(1s',
C.J.Sc. (G), IV, pp. 1-18 ; Marret and Wijesekera conducted
an ethnological survey of Ceylon, the materials of which are
in the National Museum, Colombo and at the University of Harvard.
24This is especially so regarding the beginnings of the kingdom
of Jaffna, where the gains from this research, valuable though
they are, have not increased our knowledge of the origins of
the kingdom. With the progress of archaeological research and
place-name studies, we hope these limitations could be overcome
to a great extent.
As we have stated earlier, the materia]. used in the
first part of our study dealing with the Dravidian settlements
is mainly derived from sources hitherto untapped. These include
nearly a hundred Tamil inscriptions, about half of which are
unpublished, and the Tamil chronicles. Most of the Tamil
inscriptions and. the Tainil chronicle Maak4appu-mmiyam
have been used here for the first time. In this sense, a substantial
section of the first five chapters forms an original contribution
to our subject.
In the transliteration of Tamil names and. words
we have adopted the system used in the Madras Tamil Lexicon.
However, in the case of more familiar names, we have used the
transcription that is familiar to all Indologists (j., agam
for Cafikani and P4ya for Piya). We have usually broken up
the longer compounds with hyphens and simplified the junction
of words ao as to facilitate the understanding of their meaning.
25
CHAPTER I
TEE BEG INNIS OF DRAVIDIAN SETTLEIEIITS
Front the earliest times to the end of the tenth century A.D.
No appreciable light is thrown by either tradition
or archaeology on the darkness in which the history of the earliest
Dravidian settlements in Ceylon is shrouded. The archaeological
finds so far have not been very encouraging and few definite
conclusions can be drawn from the little that has been discovered.
The Pli and Sinhalese chronicles furnish some evidence regarding
the political relations between the Dravidian kingdoms and Ceylon,
but contain little information on Dravidian settlements in the
island. The late Tamil chronicles of Ceylon, on the other hand,
hardly preserve any memory of the very early times. Under these
circumstances, one has to piece together the hopelessly meagre
evidence in the above sources to determine the chronology and
nature of the early Dravidian settlements in Ceylon.
It has been claimed by certain writers on the history
of Jaffna that the people of northern Ceylon at the time of the
earliest Indo-Aryan settlements, called gas in the chronicles,
were T,n11s Some others have claimed that these gas were Tantil
1. S. Gnanapragasar, 'Ceylon originally a land of Dravidiana',
LQ . I, No.1, pp.27 If.
26
in culture and language, although ethnically they were not
Dravidian These conclusions, as we shall see presently, are
based on the legendary accounts of the gas in the P1i chronicles
and the Tamil Buddhist epic Maini!kalai as well as on the erroneous
identification of some of the place-names mentioned in early
Tami]. literature. Gaaaapragasar, a leading proponent of the
theory that the Ngas of the Pli chronicles were TRndls, has
put forward four n'xi{n arguments in support of it In the first
place, he baa argued that the island of Ceylon as well as the
language spoken there were known in ancient times as 1ain and
that the name of the language was later corrupted to Eu. These
factors, in his opinion, 'should lead one to conclude prima facie
that, at the earliest times, am was occupied, at least in the
main, by a Tamil-apeaking people' This argument is far from
logical. Presumably it rests on the fact that am is now used
only in Tamil as a name for Ceylon. But the origin of this name,
far from indicating that the island was occupied by Taniil-speaking
people in ancient times, shows that the people from whose name
ain is derived were Sinhalese. The earliest occurrence of this
name is in the Brhxri! inscriptions of South India. In these
1. C.Rasanayagarn, Ancient Jaffna, pp. 13 if.
2. S.Gnanapragasar,'ceylon originally a land of Dravidians', pp.27 ff
3. Ibid., p. 30.
27
inscriptions, from Tirupparafkuam and Sittaaval, occurs
the Prit form of this name, namely Evidently it is from
this Prkrit form that the Tamil Tam is derived. It could be
shown that a is derived from Si*h4a through the Pli STh4a,
or more probably through another Prkrit form Sihi.a. The name
Siñh4a has two elements, s14 a and a. The Sanskrit siria
becomes sha in Pli STha becomes sihi and a! (the consonant
Ii is dropped when its position is between two similar vowels
and the two vowels coalesce) in Sinhalese Si*h4a could, therefore,
have become Sihija and later SIa in early Sirthalese, aJr4.
probably even in other Prakritic languages, although no record
of such a form has survived in Sinhalese It is not difficult
1. C.Narayana Rao,'The BrThini Inscriptions of South India',
N.I.A., I, pp. 367, 368, 375.
2. ., 6:10.
3. S.Paranavitana, Sigiri Graffiti, I, p.xci. Siiha- in
becomes Si-gin in Sinhaleae.
I. Cf., Sihila (Sih4a) and Sihilaka (Si*h4aka) in a aroh
inscription from Loriyn Tangai, in Wsat Pakistan, belonging
to about the second century LD. S.Konow, Kharoth! Inscriptions,
p. 110; U.C.H.C, I, pt.l, p. 90.
j., also Sielediba in The Christian Topography of Cosmas
Indicopleustes, ed. F.O.Winstedt, p. 250.
28
to derive the forms Tja and Iam from Sja. In the early period,
when Sanskrit and Prkrit words were borrowed into Tamil, those
with the initial letter a often dropped that consonant The
name Sja, when used in the Tamil country, would, therefore,
have become a, as indeed it occurs in the pre-Christian
Brhm* inscriptions there Since the a in Prkrit and the a
in Tamil are interchangeable a would become a and the final
form am is derived front this by the addition of the consonant
in, which too is in keeping with the rules governing the form of
borrowed Sanskrit and Prkrit words ending with the vowel a,14.
especially the neuter nouns or those designating inanimate objects.
Thus, am could be derived from the name Sih4a and would,
therefore, mean the land of the Sinhalese rather than indicate
that Ceylon was originally settled by Tamils. Guanapragasar's
arguments, on this score, will become groundless. The derivation
l.., Pkt. sipp (Skt. sukti)> Tiinil ippi ippi in Maimkalai,
XXVII, 1.6k; Cittnta-cikmaçi, 23:5 ; Madras Tamil Lexicon,I,p.297;
cf. also Pkt. slsa>Tamil jyant ; Skt. san hi> Tamil anti.
•This probably occurred in the Prakritic languages,too. Cf. Skt.
Sih4a> Sinh. He or Heja > E.n and Skt. Si* 4a seems to
have become Ia in Ia-nga (My . ,35:l5).
2. C.NarayanaRao, . p. 375.
3. ., Damia> Tamiar ; Co'a > C1ar.
i. Skt. mafig4a ) mafik4am ; Skt. si*ha , cifikam
29
of !2am from Siñhaa is accepted by leading Tamil scholars
Secondly, Gnanapragaar has argued that the original
inhabitants of Ceylon came from South India and that these
pre-Aryaii aborigines were Dravidians who seem to have spoken
a Tamil dialect He bases this on the assumption that the pre-
Aryan inhabitants of India represeit an earlier wave of immigrants
from the Mediterranean area and that no trace og any langtage
other than Tamil is found in India till the arrival of the
Indo-Aryans. Although the pre-historic relations between India
and Ceylon are undeniable the rest of his arguments are based
on mere assumptions. It is not true to say that all the non-Aryan
inhabitants of India were necessarily Dravidian. There were
others as well, chief among whom were the Mu-speaking people
The chronology of the Dravidian migration to India is itself
an unsettled question There is no evidence to suggest that
Tamil was the only language spoken in India in pre-Aryan times.
1. S.Vaiyapuri Pillai, Madras Tamil Lexic n, I, p. 382;
S.Krishnaswaniy Aiyangat in the Preface to S.Rasanayagam's
Ancient Jaffna, p. v.
2. S.Gnanapragasar,'Ceylon originallyland of Dravidians', p.30.
3. U.C.H. ., I, pt. 1, pp. 75, 79.
If. K.A.Nilknta Sastri, History of South In ia, p . 59.
5. Cf., C.von FUhrer Haimendorf,'New Aspects of the Dravidian
Problem', T.C., II, No.2, p .131. The author dates the Dravidian
migration to the first millenium B.C.
30
His third argument is that 'hundreds of Taniil place-
names in Ceylon are pre-Sinhalese' He has given a few examples
of ele ents of present-day Sinhalese place-names and what have
been considered by him to be their Tamil origins. It is clear
that this argument is based on superficial similarities and not
on any historical study of the development or evolution of these
names. This could be seen in the two sets of elements as well
as from their phonological development. He has clai ed, for
instance, that the Sinhalese element dea, meaning 'low-lying
land or valley', is derived from Tamil ti, meaning corn
But dea and its more common variant de are derived from
Sans1rit droi (=valley), through the Phi doi and medieval
Sinhalese doa and
The fourth argument that Sinhalese is based on Tamil
and that, therefore, 'the original inhabitants of Ceylon' spoke
Tamil is unconvincing Gnaaapragasar arrives at this conclusion
by adopting unscientific methods in his linguistic research. One
can only quote the views of Wilhelm Geiger on this matter:-
Gnanapragasar's methods are not at all Indian; they aresimply a relapse into the old practice of comparing twoor more words of the most distant languages merely onthe basis of similar sounds without any consideration for
1. S.Gnanapragaaar,'Ceylon originally a land of Dravidians', p.31.
2. Ibid.
3. Skt. Jambu-droi ) Phi Jambu-doi ) Sixth. Daba-dei
and Daba-deiya. Cv., 81:15; Pv., p . 119; ., p. k5.Also, ip c nsciipven s u.c.riJ
If. S.Gnanapragasar,'Ceylon originally a land of Dravidians', p.31 ff.
31chronology, for phonological principles, or for thehistorical development of words and. forms. 1
Similarly the attempts of Raaanayagam to show that
the Ngas of Ceylon referred to in the Pli chronicles were
Tamil in culture and language are based on the erroneous
identification of some place-names in the Tamil Safigam texts,
without any consideration for chr.ogy or for known historical
facts An analysis of these early Tamil poems shows that the
geography of their accountá is mainly confined to the Tam.tl
country of their time, which was bounded in the north by the
Vñkaam (Vgaam) hills, in the south by Kuzriari (Cape Comorin)
and on the west and east by the seai There is no indication in
any of the poems that chieftains and rulers from outside these
limits were eulogised by the Tamil poets. A notable exception
is the Arya king Pirakatta, (Brasta) who is mentioned in the
colophon of Kapilar's ifici-pu Despite this factor,
Rasanaya,gam has tried to identify -ilaAk8i, }ntai and ICutirai
of the aigam poems with Ceylon, Mahtittha (in Ceylon) and
Kutirai-malai (in Ceylon) respectively The )-ilMciii of
1. W.Geiger, A Grammar of the Sinhalese Language, p. vii.
2. C.Rasanaragaii, . cit., pp. 13_h14.
3. Tolkppiyam, Pyiram, 11. 1-2 ; Cilappatikram, VIII, U. 1-2.
k. ifici-pu, Pattu-pu , ed. U.V.Cuvmfnata Ayyar, p. 380.
5. C.Rasanaagam, . cit., pp. 19-26.
32the Tamil poems cannot be identified as Ceylon. It was a
chieftaincy in the Tamil country when these poems were composed
and has been identified as a region in the North Arcot district
It is held to be the same as the Uttara-lk! of the Ca
inscriptions There were also other places in the Tamil country
with ilaikai as the chief element of their names which find
mention in the agam poems. We hear of To-n-ilaikai, KI-
m-ila.fLkai and Nau-n fl-ni-ilai3.kai Of , To-m-ileAki
is considered by some to represent Cey1on This may or mar not
be correet, for there is no evidence in the Tamil poems to
identify it properly. However, Ceylon was not the only place
known to the Tamils as I].añkai. In the earliest literature and
inscriptions of the Tamils Ceylon is referred to as a or
In later times, the names Ci.kajam and Ilafikai were also used.
But when Ilañkai was uáed to denote Ceylon, it was usual to
qualify it with some epithet so as to distinguish it from the
1. K.A.Nilakiinta Sastri, The Cas, pp. k35, kk2 fn. 83
V.Kanakasabhai, Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago, pp. 27, 29 ;
J.R.Narr identifies it as a place near Dharmapuri, The Eight
Tarnil Anthologies with special reference to and
Patiuppattn, thesis submitted to the University of London, 1958.
2. See infra, p.
3. u-p uppaai, 11. 119-120.
V.Kanakasabhai, . cit., p.27 ; J.R.Narr, . cit.
5. C.Narayana Rao, op. p.375 ; applai, 1. 191.
33other I1a..kais. The Cilappatikram refers to Ceylon as 'kaa1
Ilaiikai' (Iiakai surrounded by the sea) 1 while the Main1kalai
cãUs it Ila3kti:pam (Skt. Laik-dvIpa) The most common epithet
was tea, meaning south, thereby denoting that it was the Lk
in the south (Te-i1kii) By about the Ca period when Ceylon
became the La.k par excellence such epithets bece.xne unnecessary.
The place named ?ntai in the early Tami]. poems is
also different from }Iahtittha, which is now known as }ntai.
Intai is a recent name for the ancient port of Mahtittba. The
name does not occur in any of the early works. In the Sixihalese
inscriptions arid literature, Nahtittha is referred to as Ntoa,
Mahavoi, Mahapuu, Mahavun, havautoa and Mhapaana ' In
the Tami]. poems of about the seventh, eighth and. ninth centuries
and in the Ca inscriptions of the eleventh century, the
Tamilised form tam has been used By about the seventeenth
century, the variant jam was in use In Ptolemy's map this
1. Ci1appatikram, p.636.
2. M4inka1ai, XXVIII, 1. 107.
3. See infra, p . ++&.
k. C.W.Nicholas, 'Historical Topography of Ancient and Medieval
Ceylon', J.R.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., VI, 1959, pp. 75-81.r
Tvra Tiruppatikafik4, Tirumuai, 2, Patikam 2k3 and Tirumutai 3,Pabi1t&-381, pp. 518, &; S. 1.1., IV, Nos. ].k12, ]I].k.
6. Cf., Mantotte in Memoirs of Rijckloff van Goens 1665, Tr. S.Pieters
p . 106.
34
port is named }Iodouttou The present name of 1ntai is evidently
an abbreviation of I.ntam There is no evidence whatsoever
to identify Jntai of the aâgam poems with Nahtittha.
Similarly, the identification of Kutirai and Nutirarn
with Kutiraimalai in Ceylon is untenable. Not only was there a
place by the name of Kutirai in the Tinii1 country there is also
no reason to suppose that the name Kutirainialai for the place
on the north-western coast of Ceylon was in use at the time of
the añgam poems. It is clear from the references in the Tm(1
poems that Kutirai and !4utiram were chieftaincies in the Cra
kingdom The argument that Ptolemy's Hipporos (Gk. hippos = horse,
oros = mountain) is identifiable as Kutiraimalai (Tamil kntirai
= horse, malal = mountain) and that since Hipporos is a direct
translation of Kutiraimalai, the Tami]. name was in uBe in Ptolemy's
time, is also not convincing. It is possible that the present-
day Tamil name is itself a translation of an earlier Sinhalese
name. We find that there is still a place called Avagiri
(Skt. ava = horse, girl = mountain) very close to utiraimalai.
Possibly Avagiri was the earlier name, covering a larger area,
1. C.W.Nicbolas, . p. 75; U.C.H.C., I, pt. 1, map facing p.8.
2. Cf., Taflcavr > Taflcai.
3. V.Kanakasabhai, . cit., pp. 113, 118.
I. v.168 . J.R.Marr, in the work mentioned above,
locates Mutiram near Udamalpet.
35
and Kutiraimalai may be a Tamil rendering of later times However,
the identification of Hipporos with Kutiraimalai is itself in
doubt.
It is admitted by critical scholars that the legendary
accounts in the Pli chronicles about the Igaa are quite
unreliable Even if there were a people called 1gas, there is
no evidence to suggest that they were Tamfl- in language and
culture. There were persons with the name Nga all over India.
Even to this day we find a people called Ngas living in North-
east India. The Ngas of the chronicles, like those of many
Pli and Sanskrit works, seem to be superhiinn beings Rasanayagam' s
arguments for the existence of Taniil settlements in Ceylon in
pre-Christian times, therefore, are wholly unacceptable1
Ceylon's geographical proximity to and close contacts
with the Tami]. country and. early conquests by TRnr1 adventurers
have been often used as the basis for the assumption that Tamils
were settled in the island in the early centuries of its history.
1. There are other place-names on the north-western coast of 6eylon
which are Tamil renderings of Binhalese names. Cf., Si13.h. J4agul-
t o a-mune >Tamil Kaliy;a-tuai-mukam.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The irya Kingdom in North Ceylon', pp. 180-183;
U.C. •C., I, pt.l, p. 95.
3. See infra, p. 11oIt.
k. See infra, pp.
36Our sources undoubtedly indicate that Tamils had established
contacts with Ceylon by about the second century B.C., if not
earlier. There is reliable data in our sources relating to the
commercial, cultural, political and religious connections between
South India and Ceylon in the early centuries of the island's
history. One of the earliest references to such contacts occurs
in the Akitti taka This taka story alludes to the intercourse
between Kvripattinam, in the C1a country,and K.radipa, near
NgadIpa. Ngadipa is identifiable with the Jaffna district
which was known by that name in the pre-Christian and early Christian
centuries Kradipa appears to be the island of Kraitivu, about
two miles west of the Jaffna peninsula The Dlpavai1lsa and the
Mahvaisa refer to the two Tamil usurpers, Sena and. Gutta.ka, who
ruled from Anurdhapura in the second century B.0 They appear to
have been connected with the horse-trade in the island. According
to the I4ahvasa, their father was an a sa-nvika or ship's captain
dealing with horses Sena and Guttaka were followed by the Tamil poli.
tical adventurers, Era, Pulahattha, BAhiya, Panay nira, Piaymra
1. The Jtaka, IV, ed. E.B.Cowell, tr. W.K.D.Rouse, p. 150.
2. G.P.Malalaaekera, Dictionary of Phi Proper N nies II, p.k2.
3. C.W.Nicbolas, . cit., p. 8k ; Malalasekera has i entified
it as 'an island in the Dami4a country', . cit., I, p. 570.
k. Dv., l8:k7 ; Mv., 21:10.
5. Mv., 21:10.
37
and Dhika, who ruled at ânurdhapura for short periods in the
second and first centuries B.0 Among the paramours of Queen
Anul were two Tamils, who also rpled. at Anurdhapura for some
time in the first century B.0 In the first century A.D., 4anga
(33_li 3) went over to South India and took mercenaries to win
back his throne These merceflarie8 were probably supplied by
some chief or ruler, apparently not unconditionally. For, we
find that his son, Candukhasiva, was married to a Tamil lady
who came to be known as Dami-dev Paranavitana is of the
opinion that 'this alliance of his son with a TRmil princess
was, perhaps, a part of the price which Ianga had to pay when
he obtained military aid. from South India against his adversaries'
But it is also possible that it was the result of a friendly
alliance between a Tamil chief or ruler and Ianga. Thus, the
1. Mv., 21:13 ft., 33:39 ft. ; Dv., 18:k9, 20:16-18. The relations
between South India and Ceylon during this period have been
dealt with in great detail by W.M.K.Wijetunge in his thesis,
The Rise and Decline of Ca Power in Ceylon, submitted to
the University of London in 1962.
2. Nv., 31f:l9, 26 ; Dv., 20:27, 29.
3. ., 35:26, 27.
11. Ibid., 35:k8.
5. U.C.H.C., I, pt.]., p. 176.
38
evidence of the Pli chronicles shows that from about the
second century B.C. the Tamils of South India had established
contacts with the island. The earliest literature of the Tamils,
belonging to about the second and thud centuries A.D., does
not contain information on this point. But there is a solitary
reference in one work, the Pa applai, to trade relations
with Ceylon. It mentions the vessels laden with food-stuffs
from 1am (Ceylon) among those that called at the port of
K'vri-pat'iam, in the Ca country In the aâgam anthology,
there are some poems attributed to Pta-tvar, a Temil poet
from Ceylon But it is from the seventh century that we get any
direct reference to Ceylon in the literature of the Tsmils.
The evidence of the literary sources is confirmed
by a few inscriptions as well. There are three pre-Christian
Brhm inscriptions in Ceylon which attest to the presence of
Ts,w1R in Ceylon. One of these, from Axiurdhapuraz popularly
known as the Tamil Householders' Terrace inscription, records
the building of a prsda (terrace), probably used as an assembly
hail, by some Tami1s On one of the sides of the terrace are
found inscribed the following names: Kubira, Tia, Kubira ujata,
aga, Naata and Krava the navika (ship's captain). The last-
3. S.Paranayitana, 'Tsmi1 Householders' Terrace - Anurdhapura',
A.B.I.A., XIII, pp. 13-1k.
1. Paplai, 1. 191.
2 • _________ ; Kuuntokai, v 3L-3 ; Nariai, . fo
39
mentioned person seems to have occupied. the highest position
among them, judging fro; the height of the terrace he occupied.
As Paranavitana has pointed out, it is interesting to note that
the person who occupied the highest seat was a ship's captain.
This may mean that the community of Tmfls who insed this terrace
was a mercantile community, possibly organized into a guild.
The two other Brhmi inscriptions, from Periya-pi4iyan.k4am in
the Vavuniy district, mention a Tm11 trader Lamed Vikha,
who owned a cave in that place In South India, at Tirupparañkuam
and Sittanaval, there are at least three Brhmi inscriptions
of about the second century B.C. mentioning householders from
Ceylon (a) The establishment of religious contacts with the
Andiira country as early as the second century A.D. is attested
to by inscriptions at Ngrjuikoa, which refer to the
foundation of a monastery called the Sh4a-vihra by monks
from Ceylon Probably Telugus from the ndhra country were in
Ceylon, too t at this time. The Mahvaipsa mentions a 'Dam.13a'
named Vauka, 'a city-carpenter in the capital', among the
paramours of Queen Anul to be raised to the throne in the
1. V, pt.2, p. 2k2.
2. C.Narayana Rao, . pp. 367, 368, 3755.
3. J.Ph.Vogel, 'Ngrjuikoa Inscriptions', E.I., XX, pp. 22, 23.
40first century B.0 Although the Mahvai1sa and the Dipavaipsa
refer to him as a Daini4a, his name suggests that he was a
Telugu, for Vauka is a term that was applied to the Telugus
by the Tamila. Probably Vauka was an artisan from ndhra-dega.
The archaeological sources provide valuable data
regarding the cultural relations between ndhradea and Ceylon
in the early centuries of the Christian era. It baa been
pointed out by Paranavitana that the majority of the early
sculptures of Ceylon bear a striking similarity to those of the
ndiira school A number of portable marble reliefs and statues,
which by their material and style belong to the ndhra school,
have been discovered in the northern parts of Ceylon, in places
like Z4aha-illuppallama, Sjgiriya, Hingurakgama, Naradnki dawe la,
Pemadu and Kuccaveli Commenting on these finds, Paranavitana
says:'
The evidence of the influence of Indhra art on that ofearly Ceylon is so overwhelming that it may be suggestedthat a branch of that school was established in Ceylonand that the sculpture on the frontispieces of the ancient______ are the work of sculptors from the Kiatna valleyor local artists trained by them. k
1. Mv., 3k:20.
2. S.Para.navitana,'Examplea of ndhra art recently found in Ceylon',
A.B.I.A., XI, pp. 15-18.
3. A.S.C.A.R. for 1952, p.2k ; A.S.C.A.R for 195k, P.5: A.S.C.A.R.
for 1956, p. 11; A.S.C.A. • for 1957, p . 2k; A.S.C.A.R. for 1955,
pp. 10,11,29
i. 'Evidence of earliest £ihhalese art', c'lon Observer, k.2.195o,p.6,
41
It is clear from the evidence that has been briefly
adduced above that before the third century A.D. close contacts
had been established between Ceylon and the Ta.xnil and Telugu
countries. But this evidence does not necessarily suggest that
there were settlements of Dravidians in the island at this time.
The question to which we have to seek an answer is whether these
early contacts between South India and Ceylon led to the rise
of permanent and widespread settlements of the Dravidiama in
the idland.
The evidence outlined above reveals that commercial
interests, political adventure and the prospect of military
employment had led Tamils and possibly some Telugus to go to
Ceylon in the early centuries of the island's history. Tamil
traders possibly established temporary settlements in the ports
and main towns. But there is no reliable evidence in our literary
or epigraphic sources to c&nclude that there were notable settle-
ments of Dravidians in the island before the third century A.D.
The Maivaisa and the late chronicle Rjvaliya contain some
references to the migration of people from the Tmi1 country
to Ceylon before the third century A.D. In the account of Vijaya,
the )ahvasa refers to the arrival of a princess, seven hundred
maidens and 'craftsmen and a thousand families' from the Pya
country This statement does not inspire any confidence in us.
1. ;55 ff.
42It is as unreliable as the many other elements that have grown,
in the course of the centuries, around the traditiofl of the
original Indo-Aryan settlements in Ceylon. It is significant
to note that the earlier chronicle, Djpavaisa, has no semblance
of this tale in its account of Vijaya. It seems to have been
included later in order to enhance the prestige of the founders
of the Sinhalese kingdom.
The Pjvaliya would have us believe that GajabThu I
(U.k-136) settled twelve thousand Tamil prisoners in the districts
of Alutktruva, Srasiyapattuva, Yainuvara, Uunu'vara, Tumpan ,
v5ha, Pansiyapattuva, Egoatiha and Megoatiha in the central
highlands The cycle of Gajabhu legends in the literature and
tradition of the Sinhalese has been discussed by scholars in
some detail and it is now agreed that, although there seems to
be some kernel of truth in the accounts regarding GajabThu's
visit to South India, many of the details are highly incredible
and improbable That GajabThu visited South India is confirmed
by the Cilappatikrani Around the tradition connected with this
event, several legends seem to have grown in the course of the
centuries. The account of the Tami]. settlements in the valiya
1. ., p. 35.
2. LC.H.C., I, pt.]., pp. 182-185 ; W.N.K.Wijetunge, . cit.
3. Cilappatikram, pp. 18, 636.
43
may form part of the later details added to the original tradition.
It is also possible that it is based on some minor Tamil settle-
ments that were established in the island in the second centuryy
or later. The second century A.D. appears to have been a period
of expansion for the Ca country. The several accounts of KariklaCa's activities reveal that Tarnil settlements were established
in the newly-cleared territories north of the Ca country,
namely in Toaimaalam It is possible that the expanding
population of the Ca country went in search of new lands and
some of them settled in the western regions of Ceylon, where
even now the few Tamil-speaking Sinhalese claim descent from
those who are supposed to have been settled by Gajabhu. These
events, or more probably later Tamil settlements, may have
given rise to the legend of the twelve thousand prisoners in
later times. With the evidence that we have now, it is not possible
to verify the account in the RLTvaliya. As it stands, however,
it is difficult to accept it as reliable.
Although the literary and epigraphic sources are
not helpful in our inquiry regarding the Dravidian settlements
of the earliest period, the evidence of archaeology has been of
much value. The earliest and perhaps the most defiaite evidence
1. V.Kankabhai, . cit., pp. 27-29 ; Pafapplai, 11. 280-28k.
44concerning any Dravidian settlement in the island prior to the
third century A.D.is provided by the megalithic urn burials
from Pontparippu, on the north-western coast of Ceylon. Partial
excavations at this site at different times during the last four
decades have uncovered several urn-burials, which have rightly
been related to the megalithic culture-complex of southern India
The niegaliths of the peninsular Inìdian region have generally
been associated with the Dravidian-speakers, who are believed
to have occupied the area in the course of the first millenium B.C.
This theory is held by most modern scholars, though there are
several points of controversy which have not been satisfactorily
solved Although the urn-burials at Pomparippu have been associated
with the South Indian complex, they have not yet been systematically
excavated, and it will be difficult to express anything conclusive
till such ah excavation is completed and the finds thoroughly
eximined.
It was in 1925 that one of the pots from the burial
site was exnii,ed for the first time by the Archaeological
Department But it was not until 1956 that a systematic, though
1. C.J.Sc. (G), I, pt. 2, pp. 51-52 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 1957, pp. 11-17,
30-31.
2. K.R.Srinivas..and N.R.Banerjee, 'Survey of South Indian Nega].itbs',
Ancient India, 9, pp. 113-114.
3. C.J.Sc. (G), I, pt. 2, p. 51.
45
by no means extensive, excavation was carried out there. In 1956
more than a dozen jars were discovered and in and around these
were smRller pots which contained skulls and other hnm,4n bones,
some of which were post-cremation remaine In the next year, nearly
fourteen urns were unearthed and these, too, contained human
bones, skulls, food and personal belongings These burials were
either fractional or secondary. Of the metal artefacts, four
are of bronze and one of iron. Some of these artefatta are ainrilar
to those discovered at the megalithic sites at Brahmagiri, in
the Kannada areas of South India Deraniyagala, who was in
charge of the 1956 excavations, has compared these with the
finds of the fourth quarter phase of the Bronze Age in the Deccan,
datable to about the third century B.C1
An examination of the material from Pomparippu
shows that it is not to the material from Brahmagiri and Chandravalli
that the Ceylonese artefacts bear the closest affinity, but to
those from the sites in the Tamil country, such as 4dichchanalltlr.
The Pomparippu site differs in one important respect from those
of Mysore and Ker4a, in that its interments belong to a class
called urn-burials and have no litbic appendage either in the
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1956 , p.i
2. A.S.C.A.R. for 1957, pp. 11-17, 30-31.
3. Ibid., pp. 16-17.
k. Ibid., p. 17.
46form of a bounding circle or dolmens and cists. Even the absence
of sarcophagi is conspicuous. Such burials have been found. in
large numbers at icIichchanal].r, in the Tinnevelly district and
are peculiar to the extreme south of the peninsula The Pomparippu
site lies closer to dichchanallr in respect of the large contents
of bronze ware, than to the sites of Mysore. But it has all the
common features that makes it representative of the megalithic
culture, namely iron implements, the wheel-turned Black-and-Red
ware and the post-excarnation fragmentary and collective burials
The large and. pyriform urns are similar to those from Adichchanallr
and Brahmagiri. Probably the people responsible for these burials
were Tamils from the neighbouring Tinnevelly district, the area
which is closest to Poniparippu. The common prevalence of such
urn-burials among the Tamils of early times is evidenced by the
aam literature as well In the light of this evidence, the
Poniparippu region could be taken as one of the earliest settlement
sites of the Dravidians, probably Tamils, in Ceylon.
The problem lies not so much in the identification
of the authors of these burials as in the determination of their
date. The South Indian sites have been dated variously from
1. K,R,Sriniyasan and N.R.Banerjee, . p. 110 ;
A.Raa, Catalogue of Prehistoric Antiquities from Adichchanallur
and Perumbair.
2. K.R.Srjnjyasan and N.R.Banerjee, p. 115.
3. K.R.Srinivaaan,'The Megalithic Burials and Urn-fields of South
India in the light of Trnnil literature and tradition', icient Thdiat.L,.. bp . q.
47the seventh century B.C. to the first and second centuries AD.
From the evidence of the añgam literature we find that such
urn-burials were in vogue in the Tamil country as late as the
second and. third centuries A.D By a closer comparison of our
artefacts with their opposite numbers in the South Indian sites
as well as on the basis of stratigraphy it is possible to arrive
at a specific date for the Pomparippu burials. But unfortunately,
the excavations at Pomparippu have not been systematically completed
nor has a comparative study been undtaken. Till these things
are done it is impossible for a non-archaeologist to pronounce
a judgment on this vital question. The Adichchanallr and Perumbair
sites in the Tinnevelly district can be dated to about the third
century E.0 Considering the fact that our artefacts bear the
closest similarity to those of the latter sites, it may not be
wrong to assign them to about the same period. Al]. that could
be said for the present is that the Poinparippu site is earlier
than the third century L.D. and. is one of the earliest settlement
sites of the Dravidiana in Ceylon. Tpking into consideration
the location of the site, near the mouth of the Kafl Oya, close
to the pearl bnkR and only a few miles south of the ancient,
1. K.R.Sriuivasan, . cit., pp. 9 U.
2. K.R.Srinivasan and N.R.Banerjee, . ., p. 113.
48
though lesser known, ports of Kutirimlai and Pa].lugatuai,
where ancient ruins are still to be seen, it is possible that
this originated as a settlement of traders as well as pearl-divers
and fishermen from the opposite coast. It is diZficult to say
whether these Dravidians continued to survive as a distinct
group till later times when Pomparippu definitely becomes k.nown
to us as a Tstmil area, or whether they were assimilated to the
local Sinhalese population before long. The proximity to as well
as the continuous relations with South India may have helped
them to maintain their ethnic identity for a long time. But
these are matters of speculation.
Another possible megalithic site is to be found
in Katiraveji, on the north-eastern coast of the island. Some
years back, Paranavitana discovered here several rude slabs
of stone, cut to some size aDid shape, scattered. about the place,
but not without some order. These stones 'lie in groups of
four or five; and there are nnm1takable signs tbat some of
them may have been set up on the ground. There is one group
which still shows the original structure' Paranavitana also
found 'other relics of hunmn occupation' On the basis of the
description of such a structure in the Paramatta-jotik, be
1. C.J.Sc.(, II, pp. 91_95.
2. Ibid., p. 95.
49
surmised that these could be 'connected with a akha
If these structures served the purpose of warship, as Paranavitana
is inclined to believe, it is unlikely that several of them were
erected in one particular site. It seems more probable that
these were sepulchral structures, similar to those found in
several parts of South India. Among the many different types
of megaliths found in that peninsula, dolmenoid cista form one
claas These are either made of dressed slabs of stone and coed
by a capstone or are constructed with rough unhewn boulders.
Such cists are found in places like Tiruvlag4u in Andhra
Pradesh and Ariyr in Nadras But almost all these have port-
holes, whereas the dolmenoid cists in Cochin do not have this
features It is possible that the cists at Katirav4i belong to
the latter class. In fact, Paranavitana states that according
to his guide there was at least one structure which had four
side-slabs and another slab at the top, only a few years before
he visited the site. Two of the side-slabs bad fallen down and
the top slab had been removed for building a temple in the
1. C.J..Sc. (G), II, p. 95.
2. K.R.Srinivasan and N.R.Banerjee, p. 105.
3. Ibid., p. 106.
if. Ibid., p. 106.
50
vicinity This means that all the other groups of stones at this
site may have originally stood in the form of dolmenoid cists.
Further, the name given to this site by the villagers, who are
Tami].s, is Kura u-paai-eutta-vnrpu ( (The region of) the
margosa tree under which the monkeys mustered). This name seems
to connect these structures with the South Indian do].menoid
date. For, in the Tamil country,the megalithic structures are
known by a remarkably similar name, Kuraiku-paaai, a corruption
of the name Kurakkuppaai, meaning 'a sepulchre or tomb lowered
into the earth' The villagers of Katirav4i, like those of
South India, believe that these stone structures mark the site
where the monkeys of Rma's army encamped before the battle with
Rvaa This is a case of popular etymàlogy based on the element
kuraiku (=monkey), the corruption of kurakku • It is possible
that the later Tamil settlers in the Katirav4i region, having
seen the remarkable similarity between the megaliths of their
South Indian homeland and these structures, used the name Kurakku-patai
or Kuraku-pataai which later became Kuraz5.ku-paai. As no
excavation was carried out at this site, it is not known whether
burials exist here, and, therefore, it is not possible to say
1. C.J.Sc. (a), II, p. 95.
2. K.LSrinivaaan, . cit., p. 9.
3. Ibid.; C.J.Sc. (G), 11, p. 95.
51
anything definite on this matter. Since the sire is on the coastal
area not far from the ancient port of Gokya, it is not impossible
that the people who erected these were traders from the Cochin
area, the dolmenoid cists of which place bear the closest similarity
to our cists. Perhaps the Katirav4i area bad a small settlement
of Dravidians some time between the third century B.C. and the
first century A.D., the period normally assigned to most of the
South Indian megaliths. It is not impossible, however, that these
structures are independent of the South Indian complex. But this
is unlikely on account of their isolated character, which goes
agint their association with some other culture—complex.
Until the ninth century, with the exception of the
megalithic remains of Pomparippu and the possible exception
of those of Katirav4i, there is no definite evidence regarding
any Dravidian settlement in the island. The P].i chronicles,
South Indian literary works, and Cey].onese and South Indian
inscriptions attest to the continuous relations between Ceylon
and South India. Between the third and the ninth century, there
were two South Indian invasions of Ceylon. The first was in A.D.529
which resulted in the rule of six Tamils at Anurdhapura for
twenty-six years The second took place in the reigm of Sena I
(833-853). On this occasion, the Pya ruler ri Na Vallabha
1. Cv., 38:11 ff. ; W.M.LWijetunge, . cit.
52
defeated the Sinhalese ruler and returned with a large booty
In the same period, at least on nine occasions, Sinhalese aspirants
to the throne went over to South India and took mercenaries to
achieve their enda
There were also close relig&àus relations between
the two regions. The Pli chronicles refer to Buddhist monks
from South India going to Ceylon and vice versa. Scholars like
Buddhadatta and Mahynists like Sagharnitta went from the Ca
country. Monks from CLAn went to the ndhra country and from
there helped to spread Buddbism In the time of the aiva revival
in the Tamil country (sixth to the ninth century), monks from
Ceylon are said to have gone there and participated in public
disputations An interesting information regarding South Indian
Buddhists in Ceylon is found in some late Telugu Jam works as
well as in two Kannada inscriptions of about the twelfth century.
The Telugu works, such as the RLj vali-kathe, Akalñka-carita
and the âkalfika-stotra, refer to an eighth-century Jam teacher,
Aka1ñka by name, from ravaa Belgola in !rsore, as having disputed
with the Buddhists of 1flci and defeated them These Buddhists,
1. 50:12 ft. ; W.M.K.Wijetunge, . cit.
2. Mv., 36: 115, 119; Iv,, p. 1f9 ; Cv., 11.Lf:?l,1.0S, 125, 152; k5:18;
117:33 ft., k6 ft. ; W.M.K.Wijetunge, . cit. ; U.C.H.C., I, pp.3O95J
3. J.Ph.Vogel, .2, cit., pp. 22, 23.lf• .-iru viai a1-pnam, pp.. W .Taylov, 1L
5. H.R.Wilson, Mackenzie Collection, I, p..Lv ; ., II, pp.k5, k6,a
53
we are told, were in consequence banished to Ceylon. The substance
of these accounts seems true, for, two Kannada inscriptions
of earlier dates also refer to the same incident. Au inscription
from Tirumak4lu-NarasIpr t1k, of A.D. 1183, alludes to1 SAkal.ka's defeat of the Buddhists, while another from Sravaa
Belgola celebrates Aka1fika or his victory at flci over the
2Buddhists who were in consequence banished to the island of Ceylon'.
Since more than one literary work and two Lt1Gr&pions record
this traditionand since the details of the account are not
intrinsically impossible, it may be allowed qualified credence.
In the cultural sphere, too, there is evidence of
close relations between South India and Ceylon in this period.sew'w.f
The influence of Pallava art and architecture onhe buildings
and sculptures of the island between the sixth and the ninth
century bears testimony to this. The land'ä Geig stands out
as a unique monument of Pallava architecture in Ceylon The well-
known Man-and-Horse's-Head and the bas-relief from Isurumuniya
as well as the dvrap1a statues at Tiriyy and the bodhisattva
figtthes from Situlpavva and Kurukk4-maam exhibit unmistakable
1. E.C., III, Inscr. No.105 from 1iruniaklu-Naras!ptr t].nk '-tl.
2. E.C., II, Inscr. No.5k from ravaa Belgola, p. k.
3. A.S.C.A.R. for 1910/11, pp. 112-50.
54influence of the Pallava school of scu1pture The use of the
Grantha script of the Pallavas in the Sanskrit inscriptions at
Tiriyy and the influence of this script on the Sinhalese script
in the seventh and eighth centuries bear further testimony to
the expansion of South Indian influence into Ceylon in the later
Anurdhapura per iod
In the context of all these relations between
Ceylon and South India a certain amount of two-way traffic in
population may be expected, too. According to some traditions in
Kerala, there was a migration from Ceylon to that part of the
subcontinent in early times and the descendants of these Sinhalese
are said to be the caste of people still known as 1avar (Sin.halese
or Ceylonese) Probably there were some settlers from Ceylon in
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1936, pp. 16-19 ; Artibus Asiae, XIX, pp. 165ff.,
335 ff. ; Indian Arts and Letters, XI, p. 28 ; U.C.H.C.,I, pt.2,
p. 403.
2. A.S.C.A.R. for 1953, pp. 21, 26 ; P.E.E.Fernando, 'Palaeographical
development of the Brhm! script in Ceylon', U.C.R., VII,pp.300-301.
3. V.Nagam Aiya, Travancore State Manual, II, pp. 398-402;
T.K.Veluppillai, Travancore State Manual, II, (19 40), pp. 14-15;
C.A.)4enon, Cochin State Manual, pp. 33, 203.
55South India in early times. In Ceylon, South Indian traders
probably established temporary settlements in the ports. The fact
that the two earliest and most renowned iva temples of Ceylon
are to be found in the ancient ports of Mahtittha and Gokaa
may point to the establishment of South Indian settlements in
these ports at an early date. The antiquity of these shrines can
be traced to about the third century A.D. The aiva Tmi-1 works
of later times, prominent among these being the Takçia-kailca-
puram and the T a-vaipava-rlai, trace their origin to
pre-Christian times Much of the material in these works, relating
to the early period, falls outside the realm of historical
probability and one has to turn to other sources for reliable
information concerning this quwation. The iva temple at Nahtittha
namely Tiru-kttvaram, appears to have been notige1 in the
Dhvaisa. According to this work, there was a temple of god at
the port of Mahtittha in the ninth year of Kitti Sin Megha (A.D.3lO)
The existence of a iva temple at Goka4a in the time of }1ahaena
(27k-301) is vouched for by the Naiivasa, which mentions the
construction by Mahsena of a vihra at Goka after the destruction
of a temple of god there The Laattha pp inI, the commentary
1. ., Tirnmalai Carukkam ; Yvm., p. 6.
2. Dahavatsa, ed. and tr. B.C.Law, p. k2.
3. ., 37:kl.
56
on the 1fahvasa, states that this temple of god was a ivaliga
teniple Probably it was the predecessor of the Kvaram temple,
about which we bear from the seventh century onwards. It i8 first
mentioned in the hymns of Taa-campantar, the aiva hymnodist of
the seventh century A.D He has also sung a hymn on Tiru-ktivarazn,
the diva temple of Mahtittba These iva temples of the island,
situated at the major ports of the Anurdhapura period, were
presumably built by South Indian aiva traders. Probably there
were temporary settlements of South Indian mercantile communities
at these places from the early centuries of the Christian era.
But it is not tin the ninth century that we get any definite
evidence of any Dravidian settlement in the island.
Considering the number of occasions when South Indian
mercenaries were enlisted, it appears bhat before the ninth century
more South Indians went to Ceylon as hired soldiers than as
traders. Most of the mercenaries went to the island in the seventh
century, when Sinhalese aspirants to the throne enlisted them
on no less than seven occasions. There is no positive evidence to
suggest that these South Indians remained behind in the island
1. Laatthana1sin!, II, (P.T,S.), p. 685.
2. Tiru-fia-canipantar Tvra Tiruppatikak4, pp. 810-812.
3. Ibid., pp. 518-520.
57
and established permanent settlements. Probably they, or most
of them, stayed behind permanently. The situation created by the
increasing numbers of Ker4a and Taniil mercenaries in the seventh
century and later is comparable with that caused by the Teutonic
federates in Britain and on the Rhine and the Danube frontiers
of the Roman empire in the fifth century A.D. The British
parallel is striking in this respect. We find that a British
king employed Saxon mercenaries from the mainland to repel the
invasions of his ememies and granted land in the eastern parts
of his kingdom for their settlement. Eventually the federates
created trouble over payment, plundered the country and asserted
their power Although the situation in Ceylon was not similar
in magnitude, it is in a similar ninner that the South Indian
mercenaries appear to have behaved on several occasions between
the seventh and the tenth century. The Cflavasa refers to
instances when the mercenaries showed no desire of returning to
their homelands, resisted to being expelled by the Simhalese
rulers, created trouble over payments, plundered the country
and at times took over power at the capital. For instance,
immediately after the death of Kassapa II (650-659), his nephew
].. R.G.Collingwood and JN.L.Myres, Roman Britain and the English
Settlements, pp. 358-359.
2. Ibid., p. 359.
58
1na 'had the Damias expel1ed' But they resisted this and
1banded themselves with the resolve: we will drive him out'
With that resolve 'they seiied the town' and it was only by
making a mock treaty with them that ?.na was able to regain
power This uneasy truce did not last long. Soon after this
a Sinhalese aspirant to the throne, Hatthadha, returned to
the island with a Tamil force and the Tamile who were already
in the island 'arose and joined him on the way as he approached'
'Hattbadha who had won over the party of the Dain4as for
himself, occupied the royal city' and ruled for some time
On an earlier occasion, T'mi-1 mercenaries of Dhopatissa I
(639-650) resorted to plunder and destruction. 'The canoes
in the Mahpli Hall he left to the Damias; (and)they burned
down the royal palace together with the Relic Teniple' In the
reign of Sena V (972-982), the Tamil mercenaries were again
in power. 'The Dam4as now plundered the whole country like
devils and pillaging, seized the property of its inhabitants'?
1. 45:11.
2. Ibid., 45:12.
3. Ibid., 45:13-16.
4. Ibid., 45:19.
5. Ibid., 45:21.
6. Ibid., 44:134.
7. Ibid., 54:5-6.
59
Not long after this, in the tenth year of Mahinda V (992),
'the Ker4as who got no pay planted themselves one with another
at the door of the royal palace, determined on force, bow in
hand, armed with swords and (other) weapons, (with the cry)
"So long as there is no pay he shall not eat" When the king fled
to Iohaa, 'Ker4as, SIh4as and K$aa carried on the government
as they pleased' Just as the Saxon mercenaries founded Teutonic
settlements in places like Kent, it appears that the Dravidian
mercenaries, namely the DamIas, Ker4as and Kaaae, founded
small settlements in Rjaraha which formed the nuclei of later
settlements. As we shall see in the sequel, the Sinhalese rulers
seem to have granted lands for the settlementsof mercenaries.
The inscriptions of the tenth century refer to Tamil allotments
and lands, which, according to Paranavitana, seem 'to have been
set apart for the maintenance of the Tamil soldiers in the king's
service' But it appears that there were Tamil allotments, lands
and villages which were not necessarily set apart for the maintenance
of TamiJ. soldiers but were places where Tamila were living
There is also some indirect evidence in the Clavasa which points
1. , 55:5-6.
2. Ibid., 55:12.
3. L . , III, p. 273.
k. Se infra, p. 71.
to the existence of minor Tamil settlements in Rjaraha in
the seventh and ninth centuries That Tamils were living scattered
here and there is hinted at in a reference in the account of
Eatthadha (68k). It is stated that when Ratthadha went to
Ceylon with an army of mercenriea from South India and marched
towards Anurdhapura, presumably from Mahtittha, 'all the Damias
who dwelt here arose and joined him on the way as he approacbed'
Evidently this is a reference to the Tamils who lived in the areas
between the port and the capital. Another reference is found
in the account of the Piya invasion during the reign of Sena I
(833-853). When the Pya ruler ri a r1 Vallabba invaded
the island and encamped at Mahtlitagma, ' many Dam4as who
/ . 2dwelt scatteredi here and there, went over to his side'. Probably
there were minor settlements of mercenary and other Dravidians
in some parts of Rjaraha from about the seventh century. A
reference in the ClaTaWsa seems to imply that many of the Tamils
in the island in the eighth century were soldiers. While recounting
the meritorious deeds of Nahinda II (777-797), the chronicle
states that he gave horses to the Dami.as 'as they would not take
cattle' This probably refers to the Tamils in the capital city,
1. k5:19.
2. Ibid,, 5O:lE.
3. Ibid., 48:lk5.
61
for, it is unlikely that Nahinda II distributed horses to the
Taxnils living in all parts of the kingdom. That these Tamils
refused cattle and acdepted horses may mean that they were not
a settled peasantry but mercenaries who had more use for horses
than for cattle. But this, however, is a flimsy evidence and
the Tamils who received horses were probably a few mercenary
leaders.
It is in the thIih and tenth centuries that we again
get any definite epigraphic and archaeological evidence, though
meagre, pointing to Dravidia.n settlemOnts. For the first time
in these centuries, Tamil inscriptions come to light and Sinhalese
inscriptions refer to Tamil lands and villages. The earliest of
the ruins of iva temples are also datable to the same period.
Several Saiva ruins, aptly termed the Tamil Ruins,
have been discovered in a section of the norbhern quarter of
Anurdhapura These ruins consist of temples and residences for
priests, with some lesser buildings scattered here and there.
Some of these are ivali.ga temples while some others are dedicated
to the mother goddess. Several stone lifigas, too, have
been unearthed in this area. Al]. the shrines are of ome design,
which is simple and reminiscent of the style of early Dravidian
temples. These have a vestibule (antaria), a middle—room (ardha-
ma4) and a sanctum (garbha-gha), and were all built of brick
1. £S.C.A.R. for 1892, p. 5 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 1893, p. 5.
62basentents These aiva ruins of Anurdhapura, according to
ParaxLavitana, belong to the 'latest period of that city's history'
The style of these temples, which is in marked contrast to the
embellished granite temples of the Ca and later ?eriods, is
undoubtedly pre-Ca and, therefore, belongs to about the ninth
century, if not earlier. This date for these ruins, or at least
for most of them, has also been cnfirmed by the Tamil inscriptions
found among them, these being the earliest known Tamil records
in the island. Two of them are dated in regna]. years of Ciii-
cañka-pti rya (Skt. Sri Sagbabodhi Mhrja) who has been
identified as Aggabodhi III (629-639) by Krishna Sastri This
identification rests on the consecration name, Sababodhi,
and on the script of the inscriptions. He seems ts have been
guided mainly by the consecration name or 'throne name', judging
from his statement: 'The writing employed in the records is
sufficiently archaic to be referred to the time of Aggabodhi III,
who according to the Ceylonese chronicle Mahvasa, was surnamed
Sin Sahabodhi' Apparently, Sastri was not aware of the fact
1. A.S.C.A.R.for 1893, p. 5.
2. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 1, p. 386.
3, S.I.I., IV, Nos, 1k03, lkOk.
li. M.E.R. for 1913, p. 103.
5. Ibid.
63
that Sin S4ghabodhi and Sil.megha were borne alternately by
Sinhalese kings as consecration names in much the same way as
Rjakari and Parakari were used by the Ca rulers. The
name rI Saghabodhi was used by several rulers from the time
of Aggabodhi II and it is not easy to identify the ruler of
our inscriptioriswith any one of them. But it is possible to
date the inscriptions on other grounds. The occurrence of the
terms kumrakaam and akkcu in these inscriptions is of some
help in this respect. The term kuxnrakaiam, referring to a group
or a corporation in the position of a board of managers or
trustees of single shnines does not occur in axy of the Tmi1
inscriptions of South India before the ninth century It appears
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 1, p. 365.
2. See _____
3. K.Kanapathi Pjllaj, A Study of the Language of the Tamil
Inscriptions of the Seventh and Eighth Centuries A.D., thesis
submitted to the University of London, 1936. Even the two early
as of South India, namely the u1ka4am and the amtagaa
find mention in the inscriptions only from te time of
Nandivarman III (8kk-866) and Aparjita (879-897) respectively,
C.Minaksbi, Administration and Social Life under the Pallavas,
pp. 130, 132.
64to have been an institution of the early Ca period. The term
(Ceylon money), referring to a particular type of cèin
of Ceylon, occurs for the first time in the inscriptions of
Parntaka I (907-955) and not earlier It is unlikely that this
term had come into use in the time of Aggabodhi III, nearly
three centuries earlier. The king mentioned in our inscriptions
is also given the title of rya (Mahrja). This is an attribute
given to Mahinda IV,(956-97a), along with the name Sri Sagbabodhi,
in the Vessagiri inscription But since the use of the title
}rya may have been indiscriminate, it is not possible to date
these inscriptions to the reign of Nahinda IV on this evidence
alone. Besides, this date may be somewhat late considering the
script of the records. Probably these belong to the ninth century.
The aiva ruins amidst which these epigrapha were found may also
be dated to the same time.
These Tamil inscriptions from Anurdhapura clearly
attest to the existence of corporate organizations among the
Tamila of Anurdhapura around the ninth century. One of the records,
dated in the fifth year of Cii-cafika-pti }Trya,, registers
1. A.Velup:pillai, A Study of the Language of the Tamil Inscriptions
of the Ninth arid Tenth Centuries, thesis submitted to the
University of Oxford, 196k.
2. I, p. 3.
65
the grant of money, amounting to thirty akkcus, for the daily
offerings and the burning of the perpetual lamp, evidently to
one of the Siva temples in the area, by the members of a kumrakaam
(kunrakaattu prrm), from the money loaned by Cki1 Cei
Caâka The other inscription, dated in the seventh year of the
same king, records the gift of the same amount of money, for the
identical purpose, by the same group, from the money given by
Ckki Ceai The phrase kumrakaattu prrm was misunderstood
by Krishna Sastri when he rendered it as 'residents of Kumrakaattta-
Pr1r' Kurakaattu-prir is certainly not the name of a village.
Prrm literally means 'we the residents of the big village' and
stands for the members of the village assemblies or corporations
in the same way as (residents of the district) and
nakarattr (residents of the town) means members of the district
assemblies and mercantile guilds of the towns respectively
Kumrakaam is a term which occurs in contemporary South Indian
inscriptions and stands for a group or corporation holding trusteeship
of single shrines refers to those villagers
1. S.1.I., IV, No. 1k03
2. Ibid., No.lkOk.
3. M.E.R. for 1913, p. 103.
k C.Minakshi, .2g. cit., p. 122.
5. K.A.Ni].knta Sastri, The cZ±, p.
66
or citizens who were members of the kunrakaam. Since these
groups were not mercantile guilds, it cannot be said that they
bad extra-territorial interests. This would mean that the I€un1rakaam
of our inscriptions was a local body without any kind of relationship
with a South Indian body. The important fact to be noticed Ia
that the Tamils settled in Anurdhapura in this time bad organizations
and institutions similar to those of their kinsmen on the mainland
and used Tamil, presumably for the first time in Ceylon, in their
donative records.
A third Tami]. inscription from the same ruins throws
further interesting light on the Tamils who lived in that area
This long but badly weathered epigraph records the building of
a Buddhist vihra by the Nñku Nu Tamia± ('The Tamils of the
Four Countries'). It is dated in the reign of Seavarma. Since
palaeographically the epigraph may be said to belong to the ninth
century, this Seavarma could be either Sena I or II (833-853
and 853-887). The 11ku Iu Tamiar of this inscription also
refer to themselves as Nku (We of the Four Countries).
It appears that they were a single body rather than a group of
Tamils from four different countries. The evidence of some of
the Kannada inscriptions shows that it is so. These inscriptions
are those left by the mercantileAcalled the AiMMTuvar and their
1. S.I.I., IV, No. 1k05.
67
associates and belong to about the twelfth and thirteenth centuries
In these inscriptions, we find references to a community called
the lku }u (Four Countries), who were among the associates
of the Aififlh1uvar. They were probably a trading community like
the lu Nakarattr (Those of the Four Cities) bit there is no
evidence on this point. The ku Nu Tamiar o Tm11- of the
Nku Nu, mentioned in our inscription from Anurdhapura, seenito have been members of the same community as the lku I4u ofthe Kannada inscriptions. It is interesting to note that this
community of Tamila erected a Buddhist temple at Anurdhapura
some time in the ninth century and named it )kktai-pai.
}kktai is an epithet that refers to the Cra or Keraja king
The fact that the Buddhist or vihra built by the TamilsWLS
of the Nku I tu, suests that they may have hailed from Kerala.
On the basis of the mounds of tile fragments and
potsherds met with all over the area of the Tamil Ruins, H.C.P.Bei].
has surmised that the TRmII community relegated to this quarter
would appear to be the caste of the potters Tt would, however,
seem rather difficult to ascertain the profession of the community
1. ., VIII, p . 89 of the text ; see infra p.-o
2. M.LR. for 1916, No.130 of 1916.
3. T.A.S., V, p. 100 fa.
4. A.S.C.A.R. for 1893, p. 5.
68
that lived in this quarter on the basie of these mounds. It is
somewhat far-fetched to suppose that the Tamils at Anurdhapura
were assigned different quarters of the city on the basis of
their castes. Further, the evidence of the above inscriptions,
revealing the presence of the ku Iu who were possibly traders,
goes against this conclusion. This area, where the ruins are all
of a religious nature, appears to have had aiva as well as
Buddhist temples which were common places of worship for the
Draidians who lived in and near the city. Although the Tami].
Ruins are concentrated in the area between the path from Jetavaxirnia
to Vijayrina and the path to Pa.k4iya from Kuctam PokuQa
scattered remains of aiva monuments have been discovered here
and there even outside these limits, but almost all in the northern
part of the city. For instance, in the area north of the Basavak4ant
tank some stone liñgas were dizcovered Near the sluice of the
same tank was discovered a stone-based Piaiyr teniple Ih the
Citadel area, the figure of a small na.ndi and the argha of a
_____ were unearthed A quarter of a mile north of the Thprma
1. LS.C.A.R. for 1892, p . 5.2. A.S.C.A.R. for 1890, p. 2.
3. Ibid., p. 3
k. A.S.C.A.R. for 1898, p. 3.
69a small Hindu temple similar to those in the Tamil Ruins was
also excavated In Vihra No.1 at Pañki4iya, there are three
inscriptions in Tamil and Grantha scripts Some of these remains
may belong to later times but generally several of them seem
to belong to the period before the Ca occupation. The consensus
of evidence from all these finds should lead us to conclude
that there was a Dravidian settlement in the northern part of
Anurdhapura.
By the time of Kassapa IV (898-91k) we get in the
Sirihalese inscriptions definite references to Tamil villages
and lands. There are three significant terms which occur in this
connection in these inscriptions. They are Dem4-kblla,
Dem4at-vlademin and Dem4-am-bim, which have been translated
as 'Tamil allotment' ,'Tamil lands' and 'Tamil villages and lands'
respectively As pointed out earlier, Paranavitana has interpreted
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1898, p. 5.
2. A.S.C.A.R. for 1892, p. k ; 5.1.1., IV, Nos. 1399, lkOO.
3. D.Lde Z.Wickramasinghe, 'Anurdhapura Slab Inscription of
Naheridra IV', E.Z., I, p. 117 ; S.Paranavitana, 'Colonibo iseum
Pillar Inscription of Kassapa IV', E.Z., III, pp. 272, 273;
'Polonxiaruya Council Chamber Inscription of Abhaya Sa1mevan',
IV, p. 36 ; 'Girital Pillar Inscription of Udaya III',
III, p. 1k3.
70
the term Dem4-kblla to mean 'an allotment of land in a village,
set apart for the Tamils'. In his o4nion, they seem 'to have
been set apart for the maintenance of Tamil soldiers in the
king's service and must have been administered by royal officers'
On an examination of the different occurrences of this term in
the published inscriptions, it appears that the abpve interpretation
does not always yield a satisfactory meaning. It is difficult
to arrive at the exact meaning of this term; it appears to be
an allotment of land enjoying privileges different from those
of lands classified as paniunu But certainly it is not always
an allotment from the royal household. For instance, in the
Polonnaruva Council Chamber inscription, a Tamil allotment occurs
as the private property of an individual In this record the
allotment was granted immunities as a pamunu on condition of
paying annual'y oie pla of dried ginger to a hospital. There
is no reference in this record, or for that matter in any of the
records where the term Dem4-kbfla occurs, to any share of the
revenue being allocated for the maintenance of the Tamil soldiers.
., III, p. 273.
2. A pamunu was 'an estate possessed in perpetuity by a family
in hereditary succession, or by an institution like a monastery
pr a hospital', U.C.H.C.., I, pt. 1, p. 375.
3. ., IV, p. 36.
71
It is, therefore, clear that a Dernej-kbUa did not always
denote an allotment from the royal household nor was it necessarily
set apart for the maintenance of Tamil soldiers. It could only
mean an allotment in a village where Tamils lived, presumably
separated from the others. Some other references in the inscriptions
seem to lend support to this interpretation. In the Rjarnigva
inscription of }lahinda IV (956-972) it is recorded that certain
immunities were granted to the village of Kiigama The piralkkam,
who appear to have been a class of officials, were granted
certain privileges in Dem4-kiigam but not in Kiigarna. It is
clear from the context that Dem4-kiigam was not far away
from Kiigama. Deme.-kiigam (Tamil Kiigam) appears to have
been a Tmil sector which was originally part of the village of
Kiigama. This probably is an example of a Deme-kb].la. The
Colombo Museum Pillar inscription refers to an officier called
Deme-adhikra, who was presumably in charge of matters concerning
Tamils, or more probably Tamil mercenaries, for, as Paranavitana
has remarked, it is. when the edicts are concerned with the Tamil
allotments that this official takes a part in the promulgation
of edicts It is unlikely that it is one of the titles that were
1. II, I,56.
2. E.Z., III, pp. 272, 27k ; U.C.H.C., I, pt. 1, p. 372.
72conferred on certain officiala of the kingdom. In the time of
ParkraniabJiu I (1153-1186) we come across at least two officials
who were known as Damiadhikrins. The ciava4sa refers to Dmf-.
dhikrin Rakkha who was a comm8nder in ParkramabThu's army
The Galapta-vihra rock inscription, which is sometimes held
to be of the time of Parkramabhu II but appears to belong to
the reign of Parramabhu I, mentions Dem4a-adhikra Kahaibalk4u
J4indaln, held to be probably identical. with Nagaragiri or Nagaraga.11a
Nahinda of the Clavasa, who was one of the military comm'nders
o Parkramabhu I From the last two occurrences of this title
or designation, Dem4a-adhikra or Damidhikrin seems to have
been a term applied to a military officer. Probably be was in
charge of the Tamil mercenary forces and was, therefore, known
as Dem4a-adhikra (Tamil official or authority). Probably the
Dem4a-adhikra mentioned in the tenth century Colombo Museum
Pillar inscription was also an official commanding the Tamil
mercenary forces. His participation in the promulgation of edicts
concerning Tamil allotments was probably due to the reason that
these Tamil allotments were places where Tamil mercenaries had
settled down. The presence of Tamil settlers in some of the villages
of Rjaraha in the ninth and tenth centuries is also evidenced
by the term Dem4e-kuli which occurs in some of the Sinhalese
1. 2. 75:20, 69, 74.
2. LZ., IV, p. 208 ; tJ.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. 488.
73
inscriptions of that time. This term occurs always with the
term B4e-ki4i. Wickrainasinghe translated the terms as 'Tamil
coolies' and 'Sinhalese coolies' respectively but Paranavitana
has rightly rendered them as two types of imposts levied from
Tamils and Sinhalese respectively It seems clear from the context
that these refer to some kind of tax and not to people. It is
a very probable conjecture that the foreign settlers had to pay
imposts different from those paid by the Sinhalese. It is not
always that these two terms occur when a reference is made to
imposta. For example, in the case of the immunities granted in
respect of the village of Kiigaina, mentioned earlier, the term
k$i (impost) occurs without the epithet Dem4e (Tamil) or
H4e (Sinhalese) We have seen earlier that there was another
village called Dem4-kiigam, which was probably a Tarnil allotment
in Kiigama Since Dem4-ld4igazn was treated as a separate
village, there was apparently no need to qualify the term ku
with Dem4e and Here in respect of the immunities granted to
KiQigama. This may suggest that the two distinct types of k4!
were mentioned in the immunity grants only in regard to villages
where both Tanhils and Sinhalese were living. On the basis of this
1. . ,I, pp. 170, 175.
2.LZ., IV, p. 511,fn. 6.3. !'' II, p. 6.
k. See supr,p.'I.
.74body of indirect evidence, it may not be wrong to conclude that
in the ninth and tenth centuries there were Tamils living in
separate allotments in some Sinhalese villages and that such
an allotment was known as a Deme-kbtlla. There seems t-e- he
to have been such allotments in royal as well as pmivate villages.
Similarly, the term Demea-v!lademin (lands enjoyed
by Tm11s) 1also appears to refer to the lands that were owned
by Tm11s This phrase occurs in the Giritale Pillar inscription
of Udaya III (935-936). The Anurdhapura Slab inscription of
Mahinda IV (956-972) lays down that '(the produce) of trees and
shrubs which exist ...... in the Tamil villages and lands
(Dem4 gam-bim) (situated) in the four directions shall be appropriated
in accordance with former custom' Bere the phrase 'Tamil villages
and lands' evidently refers to the villages and lands where
Tamils had settled. As mentioned before, the Clava111sa also
refers to Tanii].s living here and there in Rjaraffha The place-
name evidence relating to Dravidian settlements in this period
is negligible. Besides Dem4-ki4igam, there is another place-name
with the element Deme occurring in the Ayitigvva inscription
1. I am indebted to R.A.L.H.Gunawardena for explaining this term to me.
2. E.Z., III, pp. 139, lk3.
3. LZ. , I, p. 117.
k. See supra, p. co•
75
of Kassapa IV (898-9lk) The Ku ur_,1'an-d m ina Pillar inscription
of the same monarch refers to a place called Kera].gama which
may have been a place where Ker4a settlers were found
The foregoing evidence of the Sinhalese inscriptions
and the Clavasa is far too scant; and vague that it is difficult
to arrive at definite conclusions regarding Dravidian settlements
outside Anurdhapura in the ninth and. tenth centuries. These
evidences certainly point to the presence of some Tamil settlers
in the villages not far from Anurdhapura. It is interesting to
note that Tamil inscriptions of the eleventh century have been
discovered within a few miles of the Dem4-kbllas and Deme-gam-bim
mentioned in the Sinhalese inscriptions This fact may not be
purely coincidental but may be a pointer in the same direction,
namely that these allotments and lands had settlements of Tamils.
These settlements were probably sm'11 and embryonic.
To sum up the evidence so far discussed, we have
in the first place references in the chronicles to the presence
of Tamil traders, invaders and mercenaries in the island from
abont the second century B.C. There is no evidence, however, to
].. E.Z., II, p, 38. IL S )te t.. !j.. fiti..y.'•
2. Ibid., pp. 22-23. The reading of this name is tentative for
the inscription is damaged at this point.
3. See map at the end of the thesis.
76
suggest that there were Dravidian settlements either in the
pre-Christian period or in the early centuries of the Christian
era, On the contrary, the general impression given by the Pli
chronicles is that the Tamils were foreign to Ceylon. Their
usurpations and unpleasant intrusions are not always dealt with
favourably. We have the evidence of three Brhm! cave inscriptions,
datable to the second or first century B.C., for the presence of
Tamils, presumably traders, in the island. But here, too, the
impression given by the inscriptions is that these Tamils were
foreigners. Although the inscriptions were set up by Taniils, whose
names are mentioned in them, the language of these records is
Proto-Sinhalese as in the case of all the other inscriptions
of the island at this time. But more important than this is that
the recorders have described themselves as Tamils, which would
indicate that they considered themselves to be distinct from, if
not alien to, the general population, just as much as the Sixihalese
donors in the pre-Christian cave inscriptions of the Tami]. country
made known the fact that they were Sinhalese householders
kuunipikan = Skt. Sifih4a kuumbikrini) In later times, too,
we get instances of Tamils, who made grants to temples outside
the Tamil country, recording them in the language of the arbut
1. Mu., 25:110; Cv., 38:35-37.
2. C.Narayana Rao, . cit., pp. 367, 368, 375.
77
niking mention of the fact that they were Tamils There is,
therefore, no epigraphic evidence suggesting the existence
of Tainil or other Dravidian settlements in Ceylon in the period
before the ninth century. It is only the archaeological evidence
that points to the existence of a Dravidian settlement at Pomparippu
and possibly another at Katirav4i, between about the second
century B.C. and the third century A.D.After this there is a
long gap till we reach the seventh century, when we get some
flimsy evidence that points to possible Tamil settlements in
the island. According to the Pli chronicle, bands of Tamil
mercenaries were taken to the island at least on seven occasions
in the seventh century. It also contains vague references to
Taniils living in some parts of Rja.taha. Certain prominent
Tamils, in possession of villages and tnk, also find meution
In the contemporary Tamil works of South India, there are references
to iva temples at the ports of Gokaa and Mahtittha which
were venerated by Taniils. However, it could not be claimed that
there is any definite evidence relating to Tamil settlements in
the seventh century. It is only in the ninth and tenth centuries
that we get such evidence in the Sinhalese and Tainil inscriptions
in the archaeological sources and to an extent in the Pli
1. E. g,, LE.P. for 189k, No. 18k of 1893.
2. Cv., 146:l92k.
7r
chronicle. That by the tenth century permanent Dravidian settle ents
had begun in the island is fairly clearly borne out by these
SOurces. On the basis of this meagre evidence that is available,
we have to conclude that there were no notable Dravidian settlements
of a widespread nature before the ninth century. The settlement
at Pomparippu and the possible settle ent at Katirav4i have to
be treated as isolated earlier settlements. These are comparable
to the earliest Saxon settlements in Britain, at places like
Dorchester, where the Teutonic artefacts are so early that they
are not sometimes considered to belong to the period of Saxon
settlement at all The burials at Pomparippu apart, the evidence
as a whole does not warrant the assumption of a date earlier
than the ninth century for the beginning of permanent and distinct
Dravidian settlements in Ceylon. Before that century, there was
intercourse between South India and Ceylon in the commercial,
political, cultural and religious spheres in the wake of which
some Dravidians went over to the island and possibly settled
down there. Probably there were some mercenary settlers, too,
from about the seventh century. Many of them may have been assimilated
to the Sinhalese population before long.
Besides the absence of positive evidence, there are
also other considerations which lead us to think that Dravidian
settlements worthy of the name were not founded before the ninth
1. R.G.Co].lingwood and J.N.L.Myres, . cit., p. 39k.
79
century. As we shall see later, the evidence of the literary
and epigraphic sèurces indicates that the present-day Tamil
areas were then settled by Sinhalese people. The evidence of
place-names, too, supportithis conclusion. A number of Simhalese
inscriptions of this period have been discovered in the Maar,
Vavuniy, Trimoomalee and Batticaloa districts, where Dravidian
settlements were found in the thirteenth century. Some of these
inscriptions provide us with the earlier Sinhalese names of villages
and tanks which now bear Taniil names. For instance, the Mar
Kaccri Pillar inscription of about the ninth century mentions
the villages of 'Pepodatua, Kumbalhala,and Tumpokon, situated
in the Kuakadavuk division of the Northern Coast', presumably
close to Kahtittha, where the record was found The Sinhalese
name of Alaricca for the raperiyak4am tank occurs in an
inscription of GajabThu I (1l11._136), from the same place The
Sinhalese name for Kurunta-k$am, in the Northern Province, a
appears as Kuruñgama in an inscription of l4ahinda III (801-80k)
from that vi1lage In this last name, the derivation of the Tm11
form from the Sinhalese is clearly evident. Besides,these
considerations, it is also worth noting that the Tamils of South
1. ., III, p. 105. $e1?'
2. A.S.C.A.R. for 1905, p. k3.
3. Ibid.
80
India did not consider Ceylon as a Ta.mil-speaking region till
very late times. In their early demarcation of the 'good Tamil-
speaking world' (Tamiu-nal-ulakam), the omission of Ceylon
is conspicuous We may, therefore, conclude that evidence for
extensive or permanent Dravidi-an settlements bearing the signs
of a date earlier than the ninth century is definitely absent.
Permanent settlements of the Dravidians probably
began by about the ninth century. Before the eleventh century
these were by no means extensive. There were Tamils and possibly
Ker4as and Karas settled in the northern quarter of Anurdh
pure. after the ninth century. Outside the capital city Tmi1,
and probably other Dravidian, settlers were found scattered
in some of the villages of Rjaraha. It is not possible to
locate all these villages with the evidence at our disposal.
The Dem4-k1b11a referred to in the Colombo Museum Pillar inscrip-
tion is stated in that record to have been situated in 'Gaagami,
a revenue(village) of Valvii in the Northern Province'
Unfortunately, neither Gaagami nor Valvii admits of any
identification.Since the provenance of the record is also unknown,
not even a rough location is possible. Since the village was in
the Northern Province of the kingdom, it is to be located somewhere
north of Anurdhapura. The Deme-k lla mentioned in the Polonnaruva
1. See supra,
2. ., III, p. 276.
81
Council Chamber inscription is identifiable. This al].Qn1ent,
according to the inscription, was in the village of Kogm,
in the district adjoining Mahara, in the province of Gin-
vaiunn-danaviya Nicholas has identified this village with
the present Kogan-vela, in }tal Eaet In the Giritale Pillar
inscription of Udaya III some Tamil lands are stated to have
been situated in the Panisk4iya district of the Eastern
Province This Parisk$iya district, according to the identifi-
cation of Nicholas, extended over the Giritale areas Dem4in-
heihaya of the Ayitigvva inscription has been identified by
Nicholas with the present Ayit1gv!va, in the flurulu division
of the Anurdhapura distnict It has not been possible to identify
Dem4-ki4igam mentioned in the R jmigva inscription of
Nahinda IV. According to the inscription, this place was in the
Eastern Province Probably it was situated somewhere in the
region east of Anurdhapura. There is a KiLigama to the south-
east of Anurdhapura but it is rather difficult to identify this
1. E.Z., IV, p. 36.
2. C.W.Nicholas, . cit., p. 3k.
3. E.Z., III, p . 139.
1, C.W.Nicholas, p. 18k.
5. E.Z., II, p. 38 ; C..Nicholas, p. 168.
6. E.Z., Ii i p. 56.
82
b4 with the Xi4igani of the above inscription, for, the mo&ern
Kiigama seems to fail outside the limits of the ancient Eastern
Province. The village named Kerellgama in the Kuurumahan-dmna
Pillar inscription was in the district of Valapu, in the Western
Province of the Anurdhapura 1cingdoni It baa not been possible
to identify this village exactly. Since the provenance of the
inscription is 14al1iinau, in the Vilpattu National Park, which
lies in the area of the ancient Western Province, we have to seek
the ancient Kerelgama soniewere in that region. The ripixuiiyva
and RabUva inscriptions of the time of Sena II (853-887) refer
to the impost, Dem4e-ku2, in connection with the villages of
Posonavull and Gliduru-gomaala, which have been identified
as !ripinniyva and RaMblva respectively The Vihrgama Pillar
inscription of Kassapa IV also refers to Deme in connegtion
with another village, the name of which is not preserved Another
inscription of Kassapa IV, mentioning Dem4e-kulI comes from
Sgiriya
The nature of these possible Tamil settlements and
the strength of the Tamil population in the island caxu.ot be
determined with the help of the meagre evidence available to us.
1. E.Z., II , pp. 22-23.
2. E.Z., 1 pp. 167, 175 ; C.W.Nicholas, p. 169.
3. E.Z, IV, p. 52.
k. A.S.C.A.R. for 1911/12, p. 108.
83
It appears that the Tainil settlers were found scattered in
different villages and probably there was no single area which
was peopled entirely by Dravidians. Many of the settlers may
have been mercenaries who were taken to the island froa time
to time by Sinha].eae princes. All that could be said with some
amount of certainty is that the ninth and tenth centuries saw
the beginnings of the Dravidian settlements which covered several
parts of the northern half of the island in the eleventh, twelfth
and thirteenth centuries.
84CHAPTER II
SL'rTLENTS IN THE PERIOD OF CLL CCC TJPAT ION (c • 993-1070)
The period of some two centuries that lies between
the fall of Anurdhapura and the collapse of Polonnaruva has
long been recognized as one of very close political, cultural
and social intercourse between South India and Ceylon. The events
of this period, it may not be wrong to claim, led to some of
the far-reaching changes that took place in the history of the
island in the thirtbenth century. These changes determined the
course of the future history of the island in many ways. But the
two main results were undoubtedly the drift of Sinhalese political
power from Rjara to the south-west and the rise of Tm{1
power in the northernmost regions of the country. The events
leading to these dramatic changes may be said to begin at the
turn of the tenth century with the Ca occupation For the
first time a large part of Ceylon became a province of a TRm41
empire, and this naturally drew the island into the arena of
South Indian politics and opened the way to the influence of
South India and the influx of the Dravidian people into Ceylon.
1. See W.LK.Wijetunge, The Rise and Decline of Ca Power in Ceylon,
thesis submitted to the University of London, 1962.
85
The history of the Ca occupation of Ceylon has
been critically examined by W.X.K.Wijetunge in a thesis submitted
to the University of London in 1962. It is, therefore, not our
intention to deal here with the Ca conquest which was begun by
Rjarja I in c.992/993 and completed by Rjndra I in 1017. In
this chapter, we shall confine ourselves to a discussion of the
Dravidian settlements that were established in the period of
the CN1a occupation.
Although it is possible to argue that the transformation
of northern and a part of eastern Ceylon into Tamil-speRking
areas must have been well under way by the time of the foundation
of the independent Tamil kingdom of Jaffna in the thirteenth
century and that this process must have begun at least a century
or two before the latter event, it is not so easy to trace the
course of the Dravidian occupation of these areas. The settlements
of the Dravidians in the eleventh and twelfth centuries cannot
be told as a na*rative with the materials at our disposal. We
can only attempt to seek an answer to some of the important
questions concerning their migration and settlement. Was there
any large-scale migration of Dravidians in the period of Ca
rule 2 What was the nature and extent of some of the settlements
indicated by the inscriptional and archaeological materials 9
It may not be possible to set out on our inquiry with the hope
of arriving at the whole truth, but at least we may be able to
86
arrive at more than what has been known so far.
The first problem that confronts us in examining
the course of the Dravidian settlements in this period is the
question of whether there was a migration of South Indians into
the island in the wake of the C 1a conquest. Of the different
kinds of evidence that lie before us, that of the literary
sources is not of much help to opr inquiry. The only literary
works that contain any notable references to the Ca conquest
are the PV.i ClavaU1sa and the Sinha.lese Pjvaliya and RLvaliya.
No notice of the occupation of the island is found in any of
the contenrporary Tamil works of South India, apart from the
incidental allusions to the conquest in such works as the
Kaliñkattu-parai The Tami]. chronicles of Ceylon, written in
much later times, strangely enough do not preserve even the
memory of the Ca conquest of the eleventh century. The names
of such C 1a conquerors as Rjarja and Rljndra are not even
mentioned in these sources. Such works have little claim on
our confidence for the history of Tam11 settlements in the eleventh
or earlier centuries.
The account of the C!lavqsa is by far the most
important literary source for the history of the period of CN1a
1. Xaliñkattu-parai, v. 6k.
87
rule. Four of its chapters have been devoted to the events of
this period and these have been written not very long after
the time of the foreign occupation But despite this distinct
value, it is of little use in our inquiry. The author of this
section of the Pli chronicle, while relating the untold dpmages
wrought by the C]as and denouncing their wickedness, does not
interest himself in the affairs of the Ca administration or
in those of the Tamils and Sinhalese in the Ca domains. The
subject of his history is the resistance organized by some
Rohaa princes. Of these princes, VijayabThu, the final liberator
of the country from the C 1a yoke, is chosen as the hero of this
section of the chronicle. The conquest of the island and the
desecration of the monasteries by the invaders are dismissed
in a dozen verses in the chapter entitled 'The Pillage of _____
After these, any reference to the Caa is made only in connection
with the resistance that was carried on against them. Repeated
references are made to the hordes of Taini]. invaders who were
taken to the island to suppress rebeliions In short, it is an
account of the miseries wrought by the Cas and of the bitter
1. Cv., 55-58.
2. Ibid., 55:13-25.
3. Ibid., 55:25 ; 58:1k ; 58:25.
88
struggle that went on between the patriotic Sinhalese rebels and
the ruthless £oeign invaders. The traditions concerning the
areas uhder foreign rule may have been considered irrelevant
to the purpose of the author. But it is more likely that the
author was depending on records which were preserved in the
south of the island and which, therefore, did not contain any
information regarding the goings-on in the districts contrèlled
by the Cas. All that we can positively gather from the P12i
chronicle is that Tamil armies were sent to Ceylon at frequent
intervals and that they were stationed in different parts of
Ceylon. Whether there were Dravidians, other than these soldiers,
who went over to the island at this time is a question that
cannot be answered with the the help of the Ctflavqisa.
In the Clavaisa account of the final campaign of
Vijayabhu against the Caa, some of their strongholds in
D2kkhiadesa and in the eastern part of the island are named.
It was after the subjugation of these places that the Sinhalese
commanders sent word to VijayabThu to join them at Poloxuiaruva
The strongholds in D2kk(iadesa are given as Muhunnaru (Ruvar2k1),
Badalatthala (Batalagola), Vpinagara (VEziaru), Tilagulla (Talagall-
.1a), Nalilgalla (Ngalla or Nikavrai), NaagaUa (Mahamaagalla)
1. .2z. 58:k6.
89
and Buddhag.ma (I nikdea) Of thãse in the east only Chagrna
(Sikãxnain) is mentioned by name It is not known from the
Clavasa whether there were any Tamil settlements in these
Ca strongholds. Evidently there were many Ca troops stationedat these places and possibly some of them settled down there.
Although the evidence of the C1tTlavasa is rather flimsy for
such a speculation, there are other considerations which support
it. The discovery of Tamil inscriptions of the twelfth century
and the occurrence of place-names denoting Taniil settlements
in or not far from most of the C]a strongholds mentioned above
suggest that there may have been Tamil settlers in and around
the Ca strongholds in the eleventh century
The Cflavaisa claims that 'all the warlike, valiant
Co.as who were to be found here and there, gathered together
in Pulatthinagara' on the óe èf the final debacle, and that
the army of Vijayabhu, when it triumpahntly entered the city,
'at once exterminated a].]. the Damias root and branch' The
statement that all the Temils who lived in Polonnaruva during
the C]a rule were annihilated is obviously an exaggeration.
1. 58:k2-k5.
2. Ibid., .$.C.
3.See infra,
'I. 58:51, 56.
90
That Vijayablhu did not have any animosity against the Tamils
but was only fighting the C 1as is borne out by ample evidence.
The employment of the Vaikkras, some of whom. may have been
1 2erstwhile mercenaries of the Cas, his patronage of Saiva temples,
and his political and matrimonial alliance witb the PIyas3
show that Vijayabhu did not harbour any grievances against the
Tamils. The evidence of the Abagamuva inscription that he
'drove away the whole darkness of the Dam4a forces' appears to
be closer to the truth than the Clavasa statements The PfliC.PiCtPVi
chronicle has, therefore, no valuable inforniation,<Tam.il settlers
in the island during the Ca occupation.
The and the fljvaliya, while mentioning
the Ca occupation, give no details regarding the period of foreign
rule. They continue the chronicle of the Sinhalese kings
withoub a break by filling in the period of Ca rule with the
account of the Rohaa rulers. They repEat with greater brevity
the story of the destruction wrought by the foreigners The
Nikya-sagrahaya and. the Saddharma-ratnkaraya also contain
].. See infra, ; U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, pp. k33-kkk.
2, See infra, p. r$
; U.C.E.C., I, pt. 2 , p. 563.
3, U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. k29.
k. D.Lde Z.Wickramasinghe, 'Abagamuva Inscription of VijayabThu I',
II, p. 216.
5. Pv., p. 10k; ., p. k2.
91
notices of this period. The former refers to the presence of
'the great multitude of Tamils in the villages, market towns and
all over the kingdom' ( gam niyafigam rjadini pur un Dem4a maha
senaga) 1 but it goes a step further than the Clavasa by stating
that all these Tamils were destroyed by Vijayablhu. The reference
to the presence of Tamils in the market towns is notable, for
we learn from the Tamil inscriptions of the period that there
were is (money-lenders) and traders of Tamil origin in some
of the places, presumably market towns, outside Polonnaruva
The surprising brevity with which the Sinhalese chronicles deal
with the C]a rule may be partly due to the paucity of records
relating to that period.
The above isolated and vague statements in the
literary sources provide no sure guidance to the nature and
extent of the migration and settlements of South Indians in the
island. These sources have omitted much that is wanting and,
in the absehce of any valuable guidance from them, we are
thrown back upon the evidence of other sources. The Tmi1-
inscriptions and the aiva and Vaiçava archaeelogical remains
provide better and more reliable information, though it is by
no means adequate for our purpose. For the first time an unusually
1, p. 20.
2. See infra, p.1oc
92
large number of Tamil inscriptions, more than three dozen
compared with only three for the period before the tenth century,
were set up in different parts of northern Ceylon during the
Ca rule. Their sudden appearance could be explained easily
if they are official records. But the interesting fact is that
not a single one Is official, although several of them appear
to have been set up by Ca officials in their private capacity.
The sudden appearance of so many Tamil epigraphs presupposes
the presence of more Tamils in Rjaraha than before. Such an
impression seems to be confirmed by the internal evidence of
the inscriptions as well. Unfortunately these epigraphe, almost
all of which register private grants to temples, do not, by
their very nature, contribute very much to our inquiry. Some
are extremely brief while some others are badly damaged.
However, they indicate the probable areas of settlement and,
in some cases, the nature of the settlement. They range from
the time of Rjarja I (985_bill.) to that of Adhirjndra I
(1067/68-1070) and, therefore, cover the whole period of Ca
rule.
Tearly a third of these inscriptions comes from
Pobonnaruva, which was renamed JaanItha-maág4am by the Cas
1. It is not possible to give the exact figure of the inscriptions
as the find spots of a number of these in the museums of CoLombo
and Anurdhapura are not known, although, judging from the
contents, some of them appear to have come from Pobonnaruwa.
93
Most of these are from the Siva Dvles Nos.II and V and from
the VaadEge. Of these, at least two belong to the reign of
RJndra I, but unfortunately only a portion of the historical
introduction (praasti) has survived in these Two inscriptions
of the time of AdhrJndra I, beginning with the familiar
historical introduction of Tik4r malarutu, are in a better
state of preservation. They are both inscribed on the walls of
iva Dvile No.11. One of these, dated in the third year of
the king (1070), is a long record registering the grant of a
perpetual lamp and some money for its maintenance by ......
Cra Ti...ya alias Eta.....koa Cappa1lavaraiya, a
Ve 4a of Mank4appi in Vir.pectu-nu, in the kfam (district)
of Tak....... in c mçaiani The title Eta......koa (Victor
of Eta......) and the name Cappallavaraiya suggest that the
donor was an official in the Ca administration who had dis-
tinguished himself in battle by taking (koa) some place. The
grant was made to the temple of VIava-w1tvi-jharam, the
present Siva Dvle No.11. The names of nearly twelve temple
officials, including those of the officiating Brhmaa, are
given in the inscription. These officials and their successors
1. S.I.I., IV, Nos. 1389 and 139k
2. Ibid., No. 1388.
94
as well as the pariyclrakar, the supervisors of the parnayvarar,
the nr and the tvar4iyr are held reBpOflsible for the
maintenance of this gift. The terms pariycrakar and yvarar
refer to the temple attendants and the company of aiva devotees
respectively is a term used in the South Indian inscriptions
of this period to refer to the members of the district assembly
(nu). Its occurrence here seems to reveal the organization
of the local assemblies on the lines of the South Indian
institutions. The term tvaraçiyr also occurs in the contemporary
South Indian inscriptions as well as in another Tamil inscription
in Ceylon and refers to temple dancers, commonly known as
dvadsis The institution of the temple dancers appears to have
been introduced into the island by the The evidence of
the Tami1 inscriptions from Polonnaruva, therefore, shows that
at least some of the aiva temples in Ceylon were organized in
much the same way as the temples of South India during the
period of Ca occupation.
The other inscription of the time of MhirIjndra,
from Polonnaruva, contains the whole of a praasti and registers
the grant of a lamp, ULt the donor's npme and the regnal year of
1. Both occur in contemporary Ca e igraphs of South India.
2. E.Z., IV, p. 195.
3. Cf., U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. klk.
95
the king are missing All the other inscriptions from Polonnaruva
are undated and have to be assigned to the Ca period purely
on palaeographical grounds. Two of these, which are fragmentary,
refer to the gods and Aakiya
Maav1ar (Viu) Four others inscribed on the pillars of
iva Dv1e No.V contain the following names: (a) Tiruppvaa-
Uaiy of Zkair, (b) Tillaikkaracu Tiyka-cintznai
vnta-vi, (c) Karpakam, daughter of Mukari-ntv and
(d) Paflca-neti-va, Uaiy of Nallr These persons seem
to have been responsible in some way for the building of the
temple now known as iva Dvle No.V. Such titles as }vnta-v,
vä and TJtaiy, borne by some of these persons, occur in
the South Indian inscriptions as the titles of C 1a officials
This indicates that all the persons mentioned aboveç except the
woman Karpakam, were officials. It is not certain whether the
village kar and Naillir, which were assigned to two of them,
were in Ceylon or in South India. Since the officials were
serving in Ceylon, these may have been Ceylonese villages. Na11r
is a common village name in the Tamil country. There are at
least four places in Ceylon with that name. One is in the Jaffna
1. S.I.I., IV, No.1392.
2. Ibid., Nos. 1390 and 1391.
3. Ibid., No. 1393.
k. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, p. k6k.
96
peninsula and three are in the Kurungala district Pafica-neti-.
mwntioned in the above inscription, may have been the
uaiyg of any one of these places, probably one of the villages
in the Kurungala district, for, according to the C'flavqmsa, the
Cas had several strongholds in that district
Of the other C,a inscriptions from Polonnaruva,
there are two gragmentary inscriptions which record the gift
of a large number of cows. One is from Siva Dvle No.11. It
records the gift o one hundred and fourteen cows to the temple
of the 'Lord of Jaanitha-puram alias Pulainari' (Vava-mtvi-
ivaram) The other is found engraved on the flight of steps
at the Vaadge. It registers the gift of a certain measure of
ghee and thirty cows Unfortunately the names of the donors are
not preserved in these two epigrapbs. An interesting aspect of
the iva Dvfle inscription is the occurrence of the toponymn
Pula.jnarj. This shows that the Tamilised form of the Sinhalese
Polonnaru was used side by side with the new C3a name of
Jaantha-puram or Jaantha-mañg4am, as in the case of other
like Nahtittha and Velgama where Tamils were living
1. There was also a place called Vikrama-p.iya Nal].r, see infra,p.2,,
2. See supra, p. gf.
3. A.S.C.A.R. for 1909, P . 27.
14 S•I••, IV, No. 1395.
5. See infra, p.
97
A few other short epigraphe of little or no value
also come from the city and the vicinity of Polonnaruva. One
such inscription is engraved on a bell found in Siva DvIle No.VI
and has the name of SrT 4piai Perum alias Ton ......, the
donor. Palaeographically, it has been assigned to the Ca
period Another, registering the grant of Adhikaraia Craa,,
a 'Vaikkra of the )u-kai division, comes from Ga]. Oya,
near Polonnaruva The title Adhikaraa may suggest that the
donor was an administrative officer among the Vaikkras.
An analysis of these inscriptions from Polonnaruva
and its surroundings reveals that almost all those in which the
donors' names are preserved are grants by persons who may have
been C,a officials. This perhaps explains the occurrence of
many Tam!]. inscriptions in this region. Since Polonnaruva was
the capital of the island under the Cas, several officilas
from the C]a country were presumably stationed there. The
occurrence of several Tam!]. inscriptions here may not necessarily
indicate the presence of many Tamil settlers. The absence of
grants by traders is rather surprising, for one would normally
expect them to figure prominently among the donors of grants to
temples. There is no evidence in our inscriptions of the existence
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1908, p. 15.
2. S.I.I,, IV, No. 1398.
98
of a 6trong civilian population of South Indian extraction in
and around Polonnaruva. Nevertheless, the organization of some
of the Ca temples at Polonnaruva on the lines of those of
South India suggests that these temples catered for the interests
of more than a handful of Ca officials and some troops. There
may have been peaceful Tamil settlers, too, in the city during
the Ca occupation.
Outside Polonnaruva, Periyak4am in the Trincomalee
district has yielded the largest nuber of C1a inscriptions.
More than a dozen Tamil inscriptions of this period have been
found at the site of the well-known Rjarija-perum-p4i or
Velgzn-vehera at Periyak4am. The Rjarja-perum-p4.i is an
interesting example, and perhaps the only one, of a Sinhalese
Buddhist vihra being converted into a Tamil Buddhist
after the C 1a conquest. The existence of a Buddhist vihra
at this site as early as the second century A.D. is known from
an inscription of the time of Bhika Tissa in one of the caves
near the present The old Sinhalese name of this pflwas Velgain-vehera, which is also given in the Tami]. inscriptions
along with the Tamil na*e of Rjarja-perum-pai.
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 195k, p. 1k; the occurrence of a brick with
BrhmT letters at this site seems to place the origina.].
foundation of the stipa here in the pre-Christian times (ibid., p.13:
99
The fragmentary nature of moat of the inscriptions
from this site deprives them of much value. The little that is
recoverable front them, however, seems to indicate the presence
of Tamil settlers of Buddhist faith in the Periyak4am region.
The conversion of the old vihra into a Tamil pfli apparentlytook place in the reign of Rjarja I (985-101k) or immediately
after that, for the has been named after this monarch.
The Zinhalese origin of the vihra is clearly indicated by the
use of the Sinhalese name along with the Tamil name in the
inscriptions. The absence of Tamil inscriptions of a date prior
to the eleventh century and the occurrence of Sinhalese inscriptions
oZ the tenth century at this site strehgthen the argument that
the conversion of the vihra into a took place early in
the period of Ca ru1e Almost all the Tamil epigrapha from
this place belong to the Ca period. But there is a slab
inscription buried in the foundation of one of the image-houses
which contains the name of Jayab-tva,, inscribed in the T2mil
2scrpt of about the twelfth century. This Jayaba-tevaa is
presumably JayabThu I (1110-1111). This may mean that Tamil
patronage of this continued even after the C2a period,
which is to be expected if there were Tamil Buddhists living
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1953, p. 9.
2. Unpublished.
100
at Periyak4am. With this possible exception, no Tinil inscription
of the period after the eleventh century is known to have been
discovered at this site. But the shrine continued to be venerated
by Sizthalese pilgrims down to modern times The absence of Tamil
inscriptions after the eleventh century may be due to the
possible conversion of the Tamils of this region to Saivism.
The inscriptions are a].]. donative records and
register the gift of cows , buffaloes and perpetual lamps. Most
of the records are damaged and are only partly decipherable. At
least three of them are dated in regna]. years of Räjndra I
(1012-lO'44) One at least of the donors appears to have been
a C]a official. This person, 4titta-pr-araiya of Pa1ava-
putu-kui, gifted thirty-five cows and a perpetual lamp The
element pr-araiya (the great chief) and the gift of a large
number of cows suggest that he was an important personality1
Another person who gifted forty heads of cattle may also have
been an official Most of the other donors appear to have been
humble peasants or traders whose grants were lamps or small
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1953, p. 27 ; E.Z., II, p. 178 ; Nanrpota, p.6.
2. Unpublished - Nos.I 776 A, 776 B and 775 B of the epigraphical
list in the Archaeological Dept., Ceylon.
3. No. I 776 B of the above list.
k. Pr-araiya is a common element in the names of Ca officials.
5. Unpublished - No. I 775 A.
101
amounts of money
The occurrence of these Taniil inscriptions at
Periyak4ant clearly suggests the presence of Tanii]. settlers in
that area in the Ca period. It is not possible to say whether
there were any Tamil settlers in this region before the Ca
period. Presumably the Tamil settlement of Periyakuain
originated during the period of Ca rule.
Four Ca inscriptions have been found on the
north-western littoral. Three of them are from Nahtittha (ntai).
One is a fragmentary record and only the praasti of 2jndra I
is preserved in it The second inscription is the longest of
those belonging to this period, running into more than ninety-
four short lines with the first and the last few lines missing
It is a grant by one Ti Kumara, the headmen of
Citu-1ra-nall1!r in Vr -ntu, in the K atr iya4 i chmai-v4anu
of Ca-maalam. The grant was made to the temple of Rja-
rãvaram at ttam alias RjarIjapurain (Mahltittba), which
was built by the donor himself. Certain provisions made by him
for the seven-day celebration of the festival of Vickam (Vi]tha)
as well as the grant of a plot of tax-free land. and the assignment
1. Unpublished - Nos. 775 B, 776 B, 357 etc.
2. S.I.I., IV, lklk A.
3. Ibid., No, 1k12.
102of certain taxes for the coat of the daily offerings are recorded
in this inscription. Though a headman of a village in South
India, Ti Kumara appears to have held an important post in
the island, as is suggested by the powers he had of assigning
portions of the public revenue for the upkeep of a temple built
by him. The epigraph provides some useful information about the
revenue system and the temple rituals in the Ca period. The
name of RjarIja looms large in the local nomenclature. Not only
was the temple of }tam named after him (Rjarjvaram), but
the town itself and a. main street (perun-teru) were named
Rjarjapuram and Rjarja-perun-teru respectively. Besides this
information, the inscription does not give any details about
the Tamils settled in Mahtittha. Only one Tamil settler, Kua,
Ema, who was a citizen (kui) of ZtVtam owning a mansion
(ikai), a house (v!u) and a garden (tam), is referred
to in the record.
The third inscription from Mahtittha records the
arrangement made for the buraing of a street lamp outside the
Tiru-irmivaram temple at }ttam, by ..... Tva, the utaiy
of Ciu-k4att'ttr and an official of the Peruntaam of Rjendra
Ca It is not possible to say whether Ciu-k$attr was a place
in Ceylon or South India. Probably it was in South India, for
1. S.I.I., IV, No. lklkB ; see infra, p. rj,.
103
a place of that name ia mentioned in some South Indian epigraphs
It is stated in our inscription that the money for the purpose
of burning a street lamp was deposited with the cakara-piy'r,
the ri1ai-viyar and the aikkf-viyar, all of )ttam.
Cakara-ptiyr is a term that occurs in the contemporary South
Indian inscriptions as well An examination of these occurrences
shows that the cafkara-p tiy r were a group of people who had
'duties connected with the maintenance of lamps and in prticular
the supply of oil' in a temple Two records imply, moreover,
that they were a corporation of oil-niongers! It appears that
sometimes families of cakara-piyir were settled in special
quarters close to the temples in order to maintain the burning
of the temple lamps. For instance, an inacriptio4 of the second
year of Ku]Zttuiiga I (1071) from Tiruvlafigu, refers to the
settlement of twenty-five families of cañkara-piyr on land
belonging to the TiruvIlagu temple The settlement was named
1. LE.R. for 1912, Nos. 160 and 236 of 1912. The South Indian
village was in Poyyi-kLam, in Te-karai-nu in Camaalam.
2. M.E.R. for 1897, No.80 of 1897 ; M.E.R. for 1898, No.78 of 1898;
)LE.L for 1921/22, No. 5k7 of 1920; M.E.R. for 1925, No. 395 of
1925 ; K.LNilakanta Lastri, The pp. k89, 516.
3. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, p. 516, tn. 12.
4. Ibid.
5. S.I.I., III, p. 136.
104ndra-ca-pi and the cakra-ptyr were asked to supply
the oil required for fifteen perpetual lamps and to be in charge
of lighting them in the temple of I4ahãdeva at TiruvIañgu
It seems clear, therefäre, that the cafkara-piyr of )t?am,
referred to in our inscription, were there to perform a similar
function in respect of the temple of Tiru-irmvaram and were
probably settled there by the temple trustees. The i-
viyar were a community of people who sold betel leaves, as
their name implies. The term ilai-viiyar (leaf-sellers), a
variant form of ilai-viyar, occurs commonly in South Indian
inscriptions, especially of the Vijayanagara period. The
1ikky-viiyar, as their name implies, were sellers of
plantains (bananas). Probably these two communities were expected
to supply the betel leaves and the plantains required for the
daily offerings in the temple. It is not possible to say whether
they, like the cazkara-piyr, were settled near temples for
this purpose. Probably they set up their business on their own
accord near temples. The fact that the money for the maintenance
of the street lamp at Nahtittha was deposited with these
communities shows that they were organized as guilds or corporations
rather than as loose groups.
1. S.I.I., III, p. 136.
105
The above Ca inscriptions of Mahtittha, therefore,
provide us with some information about that port in the time of
the Ca occupation. We find that it was renamed by the Cas
as Rjarjapurarn. There were at least two Saiva temples, one
of which was built L tb period and named RIjarijvaram, after
Rjarja Ca. There were at least a few Tamil trading communities
who were associated with the temples. Probably there were also
other Tamil settlers at Mahtittha during the Ca period.
Tanii]. inscriptions of the Ca period have also
been discovered in the Hurulu and Nuvaragam divisions of the
Tamankauva district in the North-central Province, Most of
these are too brief or badly weathered to be of any use to us.
In the Hurulu division, the inscriptions are mainly concentrated
in Padaviya. Some of them date back to the time of Rjarja I.
There are more than rn, half a dozen of these. Most of these have
been found among the ruins of Siva temples. One of them, dated
in the twenty-seventh year of Rjarja I (loll), appears to be
a record of a mercantile community for it contains the names
of a number of cet'is (money-lenders or traders) Another, also
dated in the reign of Rjarja I, registers a number of gifts
to a temple which appears to have been named after Rjarãja.
1. Unpublished - No. I 3k0 of the epigraphica]. list in the
Archaeological Dept., Ceylon ; A.S.C.A. . for 1891, p. 64.
106
The gifts were made by several individuals who may have been members
of some mercantile or other body since they have all recorded
their gifts in one inecription Padaviya seems to have been a
coznmercia]. centre in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, for,
Tamil inscriptions of the twelfth century also attest to the
presence of Southnlndian traders, especially the well-known
VIra-valafijiyar, at this place The Tamil 8ettlement here in
the Ca period may have been mainly mercantile in character.
A Tamil inscription assignable to this period, from MahI-kachcha-.
koi, nearly fifteen miles west of Padaviya, also mentions a
number of ceffis Probably it was also set up by a mercantile
community from the Tamil country.
In the Nuvaragam division, Anurdhapurai Saftgili-
kanadarva and Atkaa have yielded a few inscriptions of this
period, which are, however, disappointingly short and of little
value to us. Of the inscriptions at the Pañk$iya-vihra at
Anurdhapura, one records the gift of a certain Kcari Araci
while the other two mention two persons, who probably had
donated something to that establishments They were apparently
Buddhists. A short inscription on a pillar within the precincts
1. Unpublished - No. I 34.
2. Unpublished - see infra, p.
3. Unpublished ; A.S.C.L.. for 1905, pp. 36, 50.k. 3.1.1., IV, Nos. 1399, 114.00, 114.01.
107
of the RuvanvJ.isya gives the name Jaatppa-kaa Perum-p44
(the Great Temple of the Victor of Jagat3ppa), evidently referring
to the same stpa The surprisingly few and unimportant Ca
inscriptions from Anurdhapura shows that the former capital
city did not remain an important centre under the There
are no Ca inscriptions indicating the presence of South Indian
officials in that city. Even the aiva temples there apparently
did not enjoy the patronage of the Ca ruling class in the
island, But Anurdhapura seems to have attracted the attention
of a few Tamil Buddhists who presumably lived there or weht
there on pilgrimage.
The inscription from Safxgili-kanadarva registers
the grant of land and the deposit of some money on interest
by the army chief Jayamui-n apparently to a temple,
the name of which is not preserved The title Spatik4 as
well as the eI.ement in his name suggest that he was
a military official in charge of some Ca troops in the
Nuvaragam region The inscription is dated in the reign of
Rjndra I. The epigraph of Atkaa, which is dated in the
twenty-eighth year of a ruler whose name is not given, records
1. S.I.I., IV, No. lkO2.
2. Ibid., No. lko8.
3. See supra, p.qc
108
the gift a 1_' by a certain Araka Irina of land in
Kallaiyil-teliyal-peu, twenty beads of cattle and fifty
coconuts to the Uttama-ca-ivaram teniple The identity of
Kallaiyil-teliyal-peu is not known. Probably this place and
the temple of Uttama-ca-ivarani were both in the region of
Saxgili-kanadarva. Uttama Ca was not only the name of the
immediate predecessor of Rjarja I on the C 1a throne, but was
also used as a title by members of the Ca royal family in
the time Rjndra II (lO5k-lO63) It is not likely that the
temple referred to in our inscription was named after King
Uttama Ca, for Ceylon was not under the Cas in his time.
It is possible that it was named after a member of the Ca
royal family, with the title Uttama Ca, in the reign of
Rjndra ii.
Only one Ca inscription has been discovered in
the North-western Province. This record comes from Attaragalla
in the Puttalam district and is dated in the ninth year of
Rjndra Ca, who may be the second of that name. It is badly
damaged and seems to record the building of an ambalam (iim)
The Central Province has also yielded one Ca inscription.
1. 3.1.1., IV, No. 11111.
2. Y.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, P. 261.
3. S.I.I., IV, No. 1k15.
109
This inscription found in Diyavinna is written in Tami]. and
Grantha characters and 'states that a person called Virabhavaaa
DahaIbbha ?1al1ai arrived at this place' This is rather
interesting, for it is the only Tamil inscription of this period
which has beeh discovered so far south, outside the limits of
the area which was under the actual control of the Cas. The
personality referred to here rna..y have been one of the Ca
soldiers or army chiefs who were operating against the Rohaa
princes in the central highlands. The names VIrabhavaa and
Malla suggest that he was a warrior, but it is not possible
to draw any conclusions on the basis of this stray epigraph,
which may have been set up by an adventurous personality totally
unconnected with the C 1a wars. The occurrence of this single
inscription cannot be taken to indicate any Tamil settlement in
that area in the C1a period.
The contemporary Tamil inscriptions of South India,
while referring to the frequent battles fought in the island,
have little information about axy South Indian migration or about
the Tami].s of Ceylon. They confirm the statement of the Clavaisa
regarding the large armies sent by the Caa to suppress
2uprisings in Ceylon. One of these inscriptions from Tirumukk1Ial,
1. Unpublished - No. 580 ; S.Paranavitana, 'Epigraphical Summary',
C.J.Sc. (G), II, p. 191.
2. UVC.H.CI,, I, PT. 2, p. k25.
110
of the year 1067, mentions a personality named Kuriakulattaraiya
as one of the commanders who fought on the side of the Sinhalese
prince VijayabThu His name suggests that be was a Tamil. Tamil
inscriptions of the Pya country, belonging to the thirteenth
century, refer to a high official called Kurukulattaraiya It
is not known whether the Kurukulattaraiyars belonged to a noble
family. The first element of the name, kurukula (Skt. gurukula),"S
reminds,(of the Kurukula caste, who are of South Indian origin,
living in the western districts of Ceylon. The large majority
of them speak Tami]. as their mother tongue. Kuruku1attaraiya
(Chief of the Kurukula) is referred to in our inscription as a
feudatory 'who wore a golden enk1et' It has been claimed that
he was a chief of the Kurukula community in the is1and If it
is true, it would mean that as early as the eleventh century
the Kurukula community was in Ceylon and that its chieftain paid
allegiance to the Sinhalese ruler. But the evidence of one name
is far too flimsy to be the basis for such a conclusion. In this
period, officials in outhnIndia often adopted names ending in
1. LV.Subrmiinya Ayyar, 'The Tirumukka]. Inscription of
Virarjndra', E.I., XXI, p. 2k3.
2. M.E.R. for 1923, No. 5kk of 192 ; 5.1.1., VIII, p. 212 ;
K.A.NilkRnta Sastri, The Pyan Kingdom, pp. 13k-.155.
3. J . , XXI, p. 2k3.
k. M.D.Raghavan, The Karva of Ceylon, p. 5 ff.
111
-araiya, as, for instance, Pallavaraiya (Chief of the Pallavas)
and Kalifdcattaraiya (Chief of the Kliñgas). Kurukulattaraiya,
may also have been just a title of a mercenary leader in the
army of VijayabThu. He may have been mistaken by the Cas for
a feudatory chief.
An inscription of Rjarja I from Tanjore registers
the grant of land in five villages of Ceylon to the temple of
Tanjore. These villages are said to have been located in }ppicuzxzpu
Koiyram alias Rjarja-v4anu and in Kaakka Koiyram
alias Vikkirama-c5a-v4anu Koiyrazn is a territorial
division in the Trincomalee district, still known by that name,
which is a Tamilieed form of the SirLhalese Kotasara (Pii Kohaera).
Although several Ca inscriptions have been discovered in the
Trincomalee district, none comes from Koftiyram. Since the
above grant was made by a Ca ruler and not by the citizens of
the five villages, it is not possible to aay whether there were
Tamils living in Koiyram in this period. But there are at
least two other South Indian epigra hs which record the grants
of some Ceylonese citizens to South In ian temples. One of them
is in Kuttflam, in the Tinnevelly district and registers 'the
grant of land by residents of Viandai alias Vikrama-pya-
nalltr, a village in KUr-nAu, which was a sub-division of
1. S.I.I., II, p. k26.
112a-ma4alam, to the temple of KuttLam' There are several
interesting points to be noted in this record. Who were thesc.
residents of Viandai 7 Evidently they were Saivas. Though
generally at this time the aivas who were in the island were
Tamils or Ker4as, there may have been some aivas originating
from other parts of India or even from among the Sinhalese, .
It seems, however, unlikely that a group of Sinhalese or other
non-Tamil Saivas from a particular village in Ceylon evinced
an interest in the affairs of a temple in a South Indian
village, unless they were in some way connected with that villge.
It seems more likely that they were Tamil settlers frok the
Kuttlam area who still showed an interest in the affairs of
their former village and temples. Such an interest can be seen
even now among Saiva settlers from India and Ceylon in places
like Malaya, who send gifts to the temples formerly frequented
by them. Moreover, the name of the Ceylonese village was changed
from Viandai to Vikrama-pya-nallr and. the district, too,
was given the Tamil name of tr-nu. As pointed out earlier,in Tamil
many Sinhalese villages were arbitrarily renamed/by the C]as
and the occurrence of a Tam.il toponym does not necessarily point
to Tmi1 occupation of the area designated by it. But such names
1. LE.R. for 1917/18, No. k5k of 1917.
1131were always derived from the names ofroya1ties. Viandai is
the only place in the island known to have been named after
a Pp4ya prince. Probably some settlers from the Pya country
were responsible for this change of name. Kuttlam was in the
Pp4ya country and the residents of Viandai who made the above
grant may have hailed from Kutt1ani or from some other place
near this village. Perhaps Viandai was renamed after Vikrama
Pya who took refuge in Ceylon after his defeat at the hands
of the Cas It has not been possible to identify this place.
The above account practically completes the total
of our epigraphical knowledge as far as the period of Ca rule
is concerned. As we have seen, almost all the inscriptions are
donative records and Lea]. with matters that are of little help
to our inquiry. They help us to trace the areas of Tamil settlement,
but they are not alw&ys a sure guide in this respect. The records
1. Rjarja-puram for Nahtittha, Jaantha-niañg4ain for
Polonnaruva, jarja-vaanu for a division in Kotasara,
Vii ama-ca-v4anu for another division in Koasara
as well as Nikarili-c1a-v4an u, Rjndr a-c inka-v4antu
and }Aummuli C malam are from the names and titles of
Rjarja I and Rjndra I.
2. K.A.Nilajcanta Sastri, The Caa, pp. 250-251.
114set up by officials do not necessarily indicate the presence of
Taxnil settlers in their areas. But the place-name material and
the evidence regarding the existence of aiva and Vaiava
temples found in these inscriptions are often useful in finding
an anawerØ to our questions. This evidence has to be compared
with that of other aources before it is used to draw conclusions.
Now we have to turn to the archaeological material
that is available for this period. Unfortunately there is no
positive material which could help us to trace the settlements
of the Dravidians in Ceylon, similar, for instance, to the
Saxon cemeteries of England which have greatly helped to map
çu4 the earliest English settlements. The only archaeological
remains of considerable importance that have been left behind
by the Dravidians are their religious monuments and sculptures.
As the Hindu temples of this period were normally erected in
areas where there were aiva and Vaiava Tamils, the remains
of these structures could indicate in some way the regions of
Tami]. settlement. It could be argued that there may have been
aivas and Vaiavas among the Sinhalese and, therefore, the
presence of aiva-Vaiava remains may not be a sure guide to
the location of the Dravidian settlements. The presence of aivas
and Vaiavas among the Sinhalese is only a theoretical possibility.
There is no evidence to suggest that there were Sinhalese who
were aivas or Vaiavas in the island during this period.
115
Moreover, it is not difficult to identify the monuments of the
Taniils in this period. The architectural style, the style of
the sculptural finds and the occurrence of Tamil inscriptions
are factors which help to reveal the identity of the temples
built by Tamila. As the archaeological exploration and discoveries
in the northern and eastern parts of the islan&, which are the
traditional Tamil areas in Ceylon, are by no means complete,
the material available to us is inevitably limited. To makeS
this position worse, the Saiva and Vaiava remains so far
unearthed have not been properly dated. But many of these can,
however, be dated on the basis of their architectural style
and the inscriptions found among their ruins. The ruins of no
less than thirty aiva-Vaiava temples, belonging to the period
between the beginning of the eleventh and the end of the thirteenth
century, have been discovered in the island and. all these are
in the northern and eastern parts. In the case of the well-preserved
temples, the architectural style serves as a guide to the dating.
The occurrence of inscriptions in some other foundations helps
to determine their age. A few are not sufficiently well preserved
or they yield no inscriptions and. cannot, therefore, be dated
with any certainty, although some of the remaining architectural
members provide a rough guide to their age.
116
About ten Siva Dv1es, five Viu temples and one
KI temple have come to light in Polonnaruva Of these, ivaDvles Nos. II and V, and probably No. V1 belong to the period
of C]a rule. iva Dvle No.11 is the only aiva temple of this
period which has been completely preserved. It is considered
to be an outstanding exampi. of the C 1a style of Dravidian
architecture All the three iva temples yield inscriptions of
this period. iva Dvle No.1 is in the Pçya style of architecture
and belongd to either the twelfth or the thirteenth century'
Almost all the other temples at Polonnaruva appear to belong to
the thirteenth century Of the Ca temples at Polonnaruva, the
name of iva Dvle No.11 alone is known from the inscriptions.
It was called Vava-mtvi-Dvaram, after the chief queen of
Rjarja I. A nu*ber of bronze images, representing aiva saints
and deities, were discovered in these temples. Some of them
have been acclaimed as masterpieces of Hindu sculpture
1. A. .C.A.L for 1902, pp.7-8 ;A$'C14ror 1908, pp. 3-10 ;
A.S.C.A.R. for 1909, p. 17; A. .C.A.R. for 193k, pp. 16-17.
2. A.S.C.A. . for 1911-12, p. Uk.
3. S.Paranavitana, Art and Architecture of Ceylon - Polonnaruva
Period, p. 31.
k. Ibid.
5. See infra, L1.j•
6. A.LCoomaraswamy, Bronzes from Ceylon, p. 9.
117Some remains of Ca temples have been discovered
outside Polonnaruva, too. At Norago1a, near Padaviya, were
unearthed the remains of three temples Tamil inscriptions,
some dating to the time of Rjarja I, have been found in these
ruins. The occurrence of nandi, lii!iga and yoni figures shows
that these structures belonged to aivism The names of these
temples are not known, but one of them appears to have been
named after Rjarja Besides these Structures, three other
aiva temples of the C3,a period are known from contemporary
inscriptions, but their remains have not been unearthed so far.
These are the Tirn-irnff gvaram and Rjarja-ivaram temples of
Mahtittha and the Uttama-ca-varam of Xtkaa Among the
ruins at Nahtittha (!ntai), remains of some buildings of the
eleventh century as weLLas a nandi, a lifga and a Gaa image
were found Some of these may be the ruins of C1a temples.
Saiva temples of the Polonnaruva period have also been discovered
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1891, p. 10; A.S.C.A.R. for 1961/62, p. 67.
2. Ibid,
3. See supra, p. oc
k. See supra, 1'
5. A.S.C.A.R. for 1908, pp. 28, 30; K.Vaithianathan, Thirpketheesvaran
Papepe, p. 13.
118at Nalla-t ai-iakkam, Buddhannehe la, Maha-kanadarva, Ptak.0
and P4amai Some of them may date back to the period of Ca
occupation. But there is no evidence with which we can date
these to the Ca period with certainty.
The remains of only one Ca Buddhist temple }Jave
been found in the island, viz., at Periyak4am, in the Trincomalee
district. As we have mentioned earlier, the temple was originally
a Sinhalese Buddhist institution by the name of Velgam-vehera
It was rebuilt in the eleventh century in the style of a Tamil
4i and was renamed Rjarja-perum-p4ji. The architectural
style of the temple 'differs from that of the Anurdhapura Buddhist
shrines and is akin to the Tamil Hindu shrines at Polonnaruva'
The discovery of bronze and stone sculptures in
South Indian style and of temples built in Ca style seems to
indicate the presence of sculptors and stone-masons from South
India. The style of & building is not always a sure guide to
the racial or communal origins of the masons and architects
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1907, p. 27 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 1891, pp. II, 30;
A.S.C.A.R. for 1961162 , P . 59 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 1933, p. 18;
cJ.Sc. (G), II, pp. 156-157.
2. See supra, p. c1g
3. S.Paranavitana in the Encyclopaedia of Buddhis - Volume of
ecimen Articles, p. 83.
119responsible for its erection. It is always possible for the
artisans of one country to learn the architecture of another
neighbouring country. It would be of interest, therefore, to
find, out whether Dravidian craftsmen were employed to execute
the Saiva and Vaiava monuments at Polonnaruva and elsewhere.
The opinio4 of archaeologists is divided on thia matter.
Godakumbure points out that the Sinhalese people were 'experts
in architecture, sculpture and painting' and claims that 'the
Cholas who brought the Sinhalese under subjection at the end
of the tenth century employed these Sinhalese craftsmen to
build temples for their gods, and make sculptures of thent'
On the other hand, Paranavitana's opinion is that the 'Sinhalese
sculptors and painters had no opportunity to practise their
arts, for their patrons - royalty, nobility and the Buddhist
Church - had ceased to exist under the Cho].a rule' If we turn
to see the monuments in the C1a style in the island, we find
that only the Aaiva-Vaiçava temples at Polonnaruva and Noragoa
and the Buddhist Rjarja-perum-p4i at Periyak4am, all of
which enjoyed the patronage of Tamils as revealed by their
inscriptions, fall under this category. No Sinhalese monument
1. C.E.Godakumbure, 'Bronzes from Polonnarnva, JR.A.S. (.B.),
N.S. , VII, pt.2, p. 2k).
2. S.Paranavitana, Art and Architecture in Ceylon - Polonnarua
Period, p. 22.
120of the tenth century was built in the Ca style. The Sinhalese
raftsnien would have been unfamiliar with the Ca style of archi-
tecture and, therefore, would not have been in a position to
execute at the very beginning of (Zla rule such an outstanding
example of Ca architecture as the iva Dvle No.11. Only
artisans skilled in the architecture of the South Indian temples
could have accomplished this task. There is some evidence to
show that there were Tamil masons in Ceylon in the Polonnaruva
period who were employed by Sinhalese monarchs to build Buddhist
monuments. Tami]. letters have been used as mason's marks in
certain constructions dating from the time of ParkramabThu I
at Polonnaruva and Padaviya One of the Tamil inscriptions from
Budumuttva attests to the presence of a community of blacksmiths,
identifiable as Tamils, in the KurunRgala area in the regin of
Vijayabhu I These considerations lead us to think that the
Ca authorities, who introduced from South India such communities
as the cafikara-p tiy r for the maintenance of aiva temples
would ha'e invited craftsmen from the mainland to build temples
in the style of the South Indian examples. Further, from the
1. See infra, p . irl
2. , III, P. 305.
3. See supra, p.D3•
121practice of later times we see that Tamil or South Indian artisans
were engaged for the building of Dravidian-style structures in
the island. Inscriptions of the reign èf Bhuvanekabhu IV (l3kl-].351)
declare that the Lktilaka and Gaa]1dei shrines near Gampola,
the two well-known Dravidian-style temples of the fourteenth
century, were the creations of Sthapatiryara and Gaevarcrya
respectively The names of these architects clearly suggest that
they were of South Indian origin. It is, therefore, probable
that South Indian craftsnien were invited to Ceylon to build the
Zaiva-Vaiava temples of the Ca period, although it is not
impossible that local cra!tsmen were also engaged to do this
work.
There is also a controversy regarding the sculptors
who were responsible for casting the many Saiva and Vaiaa
bronzes that have been discovered in the C 1a temples at Polonnaruva.
Godakunibure claims that these bronzes have certain 'distinctive
features' which mark them as products of Sinhalese sculptors,
but fails to explain what these distinctive features are Bell's
opinion is that they were 'doubtless cast in India' Paranavitana
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. 782 ; U.C.R., XVIII, Nos.l&2, p . 11.
2. C.E.Godakumbure, 2• cit., pp. 2k3 ft.
3. A.S.C.A.R. for , p.
122supports him by stating that 'these bronzes have certainly been
imported from South India and belong to the history of art of
that region. ' 10n the other hand, Basham feels that an 'important
school of bronze-casting existed in Ceylon, and produced works
similar in style to those of South India' It is difficult to
determine who cast these bronzes purely on the basis of their
style. In the first place, there is so much in common between
the plastic arts of Ceylon and Soi.thh India in this period that
slight variations in form do not always indicate a difference in
origin. Secondly, it is difficult to make a comparison between
the styles of the two regions. Iconography in Ceylon was mainly
represented by Buddhist images while in South India it was generally
represented by Saiva and Vaiava images. In the absence of a
tradition of casting aia and Vaiava icons, the Sinhalese
craftsmen, when employed to cast such images, would have evidently
turned to South India for the style. l4oulds may have been brought
from the mainland and the bronzes cast in the island. Since there
would have been little difficulty in transporting bronzes across
the narrow straits, some may have been im orted from South India.
It is, therefore, not possible to determine who cast these bronzes.
All that we can say is that they belong to the South Indian school
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 6 9.
2. A.L.Basham, he onder that wa India, p. 376.
123of sculpture. In the case of the aiva temples, however, it is
possible to conjecture that they are the work of South In ian
stone-masons who had gone to the island. Some of the Tamil masons
employed in the time of Parkramabhu I fôr the building of
Buddhist structures may have been descendants of the C 1a masons
The evidence of place-names for the period prior
to the thirteenth century is almost negligible. Only a few
recorded forms of Tamil toponyms which show some Dravidian association
are available for the Ca period. Even these forms have to be
used with extreme caution owing to several reasons. Under normal
circumstances the occurrence of Tamil or Tamilised toponyma
would indicate the presence of Tamil settlers in the places
represented by them. But the Tamil and. Tamilised place-names of
the Ca empire outside the Tamil country do not necessarily
indicate Tamil settlement. Tamil names were often arbitrarily
given to places by the Ca administrators. Nost of these were
frequently altered to commemorate personalities and events. As
Nilakanta Sastri puts it, 'the subordinate divisions evidently
underwent numerous reshufflings, and their names were changed
so often as to justify the complaint that 'Ca geo raphy came
to suffer as much from the plague of homonyms as the kings
themselves' ' The following Tnmil names of places in Ceylon
1. See infra, p. IS'f
2. I.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, p. k65.
124are known from the Ca inscriptions: Jaantha-mañg4ani
Rj ar ja-pur a4 R jar ja-perunt-t eru R j ar j a-v4anu' Vikrama-.
cia-v$antu Arumoi-tva-v4anu Parakc ari-v4anu'
Nikarili-ca-v4an Rjndra-c inka-v4a.nt ?
and Vikrama-p tiya-nallTh? All these, except t1r-nu, are
names derived from those of roya1tiea All of them, with the
possible exception of the last, have evidently been given by the
Ca administrators. Such names, therefore, do not always reflect
the existence of Tainil settlements in those places. There are
a few other Tamil toponyms occurring in the CVa epigraphs of
the island, such as Zkar, Nallr, kari-nund Palava-
1. 6.1.1., IV, No. 1388.
2. Ibid., No. 1k12.
3. Ibid.
4. 6.1.1., II, p. k26.
5. Ibid.
6. 6.1.1., IV, No. lkl2.
7. Unpublished - No. I 775.
8. A.S.C.A.L for 1909, p. 27.
9. Unpublished - No. I 357.
10. M.E.R. for 1917/18, p. 1k3.
11. Ibid.
12. See supra, p.gj2,.
13.S.I.I., IV, No. 1393.
125putu-ci$i But it is not possible to determine whether these are
place-names of Ceylon or South India. Some of these appear as
•1!vita villages held by CVa officials while some others occur
as the places of origin of certain donors. As villages in South
India were sometimes assigned to officials serving in Ceylon,
as in the case of Ti Kumara, who was assigned the village of
Ciu-ka-nallr in Cnmsalam although he was serving at
Mahtittba and as many of the donors mentioned in the inscriptions
may have come from South India, we cannot be certain that these
villages were in Ceylon. Moreover, some of these names occur
both in the Tamil country and. in Ceylon, so that it is difficult
to identify them in any particular region. NaUUr, for instance,
is a very common name in South India. In Ceylon, too, there at
least four places of that name Putu-kui also occurs in both
regions It seems probable that most of these places mentioned
in our inscriptions were in South India.
There are a few Tamilised forms of Sinhalese place-
names which occur in the contemporary inscriptions, namely
Ntffam5(Sinh. ?toa, Pli Mahtittha), Pulainari 6 (Sinii. Polonnaru,
1. Unpublished - No. I 776.
2. See suDra, p. iO
3. See p. qrr.
k. Pudukkuiya in Anurdhapura district and Putukki4i in
Mafig4anu in South India, M.E. • for 1917/1 , p. 89.
5. S.I.I., IV, No.l 1fl ; see supra, p.1o1.
6. A.S.C.A.R. for 1909, p. 27.
126Pli Pulattbinagara), Koiy'rain1 (Sixth. ICoasara, P].i ICoffhasra)
and. Velakmam (Sixth. Velagama, Phi Velag.nia). The occurrence
of Tamilised forms of toponyms in the Ca inscriptions may
not always suggest Tamil occupation of the areas denoted by them.
The context in which they occur is equally important. The long
list of South-east Asian place-names in the inscriptions of
RjThdra I, for instance, are Tamilise d forms of Malay and
other names They may have been Tamilised earlier by the Tainil
traders who frequented these places. But what is important is
that they occur here as places invaded by the Ca navy, and when
their names came to be recorded in Tamil the original forms
could not inevitably be retained. The mere fact that the kames
of these places are Tamilised may point to Tamil association
with those areas but does not necessarily indicate T mil settlement
there. The situation is different in the case of the above plpce-
names in Ceylon. They were probably Tamilised as a result of
Tamils living in those areas. lttam is a name that occurs in
Tanzil literature as early as the seventh entury There is some
evidence for the presence of Tamils in this pI&ce in the Anurdhapura
period Tamil inscriptions of the Ca period have been found here
1. S.I.I., II, p. 1426 ; see supra, p .'(. • la. Unpublished - No.1 357.
2. LA.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, pp. 215-218.
3. See supra, p.33
14. See supra,
5. See supra, p. Iol•
121The present name of this lace is a variant of this Taniil form.
It still continues to be part of the Tamil areas of Ceylon. These
considerations would lead uá to infer that the Tamilisatiozi
of this place-name was the result of Tamil settle ent in the
area. Similarly, Kotiyram is a place-name still in use. The
area which it denotes is settled by Tamils. Velskmm and
Pulainari are not in use today. But Taniil inscriptions as well
as Dravidian ruins of the C1a period have been found in the
places denoted by them It is, therefore, very probable that
these Tamilised forms of Sinhalese place-names are the result
of Tamil settlement. Thus, the evidence of toponyms have to be
used with caution. By itself, it cannot form the basis of any
important conclusion, It could, however, be used to strengthen
arguments based on other more reliable evidence.
The evidence of the four different types of sources
that we have just analysed generally corroborate and supplement
each other. While some of them provide more information than
the others, the general conclusions that ,could be drawn from
them remain basically the same. In the first place, while these
sources reflect the presence of a larger number of Tamila than
before, they do not at the same time point to any great Dravidian
migration having taken place in the wake of the Ca conquest.
1. See supra,
128They reveal the presence of Tamils in certain regions but no
particular area o considerable size seems to have been completely
settled by them. This becomes clear if we try to trace the places
where evidence of their settlement is available. According to
the literary sources, Tamils were found scattered in the villages
and market towns, all over the kingdom. There were C1a strongholds
in the Kurungala district, the northern region of the ?tale
district and in some parts of the Batticaloa district. The evidence
of the other sources confirm this.
The find spots of the inscriptions show that the
Tamils were living scattered in the northern parts of the island.
With the exception of the inscriptions from Attaragalla and
Diyavinna, all the other inscriptions could be grouped under
five regions, namely the Burulu and Nuvaragain divisions of the
Nuvarakalviya district (North-central Province), the Siih4a
Pattu division of the Tamanic.açIuva district (North-central Province),
)ntai in the Nanr district (Northern Province) and Periyakuam
in the Trincomalee distriet (Eastern Province). The inscription
from Nahkachchatkoi could be grouped with those of the Hurulu
division, for its provenace lies only about three miles outside
this divisiox Dravidian archaeological remains have been
1. a) Rurulu - inscriptions from FAoragoa, Padaviya, Paragiyaviya;
b) Nuvaragam - Anurdhapura, Sañgili-kanadarv , Atkaa;
c) Siñh4a Pattu - Polonnaruva, Giritale, Gal Oya.
1).1.
discovered. in the Eurulu division, Siñh4a Pattu division and
Periyak4am. Tamilised forms of Sinhalese place-names occur in
Nntai, the Trincomalee district and the Siih4a Pattu division.
There is no archaeological, inscriptional or place-name evidence
of the Ca period in the Kurungala district, ?tale and Batticaloa
where, according to the Clavawa, Ca strongholds had been
established. But there is evidence of this type, belonging to
the twelfth century, which indicate the presence of Tarnil aettlers
in those areas during that century Possibly these settlements
of the twelfth century, or at least some of them, had their
origins in the Ca period.
Thus, there is a general agreement between the
different types of evidence relating to the settlements of the
period of C 1a rule. We may not be wrong, therefore, in concluding
that there were Tamil settlements in this period in ntai and.
in some parts of the Nuvaragam, Hurulu and Si4a Pattu divisions
and in Periyak$am. This conclusion is further strengthened by
the fact that these are the very areas where tie presence of
Tamil settlers is indicated by the sources of the Anurdhapuraperiod Although each of the arguments to assume Taniil settlements
in these areas in the Ca period may not be very strong, they
have a certain cumulative strength which is enough to justify us
1. See infra, p. I&.
2. See supra, p4.1.
130
in provisionally marking those areas as occupied by Tamil
settlers.
There is, however, no sufficient evidente to
warrant the conclusion that there was a large-scale migration
of Dravidians into the island in this perio&. The available
evidence shows a strengthening of the earlier settlements,
which appears to have been mainly due to the arrival of more
traders, mercenaries artisans and officials, The history of
the subsequent period clearly shows that the Sinhalese were
in control of the northern and eastern parts of Ceylon, which
were to fall later into the hands of Tamils and Ker4as, for
the next century and a half. The Sinhalese chroniclers, who
refer to the abandonment of the northern regions by the Sinhalese
and their occupation by the foreigners, give no such comment
for the C]a period
Furthermore, there seems to have been no reason
for a. mass exodus from South India in this period. The Cas
provided political security for that region and tke general
impression given by the inscriptions is one of prosperity
everywhere. These sources, of course, do not reflect the true
economic condition of the common people. However, only four
instances of famine in the Tamil country are known from the
1. 2z 80: 63-78, 81:1-10.
1311inscriptions. All these famines occurred after the eleventh
century and were confined to small areas There was, of course,
the need for new land, as appears from the numemous references
to the reclamation of forest and waste land and to the efforts
'to increase the area under the ploh and the inducements offered
to encourage such efforts on the part of the people' There
' t5 I14t.VtY , no evi ence of any migration to foreign lands
due to political or economic reasons other than perhaps commercial
motives. In this period, colonisation did not follow imperial
expansion, as in modern times, and there is no evidence
that any policy of establi hing settlements was followed by
the C1a rulers. But there is, however, some evidence regarding
the settlement of certain castes or communities, for the performance
of particular duties, in different parts of the Iamil country
by rulers and local assemblies. The Brhamaas formed one such
community. Nany BrThmaa villages, called agrahras, mag4ms
or catur-vdi-mafig4anis, were created by royal grants and 'new
colonies of pious and learned Brahmins were settled in the different
parts of the couhtry' Another community, which was áettled close
1. .P. for 1 99, No.33; LE.R. for 1911, No.29;
M.E. • for 191k, No.17 ; N.E.R. for 1935, No.1k.
2. See infra, p. jqo
3. M.E.R. for 1902, Nos. 485, 506 ; Y.E.R. for 19 3, No.385 ;
N.E.R. for 1911, No.2 7, etc. ; K.A.Nilakanta Sastri,
The C j,.as, pp. 584-5 5.
4. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, pp.k92-493.
132
to temples for the performance of services to them, was that
of the ckara-piyr Some records of the thirteenth century
attest to the creation of mercantile settlements by chiefs and
local assembliea in South India It is not known whether such
a practice existed in the eleventh century. The Brhmaaa of
Polonnaruva and the cañkra-piyr of Mahtittha may have
been settled in those places by Ca authorities. The catur-
vdi-maxg4am,at Kanta, of which we know from an inscription
of the time of VijayabThu I ( L055-l].l0 ) may have similarly
originated in the Ca period. But these instances are different
from a policy of settling people in conquered lands. In a Tamil
epigraph of Ku]Zttuga I (1070-1120) from Mulbagal, in }&ysore,
there occurs the phrase i tou nilaik4 iar4i ' It has been
rendered aa:'who was pleased to establish settlements of people
on all sides (in the conquered country)' The implication is
that Ku1ttuiga opened up settlements, presumably of people from
his e pire, in newly conquered territories. But the translation
is not accurate, for nilaik :j. doe8 not mean settlements of people
but stations and what was mean evidently were military posts
rather than settlements.
1. Lee supra, p. 103.
2. M.E.R. for 1935/3 , Nos. 150, 196.
3. E.Z., IV, pp. 19k-195.
i. E.C., X, No. k2b.
5. Ibid., p. 81.
133
CHAPTER Ill
STLE1'TS IN THE LATE ELEVENTH AND THE TWELFTH CE!TURY
The slow migration and settlement of the Dravidiansttss4' Mt
in the island seem to have continued,Awith greater vigour,in the
period after the Ca rule. A number of Tami-1 inscriptions
belonging to the late eleventh and the twelfth century have
been found in the northern and eastern areas of the island.
The evidence of the literary sources, too, suggests a growth
in the strength and influence of the South Indian element in
the country in the period between the end of Ca rule and the
invasion of Zgha (lO7O-l25). In this period, the reign of
Parkramabhu I (1153-1186) may be said to mark the heyday of
Sinhalese power and glory. This monarch, while he succeeded in
controlling the growing influence of the South Indians in the
island and in preventing any inroad from the mainland, 'left
the country in a state of exhaustion at the end of his rule'
The political confusion that ensued the reign of Parkramabhu I
greatly helped the increase of Kalifiga and Dravidian influence
on an unprecedented scale and, in some ways, prepared the
ground for the rise of an independent Tamil kingdom in northern
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, pp. 5k7, 716.
134
Ceylon This period, therefore, sees the culmination of that had
begun to influence the course of the island's history towards
the end of the &nuridhapura period. From about the middle of thethe SwaLi.ec VitLf
thirteenth century&had to contend with a permanent enemy in
the northern regions of the island, instead of the traditional
enemy from the mainland.
The period under review was conspicuously free
from foreign inroads. On the contrary, there were Sinhalese
invasions of South India, and the island was involved in South
Indian politics to a greater extent than ever before. The very
close relations between South India and Ceylon in the political,
cultural and economic spheres brought into the island more and
more mercantile communities 1 mercenaries, artisans and BrThmas
from the Dravidian kingdoms. The invitation of foreign mercenaries
by aspirants to the Sithaleae throne, a common feature in the
Anurdhapura period, was absent in this period. But there were
strong and influential bodies of foreign mercenaries in the
island in this period, many of whom, as we shal]. see later,
seem to have gone there along with some of the mercantile
communities.
1. The political confusion that followed the reign of Parlkrama-
bThu I and the rise of Kaliga influence have been dealt with
by A.Liyanagamage in his thesis, The Decline of Polonnaruva
and the Rise of DaMbade, University of London, 1963.
135
The most important feature of tbi8 period, in
regard to Dravidian settlements in the island, is the presenceof a number of mercenaries, traders, artisans and Brhmas from
a].]. parts of South India. The most important among these
Dravidian communities were the mercantile bodies known as the
Aififi1!ruvar, Valafljiyar and the Nnidis as well as the mercenary
forces called the V aikk!ras. An analysis of the activities of
the mercantile communities reveals that they may have been
responsible for the migration of several traders, artisans and
mercenaries into the island in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.
More than seventy inscriptions, in Tamil, Telugu,
Knnada and Malayalam, which refer to the activities of the
mercantile communities mentioned above, have been discovered in
South India. These range between the eighth and the seventeenth
century. Outside the South Indian peninsula, there are seven
in Ceylon one in Sumatra2and another in Burma which refer
1. i) S.I.i., IV, No. 11+05, from Anuridhapura; ii) E.Z., I,
p. 181, from P4iyafiku!ama ('I) ; iii) E.Z., II, p. 236 , from
naulundiva; iv) El., XVIII, pp. 330-338, from Polonnaruva;
v) Unpublished - from Vhlkaa; vi) Unpublished - from
Padaviya; vii) Unpublished - from VihrThTnna.
2. M.E.R. for 1891-1892, p. 11.
3. E.I., VII, p. 197.
136
to them or to their associate bodies. These range between the
nita.nd the twelfth century. The widespread activities of these
mercantile communities have long been recognized by South Indian
historians. They have often been referred to as mercantile
gu.ilds and autonèmous corporations a! merchants But the actual
nature and organization of these 'guild as well as the
relationship between them and the large number of professional
bodies often associated with them have not been fully analysed.
There has been considerable confusion in the names used to
describe these 'guilds'. In Ceylon, writers on the history of
this period have made passing remarks on these communities
and have collectively referred té them as Valafljiyar Some
of these, like the Nakarattr, have sometimes been mistaken for
divisions of the VaikkIrae To understand the presence and
the activities of these communities in Ceylon, it is necessary
to nlyse briefly their organization and activities in South
India.
The Ai1iuvar, NLidis, Va1ajiyar and the
Nakarattir appear together in the majority of their inscriptions
1. K.A.Rilkanta Sastri, The p. 595 ;
T.V.I4ahalingam, South Indian Polity, pp. 389 If.
2. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 550.
3. 5 • Paranavitana, 'The Polonnaruva Ins cript ion ol Vi jayabThu I',
E.I.., XVIII, 1926, pp. 33k, 335.
137
in South India. The moat prominent among these were the Aifruvar,
who were also known as the Ayylv4e, Vra Balafijiyar and Banaflju
Dharmaara as well as by numerous other variants of these names
Most of their records are preambled by a long eulogy or praasti,
giving an account of their origin and achievements. By far the
largest number of these, nearly forty, are in Kairnada while there
are about a dozen each in Tamil and Telugu and a handful in
Malayalam. The earliest of these goes back to the eighth century
The latest is dated aka 1602 (A.D. i68o) At present, therefore,
the origin of this community can be traced back only to the
eighth century.
The earliest inscription of the AifitTuvar is
found at Aihoe, the ancient Ayvoe, which they claim as their
seat of power. Since the earliest available of their records
comes from Aihoe, it is possible that it belongs to the early
years of their history. The origin of this community, may,
1. M.E.R. for 1916, No.97 of 1915 - Ayyappoa1 ;
., VIII, p. 89 of the text - Ayyvajeya Aynrvva SvImig4u ;
i.E.R. for 1918, No. 18 of 1917-18 A - Samayins of Ayyav4i;
XI, p. 181 of the text - Aiv4e )thzkhyarada
2. JT.Fleet, 'Sanskrit and Canarese Inscriptions', l.A., VI, Nay 1877,
p . 138.
3. ?,E.R. for 1918, No. 18 of 1917-18 in Appendix A.
138
therefore, date back to about the eighth century. There is little
doubt that Ayyvoe was the place of their origin, for not only
did they call themselves the yIvoe or the Five Hundred of
Ayyvoe but they also named many of the places where they
had established themselvea in later times as Southern Ayyvoes
(Teftka Ayvoe) In most of their inscriptions of the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries, the members of this community claim
to have come from Ahichchatra in North India It is not possible
to say how far this claim is true. But it is not impossible
that some of the wandering traders from North India were responsible
for the founding of a mercantile body which later grew into
this powerful community.
The name of this community has been the subject
of various interpretations by different scholars. In most of
the Kannada inscriptions, it appears as the Five Hundred Svznina
of Ayyv4e (Ayyv4eya Ayn!rvva Svmig4u) Several variants
of this name occur in the Tamil epigraphe, such as tci-
ticai-1yirattu-airruvar (live Hundred of the Thousand Directions
of the Several Countriea)
1. V, p. 325 of the text.
2. .E.R. for 1906, No. 180 of 1905.
3. VIII, p. 89 of the text.$A-NiL..tc..Ii4* S.c4ri, '4 Ptvo%. G1'J.
k.,(Tiidschrift Voor Indische Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, LXXII,
1932, p. 318.
139
(Five Hundred of the Thousand Directions of the Four (quarters)
Ticai-yirattu-aififiuvar (Five Hundred of the Thousand Directions)2
and Aififih1uvar (Five Kundred) Sometimes they are just referred
to as Aiv4e, Ayyav4e or Ayyappoal. The use of the name
Aiflffiiuvar has led R.C.Majumdar to think that this 'organization'
consisted of five hundred members T.V.!.halingam, on the other
hand, feels that 'their extra-territorial organization was
managed by an executive committee of five hundred members'
A,Appadorai, too, holds a similar view when he states that the
'most important personages were constituted into a board called
the Five Hundred Svmis of Ayyvoe'? L.D.Barnett's opinion is
that this 'corporation' had their central body at AyyIvoe,
which .as the seat of their Board of Directors, consisting of
a council of five hundred members All these opinions are based
1. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, A T; \ ir
± ±.'
2. Ibid.
3. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The C5as, p. 596.
k. M.E.R. for 1919, No.223 of 1918; E.C., II, (Revised ed.),
p. 78 of the text; M.E.R. for 1916, No. 97 of 1915.
5. R.C.}lajumdar, Corporate Life in Ancient India, P. 88.
6. T .V. Mahalingam, . cit., P . 392.
7. A.Appadorai, Economic Conditions in Southern India, II, p. 39k.
8. L.D.Barnett, The Ancient Tamil Township and Village, Unpublished,
quoted in B.A.Saletore's Social and Political Life in theViiayanaara Empire, LI, p.'I8 j.i.
140on the interpretations of the term AiZfiuvar and deserve
closer exeini-nation. Majumdar's view that the organization consisted
of five hundred members is not tenable. The activities of this
body was never limited to any one area or century. On the
contrary, its records have been found in several districts
of South India and. in Ceylon and. Sumatra. These range over a
period of nearly ten centuries. It is, therefore, improbable
that the organization had a constant number of members
throughout this period and ail over the vast area covered by t
their activities. The meaning of the term Aiuvar has to
be expiLined differently. The opinions of Appadorai, Barnett
and Nahalingam are based on the assumption that the Aifflh1uvar
were a single unified body with their headquarters at Ayivo.e
and that all the members mentioned in their inscriptions
all over South India owed allegiance to a central body. It
seems rather too much to expect the Aiflfluvar to have been
such a unified body with a continuous history of nearly ten
centuries and with branches all over South India and even
overseas. Such an organization is too modern a concept and may
not be applicable to this period of South Indian history.
A careful analysis of the inscriptions reveals that there is
no justification for the view that the AiZffI1ruvar represented
a central body of the corporation or for the theory that they
had their headquarters at Ayyv4e. In the first place, it is
141not necessary to assume that the membership of the corporation
or its central body, if ever there was one, was limited to five
hundred. In this instance, the number five hundred has to be
taken as a conventional number from which this mercantile
community baa derived its name. This may be explained in
several ways. The number five hundred may preserve the memory
of the number of people who banded themselves together and
originated this mercantile community. This number may have
been a figure close to five hundred and may have been rounded
off to five buntred. Naming guilds and other bodies after what
may have been considered their numerical strngth is not
something unusual in Indian history. In the Jtakaa we get
references to carpenters and robbers organized in guilda of
five hundred Certain other guilds had a thousand men in each
of theme Even in later times there were such bodies in South
India. An inscription from Travancore refers to a body of six
hundred while another from Bijpur refers to a body of BI'Ihniaas
called the Five Hundred 14ahjanas (}lahljanañg4 Aynflrvvara)
1. The Jtakas, IV, ed. E.B.Cowell, Tr. W.H.D.Rouse, (1901),
p. 268 - Sattigumba Jtaka.
2. Ibid., p. 99 - Samudda-vIija Jtaka.
3. E.I., V, p. 47.
142There was also a community of BrIbmas in Cidambaram (Tillai)
who were known as the Three Thousand of Tillai (Tillai NvIyiravar)
In modern times we get the example of the Syrian Christians of
Ker4a being divided into the Seven Hundred (Eunhrukar) and
the Five Hundred (LfiffUrukar) Th. name Five Hundred is, therefore,
no indication of the numerical strngth of the AififT!nvar in
the later centuries of their history. There is also another
possibility of explaining this name. The AiZfit!ruvar claim in
their inscriptions that they migrated from Ahichchatra. This
may mean that the community originated in South India with the
arrival of some wandering traders from North India who already
belonged to a mercantile corporation known as the Five Hundred,
for it is quite possible that such corporations continued to
exist in North India from the time of the JItzka.
It is equally untenable to claim that the Aififlh1ruvar
had their headquarters at Aihoe or Ayylvoje. The fact that
only one, and that the earliest, of their records has been
discovered at Aiho.e is not without any significance. If the
Aiflffuvar had their headquarters in this town, it is strange
1. M.E.R. for 1922/23, No. 395 of 1922. V v7t+•
2. T.A.S., II, p. 75.
143that out of over seventy records left by them not a single one
belonging to the period after the eighth century has been
found at Aihoó. The fact that they continued to call themselves
the Aififfaruvar of Ayyv4e or Ayyvoe does not necessarily
mean that they had their headquarters in that town. There is
no etidence to suggest that they had any connection with
Ayyvoe alter the eighth century. As we have pointed out earlier,
.Ayylv4e appears to have been the town where this mercantile
community had its origins. It seems possible, therefore, that
the Aifi!flTuvar were originally known as the Aiffuvar of
AyyIvoe. Nembers of their community seem to have used this
name in the later centuries, too, when they had established
themselves in other parts of South India. The occurrence of
Ayyvo.e in their name seems , therefre, to be a reminder of
their place of origin rather than a reference to their
headquarters. Their practice of calling many of the new places
where they established themselves as Southern Ayyvoes
(TerTh or Dakia Ayylv4e) also shows that they considered
Ayyvoe to be their original home Further there is no evidence
1. Cf., The Ki BrI1' maas and the Tillai BrThmaas called
themselves so even when they were settled in places other
than Ki and Tillai respectively.
144to suggest that there was any kind of communication between
AyyIvoe and the other places where the Aififf1ruvar were found.
Ayylv4e seems té have declined as a centre of their activity
before the tenth century, when we begin to get their records
in other places.
There is also no evidence to support the hypothesis
that the AiIflUruvar were a single unified corporation of
merchants. The application to the Aiflflh!uvar of the terms
'corporation' and 'guild' appears to be rather UfljflBtified.
It seems more appropriate to cal]. them a community of merchants
with common origin, interests and beliefs. They were all bound
together by the Banafiju Dharma3 which they claimed to follow
There is no evidence of any other fora of bond, administrative
or otherwise, between them. There is little evidence regarding
any definite organization in their community. An official called
Paaa-svimi is met with in most of their inscriptions. But
be appears as the head of a mercantile town who took part in
the meetings of the Aiflffruvar as well as of other mercantile
bodies It is, therefore, difficult to decide whther he was an
official of the Aiflfi71uvar or the head of a town acknowledged
I. EC., VIII, p. 89 of the text.
2. E.C., VII, Inscription No. 9k from Shikarpur TV.uq.
145by all the professional bodies in the town. The term ffaa
-svmi (lord of the town) itself suggests that he was the general
head of a town rather than an official of any particular body.
The only other official term that occurs in the records of the
Aiflfl!ruvar is igeya, which is of doubtful meaning' Some have
suggested that it could mean a passport department But it is
difficult to determine the real meaning of the term. The
Aiflflh!uvar may have been a loosely organized body because of
their community of interests but sufficient evidence is lacking
to call them a corporation or a trading guild. The fact that
some of their associate bodies like the Valafijiyar and the
Nakarattlr, who are conunonly referred to as mercantile corporations
and guilds have survived to this da as mercantile castes
in South IndiaL4 should serve as a corrective to the impression
that the Lifluvar and other trading communities of this
period were organized as corporations
L. II, (Revised ed.), p. 90 of the Kannada text.
2. Ibid., p. 78 of the translation.
3. A.Appadorai, . ., p. 378.
4, Iperia1 Gazetteer of India, XVIII, pp. 188-189.
5. Even in modern times the business community of Ceis havetheir own fiscal year, stick to their own system of book-keeping
and follow their own type of business practices and customs.
But they could hardly be called a corporation on these grounds.
146The AifffhIruvar were primarily traders in various
types of merchandise as they themselves claim in their inscriptionai
They call themselves wandering traders and claim to have
visited a large number of countries, many of which were in
North India and some outside the subcontinent But none of their
inscriptions has been found in any part of North India and
this claim may not be altogether true. But the fact that their
records have been left in Ceylon and in Sumatra shows that
they were an adventurous community whose members went to
far off lands in pursuit of their profession.
Apart from their fundtion as traders, they seem
to have occupied a leading position among a larger number of
occupational groups in the towns, exercising much power and
influence over tbem In many of their inscriptions, we get as
1. E.G., VII, p. 159 of the text.
2. E.C., VII, No. 118 from Shikarpur T.1uq - The following
countries are mentioned:- 'Chra, Cba, PIya, Nagadha,
Kausala, SaurItra, Dhanustra, Kurumbha, Imbboja, Gaufla,
La, Barvvara, Praaa, Npja, kapda, Lambakara,
StrT-rljya, Ghola-mukha emba nIndafigaum'.
3. Ibid., Noe. 118 and 119 from Shiknipur T.luq, pp. 158-163 of
the text.
147many as forty-six such bodies associated with the Aififih1uvar
and their Banaflju Dharma3 These include the NLdie, Baajigas
or Valafljiyar and. the Naaratt1r. The exact relationship
between the AififUruvar and these bodies is not easy to
determine. Nany of the inscriptions give us , however, some
idea of the nature of this relationship. Certain writers have
expressed the view that the Aif1Zuvar were a federation of
all these bodies and not a community by themselves T.V.Mahalingam
considers th associate bodies to be sub-divisions of the
Ain1mznvar But these views are again based on the assumption
1. E.C., VII, pp. 158-159 of the text ; M.E.R. for 1918 , p. 17k.
The following communities are mentioned:-
Gavaras, Gatrigas, Seis, Seiguttas, Mtgakras, Settiputras,
Bra-vaigaa, NnIdis, IIu, Nagara, Baafijigas, Etivraa,
Nuai-vras, I flcika-vTraa, Koñga-vas, Kaalis, Bhadrakae,
Gav$aevmis, iñgam, iu-puli, Valattnkk.i, Variyas,
Paradis, Svadis, Va1afLgai-taiyar, Niyyattir, BTras,
Ga4igae, GavuQ4ae, Murnmuri-da4as, 4vaQa-klras, V!rakoi,
Vyavahri1cas, Pa.flchflaa, KumbhalflcaR, Tantuvayins, Vastrabhedakae,
Tila Ghak, Kurantak s, Vastra-rakk, Dvagas, Parikeliti,
G-rakçakas, Kfras, Rjk and Zauras.
2.. S.Cbandrasekhara Sastri,'Economic Conditions under the Hoysalas',
Half-Yearly Journal of the Mysore Univeristy, II, 2, July,( p.223.
3 • TV. Mahalingam, . cit., p • 390.
145that all these bodies were organized trade guilda. There is
no doubt that the Aiflruvar were a community d.etinct from
*1]. others mentioned with them. They are referred to as such
in their records, where the Aiflffaruvar, NnIdie, the
NrattIr, the eighteen samayas and other communities are
distinctly listed as different bodiee But in all these
instances, the leading position of the AiflfiIruvar over all
the others is clearly brought out. There are many instances to
show that the Aifiruvar presided over several meetings
where affairs of the other communities were aettled The
prahsti appearing in many of their records is called the
AynUrvvara praheti and is clearly in praise of the
This community seems, therefore, to have enjoyed considerable
power and influence over the many pafeboiona-]. groups in the
towns and trading centres of South India. They, as well as
the other major mercantile communities like the Valajiyar and
the Nakarattr, were conceded a share of the administrative
duties of the state. We find in the inscriptions that they had
1. LE.R. for 1925/26, No. 131 of 1926 ; M.E.R. for 1919,
No. 216 of 1918.
2. E.G., VII, p. 159 of the text.
3. Ibid.
149a share in the collection of tolls, taxes and rates 1 and had
the power of declaring certain towns as i-v!ra-paa4as
and Southern Aryv4es They also reserved for themselves the
power to grant trading privileges in certain articles to
individual tradera They were great benefactors of temples to
which they granted part of the tolls and rates collected by theme
The communities associated with the Aiflflh1ruvar
were not all mercantile in character. Many were other occupational
groups which later evolved into castes. Examples of such comnn(ities
are the Paflc3las (the five classes of smiths), K.unibhallkzae
(potters) and the Kauras (barbers) who were among the
eighteen samayas. Even the Valafijiyar and the Nakarattr later
evolved into castes There were also some communities which
were given to martial pursuits, such as the Ei-vras, Muai-vTras,
Ificii'lkz-vTraa, Koñga-vI.as and the Mummuri-daQ4as? Their names
1. E.G., VII, p. 159 of the text; M.E.R. for 1919, No. 9 of
1918-19, Appendix A , No. 216 of 1918 ; M.E.R. for 1912,
No. 377 of 1911.
2. M.E.R. for 1913, No. 3k2 of 1912; E.C., VIII, p. 89 of the text.
3. LE.P. for 1919, Nos. 10 and 11 of 1918-19 Appendix A.
k. M.E.R. for 1912, No. 377 of 1911.
5. The Imperial Gazt.teer of India, XVIII, p. 198.
6. Ibid.
7. See infra,
150
suggest the nature of the work they were doing.
As mentioned earlier, there are seven inscriptions
in Ceylon which attest to the presence of the AiZ.ffuvar and.
their associates in the island although Ceylon has been omitted
in the list of countries covered by their activities, furnished
in their inscriptions The earliest of these inscriptions comes
from Anurdhapura and its contents have already been discussed
The inscription is datable to the ninth century. The Nku-nItu
(Four Countries), a community identifiable with the Nlku-nu
of the Kannada inscriptions, was responsible for setting up
this record. The Nilku-n4u of the Kannada inscriptions are
found associated with the Aiflffruvar and were probably a
trading community like the ].u-nakarattr (Those of the Four
Towns) This may mean that some associates of the Ai1Iflh1uvar,
and probably the lattei too, were in the island in the ninth
century.
There is definite evidence regarding the presence
of the Valafliyar and the Nakarattr in Ceylon in the twelfth
1. See eupra, p.
2. See supra, p.
3. E.C., VII, p. 310 of the text ; E.C., VIII, p. 89 of the text;
LE.R. for 1917, No. 130 of 1916.
151
century. The source of our information is the fla l]drTra inscription
from Polonnaruva, which appears to have been set up not long
after the death of Vij&yabThu I (iUO) The Valafijiyar and the
Nakarattr are referred to here as those closely associated
with the Vjikkaa. The exact relationship is couched in the
following lines of the inscription:-
)-tantirattm ki ekajukku nittaikai uaValaflceyaraiyuni eau kt!i varum Nakarattiruiraiyum_ki ..... 2
Paranavitana has rendered it in English as follows:-
We of the I4ahtantra, having called together theValafijiyar who are our leaders, and the Naka.rattr andothers, who always accompany us... 3
The Valaceyar of our inscription,were, of course, the
Valafijiyar who are sometimes referred to as Baafijigas in the
Kannada inscriptions. In the first place, these lines inform
us that the Vala.jiyar and the Nakarattr were in Ceylon along
with the VjaikkIras in the twelfth century and possib].y in the
eleventh, too, for there is evidence for the presence of the
Vaikkras in the eleventh century But more important than
this is the light thrown on the nature of the relationship
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Polonnaruva Inscription of VijayabThu I',
2 • £i• ' pp. 330-338.
2. Ibid., p. 337.
3. Ibid., p. 338.
k. See supra, p.c7.
152between the Valafljiyar and the Vaikkras.Commenting on this
Paranavitana writes that 'it seems from our inscription as if
the three divisions or 'hands' to which the V.ai-kkras were
divided consisted of the Mahitantra, the Va1ajiyar and the
Nagarattr', and adds that 'as the Valafijiyars are said to have
been the leaders (nfddai) of the V i-1ckra troops, it might
be conjectured that the latter migrated to Ceylon with the
Valafjiyar whom they served' But, as Ni].knta Sastri has pointed
out, there is no reason to assume that the Valafljiyar and the
Nakarattr formed two of the three divisions of the aikkras
The lines quoted above refer to the Valafijiyar as the nt!tãtaik4
of the tjaikk ras. Paranavitana has translated the word nttitaikaj
as leaders. Nilakanta Sastri has the following comment to make
on this translation:-
The translation of n!tdaig4 into 'leaders' is not quiteaccurate; the word literally means 'grandfathers', andwhat is meant cannot be physical descent when it is onecorporation claiming this relation to another, and mustimply some kind of spiritual, or constitutional. relation. 3
Although nfjtaik4 means 'grandfathers' or 'ancestors', it
could also be taken to mean elders In this context, it is not
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Polonnaruva Inscription of VijayabThn I', p.335
2. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, 'VijayabThu, Th. Liberator of Ceylon',
J.LA.S. (c.B.), N.S., IV, 195k, p. 70.
3. Ibid.
k. E.Z., II, p. 25k. D.}Lde Z.Wickrn2Ringhe has given this
translation.
153
possible to take the first two meanings, for the Valafijiyar being
a mercantile community and the V t1dc!pa being a mercenary
body we cannot say that one is descended from the other. The
meaning 'elders' seems to be more appropriate. But here, too,
the Valafijiyar cannot be taken to be the elders in the physical
sense. They appear to have been regarded as the leaders of the
T!af1dc!ras, as Paranavitana. baa rendered, and seem to have
been elders in the social sense. This relationship becomes clear
if we look at the social structure in South India in this period.
In the eleventh and the twelfth century, and in fact till
recent times, the various castes of the Dravidian areas were
divided into two major sections called the Iei (Left Rand)
and the Valañkai (night Hand) The Vjatkk!ra inscription
under discussion attests to the presence of the members of these
two sections in Ceylon in the twelfth century Certain mercantile
communities were considered to be the heads or leaders of
these sections. In the case of the Valki1 the N.udia and
the Valafijiyar were among the leaders while the Iikai had
1. B.A.Saletore, Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara
Empire, II, p. 68 ff.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The Polonnaruva Inscription of VijayabThu I',
p. 337.
the 1a1r,rattir as one of their leaders The V1?ri- were often
considered to be of a higher social atatus than the IaI%kRi
Although the ffaikk ra forces in Ceylon were drawn from both
sections, as they admit in our inscription, the Nabltantra
division, who alone call the Valafijiyar their m±taik4,
appears to have been drawn from the Valkii. This assumption
is further strengthened by the fact that the 'Nakaratt.r 4ir'are referred to as those who accompany the atantra The
phrase Nakarattr baa been translated by Paranavitana
as the 'Nakarattir and others'f' But literally uiffr means
'those included', from uflitu meaning 'include'. The phrase
would, therefore, mean 'those included (in a group) with the
Nakarattir'. This seems to be a reference to the Iafi1tai leaders.
The reason why this group is mentioned as those who accompany
the Z4ahitantra must be the subordinate position held by them
in the presence of the ValAksi. The leaders of both sections
were invited for the meeting of the aik1ra.g obviously
because the latter were drawn from both seetions of the Dravidians.
1. E.G., XI, p. 61 of the text ; The Imperial Gazetteer of India,
XVIII, pp. 198-199.
2. B.A.Saletore, 2• cit., p. 68 ff.
3. See supra, p. 151
k. See supra, p. s5S
155
It seems, therefore, reasonable to assume that the mercenary
forces called the Vfl.aikkrae went to the island along with
the mercantile communities who, as we have seen earlier, had
a number of martial communities associated with them in South
India. Some of the Vjaikkras, however, may have gone there
independently and later acknowledged the leadership of the
mercantile communities.
The Valafijiyar, Nakarattr and some of the mercenary
bodies were only a few of the associates of the Aififfauvar who
were in Ceylon in the twelfth century. There are at least
three Tamil inscriptions in the island which refer to several
others. These records, which are unpublished, are found at
Vihalkaa, Vihrh!nna and Padaviya and contain the praasti
of the Aififii1ruvar at the beginning Unfortunately all are
badly damaged and the actual purport of the inscriptions cannot
be ascertained. These could be assigned to the twelfth century
on pa].aeographica]. grounds. The script of these inscriptions
is very similar to that of the Tamil inscriptions of the time
of GajabThu II ( 1132-1153). Apart from these Tamil epigraphe,
there is another record of the Aifffih1ruvar in the Sinhalese script
of the twelfth or the thirteenth century. Unfortunately only
1. See supra, p.i3n'
153
three lines of this inscription, containin( part of the paasti,
have been preserved Since the praasti is in Sanskrit, it is
not known whether the rest of the inscription was in Sinhalese
or not.
The pragasti in the Tamil inscriptions is a shorter
version of that appearing in the Kannada records and begins with
the words Samaatha bhuvanraya pafica ata v!ra sisana. As in
the Kolar inscription of ii8O the AiflfiUuvar describe themselves
here as the 'children of the Goddess of the City of Ayyappoil'
(&,yappo]4pura Paramvarikku makkaj). The praasti is followed
by a list of members of the different communities who were
associated with the Aiflflttuvar in the island. The number of
communities is not as large as in the South Indian inscriptions.
Among those mentioned in the preserved portions of the inscriptions
are the Ceis, Ceiputras, Nndis, Valafijiyar, V!rakkoti,
Valaf&kai, A2gIckiras, Xvaa1dc ras, Iaflc I A1m and the Koñga-vias.
The Cettis were traders as well as money lenders
or bankers In our inscriptions they are sometimes referred to
as the 'Ceis of the countries of the eighteen worlds' ( patifl!.
-pThni nu ceftik4). Several meznbezs of this community are
1. D.Lde Z.Wickramasinghe, 'Polonnaruva: Anaulundva Slab-Inscription'
E.Z., II, p. 236.
2. E.G., X, No.170 from Kolar -' Ayyv4epura Paramevariya makk4'.
3. A.Appadorai, . cit., pp. 379-380.
151
named in the8e inscriptions. In the VThalka4a inscription,
these Ceis and the V!rakkoiyar are recorded to have done
something in order that a certain town may not be destroyed.
It is not clear what the nature of their work was and which
town was protected in that manner. There are some place names
in the North-central and North-western ProviAces with cei
fleir first element. These may date from the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries and may indicate the presence of Cefti
settlers in those places
The Ceiputrae may also have been traders, bat
we have no information regarding the nature of their activities.
The ndia, as we have already noted, were a community of
traders like the Valafijiyar. In many of the Kannada inscriptions
they are referred to as the Ubhaya Indis (both ndis)
It is not known who these two classes of Nndis were. In
an inscription from Bangalore, there occurs the phrase
svad!a t'arada nindam (local and foreign Nnida It
may be that this mercantile community was divided into a
.. •c,,i,,,, I? 1 ?) 1 , c-
2. E.G., IX, p. 83 of the text ; E.I., XIX, p. 25.
3. E.G., IX, p. 1 of the text.
158
local and a foreign group. But this phrase could also mean
'those of the svad&a, parad!a and nThda (communities),'
for we come across a body known as the Paradis in another
inacription It is difficult to settle this question without
ez.im-i-ning some of the unpublished inscriptions which remain
inaccessible at the moment. It is also not known whether the
Nndis were actually a community of merchants from different
countries, as the name implies, or whether they were so called
because they were descended from foreign merchants who had
established their business in the Kannada country, where the
community seems to have originated. Whatever their origin ma
have been, they were among those who travelled to distant lands
in pursuit of their trade, possibly with the AiZflturuvar. Their
presence in Pagan, Burma, is known from the Teinil inscription
found there In Ceylon, apart from the evidence of the Tamil
inscriptions, there is also a Sinhalese epigraph of the time of
queen Lt]1vat (1197-1200, 1209-1210, 1211-1212) which mentions
- them. According to this record, in the reign of LT]1vat the
lndia (Nnd!i vyp rayan) had an alms house at Anurdhapura
1. M.E.R. for 1932/33, No. 173 of 1932/33.
2. ., VII, p. 198. -
3. D.M.de Z.Wickramasinghe, 'The Slab-Inscription Marked of
queen LT]ivat!', E.Z., I, p. 179.
159
As in South India, these mercantile co n"'fl'nitiea wereengaged
in providing charitable services and in patronising religious
institutions.
The VT.rakkoi or Vrakkofiyar were another
mercantile community found in Ceylon in about the twelfth
century. They are recorded in the VIha 1kaa inscription to
have associated themselves with the Cetis in tkirg certain
steps to protect a town They are mentioned in a few South
Indian inscriptions, too, but do not seem to have been a
prominent trading comnnznity
The Akkkras and the va zkk ras appear to have
been two of the non-mercantile Dravidian communities that were
in the island in this period. The 1Akak1ras are frequently
mentioned in the records of the AiffflXuvar but it haø not been
possible to find out the nature of their profession. An akakk.ra,
in T41, is a dandy or a masquerader and is derived from the
Sanskrit word a.figa (=body) Perhaps they were professional
entertainers who specialised in masque. The Avaakr rae do not
find mention in the South Indian inscriptions but are referred
1. See supra, p. JS7.
2. M.E.R. for 1910, No. U of 1910.
3. Nadras Tamil Lexicon, I, p. 18.
160
to in the V 1kala and VihirhThna epigraphe. The name is derived
from am (Skt. meaning market or bazaar Perhaps the
4va4akkras were those who were responsible for the maintenance
of markets and other public places.
The Valkai of our inscriptions are the eighteen
castes of South India who were categorized under this name.
The term occurs in the Jaik1cra inscription as well, along
with the term It.Aki This clearly shows that the South Indian
caste system was maintained b.mong the Dravidiana in Ceylon, too.
The Valafijiyar and the } ndEis as well as some of the laikkras
were Valakai comnmnities But no information is available
regarding the number and names of the Va1a.kai castes in the
island.
There is no information at all regarding the
activities of the 4aciAkams (young lions). It is not possible
to conjecture from the name the nature of their profession. The
Koñga-vias appear to have been a community given to military
pursuita The name means 'swordsmen of Koigu'. They may have been
a class of sword fighters who were among the mercenary communities
1. Madras Tamil Lexicon, I, P. 21+9.
2. See supra, p. I3-
3. See enpra, p. I^3-
1+. E.A.Nilk2nta Sastri, 'A Tamil Merchant-guild in Sumatra', p. 319.
161
who accompanied the mercantile bodies. The Vhalkaa inscription
has a list of several military personalities who were associated
with the Ceis, VTrakkoiyar and the Valafljiyar. They have
such titles as C!pati (army chief), mallan (wrestler) and
(victor). A certain Citta, is referred to as the Valaftceyar
Cpati, apparently because he was in the service of the
Valafijiyar. Mercantile communities may have employed mercenary
forces to protect their endowments as well as to safeguard
their trust properties. This perhaps explains the presence of
Munimuridaas ( a class of mercenaries) on many occasions when
grants were made by the mercantile communities
Some at least of the mercenary communities from
which the Vai1dras were drawn seem to have gone to the island
along with the mercantile communities. The claim of the }1ahtantras,
a section of the rja1kkras, that the Valafijiyar were their
elders and the invitation extended tè the Valafljiyar and the
Nakarattr to attend an important meeting of the aikkaa
at Polonnaruva show that these mercenary bodies were closely
associated with the leading mercantile communities from South
Indja
1. VII, p. 159 of the text ; E.G., IX, p. 83 of the text;
E.G., XI, p1 126 of the text.
162As pointed out earlier, the period under review was
one during which the practice of inviting foreign mercenaries
to the island was absent. But despite this, the Dravidian
mercenaries formed one of the significant sections of the army
of the Sinhalese kings. Of these, the V!.aikk raa iLndoubtedly
formed the most important troops. Since much has been written
on the origin and history of these mercenary forces, it may
be necessary to point out some of the misconeeptions regarding
them among writers on Ceylonese history and to attempt a better
understanding of the subject The best source of our information
on this subject is undoubted]$ the Polonnaruva inscription of
the aikkrae. Be8ides this, there are at least two other
Tamil inscriptions in the island, from Ga]. Oya and P4aniDai,
referring to the Vjaikkras and the notices in the q1si
Nilakanta Sastri has explained that the word vaikkra is
derived from the word v!ai (= time, occasion, moment) and that
it stands for the 'time or occasion indicated in an oath by
the soldier who binds himself by the oath to lay down his life
in certain contingencies4 Sastri has also given the alternate
1. K.L.Nilakanta Sastri, 'Vijayabhu I, The Liberator of Ceylon',
pp. 58-60, 67-71; The Cas, pp. 315, 316, 'ik, 455;
S.Paranavitana, 'The Polonnaruva Inscription of V.jayabhu I',
pP. 333-335; T.V.!halingam, . cit., pp. 258-260.
2. LA.Nil2kpnta Sastri, 'Vijayabhu I, The Liberator of Ceylon', p.68
163
interpretation that 'their designation implies that they were
ever ready to defend the king and his cause with their lives
when occasion (v!ai) arose' It is not possible to determine
whether the element vai is the sane as the Tamil word meaning
time or occasion. It is quite possible that it is derived from
some other word now unknown to ue References to the V!aikkras
occur in Taniil inscriptions and literature from about the
eleventh century. These mercenaries were not all in the employ
of kings. Many were employed by village assemblies and other
institutions They seem to have been divided into different
types according to the nature of the duty performed by them.
We meet with the following types, for instance, in the sources
mentioned above:- a) P-VaikkLar (Tami]. p = flowers)t
b) K4a-fffr dr.ra (Tamil k4jaz' = robbers) c) Rkasa-V. dcrar
(skt. rkasa = giant) d) Tacca-V.aikkrar (Tainil Taccar=carpenters)?
1. LA.Nil2k1,ta Sastri, The Cas, p. k5k.
2. Cf., Indoneasian word b&la, 'to defend'.
3. B.A..Saletore, I, . cit., p. 3k8.
4. K.LNilakanta Sastri, 'VijayabThu I, The Liberator of Ceylon', p.67.
5. . . R. for 1914, No. 368 of 1914.
6. M. .R. for 1921, No. 393 of 1921.
7. LR. for 192k, No. 194 of 192k.
164e) Tiru-ciila-aikkrar (Taniil tiru = sacred, = spear) and
1) Tiru-ciampala-Va1 krar (ciampalam = hal]. of wisdozn)
The exact functions of these different V,ik1r.ras is not
clear from their names. PU-V!.aikkrar may have been those who
guarded the flower gardens in a temple. Kaa-Vjafkkirar may
have been employed to guard a place against thieves. Rkasa
Vaikkrar may have got this na4e because of their size.
Tiru-cfla-Vaikkrar may have been guards of temples who were
armed with spears. We can only speculate on their functions from
the names they bore.
A number of divisions of VaikkIras, probably in
the service of kings, were named after kings and princes. Among
them were the (a) Nittavinta ffaUdcirar (b) Jaanta-
terifica V.aikkrar1' Cc) k]akiya Ca-teriflca Va1 kkrar
(d) Aridurga-lngbana-t erint a Valafkai Vaikkrar (e) Candra
Parlkrama-t erint a Va].afikai aikkrar' and (f) Iaiya-rja-terint a
1. M.E.P. for 1925, No. 188 of 1925.
2. Ibid., No. 2k3 of 1925.
3. LE.R. for 1927, No. 282 of 1927.
k. M.E.R. for 1921, No. 393 of 1921.
5. 3.1.1., II, Introduction, p. 9.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
165
Va1Aki VjaUdcrar The epithet Va1a.fkai or Ijatkai denoted
their caste group.
These mercenaries were not a 'warlike tribe or a
clan or a military community' as Geiger thought? but 'a type of
troops bounds by specific oaths of loyalty which they were
bound to keep at the risk of their own lives' They yore drawn
from different castes and were probably organized as a military
guild. R.C.Majumdar takes them as 'a good example of Katriya
The assembly of the Vaikkra community at Polonnaruva
as well as the organized manner in which they sometimes revolted
against the Sinhalese rulers may support this contention. But
apart from these, there is no substantial evidence to prove
this conclusively.
Vai1dcra mercenaries were employed in Ceylon in
the time of Vijayabhu I (1055-1110) and possibly even earlier,
under the Cas. The Colombo Museum Pillar inscription of
Kassapa IV (898-91k) has a reference to a Vekk who was a
body-guard Judging from his profession, this person may have
1. 8.1.1., II, Introduction, p. 9.
2. W.Geiger, Culture of Ceylon in !iedieval Times, p. 152.
3. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, 'VijayabThu I, The Liberatthr of Ceylon' ,p.58.
k. See supra, p. 1S3.
5. R.C.Majumdar, . p. 31.
6. EL III, p. 276.
166
been a aikkra (Pii V.akkr& may have become Vekk in
Sinhalese by the omission of the final ), but it is not certain
whether there were VakkTras in the island as early as the
tenth century. A Tamil inscription from Gal Oya, near Polonnaruva,
records a grant by a certain Atikaraa, C&Aa4a, a MIu-kai
Tiru-Jaikkra Although on palaeographical grounds this
epigraph may be dated to the eleventh century, it is difficult
to say whther it is a Ca record. It may well belong to the
time of Vijayabhu I. In the present state of our knowledge,
it is not possible to say whether there were V.a1-kkiras in
the island before the time og Vijayabhu I.
The Cilavaisa makes a few references to the
influence exerted by the Jaikkras in the island the
e^tLtt ttf4tLi centuries. It is clear from these that
the Sinhalese rulers from the time of Vijayabhu I depended
to a great extent on these mercenaries for the defence of their
kingdom It is not necessary to assume that all these mercenaries
came from South India. As Nilknta Sastri has pointed out, some
of the Vlaikkras may have been enlisted from among the Dravidians
who were settled in the island This is also perhaps one of
1. I.I., IV, No. 1398.
2. .,6O:36, 63:2k, 29 and 77:kk.
3. K.A.Nila.kanta Sastri, 'VijayabThu I, The Liberator of Ceylon', p.60.
167
the reasons why we do not hear often of mercenaries being
enlisted from the mainland in this period.
From the Polonnaruva inscription we learn that
there were several sections among the Vaikkraa in the island.
The Mahtantra appears to have been the leading group among
them. According to this inscription, it was the Nahitantras
who first met and invited the Va]Jjiyar, the Nakarattir and
others for the assembly of the V.aikk!ras at Polonnaruva. They
seem to have followed a code of conduct or rules called the
Mahtantra for, at the end of the inscription, there is an
imprecation to the effect that those who violate the Mahtantra
will go to hell We agree With Nile 1 nta Lastri that the
interpretations that they belonged to some sort of Mahyna
2or Saiva sect seem to be very unlikely. In the South Indian
inscriptions, the term Mahãtantra occurs as the name of a military
community or claas Nilknta Sastri is right in suggesting -
that this term may relate to some school of militarism in
South India
1. E.I., xVIII, P. 337
2. K.A.Nilakanta Saetri,'Vijayabihu I, The Liberator of Ceylon', p.71.
3. M.E.R. for 1917, No. k33 of 1916.
4. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri,'Vi4yabThu I, The Liberator of Ceylon', p.71.
168
Among the other sections of the Va{k-kraa the
Polonnaruva inscription mentions those of the Valañkai, I1kRi,
Ciu-taam, Piaik4-taam, Vatukar, J!a1ayIar and Parivra-
kntam. This mixed composition of the VTi {kkiras clearly
shows that they were not members of one military caste or
community but were organized more like a military guild. Of
these different sections, the Vaikkras of the Valfika{ and
Ttafikai. were obviously tho8e drawn from the two categories of
Dravidian castes known as Vale lflcei and Içaikai. The ValAkai
laikkras appear to have been further sub-divided into
various sections. In the P4anilai inscription of the forty-
second year of VijayabThu I (1097), a Vaikkra of the
Vi kid rama-ca].mka-terinta Val_b1 division is mentioned
This division was apparently named after VikramabThu I (1111-1132),
the son of VijayabThu I and bearer of the consecration name
Ca1mka (Pii, Si1megba) The naming of a division of the
army after a ruler indicates that the Sinhalese rulers were
following a South Indian practive
1. S.Paranavitana, 'A Tamil Slab Inscription from P4amftai',
IV, p. 19k.
2. As Vikramabhu considered himself to be the legal successor
of Vijayabhn I, who bore the consecration name of Siri-sañghabodhi1
be would have adopted the consecration name of Si1-megha-vaa.
3. See supra, p.
169
The meanings of the terms CiEu-taarn and Piaflc4-
ta 1am are still obscure. Ciu-taam and P, un-taam occur in
a number of South Indian inscriptions of this period. The
term 4u-ta has been variously interpreted as (a) private
treasure (b) minor or small treasury (c) the followers of the
king during his minority Cd) one of the 'purely honorary titles
conferred on officers as well as private individuals according
to the status held by them in official position or societyk
and (e) a c1as of subordinate officials The first two
interpretations are based on the assumption that the element
is derived from the word dhana, meaning treasure or
wealth. The term occurs in connection with certain officials
whose position could be described as military. We get, for
instance, the phrases u-taattu Vafuka kvalar (the Vatuka,
i.e. Telugu, guards of the Ciu-taam) and Ciu-taattu Valafikai
Vaikkra_paaik4 (the Valañkai Vaikkra troops of the
Ciu-taaxn) in two South Indian inscriptiona In another
1. Madras Tamil Lexicon, III, p. lk6o.
2. S.Paranavitana,'The Polonnaru'va Inscription of VijayabThu I',p. 336
S.I.I., II, p. 9.
3. S.Paranavitana,'Tlie Polon.naruva Inscription of VijayabThu I',p.336.
i. Ibid.
5. S.I.I., II, Intro., p. 11; K.A.Nilknta Sastri, The Cas, p.k63.
6. E.I., XVIII, p. 336.
170
inscription, an official who had military personnel under him
is described as Citu-tanam Perun-taam ri:ya (The Great chief
or Lord of the Citu-taam and Perun-taam) In yet another record,
certain }alay3a officers of Kulttufiga I are stated to have
2been attached to the Perun-taam and the Ciu-taani. A Ca
record in Ceylon refers to an official of the Perun-taani of
Rjndra I (RjThdra C1a Tvar Perun-taattu paimaka)
serving in the island While in Ceylon Dravidian mercenaries
were in the Citu-taain and the Pi.aik4-taijam, we find that
Telugu and Nalaya persons were attached to the Ciu-taam
and the Perun-taana in the Ca country. The above occurrehces
of the terms u-tan, perun-tan and aik4 am show
that these stand either for departments of the state or for
divisiona of the army. It is not possible to explain u-tan
as private treasure for it does not suit the context in the
above instances. It is used, however, in this sense or in
the sense of treasury in some of the C3a inscriptions of the
time of Rjarja I ' The explanation that the ciu-ta and
1. N.E.R. for 1913, No. 14]. of 1912.
2. M.E.R. for 1938/39, No. 130 of l98/39.
3. 5.1.1., IV, No.lLflk.4.. 5.1.1., II, P . 3.
171
perun-taxi were the 'minor' and 'major' treasuries respectively,
though plausible, leaves the term inexplicable.
It is not known whether the royal treasury was divided into
three different departments to which were attached three sections
of the army. This seems unlikely. It is also unlikely that the
guards and soldiers who protected a king during his minority
belonged to a section of the army different from that of those
who protected him in his later life. It is also not possible to
explain these terms as mere honorary titles,for, in the instances
quoted above as well as in the Polonnaruva inscription, such
an interpretation does not seem to suit the context. Hultsech
baa sometimes referred to the Ciu-taam as a class of subordinate
officials and Ni].akanta Lastri, too, is of the opinion that
this was a flower grade of official nobility' The latter opinion
is the result of confusing the terms perun-tan. and perun-tarani
as referring to the same institution But an examination of
the occurrences of these two terms in the south Indian
inscriptions reveals that the two are different in their meaning.
Peruntaram appears as an honorific indicating high official
1. S.I.I., II, Intro., p. 11.
2. LA.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, p. k63.
3. Ibid. ; peruntarani - perum (= high or big) + taram (=status).
172status and was used for individual officers, whereas perun-ta
seems to have been a department o a body to which were often
attached a number of soldiers. Perun-taram is often used for
single individuals as, for instance, ar RLjirlja Dvar Peruntaram
which occurs as the title of a s!npati in a Tanjore inscription
Another inscription from G5vindaputtflr describes a person
called VikramCa Nahirja, as a peruntaram of Mumnnii Ca
But whenever individual officers are mentioned in connection
with the Perun-taam, they are referred to as those attached
to the Perun-taam as, for instance, Perun-taattu-paimakap
(servant of the Perun-taam) The occurrence of the phrase
Ciu-ta.attu peun-taram (perun-taram of the Ciu-taam) in some
of the inscriptions not only shows clearly that the terms
perun-taram and perun-tan are different but also demonstrates
FYvntYthat the latter stands for someone attached to a larger body
which is the Ciu-taani Nilkanta Sastri explains this, however,
as implying an intermediate status between the perun-ts
and the u-tanam in the official nobility This is not correct
1. s.I.I., II, p. 161.
2. i. .R. for 1928/29, No.168 of 1928/29.
3. S.I.I.,IV, No.lk])i.
i. s.i.i., II, p. 56.
5. K.A.NilaJcanta Sastri, The Caa, p. 1163.
173
for the term perun-taram in such instances stands for individuals
rather than for a clase. None of the foregoing explanations
for the terms u-ta, perun-tan and fl.aik4-tan,
therefore, seems to be wholly satisfactory. The ju-ta
occurring in the sense of treasury in some of the Tanjore
inscriptions of Rjarja I appears to be different from the
ciu-tan of the other inscriptions. In the latter inscriptions
we may have to take all the three terms to stand for certain
sections of the army which might have bad different functions
in the admtnistration during this period. Wherever the nature
of the profession of those individuals and groups associated
with these terms is indicated, we find that it was military.
The derivation of the element is not clear. It is unlikely
that it is related to i (army). It may be related to
(army; Nalayalam t4am ; Kannada d4am)
The Vaukar and the Malayjar were, of course,
the mercenaries from the Telugu and Ker4a countries. This
shows that the recruitment to the V i1dcra army was not
confined to the Tamils alone but included other Dravidians as
well. The literary sources, too, contain frequent references to
1. The Ja of t4am may have interchanged with va and later
became a. Cf., Kannada baaftjiga - Tamil v4afijiyar.
the Ker4a and ica4ia mercenaries in the employ of the
Sinhalese rulers in this period The Telugus are, however, not
mentioned in these sources. Keraja and Telugu mercenaries seem
to have been numerous in the Ca country in this period, while
Kannaa mercenaries went as far north as Bengal in pursuit of
their profession The Cavaa makes a distinction between the
Ier4aa and the ffaikkras which might mean that only a section
of the Ier4a mercenaries were included in the VN.aikkra
army
The Parivra-kntam of the Polonn2rTa inscription
is not known from the South Indian inscriptions. It is, therefore,
difficult to say whether it was just another division of the
Vflaikkra army or a military community included in that army.
It has been suggested that it may stand for the spearmen in the
king's procession (parivL,a) A division of the Ca army was
known as the pariirattr and a number of such divisions are
named in the inscriptions We also come across a troop of
1. Cv., 69:18 ; 70:230 ; 7:144.
2. D.C.Sircar, 'Karta5 outside Karta', J.N.Banvrjea Volume, p. 211.
3. Cv., 7k:k4.
k. D.M.de Z.Wickramasinghe,'Polonnarnva: Slab Inscription of the
Vaikkrae', E.Z., II, p. 25k.
5. .I.I., II, Intro., p. 9.
175
body-guards known as parivra-meykpparka In modern Mysore
there is a caste called the Parivira Bant, which is claimed
to have been originally a military class The Parivra-kntam
of our inscription appears to have been a similar military
body which was perhaps associated with the royal procession.
There has been some difference of opinion among
scholars regarding the interpretation of the phrase M1u-kai
airk'ra,. This occurs in the Polonxiaruva inscription as well
as in another Tamil record from Gal Oya Mu-kai has been
generally taken to refer to three divisions in the Vaiickra
army. 'It seems from our inscription as if the three divisions
or 'hands' to which the ffa{kk'ras were divided , consisted
of the Mahtantra, the Valafljiyar and the Nagarattir', is the
comment of Paranavitana on this phraae Wickramasinghe baa
observed: 'Whether the term u-kai refers to the triple
principle, namely, giva-$akti-Au or Pati-Pacu-Pica corresponding
to the trika of Cashmere çaivism, or it is only an epithet of
the VaUckras due possibly to their army being composed of
1. S.I.I., II, p. 96.
2. J.Sturrock, Manual of South Kanara, I, pp. 156-157.
3. S.I.I., IV, No. 1398.
k. S.Paranavitana, 'The Polonnaruva Inscription of VijayabThu I',
p. 33k.
1(0
three wings, we are unable at present to say' Nilknta Zastri
is inclined to think that refers to the 'traditional
three arms left after the chariots went out of use, viz.,
elephant corps, cavalry and i.nfantry' As we have seen earlier,
the Valafijiyar and the Nakarattr were mercantile communities
and. not divisions of the V!aik1 ra army. There is no evidence
suggesting any connection between the triple principle of
Saivism and !u-kai. Although Nilakanta Sastri's suggestion
seems to be plausible, there are certain difficulties in
accepting it. In the first place, there are some inscriptions
in which an individual member of the Iaikkira army is referred
to as Mu-kai VWikk raa It is difficult to assume tat
some of the Vaikk.ras belonged to all three divisions of the
army, if their army was divided into three different sections.
Secondly, it is not likely that the V.aikkras called themselves
Nu-kai Vaikkras because their army was divided into
three divisions, for, such a division was not a distinctive
feature of their army alone. It is more likely that the epithet
1. D.M.de Z.Wicla'amasinghe, 'Polonnaruva: Slab Inscription of
the Vaikkrae', p. 251.
2. K.A.Ni].akanta Sastri,'VijayabThu I, The Liberator of Ceylon', p.69.
3. S.I.I., IV, No.1398.
177
u-kai has some other significance which we are not in a position
to grasp clearly. does not occur only in connection
with the Vs1&ras. In an inscription from frrmdvi, we are
informed of the existence of a regiment called the Mu-kai
Mahsai, who were also known as the Paai-piitta-pafl1yiravar
(The Many Thousands who are armed as a Troop) 4occura
here in a similar sense as Valkii in the names Valañkai
Nahsai and Valaâkai 1a1ickrar It seems likely that NUu-kai
was the name of a group of castes like the Valki and the
Iañkai or of a community given to military pursuits This name
might have been chosen for some reason unknown to us.
Although the Vaikkraa appear to have been the
most prominent of the Dravidian mercenary forces in the island
during this period, there were other Dravidian troops, too.
Of these the Agampai troops deserve mention. It is in the reign
of Parkramabu I that we first hear of the Agampais. The
Ni1ya-sañrahaya mentions their army among the forces despatched
by Par.kramabhu on his foreign expeditions. This Agampai
1. Y.E.R. for 1905, No.120 of 1905 ; LA.Nilakanta Sastri,
'Vijayabhu I, The Liberator of Ceylon', p. 69.
2. 1.E. . for 1911, No. 116k of 1911; see supra, p..
3. u-kai may be a variant of }m-kai (the third hand), the
Valkai and the I1'IkRi being the other two 'hands' (kai), and may
denote a third group of castes, possibly a minor one.
178
army is said to have been 2, 1125,000 (sic) strong, which is
undoubtedly an exaggeration The Aganrpais are again referred
to in the Polonnaruva Council Chamber inscription of Nia.ka
NaUa The literary works and inscriptions of the thirteenth,
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries contain several references
to the Agampai troops of the later Sinhalese ru1ers Four
classes of Agampais, namely the äja-, Nuhukala-, Netti- and
Bla-Aganipais are mentioned in these sources.
In the South Indian inscriptions, the Aganipai
or Akampaiy.r find mention from about the time of Kulttufiga I
(l070-ll2O) They often served under minor chieftains and their
leaders or chiefs were known as Akapai-muta1is The Akanrpaia
are mentioned in the inscriptions of the Tamil country and of
Ker4a and appear to have been a military caste or community
rather than a mixed force like the 1a1ic1ras? Even the women
1. p. 18.
2. C.J.Sc, (G), II, p. 137.
3. Dabadei-asna, p.3 ; Mayura-sanda, v. 157; C.J.Sc. (G), II,
p. 139 - Niya.gampya inscription ; E.Z., III, p. 2k0 - )aavala
rock inscription of Parkramabhu VI.
1i. M.B.Ariyapala, Society in Medieval Ceylon, p. 162.
5. M.E.R. for 1926, No. 72 of 1926.
6. M.E.R. for 1913, No. 506 of 1912.
7. T.A.S., V, p. 1k?.
179
of thths community (apai-peuk4) found service in the inner
apartments of the palace and in the teniples The name AkanrpaiyIr
is a compound of the Taml-1 words akampu (inside or inner
apartment) and 4iyr (servants) and this community may have
originated as a class of servants in the inner apartments of
the palace and the temples, and evolved into a caste. This caste
has survived to this day in Arcot, Pudukktai and Nadural
districts and is variously known as Akampaiyr, Akaniui and
AkamufiyL In Ceylon, too, this caste was existent in the Tamil
areas till very recent times As in some parts of South India,
the members of this caste seem to have gradually mixed with
the Vear and given rise to the saying that 'the K4.ar,
Maavar and the staunch Akaiup4iy.r have gradually become
Vetar' (K4ar Maavar kaatta Akampatiyr niella india
Vear ki This saying is prevalent in South India
as well as in Ceylon Some sections of the Jkampati caste in
the Madurai district are 'regarded as a more civilized section
l.11.E.R. for 1913, No, 506 of 1912.
2. A.F.Cox, }'Ianual of North Arcot, I, P. 211;
N.Thiagarajan, A Manual of the Pudukai State, pp. 202-203.
3. K.Velupillai, a-vaipava-kaumuti, p. 108;
M.B.Ariyapala, . cit., P. 162.
4. A.F.Cox, , . cit, p. 211.
180
of the southern Maavars' In Ceylon, too, certain writers
consider the Agampai to have been South Indian Maavar who were
taken to the island as znercenaries There is, however, no
evidence on this point. Whatever their origin may have been,
it seems certain that by the twelfth or the thirteenth century
they had become an exclusive caste and that several of their
members bad gone to Ceylon as mercenaries.
After the twelfth century, our sources record the
presence of some other Dravidian mercenary communities serving
under $inha].ese rulers. Of these, the Nukkuvas and the Kurukulas,
who in modern times are among the major castes in the Tanhil
regions of Ceylon, appear prominently But it is not known whether
they bad already begun their migration to the island in the
twelfth century, The Dabadei-aana gives the earliest reference
to the Mukkuvae. It is recorded here that they formed part of
the troops employed by ParlkramabThu II (l236-l27O) The Kurukulas
may have been in the island as early as the time of the Ca
occupation. As pointed out earlier, the earliest reference to
the presence of the Kurukulas in Ceylon may be said to be found
l.A.P.Cox, . cit., p. 211.
2. Pufiflarataha Thera, Lañkv! Pur' Tattvaya, p. 95.
3. Dabadei-asna, p. I. ; Nukkuva-haana, p. 175 ff.
k. DaMbadepi-asna, p. .
181
in a Ca record from Tirumuicka1, of the year 1067, if the
person named Kuruku1attaraiya in it is taken to be a chief of
the Kuruku1as They are mentioned in later literary sources
as having been in the service of ParkramabIhu VI (lkl2—].k67)
But no evidence is available regarding the presence of these
two communities in the twelfth century. The Mukkuvas, as we
shall see later, were Ker4ae and the Xuruku].as appear to
have been from the Tamil country. It is possible that members
of these two mercenary communities were also found among the
many Ker4as and 'Dam4as' in the island during the twe]Lfth
century.
Apart front the mercenary troops who were in theregular service of the Sinhalese kings, there were also other
South Indian soldiers who were taken to the island as prisoners
of war by the generals of Parkramabhu I. It haa been. the
practise of Sinhalese generals even in earlier times to capture
prisoners during their South Indian campaigns, which were,
however, rare, and send them over to Ceylon Lakpura, the
1. See sura, p.110 ; LD.Ragbavan, The Karva of Ceylon, p.9.
2. M.D.Raghavan, pp. 8-55.
3.I.43.
182general of Parkramabhu I who conducted campaigns against the
C2a and PIya rulers, was under special instructions from
hi8 king to send prisoners from South India for a particular
purpose. In the words of the Clavaisa, some of the defeated
Tamil armies, 'at the commend of the ruler of LaAk who thought
to have all the cetiyas formerly destroyed by the Dmijas
rebuilt by them, he [LsAkpuraJ had brought to Lk and the
work of restoration begun on the Ratanaviluka cetiya. In
another place, the Clavaisa further states that Laâkpura,
after having made over the government of the Pi4ya kingdom to
VTra Pya, 'sent with speed to STh4a the many horses, men
and elephants captured from the Coa country and from the Pap4u
2land'. In addition to the restoration of ruined Buddhist monuments,
the Tamil prisoners were engaged in the task of building new
and ambitious structures as well. It is stated in the Ctflavaisa
that ParkramabThu 'also had the Mahthpa erected which bore
the name of Damia thpa because it had been built by the
Damiaa who had been brought hither after the conquest of the
Pa4u kingdom' It is confirmed by the contemporary Ca records
1. Cv., 76:103-10k.
2. Ibid., 77:103.
. Ibid., 78:76-77.
183
that Lafikpura actually won many successes in his initial campaigns
in South India We cannot, therefore, cast doubt on these state-
ments of the P1i chronicle. The gigantic Daxn4a-tbUpa stands
at Polonnaruva to this day, preserting the memory of the Tamil
prisoners. It was intended to sprpass al]. other monuments of its
type in Ceylon and. its circumference at the base is given in
the Chronicle as 1300 cnbits Unfortunately it has not been
possible to ascertain the dimensions of the base from the ruins
at Polonnarua, as it has not been completely excavated. The
dome stands at about fifty feet from the ground. forming an
extensive circular plateau at the top ParkramabThu must have
commanded a large force of South Indian prisoners to undertake
the building of such a stpa and the repair of other buildings.have
These prisoners must, in the course of time,/mingled with the
Tamil population of the island. Some of them may have been
employed in vihras, as on an earlier occasion when Tami].
prisoners were enslaved and. given over to vih.ras An inscription
from the Ga1apta vihra, near Bentoa, dated in the thirtieth
1. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, 'ParkramabThu and South India', C.H.J., IV,
pp. k6-48 ; U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, pp. k82-k83.
2. Cv., 78:77 ; S.Paranavitana, The tpa in Ceylon, p. 10.
3. S.Paranavita.na , The Stpa in Ceylon, p. 10.
4 • - P - c.!..1 44 '
184year of a ParkramabThu, who is probably the first of that
name, mentions some Tamils among the slaves attached tè that
vihira It is possible that some of them were prisoners from
South India.
In addition to the Tam1l prisoners, Tamil artisans
also seem to have been employed in the time of Parkramabhu I
for the erection of Buddhist edifices. According to the C1flavasa,
there was a dearth of stone-masons in the time pf Parkramabhu
and, as a result, members of other occupational groups were
employed for the work of stone-carving As Paranvitana has
pointed out, in this period, 'when there was a demand for their
art, it is likely that skilled workers came to Ceylon from the
neighbouring continent, where they 'ust have been quite numerous
at that time' As evidence of this, Tamil letters have been
found as mason's marks on the stones of some of the buildings
dating from the time of ParkramabThu I. These letters have
been found not only at Polonnaruva, in such constructions as
the Lotue Bath, but also in some momuments at Padaviya The
building of aiva and Vaiava temples in the Dravidian style
1. S.Paranavitana, 'Galapta Vihra Rock Inscription', E..Z., IV, p.211.
2. Cv., 68:25-26.
3. U.C.R.C.., I, pt.2 , p. 592.
i. Ibid. ; A.S.C.A.R. for 195k, p. 20.
185
of architecture would have also led to the employment of
South Indian artisans in Ceylon. As mentioned before, a number
of aiva and Vaiqava temples, roughly datable to the Po].onnaruva
period, have been found at Polonnaruva and. elsewhere With
the possible exception of the Ca temples, it is difficult
to determine which of the others were built before the thirteenth
century. Nan; of them, as we shall see later, appear to have
been constructed in the thriteenth century The Tanii]. inscrip-
tions of this period attest to the patronage extended by some
of the Sinhalese monarchs, especially VijayabThu I, Gajabhu II
and Vikramabhu I, to Saiviai In fact, two of these epigraphe
mention two temples named after VijayabThu I and VikaramabThu I.
One iá the temple of Vijayarja-Tvarazn at Kant4y and the other
is the Vik1cirama-ca]imka-varam at kal (1galla) These
temples were built apparently in the reigns of VijayabThu I
and VikramabThu I respectively. Some of the iva and Vin t
temples at Polonnaruva may also have been built in the reigns
of these monarchs. It is, therefore, possible that several
1. See supra, p.117.
2. See infra, f411.^.
3. E.Z., IV, p. 191 fl. ; Ibid., III, p. 302 If. ; S.I.I., IV, No.1397;
unpublished inscription No. 1 359 of the epigraphica]. list
in the Archaeological Department, Ceylon.
1• E.Z., III, p. 302 ; ibid., IV, p. 191.
186
South Indian artisans found employment in the island in this
time, as in the later periods.
BrThmaaa were among the South Indian communities
in the island in this period. The Polonnaruva period was one of
increasing Bria influence in Ceylon. The services of Brhmaaa
were enlisted for the performance of various rites in the royal
court a.td palace. This was especially so in the time of Parkrama-
bhu I when Brahmanic rites, we are told, were performed at every
important occurrence in his life. The Ct!lavaisa refers to the
sacrifices performed by BrIhznaas and to the alma offered to
them by rulers like ParkramabThu and nbharaa The Tamil
and Sinhalese inscriptions, too, furnish evidence on this matter.
The Sinhalese inscriptions of N1a1ika Nalla mention Brhmaas
among those to whom that monarch offered Two Tamil
inscriptions from P4am t ai and Nahakirinda refer to two
Brhmaa settlements named after VijayabThu and JayaAkoa
Calmka (probably VikramabThu I), namely the Vijayarja-
cat urv!di-maâg4am at Kant ajy and the Jayai.ko a-c alImka-
caturvdi-magg4am at Nahk4rinda An unpublished Taniil inscription
1. Cv., 62:33, k2, k6 ; 6k:l6; 67:9k; 77:105.
2. II, P. 17k.
3. E.Z., IV, p. 19k; unpublished inscription from Nahakirinda,
No. I 29k of the epigraphica]. list in the Archaeological
Department, Ceylon.
187
from 1Cantay associates Gajabhu 11 with a sacrifice held at
the brahinadeya that place The same monarch is credited in
the T ia-]cailca-puram with the patronage of Brhmaaa
attached to the temple of cvaram The patronage extended
to them by the Sinhalese rulers as well as the need for them
in the new temples of the island may have been responsible for
the migration of BrIhmaas from South India. Although it is
possible that there were in Ceylon BrThmaas from other parts
of the subcontinent, there is little doubt that the catur-v!cli-
mafga!ams were settlements of South Indian BrThmaas. The
occurrence of Tamil inscriptions in these places lends support
to this hypothesis. Even the little internal evidence that we
get in these inscriptions regarding the BrIhmaas points in the
same direction. The P4aniftai inscription, for instance,
furnishes us with the names of a BrThmaa couple from the
Vijayarija-caturvdi-mag4am at Kant4y. They are KrLnpacceu
Tajfia K.iramavitta and NaAkaiccii These persona were South
Indians, probably of Telugu origin. In the contemporary inscriptions
1. No. I 359 of the epigraphical list in the Archaeological
Department, Ceylon.
2. ., VII, vv.95-97.
3. S.Paranavitana, 'A Tpm4l Slab Inscription from Paaxzai',
., IV, p. 195. The reading NJcaiccai for NaAkeicclzi is wrong.
188
of South India, especially in those from the South Arcot district,
Kiramavitta occurs as a name among the BrThmaas Kr.zzTpaccetcu,
or more correctly, Krmpicceu, occurs as the name of a
village somewhere in Uayrgui, in the South Arcot district
Natkaicci, too, occurs in these inscriptions as a name of
Brihmaa 1adies The element ci in this name is a Telugu
word signifying women and often applied to names of married
women as a mark of respects Numerous names of BrThmaia women
with the element ci occur in the inscriptions of South Arcot
and Guntr districts The BrThmaa couple of our inscription
were, therefore, probably Telugus who came from South Li-cot
or Guntr district.
1. M.E.R. for 1921, NO.556 of 1920 - The name Tajfia Kramavitta
occurs in this ; M.E.R. for 1922/23, No. 380 of 1922 - A certain
mai Nañgai4i, wife of Yajfla Kramavitta is mentioned here;
ibid., Noe.369, 371, 37k and 382 of 1922 refer to several persons
named Kramavitt an,.
2. M.E.R. for 1921, No.603 of 1920.
3. M.E.R. for 1922, No.380 of 1922.
k. M.E.R. for 1921, pp . 92-93.
5. M.E.P. for 1922, Nos. 380, 55k, 558, 57k and 585 of 1922.
Such names as NaAgai4Ii, AniarIeIi, Ayita41i,
and Pr1-ii occur in these records.
189
As we have seen, our literary and. epigra hic
sources rovide information, though by no means adequate,
regarding the presence of bouth 'ndian mercantile, mercenary,
artisan and Brhmaa communities only. There is hardly any
evidence regarding the migration of peasant settlers during
this eriod. ihe absence of any evidence, however, does not
necessarily ean that no such migration took place. It is
possible that side by side with the migration of the above
occupational groups there were igrations of peasants, too.
Such migrations and settlements may have occurred in the
northernmost regions as well as in the north-western and
north-eastern ].ittorals of the island which lay close to
South India and where the power of the Sinhalese ruler at
Folonnaruva does not seem to have been felt effectively.
The areas of Taniil settle ent in this period, as indicated
by the presence of inscriptions and archaeological finds,
lie ostly in the vicinity of ancient irrigation works
The majority of these settlement sites are far removed from
the capital city and the known provincial towns, where such
co unities as merchants and mercenaries would have norzzaUy
lived. these considerations lead us to think that there may
1. See infra, p. )'1.
190
have been a Blow and unnoticed migration of small groups of
peasants from the iami]. country into the island in this period.
These are, however, matters of conjecture and in the absence
of any evidence nothing definite can be concluded.
The South Indian 6ources, while providing fairly
substantial evidence regarding the migration of mercantile
and mercenary bodies from the Dravidian regions to outside
areas, are silent on the question of peaceful peasant
migrations As mentioned earlier, there were at least three
.2famines in the Tam.il country in this period. These were not
widespread but confined to certain regions only. We are
informed by one inscription that there was a famine in
Arakaanal].r, in the Squth Arcot district, in A.D. 1131
and that 'people moved after selling their lands' It is
reasonable to think that such movements of people during
times of famine were confined to South India, although it is
pos ible that a few went to Ceylon, too. Like famine, excessive
1. See supra, .,3r.
2. See supra, p. g3
3. M.E.R. for 1931+/35, Inscription o.151 of 193k/35;
K.A..Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, p.562.
191
taxation or inability to pay taxes also forced villagers to
abandon their homes and migrate to other places. Under the
thoroughly centralised revenue administration of the Cas,
people who, for three years, failed to pay taxes due on the
lands owned by them forfeited their lands, which were then
sold by the village assembly+ Inscriptions of the reign of
Ku]Zttithga I furnish instances of assessments not being paid
regularly and the lands of tenants who defaulted payment being
sold in consequence. Some BrThmaa tenants of Vavai-mtvi-
caturvdi-magaam, for instance, being unable to pay the
assessments, left the village Again, in the forty-ninth year
of Ku]Zttuñga I (A.D. 1118), tenants deserted the village of
K!ri-rAjapuram as they could not pay the taxes There are
several examples of such desertions in the later
But it is not possible to say whether there were many such
instances during this period. Except for a few scattered
examples, there is hardly any evidence regarding migrations.
1. .E.R. for 1897,
2. !'.E.R. for 1910, Inscription No.98 of 1910.
3. Ibid. 1 Inscription No.6 Zf7 of 1909.
k. Cf., B.A.Saletore, Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagar
Empire, II, pp.l97-198.
192Even these minor movements of people would have been confined
to the Tamil country only. There is, however, a late tradition
recorded in the Ca-prva-paftayam which refers to an overseas
emigration of a hundred families from Trichinopoly in the time
of one Vikramditya But the tradition loses its value by
several discrepancies. According to this account, in the time
of Vikramditya, 1SlivThana and his Sainaia troops lay siege to
Trichinopoly. Thiring the siege a pariah named Ve and
hundred others with their families escaped, went to the sea-
shore whence proceeded to some island' It is not clear which
Vikramditya is referred to here. It is possible that the ruler
was Vikramditya VI (io7, - ( Il-c. ) of the Western Ch.lukyas for,
of the many Chlukya and Ba rulers of this name, it was
Vikramditya VI who made successful inroads into the doniinions
of the Cas. SlivThana is a variant of tavhana and its
occurrence here is apparently the result of mixing up different
legends regarding early invasions. It is hardly possible that
this legend preserves any memory of the Stavhana invasions
of the period prior to the third century A.D. The Samaa troops,
according to Taylor, are in fact Yavana or 'uslim troops
1. C -prva-paayam, No.165 of the Lackenzie Manuscripts in
1.adras, quoted in the Analysis of the }ackenzie Nanu cripta,
W.Taylor, p .1i., 60.
2. W.Taylor, . cit., p.5k.
3. ;_4.
193
The whole account seems to be of late origin, based on different
traditions of earlier invasions, and has hardly a claim to any
credence. Perhaps it refers to an iinlcriown migration, but this
is a matter of speculation.
It is possible that small groups of peaceful
settlers from South India trickled into the island in this
period. But the increase of the Dravidian element in the local
population seems to have been steadily maintained mainly by
the migration of mercenaries, mercantile communities and artisans.
It was only after the downfall of Polonnaruva, as we shall see
later, that many peaceful settlers from the Taniil country
migrated to the northern regions of the island.
The areas of Dravidian settlement in the island in
the latter part of the eleventh and the twelfth century, as in
the period of Ca rule, have to be traced primarily with the
help of Tamil inscriptions and Saiva archaeolo ical remains.
The meagre evidence of the literary sources and toponynis is
useful in supplementing the testimony of the epigraphic and
archaeological material. Inscriptions do not present much
difficulty in the attempt of tracing some of the probable areas
of settlement. Normally the provenance as well as the internal
194evidence of the epigraphs help us to a great extent in locating
the settlements. In most cases, the regnal years of kings which
they provide help to date them almost accurately. Even in the
case of inscriptions which do not carry dates, their palaeography
aids us to date them roughly. On the other hand, the archaeological
materials present several difficulties. The limited materials
that are so far available to us are in the form of ruined
aiva and Vaiava temples and icons. The presence of these
temples and icons in any area almost certainly indicates
South Indian settlements, often those of Tamils. A major
difficulty which besets any attempt to trace the areas of
settlement by such archaeological evidence is the doubt whether
the date of an image or of a temple can be determined with
sufficient accuracy to be of use to us. There are some temples
which contain datable inscriptions. There are others, more
numerous, which on the basis of the architectural style as
well as the iconographic style of their images could be roughly
assigned to the eleventh and twelfth centuries. But some of
these may well belong to the early part of the thirteenth
century. Therefore, only those few which could be assigned to
the latter part of the eleventh and the twelfth century with
a reasonable degree of likelihood are considered here in our
discussion. The rest have been taken to belong to the
195
thirteenth century. There is room, however, for a small margin
of error on either side.
The other difficulties in the use of archaeological
materials are mainly those concerning the identification of the
aiva and Vaiava temples of this period. This is due to the
transformation of some of these temples into Buddhist institutions
and vice versa in the course of time. In areas where Tamil
settlers have been assimilated to the Sinhalese population or
where resettlement by the Sinhalese took place after the sites
had been abandoned by Tamils, hiva and Vair&va temples have
often been converted to Buddhist dv.les. This appears from the
architectural style of the buildings or from the distinctively
aiva and Vaiava finds in them A similar conversion, perhaps
on a greater scale, has occurred in the areas where Tamils have
established permanent settlements. As we shall see later, by
far the largest number of such structures belong to the period
2after the twelfth century. The date of such converted temples
can Only be ascertained roughly with the help of earlier
Sinhalese inscriptions found on their architectural parts or
of the style of the buildings. In some cases stones and pillars
1. Cf., A.S.C.A.R. for 1911/12, p. 8.2. See infra,
196
from ruined Buddhist buildings have been used to build aiva
temples and such temples, too, cannot easily be dated. In areas
where there has been a continuous Tainil settlement from this
period or earlier, old temples have been renovated Q3ularly
and kept in a good state of repair. Among these, it is difficult
to identify those of this period unless inscriptions or other
datable finds are available. As a result o such difficulties
it is not possible to use afl. the archaeological evidence in a
work of this nature until a thorough survey of all these temple
sites has been completed. For the present, we have to rely on
the evidence of those few which could be assigned to this
period with certain degree of confidence.
A few early forms of Tamilised Sinhalese place
names are available from the inscriptions of this period. These
as well as the little evidence of the literary sources can be
used to confirm and supplement the evidence of the epigraphic
and archaeological materials. The P2i and Sirthalese chronicles
have hardly any information to offer in this respect. But for
the first time we begin to get fairly reliable traditions
relating to this period in the Tmi1 chronicles of the inland.
The Takia-kiiI!c a-puram, T ii' i-kc ala-puram and the
car-kalveu, all of which are chronicles of the temple of
197
Kvaram at Trincomalee, contain traditions of the time of
Gajabhu II, probably preserved originally in the annals of
Kvaram. With the help of all these sources it is possible
to locate several, if not all, of the Tamil settlement sites
of this period.
Two regions have yielded the majority of the Tamil
inscriptions and aiva archaeological materials for this period.
One is the north-eastern littoral, forming the northern part of
the present eastern Province, from the Kokkuly Lagoon down to
Verukal with a width of about twenty-five miles from the sea
to the interior. The other is the northern part of ancient
Dakkhiadesa, now comprising largely the southern regions of the
North-western Province. In the former region, Tamil inscriptions
have been discovered at Padaviya, h1ka, Kanta]iy, Paaznai
and MafLkai. aiva archaeological remains datable to this
period are found at Kumpakaia-malai, Kandasmi-malai, horagoa,
Kantaly, P4anzftai, Pta-ku and Tampalakmam. In theliterary sources we get traditions pointing to the presence of
Tamils at TrincomaJ.ee, Tampalak niin , KantalAy and Verukal. In
the previous chapters we have seen that there is a certain
amount of evidence which points to Tainil settlements at Padaviya,
Moragoa, Paragiyaiya, Periyak4am and Trincomalee
1. See supra,
198
The evidence relating to this period not only points in the same
direction but also indicates an extension of these settle ents.
The area around the anciant port of Gokaa, the
modern Trincomalee, seems to have had a fairly strong Tamil
element in its population in this period. The Tainil settlements
of this region seem to have extended from Trincomalee to
Periyak$azn and Nakai in the north, Kant aily arid Pta-k4u
in the south-west and possibly Verukal in the south. Kantaly,
Pta-ku and P4an1ai, lying within three miles ãf each
other, have yielded three Tamil inscriptions and some aiva
remains dating back to this period. Two Taniil inscriptions of
the time of Gajabhu II (1132-1153) come from Kantaly One
records the setting-up of a boundary stone at a sacrificial
ground (ii naçanta bhmi) in the brahmadeya of Kantaly, by
Laikevara, Gajabahu Dvar. The other epigraph also records the
setting-up of a boundary stone by one K4ivai Apinia nip,
who bore the title of Laflai Vijaya Ceaviruttar (the victorious
commander of Lafk), at the request of Lafikvara Gajabhu
Dvar, at Kanta1y The Tamil inscription from Pa.amai,
1. .1.1., IV, No.1397; the other inscription is unpublished
and is listed as No. I 359 of the e igraphical collection
in the Department of Archaeology, Ceylon.
2. Unpublished - Inscription No.1 359.
3. 3.1.1., IV, 10.1397.
199
of the time of Vijayabhu I (A.D. 1097) refers to Kantaly as
Vi jayar ja-c at urvdi-niaiig4am (Kant alya Vij ayarj a-c aturvdi-
mak4attu) and mentions the existence of a aiva temple in that
place called Te Kailsam r! Vijayarja-varam This inscription
was found among the debris of a ruined aiva temple. The stone
pillars of tbs temple are in the style of those of the aiva
temples which could be dated to the Polonnaruva period A
fragmentary image of Prvat was also found among the debris
Since the inscription recording donations to the Vijayarja-
!varam has been found at this site, the ruined temple may be
identified as the Vijayarja-varam. In the twelfth century,
Paamtai must have formed part of Kanta1y. This temple
seems to have been built in the time of Vijayabhu I (1055-1110),
for it bears the name of that monarch. It is interesting to
note that it was also known as Te Kai1sam (Southern Kaila),
for this name is given only to the temple of Kvaram temple
at Trincomalee in the Tamil chronicles Irom the P4anhai
1. 3. aranavitana, 'A Ta ii Slab Inscription from Paavai',
E.Z., IV, p.19k.
2. A.S.C.A.R. for 1933, p.18.
3. Ibid.
1• Cf., 7:28, p.68.
200inscription we find that the Vija,.yarja-varain was organized
more or less on the same lines as any contemporary shrine in
South India. The gifts to the temple sometimes took the form
of cash deposits, the interests of which were used for the
maintenance of various services in the temple. The institution
of devadss was a feature of the organization of this temple
for it is stated that seven girls were branded on their
foreheads and given over to the temple as tvar-atiyr (Skt.
devada&Ts). As ln . many of the South Indian temples, the
endowment was placed in the trust of a a1-kkra, of the
Vikkirama-caI.m!ka-terinta Valañkai division. Near P4aznai
and Kantaly is the village of PVta-ku where, too, were
found a stone image of Viu and the ruins of a aiva shrine.
The style of the image belongs to the period between the tenth
and the thirteenth century while the temple is believed to
date back to the time of Vijayabhu I
The foregoing evidence clearly indicates that
South Indians, especially BrThxnaas, were settled in Kantaly
and the surroundin villages from at least the time of VijayabThu I.
1. E.Z., IV, p. 193.
2. A.S.C.A.R. for 1933, p.1S; C.J.Sc. (G), II, pp.156-157.
201The Kanta].y Stone Seat inscription of Niai"k Malla (1187-1196)
attests to the continued existence of the BrThmaa settlement
(caturveda-brahaapura) in that plaoe during the twelfth century
and refers to a aiva establishment called Prvat1-satra,
probably built in the time of Niañka Ma11a The Tamil chronicles,
too, refer to Kanta1y as a place of importance to aivas and
associate Gajabhu II with that p1mce This is confirmed not
only by the Tamil inscriptions found there but also by the
C1avarjisa, according to which 'Gajabhu betook himself to
Gafig-taka (Kanta1y), made it his residence and dwelt there
happily' and 'died during his sojolLrn there' That Gajabhu
patronised non-Buddhists is implied in the C1avaisa where it
is stated that 'he had fetched nobles of heretical faith from
abroad and had thus filed Rjarafha with the briers (of heresy)'
The toponym Kanta1y supports the conclusion that
the place it represents was settled by Tamils or Tamil-speakers
in the twelfth century. It is in tke Pa.amtai inscription
1. D.M.de Z.bückremasinghe, 'KantaIi Ga1-sarxa Inscription of
Kitti Nissañka Malla', E.Z., II,, p.286.
2. ., 7 : 87-106; Kk., p.20; ., pp.170-178.
3. See supra, p. 19 ; Cv., 71:1,25.
k. Cv., 70:53, 3k.
202that we get the earliest occurrence of the name Kantaly. After
that it occurs in the two inscriptions of GajabThu II mentioned
above. Kantaily is the Tami].ised form of the Sinhalese name
Gagata]. (Pli Gagtaka) This Tamilisation seems to have
taken place during this period as a result of the Taznil
settlement. The Tamil form has remained in usage to this day
and the Sinhalese origin has been completely forgotten. It is
interesting to note that today, when they have begun to re-
colonise this place, the Sinhalese call it Kantail after the
Taniilised name. As early as the fifteenth century, folk
etymology among the Tamila has attempted to explain the origin
of the name Kantaily in a different way. The name was split
into two elements, ka (eye) and t4ai (to grow), and a story
was woven round it. It is said that Gajabhu II regained his
lost eye-sight at this place and hence the name Kat4ai (where
the eye grew) Such an explanation is typical of the folk
etyqiology that one finds in the Tamil speaking areas where the
origin of a large number of Sinhalese toponyms has been puzzling
the new settlers.
1. ., , p.116; Cv., 71:2.
2. Cf., 7:63.
203About four miles north of Trincomalee is }1ai
where a Tamil inscription of the time of Gajabhu II has been
found The inscription records the grant by Gajabhu of land
to one Minta Koa, who is designated Superintendent of the
Pa].anquin Bearers (tiru-p41i-civikaiyri1_kaki) . The land
was granted as a jvita evidently for services rendered by the
donee. On another side of the slab on which this inscription
is indited, there is another Tamil epigraph, the purport of
which is not quite clear It states that nbharaa
paraia Tvar) sent a letter (tirumukam) approving the deed
(ceya].) of Gajabhu (Gajabmu T!var) and caused a stone
inscription (ci1-l!kam) to be set up. There was only one
Mnbharaa who was contemporaneous with GajabThu II, namely
the one who ruled in Rohaa in the middle of the twelfth
century, and, therefore, the }nbharaa of our inscription
must be the same person. It is not clear whether the transaction
referred to in the inscription had anything to do with the
grant of Gajabhu recorded on the same slab. But this seems
unlikely for Inbharaa never had any authority over Rjaratha,
1. K.Kana athi Pillai, '1añkai Inscription of Gajabhu II',
U.C. •, XX, No.1, April 1962, pp.12-1
2. Ibid.
204where this inscription is found. It seems more likely that it
concerns about one of the many transactions that took place
between the two rulers during their wars with ParkramabThu I
Within about three miles of Mafikai is Periyaku.am
where, as we have alyeady seen, the presence of Tami]. settlers
in the eleventh century is indicated by many epigraphs No
Tamil inscription of the twelfth century has been found here,
yet it may not be wrong to sa that there must have been
Tamils in the twelfth century, too. At Trinconialee, only a
fragmentary Tamul inscription of about the twelfth century
has come to light The paucity of Tamil inscriptions in this
place may be explained by the fact that the original temple
of K5varam, where one would have normally expected to find
any inscription, was completely destroyed by the Portuguese
in the seventeenth century. The materials of the destroyed
temple were used by the Portuguese to build a fortress at
Trinconialee. Inscriptions of about the twelfth, thirteenth
and sixteenth centuries have been found here on the bricks
].. Cf., Cv., 71:1-5.
2. See supra,
3. Unpublished.
205and door-jambs or on fragments of atone in the fortress It is
said that more inscriptions were found on the stones of Portu-
guese buildings demolished in the area in the last century
A number of bronze images of iva and PrvatT have been unearthed
in different parts of the present temple precincts within Fort
Fredericlã It has been surmised that these were buried by the
temple priests at the time of the Portuguese attack in l62.
Most of these have been assigned, on grounds of style, • to
a date between the eleventh and the thirteenth century' some
of these may belong to the period of Ca occupation and some
may date to the thirteenth century when a prince named
Ku.akka appears to have carried out renovations to the
temp1e It is not possible to say whether many of these belong
to the twelfth century. These finds, however, indicate that
1. H.1.Codrington, 'The Inscription at Fort Frederick, Trinconialee',
3. .A.S. (C.B.), No.80, p. 1fk8; S.Paranavitana, 'A Fragmentar
Sanskrit Inscription from Trincomalee', E.Z., V, p.173;
A.S.C.A. . for 1957, p.8.
2. A.Sriskantaraca, 'Tirukamalai VaralLYUla.k4', Tirukkcar
Xlaya Kump!pika alar, 1963, p.95.
3. .Balendra, 'Trincomalee Bronzes', Tamul Culture, II, No.2,
April 1953, pp.176-198; A.S.C.A.R. for 1950, p.32.
14 .Balendra, . cit., p.190.
5. A.S.C.A. . for 1950, p.32.
6. See infra, p. 327
206around the twelfth century the temple of K!varam was a
flourishing institution. The ancient port of Gokaa may
have had a notable Tamil settlement in this period. The
C1I].avaipsa states that there were Ker4a and V.aikkAra mercenaries
dwelling at Kotha6ra in the time of ParkramabThu
Kothasra is the district of Koiyram, around the port of
Gokapa. We have seen earlier that five villages in this region
contributed in money and in kind towards the maintenance of
the temple of Rjarjvaram at Tanjore in the time of Rjarja I
This fact as *l as the re-nami-ng of two districts in this
region after Ca princes during the period of C 1a occupation
seem to suggest that Kohasra was one of the region4ihere
Ca rule was effectively felt Taniil settlements may have been
established here under the Cas. The presence of Ker4a and
V.aikkra mercenaries would have further strengthened the
Dravidian element in the population of this area in the twelfth
century. The T !a-kail5ca-irilai also refers to the presence
1. £!. 7k:kk.
2. See supra, p.111
3. Ibid.
207of Saivaa in the region of Trincomalee in the time of GajabThu II
and to the antagonism between them and the Sinhalese Buddhists
of the area The event described in this Tamil chronicle to
illustrate this antagonism seems to take us back to a time when
the Sinhalese of the Trincomalee district were being gradually
ousted by or assimilated to the Tamil population. It is stated
in this work that opposite the rock on which the temple of
Kvaram stood the Bud hists built a temple of the Buddha
and harassed the Saiva devotees who took flowers to (varam.
This led to quarrels between the Buddhists and the Pcupatar
(aivas). The latter triumphed over the Buddhists and pushed
some of them down the rock into the sea. The matter was reported
to GajabThu II, who tried to take revenge on the aivas by
attempting to destroy the Cvaram temple. But through divine
intervention he realised his folly, became converted to aivisxn
and made generous benefactions to the temple and to the Brhmaas
there Although the details of this account may not be wholly
acceptable, it is not altogether untrustworthy. GajabThu is
the only Sinhalese monarch who finds mention in the Takçia-
kailca-mlai. In this chronicle he is said to have taken the
1. E2' 7:89-96.
2. Ibid.
208consecration name of Ciica..ka-pti (Siri-sa4ha-bodhi) and this
is corroborated by the other sources He is associated with
Kantaly and is credited with the patronage of Brhinaias and
aivism. This is confirmed by Tainil inscriptions and is implied
2in the Clavaisa. Perhaps the contention that GajabThu was
converted to aivisxn is an exaggeration but the gist of the
account cannot be doubted.
Further north of Trincomalee and Kantaly, in
the coastal region east and south-east of Kokkuily Lagoon,
Tami]. inscriptions and aiva remains have come to light in
several sites. At Padaviya and Vhalkaa, two villages in this
area, were found two inscriptions of the Aiffuvar community
and their associates The Vhalkaa inscription was set up to
record certain steps taken by the
and the Vrakkotis so that a certain town 'may not be destroyed's
This town was presumably a market town somwwhere in the
VThalkaa region. Padaviya, as we have pointed out earlier,
also appears to have been a market town of considerable
1. The predecessor of Gajabhu had the consecration name of
Salnrvan (Calmka) and, therefore, GajabThu's consecration
name rust have been Siri-saga-b. Ap arently ParkramabThu I
did not recognise the unconsecrated Gajabhu and also took the
consecration na e of Siri-saga-b.
2. See supra, p4';aoo . 3. See supra, p..r. k. See supra,
209importance for a number of inscriptions of the ceis belonging
1to the Ca period were found here. The inscription of the
Aiftfiuvar found at Padaviya contains the names of some members
of the AififiUuvar, Valafljiyar and the Cei communities Another
short inscription from the same place records some deed by
a certain Iaicc'ri Iamaiyr of the Sr! Vijayarcaa ..pa....
priamaiyr Sr! Vijayarca seems to form the first part of
the name of a place or temple, the second part of which is
undecipherable. SrL Vijayarja in the Pa.amai inscription
of the time of Vijayabhu I occurs as the name, evidently after
the same monarch,of a catur-vdi-mañg4am and of a aiva temple
The temple o place bearing the name of ri Vijayarca in our
inscription from Padaviya was also presumably named after
Vijayabhu I. Pri.amaiyr is a term met with in the contemporary
South Indian inscriptions as well but its exact connotation
is not known. Nilakanta Sastri takes this to stand for a body
connected with the temple, the duties of which are obscure
1. See supra, p. IOC.
2. Among the names are Azanta Arañka, Uttama Ca .....ce1i,
.t iyparaia Valafkaiya, Tcamata Vraia.
3. .1.1., IV, No.3)409,
k, See upra, p. I7
5, K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The C.as, p.k89.
210ut from its occurrences in the inscriptions, p!riamaiyr
appears to have stood for a local body responsible for the
- 1 Ssabha of a Brhma village. As a nu ber of Siva temples of the
C5a period have been unearthed at Padaviya, it is possible
that there was a Brhmaa settlement at this place in this
period The pri.amaiyr of our inscription was probably one
of the bodies of a sabh of such a settlement. As mentioned
earlier, in this period Tamil artisans seem to have been employed
at Padaviya as at Polonnaruva for the building of Buddhist
structures, for Tamil mason's marks can be seen on some of
the Buddhist ruins here?
In three sites to the north and north-east of
Padaviya, at Kumpakana-malai, Kandasmi-ma1ai and Budd.hanagehe].a,S S
there are ruins of Saiva temples datable to this period.
Kumpakaa-malai is about eight miles to the north of Padaviya.
The old temple at this place has bricks with Taxnil letters
inscribed on theme Almost midway between Kumpakana-malai and
1. M..R. for 1923, p.lOI.
2. See supra, p. i7
3. See supra, p. t.
k. A.S.C.A. for 1905, p.35.
211Padaviya is Buddhanaghe1a where exists a ruined aiva shrine
in a cave with broken representations of a lifga, yoni and
Ga4ea. On one of the pillars used as door-jambe of the shrine
is a Sinhalese inscription of Kassapa IV (898-91k) and this
evidently points to the shrine having been built with materials
from a Buddiiist structure, either abandoned by the Buddhists
L 1or destroyed by the baivas. About twelve miles east of this
site, on the western shore of Kokkuly Lagoon, stands another
small temple 'of excellent stone-work similar to that at
Polonnaruva' (iva Dv1) These aiva ruins are clear indications
of Tamil settlement in the region around Kokkuly Lagoon during
this period.
Thus we see that the north-eastern hinterland
between Trincomalee and Kokkuly had Taini]. settlements by about
the twelfth century. In these settlements there is unmistakable
evidence of the presence of BrThinaas and mercantile communities.
In a region where there were two well-known ports at this time,
namely Gkaa and Pallavavki, the presence of mercantile
communities is only to be expected. But this does not explain
the existence of several Tmi1 settlements in this region.
1. A.S.C.A.R. for 1891, p.11; E.Z., I, p.191.
2. A.S.G.A. . for 1905, pp.36-37.
212It is not probable that all these were mercantile settlements.
If we locate these settlement sites on a map, we find that
most of these are near ancient reservoirs or at the mouth of
rivers. Padaviya, Ioragoa, VhalkaçIa, Kantaily, Ptaku,
Pa.am t ai , liañkai, Parazgiyav4iya, Periyakt4am and
Kumpakaa-malai are all situated close to ancient irrigation
works, while a place like Kandasmi-malai is at the iouth of
a river. It seems possible that there was a slow infiltration
of peasant settlers from South India which was responsible for
at least some of these settlements. The process which culminated
in the transformation of this region into a T'nil-speaking
area appears to have been well wider way by about the twelfth
century.
The other area which has yielded considerable
epigraph*c material relating to Tamil settle exits of this period
is, as we have stated earlier, In the north-western part of
the island and could be said to compr6.aè roughly the southern
districts of the North-western Province. This area stretches
from the coast of Chilaw for about fifty miles into the
interior, as far east as }nikdexa, and from )'iahananneriya in
the north to Kurungala in the south.
213We have already noticed in the last chapter that
there were several C]a strongholds in this area which had to
be first controlled before Vijayabhu could march on Polonnaruva
We also surmised that there may have been Tainil settlers,
especially mercenaries, in these strongholds during the Ca
occupation. The Tamil inscriptions of this period seem to
confirm this supposition. The Ca strongholds in this region,
as given in the C!lavaisa, were Nuhunnaru (Nuvarakl),
Badalatthala (Batalagoa), Vpnagara (Vnaru), Tilagulla
(Talagall-la), Nahgalla (}galla or Nikavr4i), Naagalla
(Nahamaagala) and Buddhagma (nikdea) Only one Tamil
inscription of the Ca period was discovered in this area.
This was at Eriyva, nearly- eight miles north-west of Nahainaagalla
But the number of Tamil inscriptions of the tweLfth century
coming from this area is These are from }iahananneriya,
Mahakirinda, Budumuttva, Pauvasnuvara and VihrThinna, which
are all within a few miles of the Ca stronghol s mentioned
above. In fact, the stronghold of Mahga1la is specifically
referred to in one of the Budumuttva inscriptions as a place
where there was a iva temple in the time of Gaabhu II
1. Cv., 58:k2-k5.
2. .1.1., IV, No.1k15.
3. S.Paranavitana, 'Two Tanill Inscriptions from Budumuttva', E.Z.,II,
p . 311.
214We also learn that the site of the inscription, the present
Budumuttva, was part of Mahgalla in the twelfth century. In
this epigraph Nahgalla appears in its Taniilised form of }ka].
and its other name is given as Vikkirama-calinka-puram,
evidently the same as Vikkamapura of the Clavaisa which has
eluded identification by scholars This new name seems to have
been given after Vikramabhu I who would have bad the consecration
name of Calnika (Sinh. Salmvan) The iva temple of Iahgalla
was also evidently named after Vikramabhu fr it was known as
Vikkirama-calmka-ivarain. Perhaps it was built in the reign
of Vikramabhu. The existence of this temple points unmistakably
to the presence of Tamil settlers in this area. The settlement
may have originated in the time of the Ca occupation. It is
of interest to note that our inscription was set up to record
certain gifts to the §iva temple by Cuntamlliyvr
(Cuttamaliyvr3), the daughter of Ku]Zttufiga I and wife of
Virapperuni., a Paya prince. No remains of the temple have
come to light in the area. The present inscription was found
1. Cv., 72:1k7.
2. See upr , p. j-
3. This is the for in which the name ap ears in the South
Indian inscriptions; cf., M.E.R.for 1931/32, No.67 of 193]J32.
215inscribed on one of the pillars of a Buddhist temple which, in
the opinion of Paranavitana, was built in the Kandyan period
(sixteenth to the eighteenth century) with the materials of an
earlier building This earlier building was evidently the
Vikkirama-calinka-ivaram, which must have been abandoned or
destroyed after the aiva population of the area ceased to
exist, probably as a result of assimilation to the Sinhalese
Buddhist population. The present site of the inscription, which
is only a mile north-west of modern Ngalla, must have formed
part of the ancient Mahgalla. Another Tamil inscription,
2dated A.D.11lS, comes from the same site. This epigraph records
the settlement of a dispute between the blacksmiths and the
washermen of the area over certain privileges. The dispute was
inquired into and settled by the paca-pradhnis of VirabThu,
the dipda of Dakkhiadesa. Among these officers were also
two Taniils, !kk]. jMcm Kaxavati and Vijayparaa. The important
fact is that the settlement is recorded in Taniil. It was obviously
meant for the benefit of the disputing communities. It is
reasonable to assume , therefore, that the members of these
1. III, .302.
2. Ibid., pp.305-306.
216communities were Tamils, for it does not seem robable that
the pafca-pradhnis of a Sinhalese dipda set up the record
of a settlement in Tamil when the contending parties were
Sinhalese. This inscription could, therefore, be taken to
confirm further the testimony of the earlier record regarding
the presehce of Tamil settlers in rAgalla. There is also a
third Tamil inscription from BudumuttRva, but it is much
weathered to admit of its being deciphered
About six miles north of }galla, at I1ahakirinda,
has been discovered another Tamil inscription dated A.D.113k
The contents of this inscription, too, points to South Indian
settlements in the area. The purport of the epigraph is to
record the grant of certain lands to the Brhmatas of Jaya.koa-
c alma-c aturvdimaig4am. This BrThmaça Settlement was
presumably named after either Jayabhu I or Vikramabhu I,
who bore the consecration name of Salm!van (Calmka), and is
to be located in the region of Iiahakirinda.
Nearly eighteen miles south of flgalla, at
Pa4uvasnuvara, was found another Tamil epigraph dated in the
fifth year of ia.ka }alla (A.D.1192) It records the
1. i.Z., III, p.3O2.
2. Unpublished - Inscription No.29k of the epi raphical list
in the Archaeolo ica.l Department, Ceylon.
3. X.Kana athi Pilai, 'A Ta il Inscription from Pauvasnuvara'U.C.R., XVIII, I os.3ek , July-Oct., 1960, pp.157-162.
211bull jug of a Buddhist pirivena at rI-pura by a general of
Niafxka Lalla called Natimapaftcara, which name suggests
that be was a Tamil. Perhaps he was in command of one of the
mercenary troops stationed at rI-pura which was the ca ita).
of Dakkhiadesa. Besides, Pauvasnuvara is only two miles
east of Iuhunnaru, one of the Ca strongholds of the eleventh
century.
Two other Tamil inscriptions of this period
come from Mahananneriya1 and Vihärhinna2 which are nearly
twelve miles north and twenty-four miles east of J.ahakirinda
respectively. Vihrhinna is closer to two of the Ca
strongholds, namely Iahamaagala and Buddhagma, which lie about
ei ht miles away. The inscription from VihArThinna, as already
mentioned, is a record of the Aififfuvar conimunity This
shows that members of this mercantile community were active
in Dakkhiadesa, too, in the twelfth century.
No archaeological remains of Dravidian origin,
with the possible exception of the pillars at the Budumuttva
1. Unpublished - Inscription No.1 980 of the epigra hical list
in the be artment of Lrchaeologç Ceylon. Unfortunately, it
has not been possible to obtain a photograph of the estam age
of this inscription and hence the contents are unknown to us.
2. Unpublished - see supra, p. )3
3. Ibid.
218te pie, have been definitely identified in this region so far.
The only ancient iva temple in the area is the well-known
Muvaram shrine, near Chilaw. The origins of this temple are
unknown, though the Tanii]. puras trace its beginnings to hoary
antiquity The Tami]. inscriptions in this temple belong to about
the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries Several finds in this
place, such as brass lamps, camphor-burners and a candelabrum,
have been described by Ananda Cooxnaraswaxny as medieval and may
well date back to this period As Tamil literature and tradition
in the island have venerated this temple along with Tiru-
ktivaram and. K!varam as a place of special sanctity
dating from early times, it is possible that this temple was
in existence in the twelfth century, with TanLi]. settlers around
it as now. Its location close to the pQo.l banks of Chilaw
suggests that it may have originated as p place of worship for
pearl divers from South India. The svara-mmiyam, tkie
chronicle of this temple, gives a detailed account of the
settlement of the Muvaram district with people from the
1. Cf., Musvara-mmiyam, in the Sri Vaivmpik-sata
aintasvmi Tvastam Kyarccaai 1alar, Cob bo, 19&l, p.3ff.
2. Unpublished.
3. !emoirs of the Colom o Museum, Series A, No.1, Colombo, 1914,
pp. 28-29.
219Tamil country in the Kali year 512 (2590 B.c.) by the Ca
prince Kuakk 1a As we shall see in the next chapter, these
traditions may reflect the events of a later period and may not
go back to very early times The prince Kua1ka,who is
associated with varam in the other Tamil chronicles,
seems to have lived in. the thirteenth century We cannot, there-
fore, be certain about the origin of the Tamil settlement
around Mu&varam.
The CUlavaisa contains a reference to the presence
.lfof Tainil mercenaries in Dakkhiadesa in this period. According
to this reference, there was a Dami3a army stationed in the
district called Raktakra in the reign of Gajabhu II. flattakara
has been identified with Ratkaravva, nearly four miles
north-west of Kurunga1a and close to the Ca stronghold of
Vpiriagara
In addition to the above epigraphic and other
material indicating settlements of the Tamils in the northern
regions of anciant Dakkhiadesa, there are also some place names
1. Mu svara-mmiyam, . vit., p.8.
2. See infra, p32l -
3. See infra, p. 317
k. Cv., 69:6.
C.W.Nicholas, 'istorical Topogr p y of Ancient an Yedieval
eylon', J. . . . (C. .), N.S., V1 1 1959, p.90.
220in the area which point in the same direction. The major
difficulty in the way of using this toponymic evidence for our
purposes is one of establishing the date of their origin.
Unfortunately early records of these toponyms are not available
to us. However, the presence of a number of Tamil place names
or Sinhalese place names indicating Tamil settlement in an
area now largely occupied by Sinhalese speakers suggests that
the names are not of recent origin. It is by no means justifiable
to assign the origin of all these names to this period. But
it may not be wrong to assume that some of them at least
originated at this time. any of the Sinhalese place names with
the element dem4a may have originated in this period for they
occur close to the places where Tarn!]. inscriptions have been
found or where the C1as had established their strongholds.
Dem4a-divullva, for instance, is about three miles east of
Jahananneriya and about six miles north-west of Eriyva, places
where Tamil inscriptions of the elventh and twelfth centuries
have been found. Dema.a-srakku.ama is about eight miles west
of Mahakirinda and. udumuttva, where, too, Tamil inscriptions
were discovered. Similarly, Dema.a-dora is about six miles
south-west of Nuhunnaru and about eight miles south-west of
Pauvasnuvara. Dema4a-nina is about ten miles south of
VihrThinna and Demaussa is about six miles north of Vpinagara,
221a Ca stronghold. The bulk of the Tainil place namea in this
area are probably of later origin, possibly of the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries when, according to some Sinhalese works,
several Tamils were settled in this area
In the light of all the above strands of evidence,
we have to loeate a number of Tamil settlements of this period
in the northern regions of Dakkhiadeaa. With the evidence that
we have it is not possible to determine the nature or strength
of these settlements. They may have arisen partly as a result
of the establishment of C 1a fortresses in this region to
protect Rjaraha from the attacks of the Rohaa princes.
Perhaps some of them were natural extensions of possible
settlements of South Indian pearl fishers along the Chilaw
coast. In the absence of any evidence to this effect, one has
to be contented with mere conjectures.
In the western littoral north of Dakk4adesa only
one place has yielded a Tainil inscription which may be
assigned to this perio This place is Virandagoa, about
ten diiles south-east of Pomparippu. Even at }1.ntai, where
inscriptions of the Za period have been found, no Tamil epigraph
of this period has come to ii ht. Since there were Tamil
1. Unpublished - Inscription 916 of the epigraphica]. list
in the Archaeological De artment, Ceylon.
222settlements here in the period of Ca rule, it is reasonable
to assume that such settlements continued to be there in the
twelfth century, too.
Next in importance to the two coastal regions
dealt with above are the two interior regions around Anurdhapura
and. Polonnaruva. It may be recollected that by virtue of the
fact that Anurdhapura was the capital of the Sinhaleseb '"kingdom, there weremercenary and mercantile settlements in
that city in the ninth and tenth cneturies and. possibly even
after that For similar reasons, there were Tamil settlements
at Polonnaruva and the surrounding areas under the Cas. In this
period we see that these settlements continued to exist in
these places, especially in the areas around the citie8. But
the evidence is certainly not sifficient to warrant the
conclusion that such settlements were numerous. Although
Anurdhapura has failed to yield any Tamil inscription or
aiva artefacts datable to this period, such finds have come
to light at l'ioragahavela, V!ragala, }iahakanadarva and
KanadayAva, which are situated close to Anurdhapura.
1. See supra, k-L
223From Moragahavela comes a Tamil inscription of A.D.fl38
recording the gift of a piece of land at PatL1ya to a Buddhist
temple by one UakakkittaD. Patlya is stated to have been
received as a jvita by the donor. This may mean that the donor
was an official in the service of Gajabhu II, in whose reign
this inscription was set up. The occurrence of th&s Tamil
inscription at !4oragahavela, therefore, may not necessarily
indicate the presence of Tamil settlers there. But since this
site is within about fifteen miles of nuriIura, V'!ragala
and Safigili-kanadarva, where Tamil inscriptions and Saiva
remains of this and earlier periods have been found it is
possible that there were Tamil settlers at Noragahavela in
this period. The Tamil inscription from Kanadarva is unfortu-
nately fragmentary and only the na e of Sri Ca!Lkabodhi-(val3xuar
alias Cakravatti SrI ParkramabThu Tva, who was probably
the first ruler of that na e, has been decipherable It is
unlikely that the ruler mentioned here is Parkramabhu II
for the site of our inscription is outside his de facto realm.
1. 13.1.1., IV, No.1k06; K.Kanapathi Pil].ai, 'APil].ar
Inscription from Moragahavela', U.C. ., XVIII, Jan.-April, 1960,
p.k6 ff.
2. See supra,
3. .1.1., IV, No.]Ji07.
224About a mile away from Kanadarva is Mahakanadarva where a
bas-relief of the goddess Cmu was unearthed in the vicinity
of a ruined dv] Several statuettes of the 3aptamtk goddesses
were also discovered in the same village At Vragala, about
ei ht miles north-west of ahakanadarva, a unique bronze
image of iva in the Ardhanrivara form was discovered It is
possible that this image was originally housed in a iva temple
in that area. Though these aiva finds from Ziahakanadarva and
Vragala cannot be precisely dated, they could be roughly
assigned to this period on grounds of style. Their presence
may be taken to indioate Tamil aiva settlements in these places
near Anurdhapura.
The evidence of inscriptions and archaeological
remains discovered in and around Polonnaruva points to South
Indian mercenary and mercantile settle ents in this region.
The V!].aikkra inscription from Polonnaruva and the Clavaisa
attest to the presence of V.aikkras, Ker4as and other mercenary
forces in the capital in this period Probably some members of
1. A. .C.A.I?. for 1961/62, p.59.
2. Ibid.
3. A.S.CA.R. for 1 56, p.k.
k. See supra, pq.-gJ..
225the Valafijiyar and the Nakarattr communities were also living
there, as is implied in the V.aikkra inscription An inscrip-
tion of the AififftTuvar, containing only a part of their
Sanakrit praasti, was found about three miles north of
Polonnaruva, at Anaulundva As Polonnaruva was the capital
city, it is reasonable to assume that atich mercantile communities
were living in and near the city. These communities may have
been responsible for the building of some of the iva temples
in the area. Of the two dozen aiva and Vaiava temples to be
found here in different stages of disre air, some belong to
the C]a period as we have already seen. Some others belong
to the thirteenth century. It is possible that a few were
built in the twelfth century under the patronage of such
patrons of aivism as Gajabhu II and VikramabThu I. The
identification of the temples of this period is, however,
rendered difficult by the problem of dating all the temples
with any degree of accuracy. The same problem applieá to the
large number of aiva and Vaiava bronzes discovered recently
1. See sura, p. gc
2. .1.de Z.Wickremasinghe, 'Polonnaruva: An ulundva Slab-
Inscription', .., II, .235.
22
at Polonnaruva As a result we are not in a position to use
the archaeological material confidently in the determination
of the Dravidian settlements in the region of Polonnaruva.
As mentioned earlier, it appears that ParkramabThu I,
and possibly some of his successors, may have int&ted artisans
aia& stone masons from South India to help the Sinhalese
craftsmen in the building of Buddhist establishments in
Polonnaruva These artisans as well as the South Indian
prisoners of war employed in repairing and building Buddhist
monuments must have strengthened the Tamil element in the
population of Polonnaruva in the twelfth century. In addition,
it appears that Tamil officials, or at least many of them, who
served under the Cas when the island formed part of the
South Indian empire, were retained by Vijayabhu I. This is
the impression given by a statement in the Pakauva inscription
of this ruler. In this copper plate inscription there is a reference
to a register of Tamil clerks (Dem4a lea aru pota) maintained
by a special keeper For a se arate register of the Tamil
1. C. .Godakumbura, 'Bronzes fro Polonnaruva', J. .A.S. (c. .),
N.S., VII, pt.2, 1961, p.239 ff.
2. See supra, p.I.
3.S.Paranavitana, 'Pakaç1uva_Copper-Plate Charter of Vijayabhu 1,
., V, p.27.
227clerks to be maintained separately there must have been several
of them in the service of the Sinhalese king. It has been pointed
out earlier that there is no etidence to sug est that Vijayabhu
harboured any grievances against the Tamils His battles were
directed against an empire that had annexed his country, but
once the country was freed he appears to have treated his
Tamil subjects with favour. The employment of Taniil mercenaries
and clerks and the patronage extended to aiva establishments
at Kantaly, as implied by the P4amtai inscription, undoubtedly
attest to the tolerant policy adopted by him towards Tamils.
Such a policy would have encouraged the Tamila in Polonnaruva
to stay behind the Cas were defeated in 1070. Presumably
the Tamils who were in Polonnaruva during the Ca period
continued to be there in the reign of Vijayabhu I.
The South Indian population of Polonnaruva consisted
not only of Tamils but also of Ker4as, Kannaas (Pli, Kaas)
and Telugus. In. the aikkra inscription we are told that the
1aikkra mercenaries at Polonnaruva consisted of Telugus (Vaukar)
and Ker4as(Ma1ay.ar) among others The Va1ajiyar and the
1. See supra, p.7o.2. See supra, p. 173.
228Nakarattr were probably of Kannaa origin as these mercantile
communities originated in the Kannaa country According to
the Ct1lavasa, there were Ker4as and Kaas at Polonnaruva
serving under GajabThu II Nidka Nalla claims in his Kantaly
Gal sana inscription that his queens from Karnna and 1ellru
(in the Telugu country) brought with them large retinues of
elephants and cavalry Though this may be a vain boast, it is
possible that the matrimonial alliances contracted by Nia.ka
Ma].la led to the arrival of Kannaa and Telugu courtiers and
soldiers with the princesses as was the custom in those days.
Such groups, however, would not have considerably added to
the Dravidian element in the city. The Kannaa or Telugu
element in the Dravidian population of Polorinaruva, or 1 for that
matter, of the island, does not seem to have been strong. It is
notable that there is no Kannaa or Telugu inscription in
the island belonging to this or any other period.
At Dimbu].gala, about ten miles south-east of
Polonnaruva, is a rock inscription of Sundaramandevj, the
chief queen of VikramabThu I, which refers to a Dema-pTh
(Pii, Dami4a-psda) in the area We have already seen that
1. See supra, p. ILt3
2. Cv., 70:230.
3. II, p.289.
k. Ibid., p.195.
229there were a Dem4-veher at Vva1kiya in the ninth century1
and a Dam.i4a-thpa at Polonnaruva in the twelfth century Now
we find that there was a Dema.U-pliu1 i Dimbu1ga1a in the time
of VikraniabThu I (1111-1132). Wickramasinghe conjectures that
this was probably erected in the time of Vijayabhu I It is
interesting to know the exact significance of the element De 4or Dem4a in these names. In the case of the Daxni.a-thUpa we
are specifically told in the Clavaisa that the stupa got this
name by virtue of the fact that it was erected by Tamil prisoners
from South Indiat In the case of the Deni4-veher it is possible
that it got its name dueZa similar reason or because it was a
residence for Tamil Buddhist monks. The Dema-ph may also
have got its name on account of one of these reasons. This
prsda was already there in the time of Vi]amabhu I who
reigned twenty years before ParkramabThu I, iii whose time
prisoners from South India were taken to Ceylon for the purpose
of repairing and building Buddhist monuments. It is not known
whether VijayabThu I also had such prisoners captured in his
1. S4e supra,p EI ,
2. See supra, p.j3.
3. E.Z., II, p.l&7.
If. See •
23wars against the Cas and had them similarly engaged. This
seems unlikely, for Vijayabhu adopted a different attitude
towards the Tamils of his kingdom and may not have, therefore,
enslaved Ca soldiers. This prsda may not have been the
work of Tamil prisoners. It not have been an exclusive
residence of Tamil Buddhist monks either, for we know from
other sources that Dimbulgala was a renowned forest dwelling
of this time where there were five hundred Sinhalese monks
1in residence. Perhaps a pious group of Tami]. Buddhists from
some nearby area paid their reverence to these learned monks
by building them a prsda and hence the name Dema4.U-ph. It
is not easy to decide between the different possibilities except
by mere conjecture. The occurrence of the name Dema-phli does not,
however, add to our knowledge of the Tamil settlements even if
we take it to indicate the presence of Tamil Buddhist monks.
At the most it may only suggest the presence of Buddhists
among the Tamils of the island.
A Tamil inscription dated in the reign of Parkrama-
bThu I has been discovered in the Jaumna district This is the
1. .G. .C., I, pt.2, p.566.
2. Llndrapala, 'The aitIvu amil Inscription of Parkramabhu 1,
U.C.R., XXI, No.1, A ru 1963, p.63 ff.
231earliest Tainil inscription so far discovered in this district
which now has the hi best concentration of Tamils in the island
and once formed the main territory of the Jaffna kingdom. The
record is at present in the island of Naitivu (Pli Igadipa)
and is a proclamation of certain regulations concerning trading
vessels wrecked off the port of rttu ,ai (Sinh. Vrtoa, Pli
Skaratittha, now known in English as Kayts). The fact that
the record is in Tamil may only mean that most of the traders
in this region being possibly Tamils from South India their
language was preferred to Sinhalese. But the manner in which
the proclamation is worded shows that it was addressed to the
officials at the port rather than to the traders of the wrecked
vessels. The preserved portion of the record statethat the
foreigners who came to the port of Vrttuai 'should be protected',
that if vessels bringing elephants and horses got wrecked
'a fourth (share of the cargo) should be taken by the Treasury
and the (other) three arts should be left to the owner' and
that 'if vessels (laden) with (other) erchan ise get wrecked
an exact half should be taken by the Treasury and (the other)
exact half should be left to the owner' This may mean that the
officers in this port to whom the proclamation wasaddressed
1. K.Indrapala, . cit., p.70.
232were Tamils. Presumably this part of the island was settled by
Tamils. The toponyniic evidence of our inscription also lends
support to this hy othesis. 1rttuai, which occurs in this
record, is one of the earliest recorded forms of Tamilised
place names available to us in the Jaffna district. It is
derived from the Sinhalese name urtota by the substitution of
the second element toa th its Tamil equivalent ai, a
phencnmenon commonly met with in a number of iamilised Sinhalese
toponyms. This Tamilised place name also occurs in another
contemporary Tamil inscription, namely the Tiruvlagu
inscription of Ca Rjdhirja II This South Indian epigraph
also contains two other Taniilised Sinha].ese place na es of Jaffna.
These are Vallikmam (modern Valikmam = Sinh. Vliligama) and
ial iv1 (modern Iafluvil = 5mb. Iauvil) The occurrence ofthese names further supports our hypothesis that there were
Tamil settlements in the Jaffna district in the twelfth century.
The Tamilisation of Sinhalese place names was evidently the
result of such settlements. As we shall see later, it is quite
possible that the Tamil settlement of the Ja±'fna district
1. V.,Venkata ubba Aiyyar, 'Tiruvlañgu In cription of Pj hirja II',
L!. XXII, p.86
2. Ibid.
233
proceeded slowly after the Ca conquest, although any attempt
at large-scale settlement of people from South India does not
seem to have taken place before the foundation of the Jaffna
kingdom in the thirteenth century.
No definite evidence regarding any significant
Tamil settlement in the Batticaloa district of the Eastern
Province, which is now a predominantly Taniil area, or in other
parts of southern Ceylonhas so far come to light. It is possible
that jhere were some Tamil settlers in the atticaloa district
for 1 from the thirteenth century onwards,we get archaeological,
epigraphic and literary evidence pointing to Tami]. settlements
in that area The Cas had a stronghold at Chagma in this
district. Not far from this place, which is now known by the
Tamilised form of Skmam, is the Tirukvil Siva temple, built
in the P4ya style of architecture and held to be of the same
2date as the Siva Dvl No.1 at Polonnaruva. Although it is
possible that this temple was built in the twelfth century, it
seems probable that it is a construction of the thirteenth
century In all probability significant Tamil settlements were
1. See infra, Pf-37-3
2. C.J.Sc. (G) , II, pp.l60-l6l.
3. See infra, p. 37
234not established in the Batticaloa district before the thirteenth
century. As for the other areas of southern Ceylon, it is not
very likely that there were Tamil settlers in this period,
except perhaps some mercantile communities in the ports along
the southern coast. Such communities were found in these ports
in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries A rock inscription
in Sinhalese from Galap'ta refers to some Tamil slaves attached
to the Galapta-vihra in the time of ParkramabThu. Unfortunately
it has not been possible to,identify this monarch definitely.
It has been surmised that he may be either the first or the
second of that name but probably the former Galapta is near
Bentota in the outhern Province and, if the inscription
belongs to the time of Par.kramabhu I, it may seem that some
of the South Indian prisoners of that monarch were sent to the
Galapta-vihra as slaves. Such a stray instance, however, is
no evidence of any !amil settlement in that area.
Thus, we see that the period between 1070 and
the end of the twelfth century was a time when Dravidian
settlements were established slowly but steadily in the north-
eastern re ion and in the southern parts of the North-western
Province. These two areas had a reater concentration of Tanifls
1. j., U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p.?68.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'Gala ta Vihra ock-Inscription', .Z., IV, p.198.
235
than. possibly any other area. The areas around Anurldhapura
and Polonnaruva, where Tamil settlers were present in earlier
periods, continued to be regions with scattered Tami]. settle-
inents. In the Jaffna district, for the first time, we get evidence
of Tamil settlements in this period. The thirteenth century
saw the steady grorth of these settlements and the beginninga
of the transformation of the northern. and eastern parts of the
island into areas permanently occu ied by Tamil speakers.
23U
CHAPTER IV
STTLEHENTS IN THE THIR.EEITH CEITURI - I : THE JAYFNA DISTRICT
The death of Ni pi3ka Malla in 1196 marked the
end of an era of comparative security, beginning from 1070,
during which the island was not plagued by foreign invasions.
Internal dissensions created by rival aspirants to power and foreign
aspirations for control of the affairs of the island came to a
head almost immediately after the demise of Nia.ka Malla.
Princes from the Ca, Pya and Kalifiga countries exploited
the weakness of the Sinhalese rulers, awopped on the island at
quick intervals and succeeded in holding power for short periods.
To add to this chaotic 8tate, petty king-makers were active
at Po].onnaruva enthroning and dethroning their Zavourites.
The rapid deterioration of the political situation culminated
in the onslaught of !gha in 1215, the like of which was
perhaps not known earlier. The impact of Ngha's occu ation of
Rjara'ha was tremendous. The Sinhalese rulers were 'ist
permanently ousted from the northern parts of the island.
A oonsiderable proportion of the Sinhalese people, too, began
the slow abandonment of that area. The occupation of Rjaatha
by Tamil and Ker4a elements became more marked and permanent.
237
For nearly seven decades this part of the island became an
arena for the contest for power among different foreign contenders,
chiefly }gha and his associates, the Pyas and the Jvakas,
until at last the P4yas settled the contest to their advantaEe
and paved the way for the rise of a dynasty from the Tamil
country in the newly founded kingdom of that region. While these
events in the island made the situation favourable for the
settlement of the South Indians in northern Ceylon, events in
South India soon provided some of the causes for the migration
of these people. The downfall of the C1as in the middle of
the thirteenth century and the decline of the Pyas at the
turn of the century were followed by the invasions of the
Muslims. The resulting insecurity and disorders seem to have led
several Tamils to migrate to Ceylon where they found a welcome
hand in the South Indian dynasty that had established itself
in Jaffna. The rulers of this dynasty a pear not only to haveLvc.
welcomed such migrants but al6o3en to the extent of inviting
settlers to the new kingdom. The thirteenth and the early part
of the fourteenth century were, therefore, a period of Tamil
immigration for the purpose of settlement. All these were set
in motion by the events that took place between 1196 and 1215,
es ecially the invasion of Igha which may justifiably be
called a land-mark in the history of the Tamils of Ceylon.
238The first important feature of this period is the
renewal of foreign invasions almost immediately after the death
of NMañka Malla. Within the short span of twenty years
beginning from 1196 there were at least ci ht invasions of the
island, most of which were led or inspired by the Cas. These
are referred to in the Somth Indian and Ceylonese inscriptions
and in the literary works. In the reigns of ParkramabThu I
and Niañka Malla there were Ceylonese invasions of South
India and, possibly, counterLnvasions from the main1and
Sinhalese troops were supplied to Pya princes in their wars
against the Cas and the Ca-supported rivals. Although the
Sinhalese forces won initial successes, in the end they seem
to have lost to the Cas One such victory over the Sinhalese
is claimed by Ku1ttui!xga iii in the ninth year of his reign (A.D.1l87)
From his tenth year (1188) this monarch claims the conquest of
Ceylon in his inscriptions The ruler of Ceylon in 1188 was
Niañka Malla, who would then have been on the throne for
hardly a year. It seems likely that there was a C1a invasion
of the island at this time, if we take the vague and fragmentary
1. f., S.Wickremasinghe, The Age of ParkraxnabThu I, thesis
submitted to the Univerâity of London in 1958; A.Liyanagaivage,
The Decline of Polonnaruva and the ise of Dabade, thesis
submitted to the University of London in 1963.
2. Ibid. 3. S.I.I., III, p.86. k.A.Butterworth andVenu opal hetty, Nellore Inscriptions, Inscription No. N 85.
239statement in the Galpota inscription of Ni6inka Malla, namely
'Lsnk in times gone by ..... thinking it was dangerous and
annoyed' (Lakdiva pera davaa ...... napur yl dh va ..) ,
to refer to some foreign intervention at the beginning of his
reign Kulttuñga III may have taken advantage of the confusion
that ensued the death of Parkramabhu I and invaded the island.
That the conquest of Ceylon was not effected in 1188 is admitted
in a C]a inscription of 119k, in which KulVttufxga is recorded
to have ordered his troops to conquer the island in that year
The claim in the inscription of 1188 is, therefore, an exaggeration
based robably on a futile invasion of the island. It is not
possible to think that any sñccess in this direction was
achieved by the Ca ruler before 1196, the year of Niaf&ka
Malla's demise. Ku1ttithga's next claim of victory over Ceylon
is made in his inscription of 1199 from Tirumikku.i The ruler
of Ceylon in 1199 was Queen Li1vatI, whose rule was chiefly
guided by the able general Kitti. Kulttu.ga(s claim in 1199
does not appear to be altogether unfounded. In a Sinhalese poem
1. ., II, p. ia. ; U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p.523.
2. .E. . for 1907, Inscription No.288 of 1907 from Tiruviaimarudr.
3. .1., VII, p.17k ; .1.1., III, p.205.
240called Sasa vata, composed in the time of LilvatI, there is
an allusion to three invasions from the Ca country which were
Successfully checked by the general Kitti The commentary (sann!)
on. this poem gives certain details of these invasions. It is
stated that on two of these occasions the invading armies landed
at 1vau (Nahtittha) and proceeded as far as Anurdhapura
before they were defeated. On the third occasion, they proceeded
from Salvat (Chilaw) as far as rIpura in Dakkhiadesa. They
.2..were all defeated by Kitti. Kitti was a general, presumably
in the armies of Par.kramabhu I and Niañka Malla, who ousted
Cô1agaga from the throne and enthroned Lilvati in ].l97 e
was ousted from power in l2OO ' The three invasions alluded to
in the Sinhalese poem must have, therefore, taken place before
12 0 and probably after 1197. It is,possible, however, that
one or two of the invasions took place in the period before
1197 when Kitti was probably one of the generals of Nia.ka
Ialla. The claim of the cja king in 11 9 was very probably
1. asadvata Sann!, p.5 ; J. .A.S. (C.B.), XXXI, No.82, pp.38k-385.
2. Ibid.
3. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p.516.
14• Ibid., p.517.
241based on one of these invasions, Nilkiita Sastri doubts the
validity of the Sinhalese account on the ground that the sann- 1on the Sasadavata is of a later date. But even if we dismiss
the details provided by the sann!, the evidence of the
Sasadvata, a work contemporaneous with the alleged invasions,
cannot easily be set aside. The next and the last claim of
KuIttuiga is made in an inscription of 1212 from Pudukki
where the conquest of Ceylon is referred to as already accomplished
This claim is perhaps based on the successful invasion of the
island in 1209, which appears to have been Ca-inspired. It
is referred to in the Ct!lavaisa and in the contemporary
Sinhalese inscriptions. In the Bpiiya inscription of queen
Kalyavati (1202-1208), it is recorded that the queen had to
leave i.ip on account o a Tamil invasion This Tamil
invasion is also mentioned in the iip inscription of the
same queen, dated in her eighth regnal years According to this
1. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, p. kl2, note 76.
2. Pu ukktai Inscriptions (Text), No.166 ; K.A.Ni1kuita Sastri,
e CN.as, p.382.
3. D. . e Z. Wickremasinghe, 'Bpii Slab Inscription of Kalavati',.., II, .19 -192.
S.Paranavitana, 'Ki4ip Slab In cription'9 .Z., V, p.157-158.
242record, the general Iti repelled this invasion but lost his life.
On the other hand, it is stated in the Cflavaisa that in 1209
the Iiandipda Anikafiga 'came at the head of a great army from
the Co.a zn9LIcyt, slew the ruler in Pulatthinagara, Prince
Dhanmisoka, together with the general yasmant and reigned
seventeen days' The invasion referred to in the Miiip! inscrip-
tion and the invasion of Anikañga have been treated as identical
and rightly so The claim of conquest in the Pudukktai inscrip-
tion may be, therefore, a reference to this short-lived conquest
achieved by G1a troops with Anikafiga at their head. But it is
also possible that it refers to the Ca invasion in the reign
of Lokec. (1210-1211), alluded to in the KoV.ñge inscription
After 1212 neither the South Indian nor the Ceylonese sources
mention any Ca invasion of the island.
Apart front the Ca invasions mentioned above,
there were two other invasions front South India which occurred
shortly before the onslaught of Ngha. One was led by a Sinhalese
aspirant Lokevara, who brought 'a great Damila army from the
opposite shore, brought the whole of Laz3.kA under his sway and
1. .!•' 80:k3-k'+.
2. Cf., A.Liyanagamage, . cit. ; E.Z., V, p . 159 U.
3. C.J.Sc, (G), II, p.1 7.
243reigned, dwelling in Pulatthinagara, nine months' It has been
surmised that this Damia army could not have been from the
Ca country, for Lokevara was no particular friend of the
Cas, as is shown by the subsequent Ca invasion of the
island during his reign Bit it is possible that this Tamil
army was only a mercenary fotice and may have come from either
the Ca or the Pya country. The invasion does not necessarily
postulate an allja,nce with any of the South Indian rulers. The
last South Indian invasion before that of }gha is claimed to
have been led by a P4ya prince Parkrania, who succeeded in
capturing power and ruling for three years
The quick series of invasions which began after
the death of Niaka YAalla culminated in that of gha, who
has been described in the chronicles as a Kliga and sometimes
as a Tamil1 The identity of this ruler has remained a matter of
much controversy. For the present we shall confine ourselves
to the invasion and its results in so far as the Dravidian
settle ents in the island are concerned.
1. Cv., 80:k7-k8.
2. E.Z., IV, p.88; U.C. .G., I, pt.2, p. 520.
3. Cv., 80:52-53.
k. Cf., V., 80:58; 3:15.
244The conquest of northern Ceylon by gha and his
troops is one of the most dramatic events in the history of
the island, with far-reaching results in the lives of the
Sixthalese and the Tamils. For the Sinhalese this was a tragic
event and its memories were preserved in fairly genuine
traditions which came very early to be incorporated in the
Sinhalese and P].i chronicles. For the Tamils it was an event
which widely opened the doors to the occu ation and colonisation
of northern and eastern Ceylon amidst the instability and the
turbulence that characterised the history of the old
Rjaraha in the thirteenth ceatury. At a time like this
no genuine traditions of the events were preserved by them
until a stable kingdom was established there. %Jhen genuine
traditions failed, others, based partly on later events,
were supplied to meet the needs of a later period. In the
chronicles of Jaffna, these traditions centre round the personality
of Vicaya K'lañkai Cakkaravartti, who, as we shall later,
was in all probability no bbher than gha or Vijaya 1liga
Cakravartti In the chronicles of Batticaloa more genuine
traditions seem to have been preserved and the invasion of
gha Ok) occupies an important place in these.
1. See infra, p. JiL J
245It is the accounts in the Sinhalese and Pli
chronicles, especially those of the Clavaisa and the P1Tjva]4ya,
that form the basis of the study of the conquest. Though
unsatisfactory in some waye, the first familiar statements of
what happened comes from them. The most important of these
accounts are those of the C11laaisa and the Pjvaliya. The
Pjvaliya account is of exceptional value as it was written
within half a century after the invasion. The nature and value
of these two accounts have formed the subject of a lengthy and.
critical discussion by A.Liyanagamae Suffice it to say here
that much of these accounts is devoted to denouncing the
wickedness of the invaders and. bemoaning the damage dome to the
Buddhist Order. Despite the bitter tone of the accounts, there
is no doubt that they are based on genuine traditions as is
confirmed by the archaeolth ica]. evidence and by one of the
Tamil chronicles and are very valukble to our study. Hence
our account of the invasion and of the subsequent occupation
of northern Ceylon is to be primarily based on these sources.
1. A. Liyanagamage, . cit.
2. See infra, p. 3'i.
24GThe CUavaida account of the invasion begins with
the following trophes:
'But since in consequence of the enormously accu u].ated,various evil deeds of the dwellers in Lañk, the devatswho were everywhere entrusted with the protection ofLaiik, failed to carry out this protection, there landeda man who held to a false creed, whose heart rejoiced inbad statesmanship, who was a forest fire for the burningdown of bushes in the forest of the good, - that is ofgenerosity and the like - who was a sun whose actionclosed the rows of night lotus flowers - that is thegood doctrine - and a moon for destroying the grace ofthe groups of the day lotuses - that is of peace -(a man) by name )gha, an unjust king sprung from theKlitga line, in whom reflection was fooled by hisgreat delusion, landed as leader of four and twentythousand warriors from the Klifiga country and conqueredthe island of Lafik.l
In these preliminary strophes we are told of the character and
lineage of gha and of the numerical strength as well as the
country of origin of the army he led. By describing Ngha as a
man who held to a false faith, the author informs us that he
was a non-Buddhist. This is confirmed by all the literary
sources, including the Tamil M4 akk4appu-mmiyam He is
described here as a king of the Kliñga line. This is generally
re eated in the other Pli and Sinhalese works and in the
Maakk4appu-nmiyam. But it is contradicted in the C1lavaisa
itself in another place where be is called a Dami3a king
1. £!• 80:5k-59.
2. 1m., p.53.
3. i!'' 83:15.
247This is t0t the only instance of a state ent in the above
account being contradicted elsewhere in the C'Lllavaxpaa, as we
shall see resently. The identity of Ngha, as stated earlier,
has formed the subject of an important controversy anon.g scholars
in the recent past. The controversy centres mainly round the
identification of the Kliga home of Igha, which has been
variously identified as Kaliñga in Eastern India, Kaliiga in
the Malay archipelago and as Jaffna Pavnavitana, as we shall
see later, has recently adduced evidence from some unpublished
documents in support of the identification of Kalitiga in
South-east Asia These documents, if their authenticity is
established, should settle this problem to the satisfaction of
all concerned. In the light of this new development we have to
await the publication of these documents before we discuss this
question further.
The statement in the Glavaisa that gha's 'four
and twenty thousand warriors' who are later described as forty-
four thousand strong, both incre ible numbers, came from Kali!xga
is not consistently maintained throu hout the chronicle.
1. See infra, L7i
2. See infra, P:&.
248Almost inimediatel after the strophes quoted above, there
appears the following strophe:
thus his great warriors oppressed the people,boasting cruelly everywhere: "We are Ker4a warriors",.. 1
This contradicts the earlier statement that they came from
Kalifiga. This is not all. Again in strophe 70 of the same chapter
they are referred to as 'Dand3a warriors' In the whole C11lavaisa
account, ha's soldiers are described in three places as Keraas
in eight places as Daniask and in one place as Ker4as and
Damias (Ker4a Dam.i4a) This confusion regarding the identity
of ! ha and his soldiers is not confined to the C11lavaisa alone.
It is found to the same extent in the PUjva].iya as well. In
fact, the accounts of 1gha's invasion and occupation in these
two works are remarkably similar so mich so that one is
inclined to think that one is based on the other or that both
are based on a common source. As the P1jvaliya is almost
1. Cv., 80:61.
2. Ibid., 80:70.
3. Ibi ., 80:61, 76; 81:3.
il. Ibid., 80:70; 81:1k; 82:6, 26; 83:12, 1k, 2k; 87:25.
5. Ibid., 83:20.
249contemporaneous with the occupation of Egha it is unlikely
that this work is based on another sOurce, unless we take the
source to be monastic records. It seems likely that the
Ci11avaisa account is based on that of the P1valiy or om
the records used by the author of the latter work. The iporant
point, however, is that the discrepancies in the two works are
identical. The Pjvaliya, too t calls gha a 1C1i!iga king
(Kaligu-raja) at first and Dravia king (Dravia-raja) and
Tamil king (Dem4a-raja) later on Similarly, his soldiers are
called }lalala (Ker4a) at first, Dema.a (Tamil) in several
other places and Dema3a and Nalala (Dem4a Nalala maha senaga)
in one place That Parkramabhu II, in his campaigns against
gha, fought the lala1as and the Dravias (Tamils) is
maintained not only in the P1jvaliya but also in other
Sinhalese works such as the Dabadei-katikvata, NiJcya-
safigrahaa and the Saddharnia-ratnkaraya There are several
ways of explaining this confusion in our sources. Firstly,
1. Pv., pp.108, 114, 116.
2. Ibid., pp.108, 116.
3. Ibid., pp.117-118; Katikvat-sa1gar, ed. D.B.Jayatilaka, p.8;
Nks., p. 8; Saddhar a-r tnkaraya, p.314.
250when the author of the Clavaisa states that gha 'landed
as leader of four and twentythousand warriors from the K5J.iixga
country', he may be failing to be precise in his statement
rather than mRking a factual mistake. For, it is possible that
what the author is saying is that }gha landed from the Kliiga
country and conquered Lak with twenty-four thousand soldiers,
who may have been recruited in South India. This is quite
probable for even on earlier occasions princes from KV.iiga,
like AnIkaga and. Lokevara, captured the throne of Polonnaruva
with the help of Tamil mercenaries from South India It is
nowhere recorded that there were mercenaries from the Klifiga
country in the island at this time. Secondly, it may be that
}gha's army consisted of Ker4a and Dami3a mercenaries who were
already in Kliñga in search of employment or in the service of
This is not impossible for we know that in this period
there were Ker4a and Karia mercenaries in the employ of11*
not only the Tamil kings of South India but alsoin far-off
places like Bengal The Nanahali plate of hadanap.la, for instance,
1. See supra, p.24Z ; U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 520.
2. See supra, p.7%- ; cf., M.E. . for 1 9, No.315 of 1909.
251includes Karas and. Choas among the mercenaries employed by
the Pla riler in the twelfth century It is, therefore, possible
that M.gba(s £er4a and Damia mercenaries went to Ceylon from
Kaliga itself. But if we are to belive the Sinhalese and Pli
chronicles that the army of ?gha was very large, then it is
unlikely that all the soldiers came from far-off Kali!xga and
we may have to accept the first possibility, namely that }gha
recruited them, or at least most of them, in South India. The
confusion between Dam4as and Kera3as also could be resolved
without much difficulty. It has been suggested that the 'Damia
Ker4a' of the C!flavaisa, translated as Dand3as and Ker4as,
should be rendered as Ker4a Dami4as, like So]! Dema.un in
Sinhalese meaning C1a Tamils The implication is that like the
Cas and the Pyas the Kera3as were also treated as Damias
and, therefore, there is actually no discrepancy in the
C].avaisa account regarding the identity of Mgha's soldiers.
Though this is a plausible explantion, it appears that 1gha's
army did not consist of only Kera4as but also Dami3as. Perhaps
at the beginning there were many Ker4as but once }TAgha had
1. D.C.Sircar, 'Karas outside Kara', J.N.Banerjea Volume, p.2].l.
2. A.Liyanagamage, . cit.
252established himself at Polonnaruva, more soldiers would. have
been recruited from among the Tamils who were resident in the
northern parts of the island. This erhaps is the reason why
both the Pjvaliya and the C1flavasa refer to them as Keraaa
and Dami.as. There seem to have been several South Indian leaders
who were united under 1gha and led different contingents of
mercenaries This may be the reason why the Hatthavanagalla-
vihra-vaisa states that there were 'many thousands of enemy
forces with their kings, the Coas, Ker4as and the like, who
had destroyed the world and the ssana and were living in
2Pulatthipura', The statement that there were forty-four
thousand Ker4as and Dami3as at the time of their final débcle
as opposed to the twenty-four thousand at the tine of the
invasion also seems to support the view that more Dami.as
8Welled the ranks of the invaders after their initi.al victories
In this period, the invaders from Kaliñga and the Malay Peninsula
appear to have solved the problem of transporting soldiers
from their home countries by hiring mercenaries from the near-by
Tamil and Ker4a countries. Once they landed in tiae island
1. See infra, ::&,
2 • Hat thavanagalla-vihra-vaisa, p • 32.
3. Cf., gv., 80:59; 83:20.
253they may have enlisted further mercenaries resident there.
Paranavitana's contention that } ha's soldiers were I,alays
does not seem convincing It is rather difficult to accept
that an army that wrought much destruction and held forth in
a number of fortresses in the northern parts of the island
could ha.e consisted entirely of soldiers froril far-off Jalay
Peninsula. While the C1Ilavaisa specifically mentions that
there were Jvakaa in the army of the Nalay invader Candrabhnu,
who invaded the island in the middle of the thirteenth century,
there is no mention of Jvks in connection with 1gha There
is little doubt that Ngha depended on South Indian mercenaries
for his success.
The invasion of )1gha, though in many ways similar
to the earlier invasions of the island, stands out prominently
in respect of the results it produced. As in the case of the
earlier invasions, there was much destruction wrèught in
Rjaraha, especially in the capital city. The account of the
Clava1sa and the Pjvaliya may be somewhat exaggerated but
1. S.Paranavitana, 'Ceylon and }alaysia in Medieval Times',
J. .A.S. (C. .), N.S., VII, pt. 1,
2. Cv., 83:36, 37.
254there is no gainsaying the fact that destruction was caused
by the armies of gha. Even in the Tamil traditions this
as ect of Ngha's rule has been preserved. In the Naakaappu-
miyam it is explicitly stated that Ik (I4gha) 'caused
all the Buddhist vihras and Buddhist temples at Tppvai
(Polonnaruva) to be destroyed and sought all the Buddhist
1monks and imprisoned them'. But unlike in the time of the
earlier invasions, this time there seems to have been much
appropriation of land and property by the invaders.
They are stated to have taken away all the possessions of
rich people It is claimed that 'villages and fields, houses
and gardens, slaves, cattle, buffaloes and whatever else
belonged to the Sih4as he Ogha) had delivered up to the
Ker4as' Even in yratha, DaQoia warriors 'dwelt as they
pleased in the single villages and houses4 Thus, the soldiers
of 1gha appear to have seized villages, fields and houses
in Ijaraha and 1yraha. We may make an allowance for
possible exaggeration but we cannot reject these statements
1. Im., p.53, 'Tppvaiyil u3a putta vikrai puttlayaik4 ellm
iippittu putta kurukk4ai elJm ti pitittu_ciaipp utti vaittu'1
2. Cv., 80:6k.
3. Ibid., 80:76.
k. Ibid., 81:1k.
25
wholly. These allegations are made in the Pjvaliya as well
and repeated in most other works Considering the fact that
the northern regions of the island slipped away from the hands
of the Sinhalese with the conquest of Zgha and the fact that
the slow migration of the Sinhalese people from Rjaraha to
the south-western parts started around this time, we cannot
rule out the possibility of confiication of lands by the invaders.
The migration of the Sinhalese population, or the bulk of it,
from Rjaraha to the south-western region of the i].and
has formed the subject of much study by scho1ars It is generally
agreed that the weakness of the successors of ParkramabThu I,
the incessant invasions of the island and the consequent
break-down of the administrative machinery which was so vital
for the upkeep of the irrigation system were among the more
important causes for the abandonment of Rjaraha in the
thirteenth century. While it is true that the break-down of
the administrative system was greatly responsible for the
abandonment of Rjaraha, one cannot underestimate the
1. Pv., pp.108-109.
2. A.Liyanaganiage, . cit. ; U.C.Ii.C., I, pt.2, pp. 713-719;
R.Murphey, 'The uin of Ancient Ceylon', Journal of Asian
Stu ies, XVI, pp.l81-200.
25Gimportance of the foreign invasions, especially that of Igha.
This latter factr was in some ways responsible for the
break-down of the administrative system as well as for the
shift of Sinhalese power to the south-west. It is important to
note that the severity of the rule of 1gha and the confiscation
of lands by the Ker4a and Damija warriors would certainly have
led to the flight of the official class, which more than any
other factor is held to have been the cause of the break-down
of the irrigation system and the subsequent abandonment and
depopulation of Rjaaha. The fact that even after Polonnaruva
was regained by the Sinhalese the seat of government was not shifted
to Rjaraçha shows that conditions were not quite normal in
that region. The break-down of the administrative machinery
was not the only reason for this. More iportant than this is
the fact that the enemy had not been quite got rid of. On
earlier occasions when the capital city was regained from the
invaders, they were completely ousted from the island. But,in
this instance,the enemy had only been driven further north.
Moreover, new enemies, namely the Jvakas, ap eared on the
scene and took the place of the earlier enemy. After the Jvakaa
the P4ya feudatories,called the ryacakravartins, took their
place. Thus, there was a succession of enemies in northern Qyl0
and neither Polonnaruva nor any other place in Rjaraha was
257quite safe for re-occupation. This factor, as much as the break-
down of the administrative machinery, was responsible for the
depopulation of Rjaraha and the failure to shift the Sinhalese
seat of government there. Not only the Sinhalese but even the
Taniils found Rjaraha unsafe. Whereas in the case of the
Sinhalese the fertile regions of the south-west afforded new
homes, the arid peninsula of Jaffna became the seat of Tamil
power and provided homes for many of the new settlers from
South India. Why was it that the new dynasty chose the arid
tvcc&bc. in the northern region of the island which had neither
irrigation works worthy of the name nor sufficient rainfall to
enable easy cultivation ? Compared with that peninsula, the
north-central parts of the island lying north of Polonnaruva,
even after the break-down of the irrigation system, would have
been a better place. These regions were never completely abandoned
by either the Sinhalese or the Tamils. We shall see in the sequel
that small numbers of Sinhalese and Tamils continued to live
in those areas under the rule of petty chieftains called Vannis
or Vaiyr, who changed alliances between the Tamil ruler of
northern Ceylon and the inhalese ruler of the south, accordin
to the political climate of the times. We shall also see later
that the occurrence of a large number of Tamil to onyms in places
which had Sinhalese names in the period before the thirteenth
century certainly suggests that the area was occupied by Tamils
258and that the majority of the Sinhalese peo le of these re ions
were either ousted by or, less probab]4, assimilated to the
.1Tam3.l population. Even in many areas where Sinhalese re-occupation
took place and where Sinhalese live at present Taniil place names
occur in considerable numbers, thereby showing that such areas
were settled by Tamils at the time of the Sinhalese re-occupation.
The area lying between the Jaffna kingdom and Iyraha,
generally known as the Vanni from the thirteenth century until
recent times, ap ears to have formed some sort of a buffer
between the warring Sinhalese and Tainil kingdoms. The rulers
of the two kingdoms appear to have found it more convenient to
leave this area under the rule of petty chiefs who paid nominal
allegiance to either of them. The northern and eastern parts
of the Vanni were in the hands of the Tamil chiefs while the
southern parts bordering on the Sinhale e kingdom proper
were in the hands of the Sinhalese. It is, therefore, necessary
to ap reciate the significance of the Tamil occupation in the
abandonment of Rjaraha by the Sinhalese. It appears that
already in the eleventh and twelfth centuries the Sinhalese
were being slowly pushed out of the northern regions where
Tamil settlements were numerous, especially from the north-eastern
1. See infra, .4y%
259
littoral This process was, therefore, expedited by the ruthless
occupation of gha and his troops in the thirteenth century.
Our literary sources attribute the cause of Sinhalese migrations
from Rjaraha at this time solely to the foreign occupation.
We get the following statement in the Clavaa on this point:
During this alien rule several virtuous people hadfounded on divers of the most inaccessible mountainsa charming town (or) a village and dwelling here andthere protected the laity and the Order 60 that theywere in peace. 2
After this some of these new towns and villages are enumerated
An echo of the Ct!lavaisa statement is found in the Hattbavana-
galla-vihra-vaisa, where it is said that when the enemy iorces
oppressed them , the ministers and such other rnportant personages
and the people left their villages and their townships in
thousands in search of places of protection in the rockyLI.
mountains and forest strongholds. Of those who remained behind,
many came under the rule of the new Vanni chieftains.
The permanent dislodgement of Sinbalese power
from Ijaraha, the confiscation of lands and properties by
the Ker4a and Dami.a soldiers and the consequent migration of
the official class and several common people to the south-west
1. See in4-a, p.L,.
2. Cv., 81:1-2.
3. I i ., 81:3-9.
k. Hatthavanaga11a-vihra-vaçisa, p. 30.
260were among the more iportant results of the invasion and
occupation of )gha. These directly helped the transformation
of the northern and eastern parts of the island into areas
predominantly settled by Tamils. The invasion of ?4gha may,
therefore, be considered to be the most important factor that
helped the establishment of more Tamil settlements in the island
in the thirteenth century.
After the invasion of )gha and before the rise
of a dynasty from the Tamil country in northern Ceylon at the
turn of the thirteenth century there were more than five foreign
invasions of the island. All except one were undertaken with
the help of South Indian troops, thas bringing in more South
Indians to the island. The first o these was the invasion of
the Jvaka ruler Candrabhnu in l2k7 This expedition of the
Jvaka ruler was undertaken with Jvaka troops from his kingdom,
according to the Clavaiisa and the Pjva].iya The next invasion
was that of Javarma Sundara P4y4some time before 1258.
This does not find mention in the Clavaisa but some inscriptions
of Sundara Pya dating from 1258 claim that he exacted
1. UC. .C., I, pt.2, pp. 622-625 ; A.tLiyana amage, . cit.
2. Cv., 83:36-37 ; Pv., p. 117.
2611tribute from the Ceylonese ruler. A second P4ya invasion
appears to have taken place in or about 1262. This, too, is
not mentioned in the C1avaisa and is known to us only from
the inscriptions of Javarma; Vira P4ya I (acc. 1253)
About the same time, the ,Jvaka ruler Candrabhnu led a
second invasion of the Sinhalese kingdom, on this occasion
with the help of 'many Dami.a soldiers, representing a great
force' whom he recruited in 'the countries of the Paua and
Coas and e1sewhere' It has been claimed that the second
Pya invasion was undertaken to help the Sinhalese ruler
combat the forces of Candrabhnut After 1263 there appears to
have occurred a few minor invasions of the island under the leader-
ship of Pfra feudatories like Ka1iñgaryar and Co.agañgadeva.
These are referred to in the Clavaisa as having taken place
immediately before the accession of Bhuvanekabhu I (A.D. l272)
1. 1. .R. for 1 9k, Inscription No. 166 of 189k; K.A.Nilakanta
Sastri, The Pyan King om, p. 162.
2. N.E. . for 1917, Inscription No.588 of 1916; K.A.Nilakanta
Sastri, The Pyan Kingdom, p.1?6.
3. Cv., 88:62-63.
k. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2 , p. 621.
5. .!•' 90:32.
262In Paranavitana's opinion, 'all these events appear to have
happened soon after the accession of }avarma Kulakhara
Pãya'(A.D. l268) The next invasion was led by the P4ya
feudatory named L'yaccakkaravartti (Lryacakravin) about
l28k We shall discuss these invasions fully in connection
with the foundation of the kingdom of Jaffna. For the present,
it is sufficient to note that these frequent invasions brought
into the island further bands of mercenaries and other soldiers,
many of whom may have stayed behind and found new homes either
in the new kingdom in northern Ceylon or in the Vanni chief-
taincies. As on earlier occasions, these invasions added to the
strength of the Tamil element in the island and were, there-
fore, an important factor in the establishment of Tamil settle-
ments in tbe thirteenth century.
Apart from the mercenary elements that went as
invaders, there would have been migrations of mercantile communities,
artisans and other peaceful settlers as well. But, unlike in
earlier times, very little information regarding such settlers
is available to us. No inscription of the thirteenth century
referring to any mercantile community has come to light so far.
1. U.C.R.C., I, pt. 2, p. 685.
2. Cv., 90:kk.
263As for monuments, only one Dravidian-style temple has survived
without much damage. Several others appear to have been erected
in the thirteenth century but they are almost all in ruins and
are not by any means significant buildings It may be that owing
to the unsettled conditions that obtained in the island in this
period there was not much building activity. The chronicles give
hardly any information in this respect. The Tamil chronicle,
Vaiyipal, refers to the migration, around this time, of the
Krnaçiyar who were a mercantile community from the Telugu
2country. This work also refers to the settlement of such artisans
as Taccar (carpenters), Tatr (goldsmiths), Kar (braziers)
and Kollar (blacksmiths) As we shall see later, the authenticity
of these statements can be questioned. It seems possible that
the author of the Vaiypal sometimes based his statements on
the conditions obtaining in his time, that is to say he was
just enumerating the castes of Jaffna in his time as having
migrated in the thirteenth century.
In the records of South India, too, there is little
or no evidence regarding the migration of peaceful settlers.
1. See infra, p ?. 3 I ff.
2. Xu. v.41
3. Ibid., m
264
One could suppose that the numerous internecine wars that
characterised the decline of the Cas would have led to the
flight of some of the defeated to places like Ceylon. The Muslim
invasions would have certainly led to such flights, but South
India was hardly affected by them in the thirteenth century.
We hear very little about fimines or any other forms of distress
that might have led to the migration of people. In the inscriptions
of the time of Kulttuñga III there are references to fRminea
in two areas of the Ca kingdom. One of the inscriptions from
Tiruppmburam, dated in the twenty-third year of KuJZttuhga III
(A.D. 1301), refers to the distressing circumstances that prevailed
in that village and to the sad incident o a and his
two daughters selling themselves to the local temple to be
saved from starvation In another inscription from TaAv1r,
of the year 1305, there is an allusion to similar distress being
suffered by the villagers for a long time But we are not in a
position to say whether such conditions were widespread in the
Ca country during these declining years of the empire.
1. LE.R. for 1911, Inscription No.86 of 1911, p.7k.
2. LE.P. for 191k, Inscription o.k58 of 1913, p. 91.
26
Perhaps such conditions led to the migration of some Tamila to
plames like Ceylon, but there is no clear evidence on this point.
Despite the absence of any evidence, we may not be wrong in
saying that migrations of small groupd of peaceful settlers
from South India to Ceylon would have gone on in this period
as in the earlier centuries.
The South Indian invasions were, therefore, still
the most predominant factor that helped to strengthen the
Dravidian element in the local population. There were more than
thirteen invasions from the mainland in the thirteenth century
and one of them at least brought in a large contingent of
mercenary forces. The chaotic conditions that prevailed in
Rjaraha afforded ample opportunities for these mercenary
elements to appropriate land and seize property. Under such
circumstances it is doubtful whether many would have liked to
return to the subcontinent. As is alleged in the Pli and
Sinhalese sources, a large number of the mercenaries must have
found new homes in Rjaraha The Tamil sources, however,
seem to prefer to treat them as peaceful settlers who went to
the island in response to invitations from the Tamil rulers
1. See supra, p.9S
2. See infra, pp.rt ft.
26G
It may be recollected that several writers on the
history of Jaffna, basing their studies on the traditional
legends found in the late Tainil chronicles, have put forward
certain thorics claiming the establishment of Tmil settlements
- 1in Jaffna in the period of the Anuradhapura rulers. These
theories are not accepted by serious students of istory as
they are not based on trustworthy data. Nany of these have been
convincingly dismissed by scholars in recent years It is,
therefore, not our intention to analyse these theories and
take serious notice of writings which at best cèuld be described
as popular. In the main we shall confine ourselves to the
sources on which these writings have been based.
The story of the Tamil settlements in the Jalfna
peninsula ha8 been told in the Tamil writings of a period at
least three centuries later than the time of the events. These
works are the Vaiypal and its paraphrase Vaiy, the Kailya-
mlai and the As pointed out in the
introduction, these works have much historical data mixed with
1. See supra, pp. .L ff
2. ., S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom in North Ceylon',
J.R.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., VII, pt. 2, 19&]., pp.17Lf_22k.
3. See supra, pp. ic-2.o.
261legendary material, some of which are based partly on popular
etymology and partly on Sinhalese legends. The chronology is
hopelessly arranged and one has to exercise great caution in
using these chronicles as source materials. Their value for the
period prior to the twelfth century is almost nil. Hence, we
have to rely almost entirely on the more trustworthy Linhalese
and Pli works and on the meagre archaeological material for
any satisfactory reconstruction of what happened in the Jaffna
peninsula before the thirteenth century.
Although our purpose in this chapter is to deal
with the Dravidian settlements of the thirteenth century, it
is necessary to analyse briefly the history of the Jaffna
peninsula before our period in order to clear certain common
but important misconceptions. By way of this analysis we will
be able to show how unfounded many of the arguments of popular
writers are. We have already shown that there is no case for
arguing that Jaffna was settled by Tamils in the pre-Christian
1centuries or even in the early Christian centuries. On the
contrary, there is some evidence in our sources which points
to the occupation of Sinhalese in the area in the eetty ivs OP
centuries. The meagre evidence in the Mahvaisa regarding the
1. See supra,
268
Jaffna peninsula does not help us to know anything about the
identity of the people who lived there in the pre-Christian
centuries. The Pli chronicle informs us that the port of
Jambukola (Camputtuai), on the eastern coast of the peninsula,
was the main port of embarkation to Tmralipti in Eastern India
from at least the time of Devnampiya Tissa (JD _LIO B.C.).
The two embassies from the island to the court of Aoka
embarked on their voyage from Jambukola Sañghamitt arrived
with the Bo-sapling at this porte The Samudda-paa-sl,
commemorating the arrival of the Bo-sapling, and the Jambukola-
vihra were built there by Devnampiya Tissa These facts only
reveal that the northernmost part of the island was under the
suzerainty of the Anurdhapura king in the third century B.C.
and that Buddhism had begun to spread by that time in that
part of the island as in the other parts. But it is in the
second century A.D. that we get some evidence regarding the
people living there. The language of the gDld-plate inscription
from Vallipurain, the earliest epigraphic record diecovered in the
Jafmna peninsula, is the early form of Sinhalese, in which
1. Mv., 11:23.
2. Ibid., 19:23.
3. Ibid., 19:27; 20:25.
269inscriptions of the time in other parts of the island were
1written. This may suggest that the Sinhalese were settled
in the Jaffna peninsula, or in some parts of at least, in
the second century A.D. There were perhaps Tainil traders in
the port of Jambukola but there is no evidence that points
to Tamil settlements in the peninsula.
That Jaffna was peopled by Buddhists during the
first millenium A.D. is borne out by the meagre evidence of
the Mahvasa and the Clavaisa as well as by the exidence
of the few archaeological and epigraphic materials found in
that peninsula. We find that in the second century A.D.
}'ahallaka ga built the Sli-pabbata-vihra in Ngadpa2(modern Jaffna district). In the same century, Kaniha
Tissa had a temple repaired in that area In the third
century, Vohrika Tissa built walls round the Tissa-vihra
in the same region Aggabodhi II (6Of-6])f) is recorded to
have 'presented the Ua1omaghara temple to the Rjyatana-
dhtu (vihra) as well as an umbrella for the Amlacetiya'
1.
2.
3. Mi,., 3:'
i. Ibid., ':3
5. x• k2:62.
270It is not possible to identify the sites of these Buddhist
establishments, but they are stated to have been in gadIpa.
These references in the Mahvaisa and the Clavai1sa not only
show that there were Buddhists in the Jaffna peninsula in
the Anurdhapura period but also indicate that it continued
to be under the suzerainty of the Anurdhapura rulers.
The gold plate from Vallipuram reveals that
there were Buddhists in that part of the peninsula in the
1second century A.D. At the site of this inscription the
foundations of a Buddhist vihra were uncovered. These founda-
tions are in the premises of a modern Viu temples There is
little doubt that the Viu temple was the original Buddhist
monument, converted inttoa Vaiava eStablishnient at a later
date when Tami.ls settled in the area. Such conversion of
Buddhist establishments into aiva and Vaiava temples seems
to have been a common phenomenon in the peninsula after it
was settled by Dravidians. In the premises of another Viu
temple at Moolai were discovered some 'vestiges of ancient
remains of walls' and a broken sedent Buddha image Again,
1. E.Z.,IV- - rr 31 ff•2. Ibid., ?2
3. A.S.C.A.P. for 19k9, p. 28.
271in the aiva temple at Nahiyappitti a Buddha image was found
under a stone step in the temple tank A lime-stone Buddha
image and the remains of an ancient dgba were unearthed at
Ni1varai, in Navakri Among the debris were two sculptured
fragments of shaped coral atèneB with a stthne-railing design.
According to D.T.Devendra, who conducted the excavation at this
site, the dgba can be dated at least to the tenth century
Near these ruins are the foundations of an ancient building
and in the middle of these is a modern iva temple. It has
been conjectured, and rightly so, that the old fotindations are
those of the vihra attached to the ancient dba Buddha
images have also been discovered in Uuvil, Kantarai and
Jaffna town Kantarai has yislded very important Buddhist
finds which prove the existence of an important Buddhist
1. P.E.Peiris, 'adipa and Buddhist Remains in Jaffna',
J.P.A.S. (C.B.), OCVI, No.70, 1917, p. 26.
2. A.S.C.A.R. for 195k, p. 32 ; ibid. for 1955, pp.17-19.
3. A.S.C.A.R. for 1955, p. 19.
k. Ibid.
5. S.Kumaracuvami, 'V4a _attua Cila Iappeyark4 Vara1',
in the a-vaipava-kaumuti by ILVeluppilai, Jaffna, 1918,
p.1k ; P.E.Peiria, . cii., p.25 ff.; J.P.A.S. (C.B.), XXVI,
No.70, p. 11.3, C.A.Z.P., II, pt. 2, p.96.
2721establishment in the region in early times. Such artefacts
as the glazed tiles and the circular discs discovered here
have helped to connect the finds with those of Anurdhapura
The Sinhalese Nampota, dated in its present form to the
fourteenth or fifteenth century, preserves the names of some
of the places of Buddhist worship in the Jaffna peninsula.
Kantarai is mentioned among these places. The others are
Ngakvila (karkvil), Telipola (Tellipp4ai), Nallgama
(}1allkam), Minuvañgomu Vihraya (VLnazjkmm), Taidivayina
Taa-t!vu or Kayts), Ngadivayina (katIvu or Nayit!vu),
Puvafgudivayina (Puz.ki4u-tIvu) and Kradivayina (KraitIvu)
Of the Buddhist establishments in these places, only the
vihra and dgba at Nkatvu have survived to this day.
It is justifiable to assume that the Iampota list dates
back to a time when the Buddhist establishments of these
places were well-known centres of worship. This was probably
before the thirteenth century for after this date the people
of the Jaffna peninsula were mainly Saivas.
1. P.E.Peiris, . £•' pp.26..28.
2. Me oirs of the A.S.C., II, pp. 5, 12.3. Nampota,
273The foregoing evidence points to the inevitable
conclusion that in the Anurdhapura period, and possibly till
about the twelfth century, there were Buddhists in the Jaffna
peninsula. Although it may appear reasonable to presume that
these Buddhists were Sibhalese like those in the 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 twelfth century and possibly even later,
there is evidence to show that the Buddhists who occupied the
Jaffna peninsula in the Anurdhapura period were Sinhalese.
We refer to the topon;niic evidence which unmistakably points
to the presence of Sinhalese settlers in the peninsula before
Tamils settled there. In an area of only about nine hundred
square miles covered by this peninsula, there occur over a
thousand Sinhalese place names which have survived in a Tamil
garb. The study of these names has not yet been systematically
undertaken. One serious that besets a valuable study
of these names is the absence of records of early forms.
Except for a handful recorded in the Vallipuram plate, the
Naintjvu inscription, the Tiruvlafg4u inscription of Rjdhi-
rja II, the Mhvasa, C1!lavaWsa, P!jvaliya and the Nampota
the early forms of the bulk of the place names are not recorded
274anywhere. This poses a serious problem in the establishment
of a reliable etymology of the toponyms before their language
could be definitely identified and their evidence used for
historical writing. But in spite of this, it has not been
difficult to separate the Sinhalese names from the Tamil.
The difficulty of finding any men{ng in Tamil for the component
elements, the ease with which meanings could be found for theni
in Sinhalese and the commonness of the final elements with
those of the present-day Sinhalese names in the southern
parts of the island are factors that help us in the identification
of the Sinhalese place names of the Jaffna peninsula. The
early forms of the few names that are available to us point
in the same direction, for, they, too, reveal their Sinhalese
origin very distinctly In the whole of the peninsula more than
1. ttuai (Kayts) is derived from Sinh. rtota or
Ertota (Pli Skaratittha). The second element toa (=port)
has been substituted by the Tamil synonym a feature
common in the Tamilised Sinhalese place-names of Ceylon. The
earliest occurrence of this name is in the inscriptions of the
twelfth century. See K.Indrapala, 'The Naitvu Tamil
Inscription of ParkramabThu I', U.C.R., XXI, No.1, Ap. 1963,p.68.Other names for which early forms are available Vali1mam,
Maffuvil, Pufkkuçu-tivu, Campu-tuai, Mallkam, Tellipp4ai,
Krai-tIyu, etc. See infra, pp. 143o
275a thousand Tamilised Sinhalese names of villages, fields and
estates have been collected. As early as the beginning of the
1century their significance was recognised. But the main difficulty
of using the evidence of these names - a difficulty that sterna
from the fact that early forms are not available - is that of
establishing the date of their origin. Despite this, however,
they help us to draw the irresistible conclusion that the
Sirijialese were settled in Jaffna before the Tamils. For how else
could one explain the occurrence of such a large number of
Tamilised Sinhalese toponynis in that small area 2 If we are to
learn from the experience of scholars who studied the place names
in Britain and in the Scandinavian countries, the survival of
Sinhalese elements in the local nomenclature of a region now
occupied by Tamuls will indicate to us certain important points
In the first place, just as in the case of English place names
where Celtic elements revdal earlier Celtic occupation, the
occurrence of Sinhalese elements in the place names of Jaffna
shows that the area was originally occupied by Sinhalese speakers
1. S.Kumaracuvami, . cit.,
2. Cf., The publications of the English Place-name Society.
S
27who were responsible for giving Sinhalese names for villages,
fields and estates The Y a-vaipava-inlai, 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 Secondly, the survival of Sinhalese elements in the
local nomenclature indicates a slow and peaceful penetration
of Tamils in the area rather than a violent occupation. This is
in contrast with the evidence of the place names in the North-
central Province, where Sinhalese names have been largely
replaced by Tami]. naxnes The large percentage of Sinhalese
element and the occurrence of Sinhalese and Tsmil conipounde in
the places names of Jaffna point to a long survival of the
Sinhalese population and an intimate intercourse between them
and the Tamila This is also,borne out by the retention of
some territorial names, like Valikmam (Sixth. VUligama) and
Marcci (Nracci-rata), which points to the retention of the
].. E.Ekwal]., 'The Celtic Element', in The Introduction
to the Study of English Place-names, ed. A.Mawer and F.LStenton,
I, pt. 1, Cambridge 1924 , pp. 17 If
2. pp.9, 24.
3. See infra, p.3ç!
4. Cf., E.Ekwall, . cit., pp. 17,27,28 and 31.
277
old territorial divisions and tell strongly against wholesale
extermination or displacement of the Sinhalese population
We are in no position to confirm with the aid of
other evidence that the penetration and settlement of Tamils
in the Jaffna peninsula was peaceful and slow, though it seems
implicit in the Tamil chronicles. According to these, Jaffna
was settled from time to time by Tamils, invited from South
India, after the establishment of a separate kingdom there
That the relations between the new-comers and the Sinhalese
were sometimes not too cordial is reflected in these works
But there is no evidence to suggest that the Sinhalese were
completely ousted from the peninsula. In fact, we are in a
position to conclude from the evidence of the place names
that the Sinhalese p0 ulation survived there long. In the
later and more reliable sections of the a-vaipava-
mlai, dealing with the rule of the Taniil kings of Jaffna,
there are references to the frequent clashes between Sinhalese
and Tamils as late as the middle of the sixteenth century.
The following statement in the is
1. Of the seven territorial divisions of Jaffna three bear
the name of Valikmam, namely Va1ikmam North, East and West;
two bear the name of Marcci, namely V4a-Marcci and Tea-
larcci. See infra, p. ç31
2. See infra, 3. Cf., Yvm., pp.2k, 36, k5.
278worthy of note in this respect:
Ke (C"ilci1i, 1519-1565) caused all the Buddhist templesthat were found in several places in Jaffna to be destroyedand completely ousted the Sinhalese subjects. None ofthe Siiihalese subjects remained (behind after that). 1
The Vaiypa1 refers to the Sinhalese as one of the communities
living in Jaffna in the time of the Tamil kings It is perhaps
not reasonable to assume that all the Sinhalese were ousted from
the peninsula by the sixteenth century. In all probability
several of them were asimi1ated to the Tamil population. Some
are inclined to believe that the Sinhalese element is represented
in at least one of the castes of Jaffna, namely the Kviyar.
No such caste exists in the social structure of the Tamils of
South India and, what is more, the name Kviyar appears to be
a Tamilised form of the Sinha].ese Goviya (peasant caste). This
caste, whose occupation it was to serve the Ve43as (the peasant
caste of the Tamils), was often referred to in the past as
Kviyacciai (Kviya prisoners), which has been taken to mean
Sinha].ese Goviyas who were taken prisoners by the Tamil Vefl4as
1. p.59.
2. ., v.q- ,
3. Cf., fri.1
279
While it i8 possible to show to some extent at least
that the Jaffna peninsula was first occupied by Sinhalese settlers,
that the Tamil penetration was probably slow and peaceful and
that the Sinhalese long survived there before they were either
assimilated to the Tamil population or ousted from the peninsula,
it is not easy to determine the period when the Tamil occupation
began. The late chronicles of Jaffna are unanimous in their
assertion that the settlement of the Tamils in the peninsula
began under the Tainil rulers of that area. The X a-vaipava-
mlai refers to the presence of Nukkuvas in Jaffna before the
foundation of the kingdom but distinguishes them from the Tamils
The Nukkuvas, as we shall see later, were a Ker4a caste who
went to the island in the centuries after the C1a occupation
The evidence of the Tamil chronicles is, however, not entirely
r1iable. The ! ppa-vaipava-rulai refers to two different
attempts at settling Tamils in Jaffna. The first attempt was
made in the ninth century but it ended in a failure as the
settlers returned to South India after some time This account
is based on the Ypi legend which , as we shall show later,
has no historical basis and. is a fabrication based on popular
1. Yvm., p. c
2. See supra, p.I&V ; see infra,
3. See infra, p.
280etymology The account of the second settleient is based. on that
of the Kailyamlai and is similar to the account in the aiy-
This account appears to be somewhat reliable an fits
into the story that could be reconstructed from the Sinhalese
sources. In the main, it places the Tamil settlement of Jaffna
after the foundation of the kingdom, which event took place in
the thirteenth century These accounts of the Tamil chronicles,
despite their late date and their obvious errors, cannot be
altogether brushed aside.
As we have seen above, the Sinhalese and P2i
chronicles, too, claim that the northern parts of the island
were settled by Tamils in the reign of Igha during the thirteenth
century The Jaffna peninsula was perhaps no exception to this.
But althogh it is possible that Tamil immigrants from Soith
India went to settle down in Jafmna in the time of )gha, it
may be wrong to ascribe all the settlements referred to in the
Tamil chronicles to the time of )gha. After all Ngha's reign
was not a peaceful one. It is difficult to believe that many
peaceful settlers would have gone over to the island under the
1. See infra,?p.2ff.
2. See £nra,
3. See supra,
281turbulent conditions that obtained in northern Ceylon at that
time. It is true that the large number of South Indian mercenaries
in gha's army would have found their homes in different parts
of I?jaraba, including the Jaffna peninsula. But the kind of
peaceful settlements that the Tamil chronicles mention may have
taken place towards the end of the thirteenth or at the beginning
of the fourteenth century, after the establishment of the
iryacakravartin dynasty. The Sinhalese literary sources of
about the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries generally consider
the northern areas - the region north of Salgal-kadura, to be
precise - as Tami]. areas In view of these considerations,
therefore, it is reasonable to demarcate the thirteenth century
as the lower limit for our date of the Tamil colonisation of
Jaffna.
The earliest evidence regarding the presence of
Tamils in the Jaffna peninsula is possibly the Taniil inscription
of Parkramabhu I (1153-1186) from Naitvu We have seen
earlier that till about the ninth century our evidence points
to minor settlements of Tamils in such important ports as
Mahtittha and Goka as well as in Anurdhapura, where there
was a considerable number of mercenary soldiers. In the ninth
1. See infra, p.c37 ; cf., Pv., p.111 ; Tri-siñhal-kaai -saha-
vitti, ed. A.J.W.Narambe, (Kandy 1926), p.21.2. See supra, p.74.
282and tenth century some villages in Rjaraha seem to have
accommodated Tamil settlers but these were by no means numerous.
It seems unlikely that there were many Tajn.il settlers in the
Jaffna peninsula or in any part of the island other than the
major ports and the capital city before the tenth century. As
we stated earlier, there were perhaps some Tamil traders in the
ports of Jambukola and rtoa, in the Jaffna peninsula. But we
have no evidence on this point. It is possible that after the
Ca occupation of the island in 1017 there were Tamil settlers
in Jaffna. Apparently no strongholds were established in that
region and there is no evidence pointing to the presence of
Tamils. Perhaps the Cas used the port of rtoa for their
commercial and naval activities. The toponym V4avar-k-pa4am
perhapsof the Vajava king, i.e. Ca king) perhaps preserves
the memory of some C 1a association As claimed by some writers,
the place name C4i-puram may be a Tamilised form of the Sinhalese
So!-pura (Ca town) and not of S4u-vra (Small Vihra)
But these are matters of speculation and cannot be confirmed
with the available evidence. We can only say that since there
were Tamil settlers in some parts of Rjaraha in the eleventh
century, some may have been in the Jaffna peninsula, too.
1. Cf., S . Rasanayagarn, . cit., p • ; V4ava is commonly used
in Tamil to refer to the Cas but it is possible that here
it iifers to a Vallabha ruler.
2. Cf., S .Kumaracuvami, j. cit., p. tg
283We may not be wrong in placing the upper limit of the date of
the Tamil settlements in Jaffna in the eleventh century. As we
have already seen, the occurrence of a TanLi]. inscription and of
three Tamilised forms of Sinhalese toponynis in the becords of
the twelfth century may point to the existence of Tamil settle-
ments in the Jaffna peninsula in the twelfth century It is,
therefore, justifiable to place the Tamil pezetration into
Jaffna and the beginnings of the gradual absorption and displace-
ment of the Sinhalese there between the eleventh and the end of
the thirteenth century.
For the study of the Tamil occupation of Jaffna in.
the thirteenth century we have hardly any archaeological remains
or epigraphic material. The absence of archaeological material
may be explained in several ways. In the first place, no archaeo-
logical excavations worthy èf the name have been conducted in
that region, except for some preliminary diggings in places
like Kantarai and Nilvarai In the second place, the litbology
of the peninsula in partly responsible for the absence of early
monuments. In the North-central Province and the other southern
parts of the island the natural outcrops of granite rocks afforded
1. See supra, P.273
2. See supra, pp.27o-17L
284materials for the erection of lasting monuments and for inscribing
records. In contrast to this, the Jaffna peninsula, the adjoining
islands and the north-western coastal strip from Kalpiiya to
MullaitIvu, all lying in the Tamil areas, are covered with a
layer of sedimentary limestone of the Miocene and. the later
ages This limestone, with its high degree of solubility, has
not ptoved to be a good medium for the expression of the arts
of architecture and sculpture. It is possible that many of the
structures of our period were reduced to mere rubble in the
course of time and used by villagers for building their semi-
permanent and modest houses. Thirdly, the kings of Jaffna
would not have had the necessary ecomod.c basis for the under-
taking of ambitious building activities. The temples of the
early period, as now, would have been limestone structures of
modest proportions These buildings have been kept in constant
repair, as no part of the peninsula was abandoned in the centuries
after our period, and only a proper archaeological survey will
help us to identify them. The secular buildings at the capital
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 1, p.14.
2. Cf., F.de Queyroz, The Temporal and Siritua]. Conquest of Ceylon,
I, Tr. S.G.Perera, p.50 - 'They never had any other city save
Nelur (Nallr) ,......... Nor is there in that place anything
else worth recording save some tnk, almost devoid of water....'
285
as well as some of the important temples, according to our
sources, were destroyed in the time of the Portuguese occupation
and the materials used for the building of the fort at Jaffna
town The discovery of stone bricks and steps with Tamil
inscriptions in the Jaffna fort and in some of the old houses
in Parkf Teru (Portuguese Street) confirms this We have,
therefore, to depend on the evidence of the Tamil chronicles
and examine the extent to whic reliable information could be
gleaned from them.
As mentioned earlier, the story of the Tami].
settlements in the Jaffna peninsula is found in four chronicles,
namely the Vaiypal, Vaiy, Kailyamlai and the Thppa-
vaipava-nilai. The Vaiypal and its paraphrase, the Vaiy,
both datable to about the sixteenth century, purport to relate
the story of the Tanhil settlements in the Jaffna peninsula as
well as in other parts of the Northern Province. In these
accounts, as pointed out earlier, there is much hietorica].
data mixed with legendary material and their chronthiogy is
highly unreliable and faulty. Their value for our study is
1. !.!_. pp.78-79.
2. AJuttuttampi Pillai, Yppa-carittiram, Jaffna, 1912, p.73.
It has not been possible to trace these inscriptions since.
28G
much depreciated as a result of these serious defects The
Kai].yam1ai, a work datable to the early part of the seventeenth
century, on the other hand, confines itself to the story of the
settlement of prominent Tamil families in the different villages
of Jaffna under the iryacakravartina. This account seems to
have been based on traditions preserved among the important families
in the kingdom at the time of the author. The Ya-vaipava-
m1ai, written in the eighteenth century, admittedly bases its
account of the settlements on the KailyaniIaii, Vaiypal
and on the two non-extant works Pararca-ckara-u]. and the
- .2Irac a-mu.
The account of the kingdom of Jafmna and of the
Taniil settlements there begin with the legend of the
(lutist) in all the four chronicles. The Vaiypal, which is
the earliest of the four works, places the foundation of the
Jaffna kingdom in the Kali year 3000 (= 102 B.C.) The legend
of the is presented briefly in a confused mRnner and
it is only with the help of the Vaiy that any sense could be
made out of it. There is no reference )•re to the invitation
1. See supra, pq..cff-
2. Yvm., Ciappuppyiram, pp. 1-2.
3. ., vv.13-lk.
287
of Tamil settlers from South India by the The laconic
and confused statements in the Vaiypal are expanded in the
Vaiy!, where it is stated more clearly that the after
having obtained the tract of land known as Maarial (present
Jaffna) from the king of Ceylon, invited a thoudand families
from India, settled them in Naar14al and them persuaded an
1Indian prince to rule over them. The incomprehensible statements
in the Vaiypal and their clear elaboration in the Vaiy
remind one of the mnemonic verses in the DTpavaisa and their
expansion in the later Pli chronicles. The Kailyainlai, while
mentioning the establishment of the Jaffna kingdom by Yppa
(Tpi), does not refer to any settlement of Tanils in his
time The Y ppa-vaipava-mlai, on the other hand, states that
fl2ppta, after founding the kingdom in the ninth century,
invited some Tamil families from South India and settled them
in Jaffna. But this settlement did not last long as the
immigrants went back to South India after the death of I ppa
As we shall see later, the legend of the in these
chronicles has no historical basis and is based on popular
1. Vaiy, ed. S.Gnana ragasar, Jaffna, 1921, p.12 ff.
2. Km., p. k.
3. Yvm., p. 2k.
288
etymology which attempts to explain the origin of the name
YL.ppam. Once the origin of Yppam was attributed to
the legendary za or , it became necessary to
include stories of Tamil colonisation in his time in order to
give substance to the tale of his founding of the kingdom
A second Taxnil settlement is described in these
chronicles to have taken place in the reign of the first Lya
king of Jaffna, who is called K].aAkai Iriya in the Vaiypal,
Vicaya IGlakai Cakkaravartti in the Vaiy, Ciz.kai Iriya in
the Kailyanilai and Ciikai Ariya alias Vicaya Kañkai
Cakkaravartti in the Y a-vaipava-mlai We shall see later
that Cifkai Ariya and Vicaya Klaikai Cakkaravartti were
probably two different personalities whom Tamil tradition has
identified as one. The identification of Vicaya XTflañkai
Cakkaravartti withKliga Vijayabhu (Vijaya Klifiga Cakravartin)
is very plausible and Gifikai iriya, may be identified with
the first of the ryacakravartin rulers of Jaffna? What is
important for the present is the unity of the Tamil traditions
in claiming that the second Tainil co].onisation of Jafmna took
place in the reign of the founder of the first proper royal
1. See infra, p.
2. v.57; Vaiya, p.6; Km., p.6; Yvm., p.30.
3. See infra, p.441
289
dynasty in the Jaffna kingdom. They disagree only in regard to
the identity of this personality. The Vaiy calla him Vicaya
K1'i Cakkaravartti while the Kailyanlai refers to ha as
Cii3ki iriya. In the Y ia-vaipava-rnlai the t o names are
given to the same person. It appears that Tamil tradition resolved
the disagreement among the earlier works by identifying Vicaya
Kañkai Cakkaravartti with Ciñkai riya. An examination of
the accounts in our chronicles shows that the two names may
refer to different personalities and that the Tamil settlements
ascribed to their reigns are also those of different periods.
The Vaiypa]. and the Vaiy refer to the settlements established
by the Tamils as well as by some Kannaas, Telugus and Ker4as
in the Jaffna peninsula and in the Vanni areas of northern and
eastern Ceylon. The Kailyamlai and the ,a-vaipava-mlai
refer only to the settlement of certain prominent families of
Jaffna. These were mainly the official class invited by the
first Aryacakravartin to organize the administration of the
new kingdom.
The accounts of the Vaiypal and the Vaiy
seem to relate to the time of Vicaya Kafikai who may be
identified as Kliñ a ViayabThu alias I1gha. These accounts
appear to preserve some memories of the events of the thirteenth
century, but these are hopelessly enmeshed with traditions of
later events that it is not always possible to separate the
290
earlier traditions from the later. The Vaiy'pal account rune
as follows. Ci-fdc, the ruler of Aazkpau, in the Vanni
regions, during the time of Kt!aá 1c i, sought the hand of the
daughter of the king of Nadurai and with that P4ya princess
want sixty Vaiyar or Vanni chieftains. These Vaiyar were
asked by Cifka, to rule kañkparu, presumably on his behalf.
Having accepted the offer, the Vaniyars invited several people
of the eighteen castes from South India to settle down in
their new dominions. These colonists were invited from Naturai
(Nadura), Marithkr, Tirnccilppai (Trichinopoly), Malaiyam
(Ker4a), Tu.uvai-nu (north-western }ysore), Toaimaalam
(To4aima4alani), Vata-kiri-ntu and Kvarpati. They went and
settled in different parts of northern and eastern Ceylon.
The Kaikki4ar, Cnr, Kuyavar, Valaiyar, C!ar, K'rar,
Timilar, Paravar, Maikkualr, Nauvar, ?mavar, Akamp4iyr,
Malaiyakam, KThnaftiyir, Kaar, Cifdca4avar, Taccar, Tar,
Kar and Kollar and. those who were exceedingly compassionate -
'1every caste was happily living in unity in Thlppam (Jaffna).
'The }'Ialaiyakatt (Ker4as) and the Kanr (braziers), along
with the Kaai Klika (Short KalifLga), lived in. Kaacy;
the woman Telli with the intimate (friends 'i) R5viyar resided
1. y., v. ki.
291in the town called Pajai; the confident Cvakar (Jvks)
lived in their Cri (i.e. Cvaka-cri), the AkampaiyI!, Kucavar,
Kollar, Otiyar and }lukkiyar (Mukkuvas) lived in Pnakari'
'Natuvra-mauvarya and the (other) Mauvarya, who governs
the beautiful land, lived in Yppam (Jaffna) along with
the king' 'Villavaryar lived in Nallr; the Maapp4is, who
are held in high esteem by the great, lived in ippy; the
Kavarar, KThnaiyr and the Tillai-mThryirattr lived in
Varai-uu'
This account of the Vaiyptal is slightly altered
in the extended VaiyL In the latter it is stated that the
Vaiyar sent messengers to laturai, Toaimaçalam, ruñkt!r,
Tiruccirppa.].i, KUta1r and Kra{1ckl in order to invite as
many settlers as possible toom among the Vefl.ar, Pirn'ar
(Brhmaas), Ce$is, Cakkiliyar, Akampais, 11alaiyakam, Timilar,
Kuyavar and other such castes, both the higher and the lower,
as well as the personalities called I.aficifika-nippa, Nalla-
vku-tva,, Atti-mppa, and Karutta-vku-ci ik-mp
1. i2 • v. k5.
2. Ibid., V. 73.
3. Ibid., v. 7k.
4. Valy3,p. 26.
9Q9
Those who went to the island in response to the invitation were
Atti-mppa, M4uvarya,, Ticai-vi1afiku-mauvarya, Ctu-
vant a-mauvarya,, Karut ta-vku, C iki -mppa, Ira-c iz.kav
mppa, Iafic iñka-nippa,, Nallavku-niey-tva, V!ra-ct aiya,
Tit a-v!ra.c iñka-nippa, Anrc apuri VTra-mauvarya, Ki4ai-
kttava,, Nui-kttava, Ciika-vku, Yppaiyir, M1kkaiyir,
Kppaiyir, Thnaicciyaãr, Tovvi-car, Tic ai-ve, Ia-
c ñka-v.ku-tva, , Taat tia-kirpa, Vkkia-mayit t afl,, Karut ta-
varya-c ifika-kumra, Nut iyi, AiMcac ifika,, Kfica-kat ta.iya,
Klifika, Tillai-mvyiravar, Cuva-t i a-rya, K k i-v4a-
K'vri-ataitt, Mu1lai-maappa3i, Kumra-maapp4.i,
Cañku-mat app4i, Caruku-ma app4i , Akampa iy.r, and the
BrhMaas of the Ariya-vkiam (Irya-vaisa) . They crossed the
sea in boats, arrived and stayed in Thppm in I1ki-nu(Ceylon)' Of these some later went to the Vanni and settled there.
'Of the four named Yppaiyir, Kppaiyir, xnaicciyar ,and
Telli, the last mentioned went and ruled in Thcpa-ntu and
hence the name Teuipp4ai' (for one of the villages there).
1. Vaiy, p. 27 ff.
2. Ibid., p. 30.
2 J1
'Attimpp4a, and Na1uvariya became lords (atipati, Skt.
adhipati) of Iyppam (Jaffna). ViUavarya resided at
Nallr. Kaaiyar-Klifikan resided at Cvukaccri (Cvaka-
cri). Vekacalam Virutufii of the Tillai-mUvyiravar
resided at Varai-nu. The ?4ukkiya (Nukkuva) named Tiruvca
Vefiyaraca, became lord of Pnri (Pt!akari). The sixty
Cañkamar and the V?arnaycurar resided at Keruvil. The
Cnr, Valaiyar, Timi].ar, Karaiyr, Paar, N4avar,
.Akampai, 1'ia1aiyakam, K'viyar, Naappa3.i, Puravartayar
(Portuguese, provedor), Cintu-ntr (Those of the Sindhu
country), Kaikk4ar, Maavar, Paravar, Muaittvar,
Kollar, Kar , Nãvitar , Va4r , Tar and the
Paaiyar went and lived in. the sixty-four districts of
Iyppam'
1. The Kaikk4ar (weavers) are the same as the Kaikklars
mentioned in the inscriptions of South India. In. the
C 1a period, they also served as royal troops.
Cf., K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, p. 1+57.
2. Vaiy, p. 30 ff.
294The accounts in the Vaiy!pal and the Vaiy are
thus basically identical, but the Vaiy provides more details
regarding some of the important colonists. It appears that the
author of the latter work obtained this supplementary information
from other traditions prevalent in his time. The problem now is
to examine the extent to which these accounts can be relied upon
for the history of our period. There is no doubt that these are
not wholly acceptable as information relating to the thirteenth
century. We shall see later that the story of ka or Vara-
rca-cifik is an unfounded myth based on the Vijaya legend
It has, therefore, no relevance to the story of the Tamil settle-
ment in Jaffna. The contention that Tamil settlers were invited
to the island by Vanni chieftains in the time of Vicaya Kulet!ikai
may not be wrong. It is in the time of }gha that we hear for
the first time about the rule of Varmi chieftains from the Pli
and Sinhalese sources We have also noticed that the settlement
of Tamils and Ker4as in a number of villages was actively
pursued in the time of }1gha, according to the P'jvaJ4y and
the Ctflavqsa. It is possible that }gha himself was not directly
responsible for this but that his subordinates, probably
1. See infra, p. L1D7
2. .,g:il ; Pv.,p.1°l
295
including the Vanni chiefs, who were in control of different
parts of northern Ceylon pursued a policy of settling colonists
front South India in the newly acquired dontinions. There may,
therefore, be some truth in what the above accounts have to
say. Some of the communities mentioned in the list of colonists
were already in Ceylon in the twelfth century. These are the
Malaiyakam (Ker4as), Kaar (Kar as) and Akampat iyr
They had gone to the island mRinly as mercenaries. The Ker4as
are also mentioned in the Clava1sa and the Pjvaliya among
the soldiers of }Igha Similarl; the reference to the Jvaka
settlement in Cvakacc!ri seems to have been based on reliable
traditions. As we know, it was in the thirteenth century that
the Jvakas under Candrabhnu occupied the northern regions pf
the island and possibly settled in places like Cvakaccri-
(Jvaka-cri ),Aand C qAfi.k al (Jvk-kffai), which preservetheir memory in their names It is possible, however, that the
reference to te Jvaka settlement is based on the place name
and not on any genuine tradition, but this seems unlikely.
1. See supra, p.
2. See supra, p 14r
3. S.Paranavitana, 'The Lya Kingdom of North Ceylon', . cit.,
p. 19k ; see infra, pr.CJ1 . . S ..I
29The Naavaryar (variant: Mauvaryar) or Maava chieftains
are mentioned among the more important colonists. It is very
probable that certain Naava chieftains were among those who
led the mercenary forces of }gha. The Naavar (variants: M4apar,
Majepar) were chiefs of certain hill-tribes in the Kara and
Taini]. areas of South India. Their warlike habits led to their
employment as mercenaries in the armies of the South Indian
rulers. In fact, their recruitment for such employment is
specially recommended in the Sanskrit work E.mandak!ya In the
latter part of the twelfth century and in the thirteenth century
the Maavars of the Tamil country became prominent as feudatories
of the P4ya rulers and played a leading role in their wars.Many Maavaryars find mention in the Pya records of the
thirteenth century It is, therefore, probable that some of
these warlike chiefs provided mercenaries for ?igha and
accompanied him to Ceylon. After the conquest of Rjarattha
they may have been given certain villages in Jaffna and in otherparts of northern Ceylon. But it is also possible that they
went to the island with the Pya armies that invaded Ceylon
1. Cf., J.D.LDerrett, The Hoysalas, Madras, 1957, pp.7-9.
2. LE.R. for 1926, Nos.k3, 50, 178, 180, 181, 536, 557,
and 573 of 1926.
297in the latter hail of the thirteenth century. The author of the
Vaiypal may have confused the 4 lrazt4tions relating to these
later events with those of the time of gha.
There are certain other statements in the above
accounts which are totally unfounded. The mention of C!ar (Chinese)
among the settlers of Jaffna is surprising. This is improbable
unless some Malaya who went with Cangrabhnu were mistaken for
Chinese and some traditions regarding them had survived. It is
not likely that there were Chinese soldiers among the forces of
Candrabhnu. Probably this reference is the result of sheer
imagination on the part of the author. Similarly, certain other
statements are based on popular etymology. This is betrayed in
the derivation of Tellipp4ai from a woman named Telli who
had settled in that village. Tellipp4ai is actually a Tamilised
form of the Sinhalese name Telipola. This Sinhalese form occurs
in the Nampota Pa3ai is clearly a Sinhalese element (poa =
market place) which occurs commonly in the Tamilised place names
The list of castes seems to have been based on the
social conditions obtaining in the Jaffna peninsula in the time
of the authors of the Vaiypal and the VaiyL it is possible
1. Nampota, p.5.2. Cf., Gam-poa = Taniil, Kamp4ai.
29
that all these castes were represented in the Tamil population
of Jaffna in the thirteenth century, but it is unlikely that
genuine traditions about al]. of them were preserved. The author
of the Vaiy, when expanding the list in the Vaiypal, was
obviously not depending on traditions. This follows fro g his
inclusion of the Puravartayar. Puravartayar is a term derived
from the Portu&uese provedor, meaning supervisor Such names as
IZkkaiyir (The (Long) Nosed), Thnaicciyar (The Dumb),
Yppaiyir (t;-e J ' ) and Eppaiyir
are obviously not names of communities.
While the Vaiypal mentions the MaappaflJ.s
without referring to their various divisions, the Vaiy
elaborates this by listing the different sections, namely the
Mullai-, Kumra-, Cahku-,and Caruku- Naapp4is. The Maappagis,
as Gnanapragasar has pointed out, appear to have been people
who went to Jaffna from Matappa3i in the Kaliga countx7
From the ppa-vaipava-niLai we know that they were members
of the royal family of Jaffna They may have gone originally
with Jgha. it is unlikely that at the time of their arrival
1. S.Gnanapragasar, pa-vaipava-vimarcan, p.kk, note.
2. Ibid., p. lk8 ____
3. p. .
299
in Jaffna they were divided into several groups. As Gnanapragasar
is inclined to think, such a division must have occurred at
a later date, for it is hard to aasume that a group of people
who were called h4appa4is because they came from a place
named Naappafl.i would have been divided into several sub-sections
even before their arrival The Vaiypa1 seems, therefore, to
preserve a genuine tradition when it refers to the Naappais
without mentioning their sub-sections. The author of the Vaiy,
on the other hand, has expanded the original version on the
basis of the conditions prevalent in his time. It is likely
that some of the other castes, too, have been similarly included
in the VaiyL
Some of the prominent colonists mentioned in the
Vaiy may be fictitious personalities. But such personalities
as the Nauvaryars and KlifLkas were probably leaders of
mercenary forces under }gha. It is possible that persons like
NaUa-vku-tva and Kautta-vku-tva, were also true persons
for there are some place names in Jaffna which are possessive
names with the element vku-t!v. Examples of such names are
Vku-tva-c!m (in VTniaikniam), Ceya-vku-tva-c!m (in
Teilippa3ai) and Vicaya-vku-tva-cTh (in Nallkam)
1. S.Gnanapragasar, !a-vaipava-vimaraan, p.1kB.
2. S.Kumaracuvami, 2' .2i.t• P • !c4
300
These were evidently named after some of the leading occupants
of those areas at the time of the Tamil settlements and may well
go back to the thirteenth century. The interesting fact about
these toponyma is that their final element, namely cima is a
word in Sinhalese (s!m) denoting boundary. This may suggest
that these names came into existence at a time when Tamils
began to settle in the midst of Sinhalese people. On the other
hand, sni is also found in Malaylam. If the element cTm
in our place names is derived from the Malaylam word, then
it may indicate that there were Kera3as among those who settled
in the Jaffna peninsula. In fact, there are other place names
which clearly suggest this, Toponyms such as }alaiyaka-kaavai
(in Pulli, Malaiya-pyi i and Malaiyaa-v4avu (in
Acoeu), (in Accuvli), Malaiya-ollai in
(in Uuvil) and Nalaiyakaa-v4avu (in rvli) preserve the
memory of the Keraa aettlement
The settlements described in the Kailyamälai
and the Y a-vaipava-mlai are probably those of the time
o the first Aryacakravartin,as stated in the former work.
The account in these two works is the same, except for minor
variations in names and certain other details, and is confined
1. S.Kuxnaracuvami, 2• cit., p.333.
301
to only the settlements of certain leading families in the new
kingdom. The ,a-vaipava-mlai follows the tradition in
the Vaiypal and the Vaiyã when it says that the Tamil colonists
were invited from the Tamil countries by the ruler of Jaffna.
The Kailyanilai is silent on this score. The rest of the
account runs as 1 èllowe. Puvakavku (BhuvanekabThu), the chief
minister who came from ?4aturai (Nadura), was made to reside at
Nallr, the capital. Pti-ma1avaj, of the Pak!rati-kulani
(Bhag!ratha kula ), from Popariyr, his brother, his brother-
in-law Cepaka-maava and the latter's brother were settled in
Tirunelvli. According to the Ya-vaipava-mlai, Pi-
nzalvan also took with him five more families. Nara-ciñka-vku-
tvaa, the Tu.uva who came from KviriyI1r, was settled
at Mayilii. The a-vaipava-mlai adds that he was the
eldest son of Pravalti-tva. Capaka ppa from Vli-nakar
(Yvm., Vvi-nakar), his relative Cantira-cra-mppa and
another Kaakarya were settled at Tellipp4ai. Pryirava
(Yvm., Pryiram-utaiy ) from Kvapati (Yvm., Kva]i1r) was
settled in Iuvil. The Y a-vaipava-rlai adds that since
this village was found to be unsatisfactory he moved to a village
further west. lakaa, a ve from Kaccllr, and his four
brothers were settled in Paccilaipp4ai. Kaaka-maava from
Cikari-mnakar (Yvm., Cikara-ninakar) and his four brothers
were settled in Pulli. KUpakrntira (Yvm., K'pakryntira)
from Kpakanu and Pu.ya-inakIpla-ppa (Yvm.,
were settled in Tolpuram. Tvarcntira, from Puflr was settled
in Kvilkkai. u-koa-mutali from Totai-nu
(Yvm., Toai-niaalam) was settled in Iruplai. Iru-kulaniuni-
t uyya-t ainyaka (Yvm., Iru-niarapum-tuyya) from Cyr
(Yvm., Ceyyr) was settled in the island of Netuntivu (Delft).
Pa].lava, and two other chiefs from Vafici were settled in
Vei-ntu (Yvm., Veli-natu alias Pallavaraya-kattu).
The variations in the lpaa-vaipava-m1ai are
not too significant and may be due to either a different version
of the Kailyamlai used by the author or the author's own
corrections on the basis of boa other sources. There is no
doubt that the a-vaipava-mlai account is based on that
of the Kailyanilai. This is admitted by the author in the
prefatory verse It is difficult to say how far this account
is reliable. As this account, unlike those of the Vaiypal
and the Vaiy, relates only to certain important families,
there i every possibility of it having been based on genuine
traditions and genealogies maintained in those families. Even
now there are a number of families which claim descent from
1. Km., 11., lk9-l99; Yvm., pp. 27-29.
2. Tim., p.1
30Jone or other of these early colonists It is, therefore, quite
possible that the author of the Kailyani]. was bang his
account on reliable traditions. As mentioned before, the l44avar
chieftains had attained prominence in the Pya country in the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries as feudatories of the Pyas.
As the first ryacakravartin came from the Pya country, it
is possible that he took with him or invited some liaavars to
be his administrators. According to our account, a personage
called aava was sebtled in Tirunelvli. In this village
there is still an estate called P i-ma1avarya-va4avu This
may mean that was one of the early Tamil
colonists in that village and may confirm the statement in the
KaiIyamlai. It is not impossible, however, that the author
of this work was depending on such place names for some of his
statements. This seems unlikely. Another place name with the
personal element Naavariya,, namely Maavarya-kuricci, occurs
in Vaa-marcci A family in this place claims descent from one
Kaaka Ma1ava, who is said to have settled there in the time
of the first ryacakravartin Kaaka }Iaava is not mentioned
1. K.Velu pillai, , cit., p 2o2
2. S.Kumaracuvami, . cit., p. oP
3.
14• K.Velup illai, .2• cit., p.
301in our sources. In view of such traditions, it may be reasonable
to hold that some at least of the colonists mentioned in the
Kailyaiu].ai are true personalities. It appears that Puvanka-
vku,who is referred to in our sources as a minister of the
first Lyacakravartin, is a later personage. He has been identified
with Prince Sapumal Kurnray who conquered Jaffna in the midd].e
of the fifteenth century Some later traditions seem to have
been confused with earlier ones in our chronicles. Some of the
persons mentioned in these accounts may very well be later
colonists.
The foregoing account of the Tamil chronicles seem
to contain some historical information in spite of their obvious
errors. We may be justified in placing some reliance on their
general story, There is hardly any epigraphic or archaeological
evidence to confirm o supplement the above account. The only
information outside the Tamil chronicles about the Tamil occupa-
tion of Jaffna in the thirteenth century comes from the P1jAvaliya
and the Clavaisa . This relates to the Keraja and Dami.a
garrisons maintained by gha and his associate JayabThu in
V1ikg.ma (Valikmam) and Skaratittha (rtota ) The -'-
tenance of garrisons in these two places, in addition to the
1. Cf., S.Paranavitana, 'The irya Kingdom of North Ceylon', . cit.,
p. 193 ; see infra, p..5.2
2. Cv., 83:17 ; p. )I
3O
many outside the pmninaula, shows that Jaffna had been subdued
Mgha. Several of his Ker4a and Dami.a mercenaries were
evidently given lands in the peninsula. The reference in the
Tamil chronicles to the Nalaiyakas or Ker4as may be based on
traditions regarding these Ker4a soldiers of Ngha. The sub-
sequent P4ya invasions would have added to the Tamil element
in the population of the peninsula.
The thirteenth century appears, therefore, to have
witnessed a marked increase in the occupation of the Jaffna
peninsula by Dravidian settlers, chiefly Tamils. Much of the t
traditions recorded in the Tamil chronicles may date back to
the thirteenth century. The confused character of these sources
and the absence of other evidence prevent us from getting a
better picture of the settlements established in the thirteenth
century. The evidence of toponyms, however, suggest that the
character of the Dravidian settlement of the Jaffna peninsula
was different from that of the major part of the Vanni districts.
The settlement in the peninsula appears to have been more peaceful
and slower. The vilence that characterised the occupation of
Polonnaruva and the surrounding regions by }1gha' s forces appears
to have been absent in the Jaffna peninsula when Tamila and
Kera.as occupied it.
3OGo.
Province, the chieftaincies of the Batticaloa and Trincomalee
Please read 306 before 306a.
The archaeology and history of the Vanni is still
an unexplored field, although the jungles of that region are
fast vanishing in the face of government-sponsored colonisation
schemes. Much of our knowledge is confined to a few writings of
some British civil servants who evinced a keen interest in the
archaeology and history of this region. Among these, the
1writings of H.Parker and J.P.Lewis deserve special mention.
1. Henry Parker, 'Irrigation in the Northern Province', Papers Laid
Before the Legislative Council of Ceylon, NoI, 1886, pp.105-116;
J.P.Lewis, Manual of the Vanni Districts; 'The Archaeology of
the Vanni', J.R.A.S. (C.B.), No.'45, 1691.
Anonymous, 'Historical Sketch of the Vanni', The Monthly Literar
egister and Notes and Queries for Ceylon, I, No.1, Jan. 1893,
pp. 1-7; Feb. 1893, pp.25-30
3O
CHAPTER V
SEiTLE!4ENTS IN THE THI1EE1TB CE1IT1JR! : VAMNI DISTRICTS
The borders of the Jaffna kingdom proper and the
Vanni chieftaincies that owed allegiance to it cannot be
ascertained with any degree of certainty. The peninsula of Jaffna,
including the neighbouring islands, was undoubtedly under the
direct ule of the kings of Jaffna as we know from the Tamil
chronicles Beyond the peninsula there appear to have been
some parts, especially in the present )1annr district, which
came under the direct rule of the kings of Jaffna. But the
rest of the present Northern and Eastern Provinces as well as
some of the northern parts of the North-central Province were
in the hands of chieftains often loosely referred to as the
Vannis or Vaniyar. The area that came under their rule was
also referred to as the Vanni. The extent of the Vanrii lands
has varied from time to time. In the Sinhalese chronicles of the
thirteenth and forteenth centuries the depopulated jungle area
that separated the Sinhalese kingdom from the Tamil kingdom
was generally referred to as the Vanni. In the chronicles of
Jaffna the name was mainly used to describe the chieftaincies
of the Northern Province. In the chronicles of the eastern
1. See infra, p-k,
307In l9kl Geiger published an interesting article on the Vanni
based almost entirely on the Pli chronicle In recent years
was published another work which sadly lacks a proper scientific
analysia There is much difference of opinion among all these
writers on the important problem of the origin and spread of
the Vannis or Vaiyars.
Who were the Vannis who emerge into limelight in
the thirteenth century amidst the confusion that followed gha'a
invasion ? This is a question which iá not easy of solution with
the evidence at our disposal. The derivation of the name itself
presents lot of difficulty. Paranavitana has the following to
Bay about the Vannis:-
The government of the districts away from thecapital was carried on by a class of chieftains referredto as Varini who someties defied the authority of theruler at the capital. The people who lived in the ancientRjaraha , which in our period (thirteenth to thefifteenth century) was being steadily encroached by forests,were under chieftains called vanni, some of whom were ofTamil race, and who transferred their allegiance to theSinhalese king, or the ruler in. Jaffna, as the exigenciesof the changing political situation dictated.
1. W.Geiger, 'Die Vannis', Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen
Aka ernie dci' Wissenachaften, II, Heft 1f, Juni l9kl, 1'lUnchen, pp.3-li1
2. C.S.Navaratnam, Vanni and the Vanniyars, Jaffna, 1960.
308
The word vanni is generally derived from Skt. or P. vana,'forest', and 18 taken to have been borne by thesechieftains because they ruled tracts of territory mostlyin forest. The number of vanni and their territories issometimes given as eighteen, and sometimes as threehundred and sixty-four. Two classes of vannis are alsomentioned, namely maha-vanni 'great vannis'and siri-vanni,'saaller vanni' , Perhaps the eighteen were the maha-vanniand the three hundred and sixty-four the siri-vanni. ].
According to this, the Vannis were only a class of chieftains
who derived their name from vana because of the nature of the
tracts that came under their authority. While agreeing with the
derivation of the name, Geiger has a different opinion to express
on the identity of the Vannis:-
Der Name der Vannis (mod. Sgh. vanniy , Pali vannioder Va!i!la ) jet in seiner Bildung nicht vollig kiar,abel' es ist kaum zu bezweifeln, da,er mit vana ,,Wald"zusammenhtngt. Wir konnen ihn passend mit ,,Waldleute"oder ,,Waldsiedler" wiedergeben.
Weiterhin jet es sehr bemerkenswert, dadas Wortvanni oder vafla niemals allein vorkommt, sondern immerin Verbindungen wie vanni-rajnO und dergleichen, an3_Stellen (83.10; 87.52; 90.33) uberdies mit dem Zusatzsih4a. Es ergabe aber em schifes Bild, woilte man dasmit ,,Vannikonige" ubersetzen und nur auf die Anfuhrerund Hauptlinge der Vanuis beziehen. Nein, es war das Nameder Gesamtheit. Das Wort rjan hat in Ceylon eineallgenieinere Bedeutung angenommen, die den Sk. katriyaentspricht. Die vannirajno beanepruchen also, einadeliger Clan zu scm, genau so wie der in Vesliherrschende Adeleclan der Liccbavi in eingha1esichenuel1en (vgl. z. B. Saddharmaratnva1iya, ed. D.B.Jayatilaka,
p.298) ala licchavirajjuruv, wtl. ,,Licchavikonige"bezeichnt wird. Wenn sich aber die Vanuis aus drucklichselber shaa nennen, so stellen sic sich dainit ale
1. UC.H.C., I, pt.2, pp. 736-737.
309
Arier in bewu ten Gegensatz zu den Darni3as (3k. dravia)wie zu den Vddaa. Wir sehen also, da(5 schom im 13 Jahrhundertdie Vannis ebenso, wie dies ihre heutigen Nachfahrentun, den Anepruch auf arieche Abkunft und vornehme Kasteerhoben, und davon dem Chronisten der zu.. Anfang des1k Jahrhunderts sein Werk Verfate, also ale Zeitgenossegelten darf, dieser Anepruch of fenbar ale durchausberechtigt anerkannt wurde. 1
We shall presently,(that while Geiger is partly right in applying
the name Vanni to a whole community or caste rather than to a
group of chieftains, he is wrong in claiming that they were all
Sinhalese and consequently of Aryan descent. But before we come
to that, let us consider the various derivations that have been
suggested for the name Vanni. Tennent mentions two possible
derivations, namely 'one significant of the forest (vanam)zhich
it (the Vanni region) covers to a great extent, the other of
the intense heat which characterisee the region' (vanni = fire
Some have tried to derive it from the TaIL1 val, 'hard', denoting
the hardness of the soil Still others have suggested a derivation
from Baniy or merchant These are all fanciful derivations
based on the similarity of their sounds with that of vanni.
1. W.Geiger, 'Die Vannis', . cit., pp.k-5.
2. .Tennent, Ceylon, II, (ktb edition), p.508.
3. J.LA.S. (C.B.), )I" , No. 115, 189k , p. 151, note.
i. Ibid.
310
The derivation from vana appears to be plausible but unusual.
The Pli form vaflfa does not seem to have been derived from
vana. No tradition has been preserved in Ceylon regarding the
derivation or origin of the name, but in South India where,
too, we hear of Vannis or Vaiyar in this period and later,
there are certain traditions regarding their origin which
throw some light on our problem.
The Tainil work entitled Cilai-eupatu, probably
composed in the period of the Vijayaxiagara empire though
ascribed to Kainpa, who lived in the Ca period, is a panegyric
on the Vaiyars According to this work, the Vaiyars
belonged to the Agni-kula and were descended from a certain
Sambhu-niuni. Gnanapragasar is inclined to think that this
association with the Agni-kula is a theory borm of the
similarity between vahni (=fire) and vanni In fact, there is
a le end among the Vaiyar caste of North Arcot which illustrates
the derivation of their name from valini. H.F.Cox has recorded
this legend in the following manner:-
In the olden times two giants named Vata i and 1ahiworshipped Brahma with such devotion that they obtainedfroi him immunity from death from every cause savefire, which element tbe bad carelessly omitted to
1. S.GnanaDragaaar, a-vaipava-vimarcana, p. kO.
2. Ibid.
311
include in their enumeration. Protected thus they harriedthe country, and Vatapi went to the length of swallowingVayu, the god of the winds, while Mahi devoured the sun.The earth was therefore enveloped in perpetual darknessand stillness, a condition of affairs which struck terrorinto the minds of the devatas and led them to ap ealto Brahma. He, recollecting the omission made by thegiants, directed his supplicants to desire the rishiJambava Munlmuni to perform a yagam or sacrifice by fire.The order having been obeyed, armed horeemen sprung fromthe flames, who undertook twelve expeditions a ainstVatapi and Mahi, whom they first destroyed and afterwardsreleased Vayu and the sun from their bodies. Their leaderthen assumed the government of the country under the nameof Rudra Vanniya Maharaja, who had five sons, the ancestorsof the Vanniya caste. 1
This is one of the many Vtãpi legends current in South India
and has no special historical significance. Perhaps it may be
preserving some memory of their origin as a warrior caste. But
its importance lies in the fact that it is meant to illustrate
their origin from fire and the derivation of their name from
vahni Thus we find in the literature and tradition of South
India the origin of the Vaniyar being associated with fire or
the Agni-kula. The derivation of their name from vahni, therefore,
seems to be plausible but not very convincing. As Gnanapragasar
has suggested, this association may represent a later attempt
to derive the name from vahni Even if we allow the association
1. H.F.Cox, A Manual of Iorth Arcot, I, (Revised by H.A.Stuart,
}iadras, 1895), p.236.
2. Ibid.
3. S.Gnanapragasar, a-vaipava-vimarcaam, p. kO.
312with the Agni-kula as plausible, it is difficult to explain why
their name was derived from a rarer word like vahni instead of
agni. Vanni being a caste name in modern India, the early
occupation of the Vaiyar may provide a clue to the origin of
the name, for almost all caste names are based on the occupations
followed by the different castes. The modern Vaiyar caste
of South India follows the profession of cultivation like the
Ve.as The Vaiyars of the Vijayagagara period, too, seem
to have been engaged in the same occupation, for they appear in
inscriptions of the time as tenants of BrThmaa and Ve33a
landlords and paid a special tax called the in iya-vari But
in the earlier centuries they appear to have been warriors.
The Cilai-eupatu praises their skill in the art of archery
and gives the bow as their emblem The Kallam refers to them
as aai-vaflLiyar (Vaiyars of the four-fold army) which
shows that they were also warriors employed in the four-fold
army of the states The evidence in the KalIam agrees with the
attributes showered on them in the Cilai-eupatu. It appears,
therefore, that in times past the Vaiyars were a community
1. H.F.Cox, . cit., p. 236.
2. I. .R. for 1913, Inscriptions o. 223 of 1912 and Nos. 30 and
3F of 1913.
3. S pv&asar ippa-vaipava-vimarc auam p. ko.
k. Kalltam, v.7 , p •3oJJ (€4 Yv.0 .t1.Aics
313of warriors or tribesmen who were noted for their skill in
archery and employed as soldiers in the armies of chiefs and
kings. Gradually they must have begun to lead a settled life
and taken to agriculture. Traditions relating to the Vijayanagara
period refer to them as a 'forest race, a tribe of low cultivators'
They may have lived originally in the forest regions. If theirC.,nP1QC-4-iofl
name has anytiag t-e---do-- with their original habitat, then it
may be derived from Skt. vanya (='wild, savage or existing in
the forest' 2 ). Vanya becomes in Tami]. (ef., Skt. =
Tamil, ) and takes the suffix -r (ir) as a persona]. plural
noun. The P.li form vafifia also suits this derivation (cf.,
Skt. = P. pufifia ). As the name is not of Tamil derivation,
it is possible that this caste or tribe originated in the
Telugu or Kannaa areas, where Sanskrit caste names are not
uncommon. Indeed the Vaiyar caste is still found in the
North Arcot district which borders on the Telugu regions.
There is no evidence regarding the date of the origin of this
caste. There is no reference to the Vaiyar in the early
1. W.Tay].or, Examination and Analysis of the Mackenzie
Manuscripts, Madras 1838, p. 78.
2. M.nier-1il1iams, Sanskrit-English Dictionary, p. 919
314sources. It is, therefore, difficult to say when this caste originated
We are inclined to think that the name Vanni originated
in India and not in Ceylon. In the first place, it occurs in the
South Indian sources earlier than in the Ceylonese works
Secondly, it is unlikely that a Sinhaleae caste with the name
Vanni migrated to South India or that the term vanni was intro-
duced from Ceylon to designate a caste in South India. But the
converse is possible. Further, the absence of traditions in the
island regarding the origins of the Vannis and their prevalence
in South India may also point in the same direction. Finally,
the Tamil chronicles of Ceylon refer to the migration of the
Vannis from the Tamil country to Ceylon. It seems, therefore, not
justifiable to say that the name was applied to a class of
chieftains or a group of Sinhalese in Ceylon because they were
living in. the forest regions. It appears that the term Vanni
became current for chieftains in the abandoned regions of
Rjaraha and in. the forest tracts ofsewhere after Vanni chiefs
from South India established themselves in the northern parts
of
1. In the Kallam the Vaiyars are said to have been created as a
result of a miraculous conversion of twelve boars into hiimin beings.
Some take this to indicate their origin as subordinates under the
Chlukyas whose emblem was the boar. Cf., Hindu Organ, Jaffna, 8.1.23
and S.Gnanapragasar, Y ppa-vaipava-vi arcane, p.kl. This
is mere speculation.
2. See infra, .
315
of Ceylon. It is even possible that the term was introduced
into the island before the Vanni chiefs went there, in the
same manner as South Indian administrative terms came to be
introduced But this seems unlikely since vanni is not a term
used in esimilar sense but rather a name that was applied to
a caste or comzminity.
The earliest occurrence of the term is
perhaps in the inscription No.556 of 1919, which appears to
belong to the time of Rjarja Ca The basis of this surmise
is the reference to one Pottappicca in this inscription.
Presumably he is the same as the Pottappicca who figures
in other records of the time of Rjarja I The term that
occurs in our inscription is vanniyapparru, meaning the area or
region of the Vaiyars. A more definite occurrence of the term
• • o-p• • • • Ifis in einscription of Rjendra I. The reference here is to a
certain Vaiya Rva (Rva the Vaiya). After this a number
of persons with the name Vaiya are mentioned in the epigraphs
of the time of Rjdhirja II, Ku1ttufLga III, and avarma
1. Cf., meykppar, m1si, mutten, etc.
2. }.E.P. for 192 , No.556 of 1919.
3. Cf., LA.NilRknta Sastri, The Cas, p. 505.
If. LE.R. for 1 98, p. 2.
31
Kulaekhara P4ya as well as in the inscriptions of the Vijaya-
nagara period 1ost of the persons mentioned in the Ca and P4ya
records bear the title of Vaiya-nya or Vaiyar-nya (Lord of the
Vaiyars) and appear to have been Vaiya chiefs. Prominent among
thea id one Vaiya-xiya Cuut who figures in as many as
fifteen records of the time of Rjdhirja II. He is described in
these as a Ialaiynp chief, with the fulsome epithets Malaiyam
Iaiyr Periya Uaiy CuUut Vaiya-nya, Rjarja
Cdiyarja One of the Ceylonese works of this period, the Upsaka-
janlaikra, also refers to a Vanni feudatory of the P4ya ruler.
(Pau-bhThnaale yo'bh vafiflo smanta bhThnipo) On the basis of
these references we may venture to suggest that tabout the
twelfth century some Vanni chiefs had risen to prominence as
feudatories of the Cas and the Pyas. Perhaps they were able
to wield much influence as the suppliers of Vaiya soldiers
to these South Indian rulers.
1. ?.E. . for 1903, Nos. 5k6 and 558 of 1902; N.E.I. for 1910,
Nos. 215 and 13k of 1910; M.E.R. for 1913, Nos.30 and 34 of 1913;
?.E.R. for 1920, No .556 of 1919; F.E.P. for 1922, No.352 of 1922;
.E.R. for 1934/35, Nos. 122, 143-149, 154-159, 126, 162, 177,
215 and 189 of 1934/35.
2. }.E.R. forI3f3c, No.lofI1344M
3. Upsaka-janlañkra, p.157
317In Ceylon, the earliest work in which the name
Vanni occurs is the P1!jvaliya. In connection with the occupation
of RAjaraba by Igha, this work refers to the ]ahavanni areas
1and the chiefs of those regions who lived in. fear of }TAgha.
This would mean that by about the latter half of the tbriteenth
century the term vanni bad come to be used in Ceylon to desig-
nate minor chieftaincies in the areas of Rjaraha where the
authority of the Sinhalese ruler was not felt any more. The
PUjvaliya and the Clavaisa frequently refer to the Vannie.
The period to which these references relate is what may be
called the post-Polonnaruva period (after 1215). Geiger is,
however, of the opinion that there is a notice in the CUavaisa
regarding the Vannis of the twelfth century, although they are
not mentioned by that name here.
E hat Vannis oline Zweifel auch schon im l2.Jahrhundertgegeben, denn auch in der Beschreibung der Zustande, wieale durch die daxnaligen Burgerkriege geworden waren,findet sich }hvs. 61.62 die Notiz : ,,Leute von vornebmerAbkunft (kulina) bielten sich, bier und dort an geeignetenPlatzen (phasutthanesu) verstreut, verborgen und nahmenihren Wohnsitz daselbst". 2
This claim of Geiger is based on his assumption that the Vannis
were Sirihalese of noble descent who sought refuge in the forest
regions in times o distress and later came to be called Vannis,
1. Pv., p. 109.
2. W.Gei.ger, 'Die Vannis', . cit., p. 8.
318
signifying 'jungle settlers' (Waldsiedler). But this interpretation,
as we shall see presently, is unacceptable. Paranavitana, too,
feels that the Vanni chiefs appear to have been in Ceylon 'from
early days' (earlier than the thirteenth centur) Thi8 opinion
is based on certain statements in the Nikya-sahrahaya and the
Eu-attanag4uvaisa . The latter works alludes to certain
Siri-vannis in the Attanag4u region who disregarded the authority
of Nugalan ) who was ruling at Anurdhapura
This monarch may be any one of the three Moggallnas who ruled
between the fifth and the seventh century. The source of our
information is a work of the post-Polonnaruva period and,
therefore, the reference to Vannis in the period before the
eighth century does not seem to be authentic. Paranavitana
himself has cast doubt on this reference by saying that 'we
cannot be certain that the author of this text was not attributing
to the past conditions which were normal in his day' The
Nika-sagrahay-a, too, has a similar reference. According to
this work, ParkramabThu I conquered three hundred and sixty-four
Vanni territories. This is, however, not mentioned in the
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, P. 738.
2. E.u-ay . , p. ki.
3. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. 737.
Li.. NIL gi&n,, p. 20.
319
C!1avasa. Though at first sight these statements may appear
inauthentic, they are actually not so. This could be explained
easily if we analyse the exact use of the term vanni in our
medieval Sinhalese and Pli sources. In these sources, vanni
is applied to chieftaincies and chiefs in Ijaraha and in
other forest tracts. Jhile in the Sinhalese sources vanni occurs
alone to mean either a chieftaincy or a chief in the C'alavaisa
- 2 _3it occurs always in compounds, namely vanni-rajattam, vanni-raja,
vanni-r jno vanni-mahIpla maha-vafifia-r ja!fia 6 (variant: niaha-
vanya-rjafi?1a)and vanni-rjhi all of which stand for 'Vannie.xce
kings'. Perhaps the on]$ e-u%.,w.ic-e is the occurrence in the
personal name Vanni BhuvanekabThu, but here,too, it is part of
that name Geiger's contention that the whole compound vanni-rjno
refers to a noble clan (adeliger Clan) of the Sinhalese in the
same way as 'Licchavi-rajjuruv'stood for the Licchavi clan is
not convincing. We are inclined to take these compounds to mean
'kings of the Vanni'. Geiger's argument that the word vanni
never occurs alone but always in a conipund is based purely on
the Clavaisa. Paranavitana' a statement that vannin were a
1. f., Pv., p.109; Rv., pp. kk, 65, 66; Nk.s*n., p.20; Girt-
sand.a, v.128.
2. Cv., 81:11. 3. Ibid., 83:10. k. Ibid., 87:26, 52.
5. Ibid., 88:87. 6. Ibid., 88:88. 7. Ibid., 89:51.
8. Ibid., c101Oc
320class of chieftains is right in so far as the Sinhalese and P.li
sources are concerned. In these sources the term is used to
denote chiefs and chieftaincies in the areas that did not come
under the direct rule of the Sinhalese king. When the authors
of the Eu-attanag4u-vapsa and the Nikba-sarahaya refer to
vanni chieftaincies of earlier centuries, they were only using
a term that came to be applied to those chieftaincies in the
thirteenth century and later. These references need hot be taken
to imply the presence of a clan of people called Vinnia in those
times. When Geiger referred to the Vannis as a noble clan of the
Sinhalese who took refuge in the jungles in the time of }Agha,
he was only referring to those Sinhalese who set themselves up
as minor chiefs in the abandoned areas of Rjaraha which
came to be known as the Vanni. e was basing his statement on
solely on the Pli chronicle and did not take into account the
evidence of the Tamil sources regarding the Vauiyars. He is
wrong, as we shall see, in calling the present-day Vanni caste
of the Northern and North-central Provinces as the descendants
of the Sinhalese Vanni-rjno of our period.
In the Sinhalese and Pli works of the thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries, therefore, the name Van.ni has been
applied to the chieftaincies of Rjaraha and other forest tracts.
As Paranavitana has pointed out, there seem to have two classes
321of Vannis, namely the }iaha-vanni and the Siri-vanni. In some
works the number of Vanni chieftaincies is given as eighteen
1and in some others as three hundred and 8ixty —fotar. These could
hardly be taken seriously. Eighteen is a conventional number
often met with in Indian literature. In fact, some Sanskrit
works refer to the existence of eighteen forest kingdoms (avika-
r jya) Since the Vanni chieftaincies were also forest kinglets,
the Sinhalese authors may have referred to them as eighteen in
number, following the Indian practice. In South India, too,
there are references to the Vamiyars of the eighteen
(districts) It is possible that traditionally it was considered
that there were eighteen Vanni chieftaincies. In the Tamil
chronicles, however, the number of such chieftaincies in the
island is given as seven Probably this referred to the major
chieftaincies that were feudatory to the Jaffna kingdom.
As in the Sinhalese sources, the name Vanni is
applied in. the Tamil chronicles of the island to the chieftaincies_$% 511.I'P.
of northernkCeYlon.
But the name Vaniyar is applied to a caste
1 a. E.u-ay., p. kl.
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. 737.
2. Cf., Vsv1'1bv -+o'y .e..ik QivI1i.J.i 1 T,
4. D.C . rcQ.1,CCc. 1s7,?c
3. A.S.S.I., IV, (J.Burgess, Tamil and Sanskrit Inscriptions), p. 120.
k. Yvm., p. 38.
322of South Indian Tamila whose leaders were the chiefs of the Vanni
districts These Tamil sources preserve traditions relating to
the migration of this caste to Ceylon, which event appears to
have taken place in the early part of the thirteenth century.
In the present day, with the opening up of several colonisation
schemes in the Vanni, the Vaiyar caste has almost become
integrated into the Sinhalese and Tamil population. But in the
nineteenth century when the Vanni was being opened up for the
first time the Vanniyar formed a distinct caste and followed
their age-old occupation of bunting and occasional cultivation.
Not all the people of the Vanni areas belonged to the Vaiyar
caste. In fact only a small percentage of the people of the
Vanni were Vaiyars. The following observation of Fowler is
worthy of note in this context.
These people are the Wanniaha and are entirely dependenton hunting and occasional chena cultivation. They haveno money and cannot buy land. These Wanniaha are a distinctcaste, of which these men are the only representativesin the province. (There are five or six villages in theNorth-Central Province, I believe). They still use theprimitive bow and. arrow and. are well acquainted with themost remote jungles through which they wander in searchof honey and game. There are some peculiarities in theirdialect, which with their mode of life, suggest relationshipwith the Veddah, but they alto ether repudiate the idea. 2
1. See infra, pp . 3 fl-2. S .Fowler, Diary of 3rd ?iay 1 87, quoted in the lionthly egister
and Noted and Queries for Ceylon, II, No. 5, May 189k , p. 98.
323The Vaiyars of the nineteenth century were divided into two
different communal groups. Those who lived in the Vavuniy and
Mullaitivu districts were Tamil speakers while those in the
Nuvarakalviya district were miinly Sinhalese speakers. There
are reasons to believe that these Sinhalese-speaking Vannis
were in fact descended from Tamil Vaiyars who had become
assimilated to the Sinhalese population after the Nuvarakalviya
district was re-colonised by the Sinhalese. It was traditionally
believed by these people that they were descendents of Tamils.
A.Brodie, basing his account on certain traditions preserved
among them, wrote in 1856:-
There is one (caste) here not general over the Islandand which is superior to that which is elsewhere consideredthe highest. I mean the Wanni caste. These persons aredescendants of certain Tamils who came over from the continentin the time of Raja Zen, who granted to each extensivetracts of land. 1
There were other aspects of their life which revealed their
close affinity to the Tarnils. Another o# the nineteenth-century
writers makes the following observations on these Sinhalese of
the Vanni region;-
They have adopted the T mu system of personal names, thusa man has his father's name prefixed to his own and doesnot take his name from the village or family he belongs toor the land he owns, as is the common Sinhalese custom elsewhere.
1. J. .A.S. (C. .), iii , 1&56, p. 1k9.
324Many of their names, too, are Tamil in a Sinha].ese shape.The older generation have taken to weari*g earrings, butthis practice has been discouraged by the presentSinhalese headmen. The Sinhalese villagers have as muchfaith in the Hindu god Pillaiyar (Ganes&') as have theTamil villagers whose favourite god he is.........As regards dress the Linhalese keep generally to theirown customs, but they often wear the Jaffna cloth (chayaveddi)and fasten the handkerchief on their heads after theTaniil manner. 1
The foregoing observations of nineteenth-century writers reveal
certain facts about the so-called Sinhalese Vanniyas. In the
first place, we find that they were a caste distinct from the
rest of the Sinhalese. Secondly, traces of Tamil descent could
be found in their traditions, customs and nlRnners. Thirdly,
they considered themselves to be superior to all other castes
in the Vanni. This feeling of superiority was evidently due to
the fact that they were at one time the ruling caste in the
Vanni. In the light of these considerations it n.s difficult to
accept the view of Geiger that the Vannis were a degenerate
group of Sinhalese. It appears that the Sinhalese Vanniyas
who lived as a separate caste in the North-central Province
were descendants of Tamil Vaniyars who migrated to the island
in the thirteenth century. It is in the same century, as we have
noticed earlier, that we first hear of Vannia in the Sinhalese
sources. It is unlikely that a Sinh ieee caste called the Vannis
1. Anonymous, 'The_Vanni', The lionthly Literary egi ter and
Notes and ueriea for eylon, II, No.5, Iay l89+, p . 98-99.
32
came into existence independently in the present North-central
Province at a time when a community of Tamil Vaiyars settled
in the adjoining districts. It seems more plausible to assume
that the Vanni people of the North-central Province in the
thirteenth century were settlers from South India like the
Va Diyars of the Vavuniy and IlullaitTvu districts, and that
their descendants became assimilated, to the Sinhalese 0 ulation
when Sinhalese re-colonisation took place in those areas
at a later date. This is clearly suggested by the evidence of
place names in the North-central Province. By far the majority
of the names of Sinhalese villages in this province in the
nineteenth century was of Tami]. on in. These villages, as we know
from the inscriptions and literary sources, bore Sinhalese
names before the thirteenth century' What led to this change
of local nomenclature? The explanation is not far to seek.
Some time in or after the thirteenth century these villages
were occupied by Tamils who gave Tamil names to them. When
Sinhalese re-colonisation took place the Tamil settlers seem to
have been gradually assimilated to the Sinhalese population.
This would explain the retention of Tamil place names by
the Sinhalese as well as the presence of Tamil castes like
the Vanniyas, Cliyas and Bairis speaking Sinhalese but
still retaining traces of Tamil descent. It appears, therefore,
1. See infra, p.3c
32
reasonable to assume that the latter-day Sinhalese Vanniyas
were descendants of Tamil settlers from South India and were
related to the Vaiyars of the Tamil areas. The term Vanni
was also used to refer to the chieftains of the Vanni ±'egiona
who may or may not have been of the VRnniyJ eaata.The term
vannirjno of the Clavaisa does not refer to the Vanniya
settlers but only to the chieftains of the Vnniregions who
were both Sinhalese and Tamil.
Traditions regarding the migration of the Vaniyars
from South India are preserved in the Tamil chronicles. In the
Takia-kailc a-pur Tiri-k;c ala-pur K!c ar-kalveu
and the a-vaipava-xnlai this migration is connected
with a personage named Kua whose identity and activities
have formed the subject of some amount of controversy. He is said
to have invited Vanni chieftains from the mainland and entrusted
them with the care of the Kvaram temple in Trincomalee and
its lands. The identity of K4akka, has not been easy to
establish. Recently Paranavitana identified him with a C4a-gañga
prince who went to Ceylon in 1223 , presumably from the
KaliAga country It cannot, however, be claimed that be has
settled the problem once and for all.
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Irya Kingdom of North Ceylon', cit.,
p. 179.
321In the sources mentioned above Ku.aka is
described as a aiva prince from the C5a country who went to
Ceylon on a pilgrimage, tarried at Trincomalee and effected
repairs to the ruined temple of X5!varam. TheTTakia-kai1ca-
purarn calls him K4akk alias C.akañkai, the son of
Mau-n!ti-kaa Ca The Tiri-kcala-puram refers to him- 2as the son of Vararamateva C akn'ik of the Ca country.
The K car-kalvetu agrees with this statement but does not
give Vararmatva's suename as C The a-vaipava-
mlai follows the Takia-kailca-piiram and refers to
Kuakkffa's father as }au-nti-k a-cia 1au-n!ti-kaa-
c]a is a mythical ruler reputed for his benevolence and compassion
who finds a place in the legendary geneaoogy of the Cas
It is hard to explain how he caine to be associated with Kuakkta.
As far as we know no Ca ruler by the name of Vararmatva
CakazUca or Vararniatva ever existed. The Ca descent
attributed to,Kuaic.ka in the Tainil sources appear to be
1. ., Pyiram, v. 8.
2.
3. ., p. 1.
yy •, p. 8.
5. Li. XV, p. 4-
323
rather unreliable. Even the name K4adca, does not seem to
have been the real name of the person. It means 'He of Tanks
and Temples' and is very probajIy a sobriquet he earned after
his tank- and temple-building activities. As Paranavitana is
inclined to believe, Cakañka may have been the real surname
of the prince. While the Tak1a-kailca-puram, the oldest
of the above Tamil sources, calls him Caiu1k ij, the Tin-
cala-puram calls his father C1akaxtka,. C akaâka seemsto have been the family name of the prince, as it was in the
case of the Eastern Gagaa (Co.agañga or Cagañga). We are,
therefore, inclined to agree with Paranavitana that the real
name of this prince was Cakañka.
The identification of this Cakaika, is no easy
matter for the name was commonly used by the Eastern Gaigas
as well as by princes and feudatories in the Ca, Pya and
Karta countries in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
Noreover, our sources reveal that a number of Indian princes
of this name had been in Ceylon in these centuries, As a result
we are up against several possibilities. Our prince may have
been (a) CoagaAga-kumra who lived in the court of Gajabhu II
(b) Coagañga who invaded Ceylon and captured power in U96
1. X•7° :V3.2. Ibid.,
329
(c) Co4agai a of the Trincomalee Sanskrit inscription who landed
in Ceylon in 1223, Cd) C4agagadeva who invaded Ceylon some
time before l28k or (e) any one of the princes of the Eastern
GafLga, Western Gafiga or Ca family or one of the feudatories
of the Cas or Pyas.
To consider the first possibility, we find that
Co.a añgakum.ra was a Ia34a prince who lived in the court of
Gajabhu II around 1153. The only evidence which may be used in
support of the identification of our prince, Kuakka, with
Coagafigakumra is to be found in the Tamil chronicles. In the
Takita-kai]c a-puram, T iri-kc a1a-puram and the K'c ar-
kalve ttu , Gajabhu and K4a are closely azsociated with
the K!varam tenxple The Ma akk4appu-mnmiyam, which refers
to as Makc!na (Nahsen, states that this
prince married a Ka1iga princess who was an adopted daughter
of Gajabhu hese-tr&i-t4ou inaj kre-eeTrvc omo memory of a-
and Ga j abnu • Is it
likely that GajabThu was closely associated with two different
lAd-i-an- princes named Cbagañga or are we to treat them as one ?
1. • , V , p. t73
2. ,
3. ., 7: 8 ff. ; ., Kayavkuppaa.1am, p. 170 ff.; Kk., p. 20.
k. Mm., p. 2
330
The evidence of the Tamil chronifles is not strong enough for
such an identification. Though the traditions concerning the
Kvaram temple were preserved by the temple authorities for
a long time, it may be difficult to base our conclusion on the
evidence of the late works which embody these traditions. It
is not impossible that Gajabhu and Kua&a lived in &Lffereut
periods, as indeed the Tkia-kailca-puramand the Tiri-kcala-
purazn treat them, but were brought together by late tradition
owing to their close association with the Kvaram temple.
Coagaftgakumra who lived in the court of GajabThu II may,
therefore, be different from K4a.kta.
The Kaliñga prince Coagafga who seized power in
1196 is said to have been a nephew of Nii3ki Na1la it is not
stated in our sources whether he invaded the island in 1196
or whether he had gone there some time before that date and
captured power in 1196. If he had gone to Ceylon in 1196, it is
unlikely that he is the same as the C4agafxga who effected
repairs to the K3!varam temple and settled Vaiyars in
Ceylon, for he was ousted from the throne within a year and
it is hard to think that under very insecure conditions he would
have undertaken the task of re airing temples and settling peo le
from South India. Moreover, if he was a nephew of NLañka halla
1. 2x. ° :
331and aspired to the kingship of the island be may have been a
Buddhist and not a aiva. It seems unlikely that he is the
Co.agañga whom we are seeking to identify.
The Sanskrit inscription from Trincomalee, discovered
among the ruins of the Kvaram temple, refers to a personage
1named Coagañga who went to Ceylon in 1223. Paranavitana has i
identified this person with Ku.ak1Za. The inscription is
fragmentary and is engraved on a part of a stone door jamb.
Among the decipherable words is the name Gokara, the ancient
name of Trincomalee and the root from which the name of the
temple is derived (Gokarevara). Since the epigraph is
inscribed. on a part of a building, Paranavitana feels that
it ' may reasonably be assumed to have recorded the building of
the monument of which it formed a part' He therefore argues
that 'it is very unlikely that there were two Coagaftgas who
both came from a foreign country, landed at Trincomalee and
busied themselves effecting improvements to the Saiva shrine
there' He adds further that the date of CoagaAga's arrival
being 1223, it 'agrees with the statement of the Yvm. that
this prince had dealings with chieftains known as Vanniyars,
1. E.Z., V , p.fl32. S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom of North . cit., p. 179.
3. Ibid.
332for it is only from the thirteenth century that Vanniyars or
Vannis are mentioned in the contemporary writings! Paranavitana
is also,of the opinion that this Coagañga is an Eastern GafLga.
There is, however, no evidence for such an assumption. But there
is no evidence eo the contrary either. Gokar.vara was the
favourite deity of the Eastern Gagas The fact that a CoagaAga
from outside the island interested himself in the affairs of
a temple of Gokarevara in Ceylon may indicate that he was an
Eastern Gaiga. Probably Paranavitana is right in identifying
him as an Eastern Gaga prince. Paranavitana's arguments for
the identification of this Coagañga with Ku.aka seem
quite tenable. But let us consider the other possibilities,
too, before we arrive at a satisfactory conclusion.
The CUavaipsa has also a reference to another
C4agañgadeva who is stated to have invaded Ceylon some time
before 128k. From the manner in which this event is introduded
to in the chronicle it does not appear to have been a major
invasion. It is said that BhuvanekabThu I 'drove back all
the Damia , like K'liñgaryara, C4agazgadeva and the
rest who had landed from the opposite coast' Apparently these
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Xrya King om of North Ceylon', . cit., p.180.
2. £ee-iii±ra1---. g.•I • i ,• I
3. Cv., 90:32.
333
enemies had led punitive raids which were not of much significance
and in time Bhuvanekabhu got rid of them. The nature of the
expedition of Kuaic.ka also seems to have been similar,
according to the Tamil sources which state that he had an army
with him but did not effect any conquest But there is one miin
difficulty in identifying C4agagadeva with Kuakka,.
The former's invasion took place not long before 128k, the
year of Bhuvanekablhu's death. If we are to accept the testimony
of the Tamil sources that K4akka introduced Vaiyars
into the island, this event must be places before 1270 when
we first begin to hear of Vannis in the literary sources
Unless we take that Kuai&ta only introduced a further
band of Vaiyars in to the island, it may not be possible to
identify K4aa, with Co.agañgadeva. Cc4agagadeva may be
different from Kuacka.
It is possible that K4aa, is different from
any of the four Coagaigas known to have been in Ceylon in. the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries. He may have been a C1a, Eastern
Gañga or Western Gaga prince or a South Indian feudatory ruler
whose visit to the island is not recorded in the Sinhalese and
1. Cf., Tv ., p. 10.
2. Cf., Pv., p. 109.
334Pli sources • The Ya-vaipava-mlai, Takia-kailc a-puriam,
Tiri-kc a1a-puram, Kc ar-kalve u and the Munn vara-mnm.iyam
maintain that Kuak was a Ca prince The last mentioned
workgives Crya Ku]Zttka (SUrya Kuittuâga) as one of the
titles of the father of K$a1c.kffa. It is unlikely that this
is a reference to KulttufLga Ca . Of the three Ca rulers
named Ku]Zttuñga, only Kulttuñga I is known to have had a son
named Coagañga (or Coagañga) This prince 'vanished into
obscurity after his viceroyalty at V!ñgi' What happened to this
prince after his viceroyalty at VgI ? Did he go on a pilgrimage
to Ceylon and effected repairs to the Kvaram temple ? We
can only speculate on this point. There were also other G1a
princes named CoagafLga. We know of at least one, whose other
name was iadhurntaka, figuring in one of the i4acriptions
iffrom Bangalore Taluq. There were also several Ca-Pya feudatories
named Co.agañga. One of them figures in about five inscriptions
dated in regnal years of Rjarja III and Kulttuñga III,
between 1210 and l222 Another feudatory named Periy Aakiyapperiim,
1. Yvm., p. 8; 7:23; ., Varar atvar varu patalam, v. 4;
Kk., p. 1; vara-m iyam , p.
2. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas, p.3'l
3. Ibd.
if. ., IX, Tamil section, p. 17.
5. F. . . for 1913, Nos. 535, 546, 549, 556, 557 and 559 of 1912.
335alias Co.agafiga whds mention in a number of records of the time
-. 1of Rjaraja III. Certain other C4agañgas are known from P4ya
inscriptions The Upsaka-jan1a.kra refers to a P4ya
feudatory named C4agazga who was himself a vafifia (Vaaiya&
This may mean that some of the Vaiyar chiefs were themselves
known as C4agafiga and one such chief may be Ki4akka who,
after establishing himself in the eastern part of Ceylon, settled
there some of his kinsmen or Vaiya subjects. It was from
South India that gha obtained a large part of hi8 troops.
Probably there were Vaniyars among his mercenary leaders.
In the folk traditions included in the aakk4appu-mmiyam
it is stated that the Mukkuva Vaiyars (Mukkuva chiefs) of
the Batticaloa area went there as leaders of 1gha's troops
and that they were granted nipams (chieftaincies) by
?gba, who is often referred to in this work as Kliáka (Kalixga)
The first mention of the Vannis in the time of gha5 and the
tradition associating him with the Vanni chiefs of Batticaloa
aug est that there may have been some connection between }gha
1. ?.E.L for 1908, Nos. 202 and 205 of 1908; Y.E.R. for 1926,
19k of 1926.
2. Cf., LE.R. for 1921, No.lkO of 1921; Z._.R. for 1922, No, 203 of
1922; M.E.R. for 1915, Nos. k09, kb, k13 of 191k.
3. Upsaka-jan1azkra, p. ç9
k. }., p. 10k. 5. See supra,
33tand the Vannis. Vaniyars were probably among the mercenary
leaders in the army of Igha. It is possible that a Vaiyar
chieftain named Coagaga was among them. }gha may have granted
him a chieftaincy in the Trincomalee area where he became as
Ki4akka. All these are, however, matters of speculation and
in the absence of any real evidence no certain concluions can
be drawn.
It is, therefore, a difficult task to identify
K$aka Cakazka with any degree of certainty. As the
traditions concerning him are very strong one cannot doubt his
historicity. The chances are that he is the same as Coagaftga
of the Trincomalee inscription. In the first palce, as Parana-
vitana has argued, Coagafxga of this inscription is associated
with the Kvaram temple like K4akkZta. Secondly, the
dates of their activities in Ceylon also seem to agree.
Ki4akka appears to have been in the island in the thirteenth
century when we first hear of Vannis. Coagañga, according to
the inscription, was in the island around 1223. It is probable
that Ku is the same as this prince. He was presumably
a scion of the Eastern Gaiga family. The reference in the Tamil
chronicles to him as a Ca prince may be a confusion resulting
from the name Coagañga. In the Tamil chronicles he is credited
337with not only the renovation of aiva temples but alsO the
repair of irrigation works such as the Kantay, Allai and
Vearasa tanks This accounts for his sobriquet 'K4akkta
(Builder of TnkR and Temples).
The personality of K4akk3a has been obscured
in Tainil tradition by several factors. His fame as a repairer of
tnkR, for instance, has led to a confusion of traditions relating
to him with those of the earlier and better known tank-builder
Nahsena. In fact, the Maakk4appu-nimiyani refers to K4akkta
as Makc Although Kuakka seems to have taken an interest
only in the repair of the major irrigation works in his
principality, Taniil tradition has credited him with the building
of those tanks. The Maffakk4appu-nnmya also refers to him
as a Vaitulliya CaivaA (Vaitulya aiva) an obvious confusion
with Nahsena who, according to the c1flvaçisa, was a Vaitulya
Buddhist Similarly, while Nahaena is recorded to have destroyed
Brhmanic temples in Trincornalee, Ku.akka is stated to
have destroyed Buddhist structures in the same place Evidently
1. Cf., , Tiruppai cey- p4alam, v. 65.
2. Nm., p. 32.
3. Ibid., p. 33.
!v., 36:111.
5. Ibid., 37:kl ; Nm., p.3k.
33:these traditions are due to a confusion between Mahsena and
K4akk ta in the eyes of later chroniclers and story-tellers.
There has also been a confusion between K4akkta and
Ukkiracinkaa (Ugra Sifxha), a legendary king mentioned in the
chronicles of Jaffna Traditions relating to Ku.akktta, and.
those about ?gha also appear to have been confused in the
Tamil works As a result of these confusions the personality of
K4akka is shrouded in mystery and his identification &e-
is rendered difficult. Divested of all these legends that
have surrounded his persoxality, K4akkta appears as a
powerful chieftain of the Trincomalee principality in the
thrteenth century, probably in the reign of ?igha. He was
probably an associate o Igha. Ganapragasar has attempted
to identify him with Jayablhu, who, according to the Clavasa,
was a powerful associate of Ngha It is difficult to say
whether K4akktta was known to the Linhalese chroniclers as
Jayabhu. There is, however, no person by the name of JayabThu
in the Tamil works. All that we can say is that Kujakka
was probably a owerful chieftain of the Trincomalee principality
under gha and earned his fame by renovating the KTvarani
temple and repairing some of the tnk in his chieftaincy.
1. See infra,
2. See infra, p9.3714.
3. S.Gnanapragasar, -vaipava-vimarca, p. 6k.
33)
In the light of the evidence that emerges out of
the confused sources at our disposal we have to assign the
migration of the Vaiyars who settled in northern Ceylon to
about the first quarter of the thirteenth century. We are inclined
to believe that they were among the ercenaries who went to
Ceylon with Ngha or with some of his associates, chief among
whom ap ears to have been the personalit T known to us as
K4akka. After the conquest of northern and eastern Ceylon
was effected by the invaders, the present Vavuniy, Mullaitvu,
Trincornalee and Batticaloa districts were probably divided into
several chieftaincies and granted to Vaiya and other mercenary
leaders. K4ackaa seems to have been res onsible for the
creation of such chieftaincies in the Trincomalee and Vavuniya
districts. Igha, according to the Batticaloa traditions, created
similar vaipams in the Batticaloa district It was in this
manner that the Tami]. Vanni chieftaincies a pear to have emerged.
Once the term vanni became current in Rjaraba, it was
probably applied to similar chieftaincies in the depopulated
Sinhalese areas of Rjaraha as well and came to stand for
any jungle chieftaincy. Those Vanni people who were settled
in the areas which later came to be re-colonised by Siniialese
gradually evolved into the Sinhale e Vanniya caste while those
1. See infra, p.379
340of the Tamil regions remained Tamil Vaiyars. This is how we
have to reconstruct the story of the Vaniyars with the meagre
evidence at our die osal. The picture may change when further
evidence comrs to light but the general outline is likely to r
remain almost the same.
The Tamil chronicles refer to seven Vanni chieftaincies
in the island. These corresponded roughly to the present
Vavuniy, Nullaitivu, Trincomalee and Batticaloa districts,
and possibly included some parts of the North-central Province.
By about the nineteenth century only the Vavuni and NullaitYvu
districts continued to be known as the Vanni. The Tamil
chronicles do not mention the Sinhalese Vanni chieftaincies
that covered the major part of the North-central and North-
western Provinces. There is evidence of these regions having
been settled by Tamils in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries
Even now two of the revenue divisions in these provinces is
are known as Vanni Hatpattu and Dema.a Hatpattu (Seven Tamil
Divisions).
Like Jaffna, the Tamil Vanni districts of Vavuniy,
Mullaitivu, Trincomalee and Batticaloa districts were settled
by Sinhalese before the conquest of the Cas. E igra hical,
archaeological and place-name evidences bear testimony to the
1. See infra, p.37
31Sinhalese settlements that once covered these regions. Proto-
Sinhalese and Sinhalese inscriptions ranging from about the
third century B.C. to the tenth century A.D. have been found
in these regions Almost the whole of the area is spotted with
ruins of early Buddhist structures. The present Batticaloa
district and parts of the Trincomalee district were included
in the kingdom of Rohaa and it is needless to say that these
were peopled by Sinhalese before Tamils settled there. The inscrip-
tions of these districts preserve the Sinhalese names of many
of the places which now bear purely Tamil names or Tamilised.
forms of earlier Sinhalese names Only a few Sinhalese inscrip-
tions of the eleventh and twelfth centuries have been found here
and after the twelfth century we do not come across any. Tamil
inscriptions occur in these regions from the eleventh century.
With the Ca occupation a slow and not too visible displacement
of the Sinhalese by the Tamils seems to have begun. Ca
1. Cf., U.C.H.C., I, pt. 1, pigraphic map opposite p.l,
A.S.C.A.R. for 1905, pp.k2-k3 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 19 7, p. 29;
E.Z., V, pt.2, pp. 2k0 ff.; E.Z., I, p.70 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 1933,
2. p. 1k; A.S.C.A.R. for 1935, p. 10 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 19k -4, p. 39;
A.S.C.A.R. for 1953, pp. 21, 2 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 195k, pp. 29, 36.
2. , GagataI (Kantay) , A.S.C.A.R. for 1937, p. 1 ;
P.iagamu (Pak m), E.Z., I p. 39; C.W.Nicholas, p. 81.
Velaka or Velagama (Velakmani), A.S.C.A.R. for 193k, p. 8.
342inscriptions and temples have not been discovered in the Batticaloa
district. In the Vavuuiy district, it is only in the regions
bordering on the Trincoxnalee district and the North-central
province that we get a few Tamil inscriptions and aiva temples
.1dating to the eleventh and twelfth centuries. But in the Trinconialee
district several Tamil inscriptions and Saiva temples dating
from the Ca period have been found This district seems, therefore,
to have attracted Tamil settlers earlier than the other three
districts. It is in the thirteenth century , with the invasion
of Igha, that widespread Tamil and Ker4a settlements appear
to have been established in these districts.
The establishment of Dravidian settlements in the
Vanni districts is dealt with in the Kcar-kalvettu, Tin-
kcala-puram, Vaiy, Vaiyal and the Ya-vaipava-
zrilai. The car-kalveu and the Tini-kcala .punam are
both chronicles of the K;varam temple and therelore embody
the same tradition. The account in these two works may be
summarised in the following manner. The prince K4akZaQ,
after effecting repairs to the K!va.ram temple, decided to
invite some families from South India and entrust to them the
task of maintaining the different services in the temple.
1. See supra,
2. See supra, p c I
343
According to the Kcar-kalveu, Ku.akka went in person
to invite the famileee while the other chrdinicle states that
he sent his ministers. In response to the invitation thirty
families went from JarufLkiir. They were of the V4ava caste.
They were assigned the duties of attr and were settled in
Trincomalee. Twenty families went from Krai (K'raikkl), They
were conferred the title of Parattr and assigned various
duties. Pa3ave.i, in the Trincomalee district was granted as
to them for settlement. A nobleman of the Krar family was
invited from Tirunelvli (Tinnevelly and conferred the title
of mutanm (chief). He was assigned duties concerning the
conduct of festivals and was granted the villages of Kau-
k4attr and Nilv4i. A minstrel from Kfici was assigned the
duty of singing hymns at the temple *nd was settled at Campr
in the Koiyr division of the Trinconialee district. The prose
section of the K!car-kalvettu adds that five cris (master
craftsmen) were invited from the Ca country and were settled
in Trincomalee. When all these people were assigned different
duties and were settled in and around Trincomalee a nobleman
from ladurai was invited and was a ointed as their
chieftain).
1. Kk., pp.2, 3, 36, 37; ., pp. 131-135.
344
In the La-vaipava-nilai this account has r atly
been greatly modified. According to this chronicle of Jaffna,
the fince Ku.akkan, after having completed the renovation
of the temple, assigned fields and estates in seven districts
to the temple. lie then invited and settled Vaiyars in those
districts and entrusted them with the task of cultivating the
temple lands. The seven districts in course of time became the
seven Vanni chieftaincies
The Vaiy and the Vaiypal contain a different
version of the Tamil settlement in the Vanni districts. The
confused account in these works may be summed up in the following
manner • When Vararcac ika, (Vara Rja Sifha), a son of Ukkira-
ciñka (Ugra Zifxha) and a king of Ceylon married oa e ..
from the P4ya country, she brought with her a retinue of
sixty Vaiyars. One of the Vaiyars stayed behind at the
capital of the kingdom and the rest were asked to take over
the chiefships of the Aa.kparu region, which corresponds
rou hly to the present Vavuniy district. These Vaiyars
then invited prom South India a number of people belonging to
the eighteen castes. They were settled in different parts of
au as well as in the peninsula of Jaffna, as mentioned
earlier. Ladurai, IaruAkir, Tiruccir a3i (Tric inopoly)
1. 1!! . ' PP . 11-12.
345
Malaiyakam, T4uvai, Toaimatalam, V4akiri-nu and Kvarati
were among the laces from which iznnii rants went to settle in
Aak au.
After this follows a long and confused list of
places in the Vanni districts where various castes and prominent
personalities went and settled. These places are Muimnakar
(Nujiyav4ai), Kakki, Taikkal, Kiakku-m'L i, Ntku-mlai,It
Karaipparu, Karuv u-ki, Kat ukk4a-pau (Ka4ukki4am
Division), Tirukkai (Trincomalee), Veruka]., Tanrpalakmam,
Ko'iyrani (Kiyr), Ilaivayal, Varpp4ai, Tuukkyr (Tuukky),
Itt imau , Netu.ki , Noccimtai, Pulv4i, Akkaraip aru,Tiriyy, Varavecti, Ceikk4am,and PaaikThnin. All these places
are in the mo&ern Vavuniy, Nullaitvu, Trincoma].ee and
Batticaloa districts. Among the castes and communities mentioned
are Cr,(oil-mongers), Paaiyar (drummers), A)mpatiyr
(Agampai mercenaries), Kaliz.kar (KalifL as), Malaiyakam (Ker4ad)
and Vaiyar
It is interestin to note that the Vaiypal
mentions 'Pflpla Vaimai, K La and others' among the
prominent people who went and settled in Tiriyy and Kaukk4am
1. ., vv. 29-81 ; Vaiy, p. 26 ff.
2.12 . v.73.
34iThe name of the Vanni chief appointed by Ki4akka is given
in the K!car-kalveu and the ri-cala-purarn as
PtTpla,. Ppla Vanimai of the Vaiypal appears to be the
same person as Pp].a Vaniya. Like the chronicles of Trinco-
malee, the VaiypIal mentions Kaukk4am, Trinconialee and
Koiyr among the places where Immigrants were settled and
NarukUr among the places from where settlers Ident to Ceylon.
Some of the traditions in the Vaiypal may have been based
on those of Trincomalee.
The Maakk4appu-mmiyam deals with only the
origin of the castes of Batticaloa. The creation of these castes
as well as the assignment of duties to them are attributed to
lgha. Except in the case of a few, it is not stated whether
these castes migrated to Batticaloa in the time of gha or
earlier. The Mukkuva Vaniyar are stated to have gone from
K3ikaam (unidentified). They belonged to the Paaiyci
(military caste) and it was the X1iñka (Kalix' a ruler) who
chose the best among them (eñk4flattrai) and took them to
the island as commanders of his army The Kuru-ntar (Skt. uru
Nthas) similarly went to Ceylon with the Kliñka Those of the
1. Nm., p. 10k.
2. Ibid., p. 105.
347Ppla Kttiram (Bh' la Gotra) and the Pvaciyar (a mercantile
community) also went to the island with the ____
It is difficult to reconclie these different
versions and separate the historical sections from tile re8t.
As we have already noted, the chronicles of Trincomalee and
Batticaloa seem to preserve a more reliable tradition than
those of Jaffna. An analysis of the above versions reveals certain
important points. In the first place, it becomes doubtless
clear that there has been a confusion of traditions relating
to ?1.gha, K4aa and possibly other prominent personalities
connected with either the Tamil settlements or the creation of
petty chieftaincies in or about the thirteenth century. Shorn
of their details, the accounts of K4akka and ZrAgha
appear very similar. In the akk4appu-m.flmiyam, the account
of }igha has four main strands which are similar to those of
the account of Kuakka, in the chronicles of (varam.
Firstly, }gha is described as an ardent Saiva who was intolerant
of Buddhism and even the Vaiiava faith K4akktta,, too,
is stated to have been a very devoted aiva although there is
nothing in the Trincomalee chronicles to indicate that he
was a bigot. It is in the Maakk4ppu-mmiyam, where he is
1. Mm., pp. 105-106.
2. Ibid., pp. 53, 70.
348
called Na1aTh, that he is said to have destroyed Buddhist
temples in Trinconia1ee Secondly, ?gha is associated with
the building of the Tirukkvil temple and its tanks and with
the invitation of priests to perform service in that temple
K4akka is credited with the renovation of R!varam t
temple and with the building of tanks. Thirdly, Ngha is stated
to have assigned various duties for the different castes of
Batticaloa This account is remarkably similar to the assignment
of duties by Ku.a cta, to the various castes he invited from
South India for the performance of services at the Kvaram
temple. Finally, while K4a kDa is said to have created
the chieftaincy of Trincomalee, the foundation of chieftaincies
in the Batticaloa, Trinconialee, Mannr and Jaffna districts is
attributed to gha
In the second place, there has been a confusion
of the traditions relating to K4akkUa with those about
UkkiracifLkaIj, who may not have been a historical personality.
Ukkiracifika's association with Jaffna is in some ways similar
to Ku ka's association with Trincomalee. The story of
1. L. P . 3k.
4. Ibid., p. 77.
3. Ibid., pp. 70, 71, 95-97.
If. Ibi ., pp. 7k, 75, bk.
34J
Ukkiraciñka, , as it ap ears in the Tainil chronicles, is basically
a different version of the Vijaya le end Sinhalese traditions
as well as some South Indian legendary material have gone into
the creation of this story which forms the starting point of
the history of the Jaffna kingdom in the chronicles of Jaffna.
Traditions of the Rohaa kingdom, which once included parts of
the present rincoma1ee district, also appear to have helped
the growth of the story of Ck1&6TA!. This is seen in the
story of 1akacavuntari, the queen of Ki4aka in some of
these accounts. In this story, traditions similar to those about
Vihradev1, the mother of Di4hagmai, are to be found The
confusion of many of these traditions seems to have been the
result of a belated attempt on the part of the later Tamil
chroniclers to reconcile the different floating traditions in
the Tamil regions and to give these a historical sequence.
In the story of Ukkiraciñ.ka,, for instance, we see an atte pt
to reconcile the stories of Vijaya, K4akkta and possibly
a third personality associated with the kingdom of Jaffna
In this story, as we shall discuss later, we could see the
1. See infra,
2. See infra, .Ck.i'
___ ckvs3. See infra, p.
350character Siha and SihabThu of the Vijaya legend in the
personalities named Ukkiraci-ka, and VararacacitLka r s ectively.
Vararcaciñka combines the characters of SiiabAhu and Vijaya.
The matrimonial mission sent by him to the P4ya court and the
arrival of the Pi4ya princess with a large retinue, as
mentioned in the Vaiypal, are both based on the Vijayalegend. The coming of the Vaiyars and the invitation of the
different castes from places like rui.kr in South India,
their settlement in parts of the Trincoinalee 4istrict and the
arrival of the chief called Ppla Vaimai are clearly based
on the story of Ki4akka,. The rest is an elaboration of
these main aspects possibly baeed,(other traditions and on
the conditions that obtained in the time of the writing of the
chronicle, that is, from the knowledge of the different castes
that were found in the Vanni districts. The later chronicle
a-vaipava-mlai attempts to reconcile the discre ancies
seen in the traditions of the Jaffna and Trincornalee chronicles.
The invitation of the Vaiyars is, therefore, attributed to
Kuak]a, and. the invitation of Tauiil settlers by the
blind minstrel Y]pi is included in the Ukkiracifikag story.
Thus it has only helped to confuse the traditions further.
Thirdly, we fin that some of the traditions in
the above accounts of the settlement in the Vanzii districts
are drawn from popular etymology o place names. Such names
351
as Kantajy, Pakai and Carnpl!r have formed the basis of these
traditions. We have already seen how the author of the Tin-
kicala-puram has incor orated a tradition which attempts
to derive the name Kantay (variant: Kant4ai) from the Taniil
words ka (eye) and ta.ai (to grow), weaving a story round it,(oJso
whereas it is actually derived from the Sinhalese name GañtaJ1va
(Pli, Gagitaka) through the later form GaAtal Similarly,
the Kcar-kalvettu, Naakk4appu-mmiyam and the Tini-cala-
puram contain a story that has been woven round the place
name Pamai, in the Batticaloa district According to this story,
Pamai was the place where the Kaliga infant princess 4aka-
cavuntart drifted ashore in her wooden cradle. Since the baby
was found here smiling, the place was named Plar-nakai (
Plar = baby or young one; nakai = smile) which later became
Pakai and eventually Pamai. But in fact Pamai is derived
from the Sinhalese name Pnama. In the Linhalese inscriptions
of the period between the fifth and the seventh century found
in this place, its ancient name occurs as Pnava The final
1. See supra, p.34.I,J,1,i.
2. Kk., p. 33 ; . , Paalam XII, v.12 ; Mm., p. 28.
3. C.W.Nicholas, . cit., p. 22 ; C.J.Sc. (G), II, pp. 113, 11k.
3521was replaced by ma in course of time and, when it became
Tamiliaed after the Tamil settlement there, the final a was
substituted with ai In this way some of the traditions preserved
in the Tamil chronicles can be traced ultimately to the work of
popular etymologists.
Thus we see that a number of unreliable traditions
have got enmeshed in the story of the Tamil settlement narrated
in the Tanill chronicles. As things are, it is very difficult
to extract from this anything more than a bare sequence of
events. Compared with the chronicles of Jaffna, those of
Trincomalee and Batticaloa are less confused. Of the later
chronicles, that of Batticaloa, namely the aakk4appu-
miya , is certainly more reliable. It is the only Tamil
chronicle which contains a number of episodes from the history
of the Sinhalese before the thirteenth century, many of which
tally with the accounts in the Mahvaisa and the Ct!lavasa.
Further, the Maakk4appu-mmiyam is the only Tamil chronicle
which mentions MAgha by that name and deals with his activities
in a manner that compares favourably with the Sinhalese accounts.
The miraculous and legendary elements which mar the accounts
1. The interchange of va and ma is common in Sinhalese,
, navaya namaya .
2. This is in keeping with Tainil practice, Gamp4a Kamp4ai,
Polonnaruva Poloauvai.
353in the chronicles of Trincomalee and Jaffna are found to a lesser
extent in the Batticaloa chronicle. These qualities do not, however,
entitle the account of the 144 akk4appu-mmiyam to be wholly
acce ted. By a comparison of this and other Tarnil accounts
with those of the Sinhalese and Pli chronicles we may be able
to arrive at some of the basic facts, decide which statements
are acceptable and te leave aside the dubious details that
have to be treated with some amount 01 scepticism.
As we have already seen, the Sinhalese and Pli
chronicles leave us in no doubt that the invasion of gha
resulted in the occupation of several parts of Rjaraha by
Tamil and Ker4a soldiers and in the dislodgement o many Sinhalese
from that area. Under the tyrannical rule of ?gha Bud hist
institutions were destroyed and what is called a 'false faith'
1was propagated. 'Villages and. fields, houses and gardens' were
'delivered up to the Ker4as' Dami3a warriors were 'settled
here and there in the country' Even in 1yr4tha there were
'Daniia warriors who dwelt as they pleased in the sin le
villages and houses's The forces of 1gha and JayabThu had
1. Cv., 8O;75.
2. Ibid., 80.76.
3. Ibid., 83:12.
k. Ibid., 81:1k.
351
set up fortifications in several places in Rjaratha. These
included Po].onnaruva, Kohasra (Koiyram), Gafigtaka
(Kantay), KkIlaya (Kokkiy), Kavt4vi4u (Ka12kk4am Pattu),
Pad! (Padaviya), Kurund! (Kuruntar in Karik aumlai South),
)inmatta (possibly near Giant's Tank), I4ahtittha (tam),
Mannra (Mar), Goa district (Trincoma].ee district),
VLikagma (Valikmam), Skaratittha (ttuai or Kayts),
Gonusu district (K1avpi region), Madhupdapatittha (possibly
Iluppaikkaavai), Pulacceri and Deb rap4an The last two laces
have not been identified. It is not known whether Debarapaan
is a variant of Dem4apaanama, by which name Jaffna was
sometimes called, as evidenced by the Naxnpota On the other
hand, Debarapaan and Pulacceri may well be places in the
Eastern province. The element ceri in the latter name suggests
that this is a Tamil name.
In the light of this account in the Sinhalese and
Phi sources we may accept some of the statements in the Tamil
chronicles. The information in the Mafta_4appu-nfrniyam that
Ngha bad in his army }ukkuva mercenaries who were given
1. v., 83:15-17 ; Pv., p.116 ; p. 3. For the
identification of the p]. ce names, see C.W.Nicholas, . cit.,
pp. k5, k6, 1, 8 1f, 86. Kklaya is sometimes i entified with
Kavuv4u.2. ampota, p. 5.
35
va (chieftaincies) may be based on some genuine tradition.
The Nukkuvas, as we shall setin the se uel, were from Ker4a.
The fortifications in the Trincomalee district, Kantay and
Koiyram, all in the Eastern Province, were doubtless in the
hands of mercenary leaders who probably became chieftains of
those regions. Parts of the present Battica.loa district may have
been occupied in this manner by }1gha(s mercenaries, among whom
there may have been ?lukkuvas. The creation of the
of Trincomalee may be related to the establishment of the
fortification in hhat district and may not be an independent
event connected with the varam temple. Later tradition
may have separated it from the general story of the establish-
m nt of chieftaincies all over northern and. eastern Ceylon
and treated it with special si nificance owing to the connections
of the chief of Trincomalee with the temple of varam.
Similarly, some of the statements in the Vaiy, Vaiypal
and the i regarding the settlement of the
Vaiyars and other castes may be accepted. The list of forti-
fications established by } ha1 s soldiers clearly indicate
their control of the areas which later became the Tamil Vanni
istrict . Many of the new Tamil settlement sites mentioned
in the V i7 and the Vaiypal are to be located in the istricts
mentioned in the Sinhale e sources as the areas where lgha's
Ker4a and Tamil soldiers had established fortifications.
Mujiyav4ai, Kaiukki, Taikkal, Vapp4ai and Kruviikki
are in the Kurundi region. Kiakkumalai and Noccimai are in
the Pad! region. Tiriyy and Katukku.am Pattu are in the
Kklaya-Kavuvu.0 regions. Tiru-kamalai, Vervki1, Tampalcmm
and Koiy.ram are in the Goa-Kothasra regions. These areas
form a major part of the Vanni districts where, according to
the a-vaipava-mlai, Kuakkta, settled Vaiyars.
If we discount the details provided in the Vaiy and the
Vaiypal, which we are in no position to confirm except to
say that the settler-castes enumerated in these works were
1pbab' found in those places in later times, we may not be
wrong in concluding that several parts of the Vanni districta,
especially those along the north-eastern coast from Kurund! in
the north to Kohasra in the south, were occupied by the soldiers
of 1Zgha and his associates. These soldiers established forti-
fications in these places and settled there. Their leaders
probably invited more settlers from among thtir kith and kin
on the mainland. The Vaniyars, Mukkuvas and other mercenary
leaders appear to have become chieftains of these new settlements.
Presumably they were appointed by Igha and his associates.
1. J.P.Lewis, A Manual of the anni Di tricts, pp. TO-
357
Probably Ki4akkan and possibly P la Vaiya, were among
these associates. We know from the Sizihalese sources that
Jayabhu was definitely one of them. All the settlements
described in the Vaiy and the Vaiyp!tal may not have been
established in the thirteenth century. The process of settlement
which began in that century probably lasted till the fourteenth
century. However, among the miin settlemntss established in the
first half of the thirteenth century were those along the north-
eastern coast, namely in Kurund! (Kurunta11r), Eklaya (Kokkiy)
Kavuçvu.0 (Kaukk4am Pattu), Pad! (Padaviya), Goa (Trincomalee)
and Kohasra (Kottiyram). Tamils had begun to settle in
:1.most of these places in the eleveith century. The new immigrants
would have helped to strengthen the older settlements and to
establish the semi-independent Tamil chieftaincies.
This much could be gleaned from the literary sources.
The archaeological and place-name materials not only confirm
this as far as the Tamil settlements are concerned but also
point to the sudden occupation of the major part of the Nar
and Vavuniy districts by Taniils. The majority of the place names
in these districts are Tamil - a feature which is in contrast
with the place names of Jaffna. The number of Tamilised
1. See supra, Ø.ii
358
Sinhalese names is very small. These names are mainly confined
to the coastal regions where peaceful penetration of Tamil
settlers had begun earlier than the thirteenth century and,
therefore the retention of Sinhalese elements in the place
names could be explained. In the Vavuniy district, for instance,
nearly eighty-two per cent are in Tamil. Three percent are
Tamilised forms of Sinhalese names. About four per cent are
Tamil-Sinhalese compounds. Less than two per cent are Sinha-
ieee names. Nearly nine per cent are of doubtful origin, where
the constituent elements in the majority of the cases are common
to both Sinhalese and Taniil. Less than one per cent of the names
have the elements ikka and pulavu indicating Ker4a
association. The remarkable feature of the place names of
the Vanni districts is the large number with the final element
k4am, meaning tank or reservoir. In the Vavuniy district,
for instance, nearly sixty-three per cent of the names end in
k4arn This may mean that by far the majority of the small
1. The percentages refer only to village names. These have been
calculated on the basis of the list of village names found in
the following works : a) azetteer No.k9: Ceylon, Official
Standard Names A proved by the U.S. Board on Geographie Names,
Office of Geo raphy, Dept. of the Interior, ashin ton, D.C., 1960;
b) J.P.Lewis, Manual of the Vanni istricts, .
35
settle ents of Dravidians that spread over the major part of
ara$ha after the fall of Polonnaruva originated as peasant
settle ents around the many tanks that were built during the
time of the S&nhalese rulers. It also seems to indicate the
original home of many of the new settlers in these areas, for
the element ku.am is more common in the place names of ICer4a
than in those of the Tamil country. In fact a large number of
the names with the element k4ani occurring in Ceylon are to be
found in Ker4a as we1l This may su gest that several of the
newwsettlers in the Vanni regions hailed from Ker4a, The Sinha-
lese sources, as we have seen, repeatedly state that the lCer4a
soldiers of Ngha played a prominent part in the confiscation
of lands and the establishment of settlements. The Tamil
1. E.g., Periyak4am, Vppañk$am, Kalk$am, Karuñk4am,
Kollak4am, !ñk4am, etc. There are also other names,
without the element kt4am, which are common to both regions.
A. comparative study of the place-names of Ker4a and the
Northern and North-central Provinces is likely to yield
much interesting information rel ting to Ker4a settlements
in Ceylon.
3G0
chronicles, too, mention Nalaiyam or }alaiyakam (Kera.a)
among the places from which settlers went to the is1axid
1taru.k1r, in Ker4a, is mentioned in the Vaiy, Vaiy5pa1,
car-kalveu and the Tiri-kcal puram as the home of
some of the settlers in the Vanni districs The tradition
that they came from Marufk'tr was current among the Vaniyars
even in the nineteenth century. J.PLLewis records this tradition
in the followin manner:-
The Tamil Vaiyas are descendants of Vai chiefs.The local exp'anation of the origin of this caste isthat they are descendants of the chiefs (Palaya aus)who ca e over from Murithkr in India, and became rulersof the Vai. 3
The na e 1uru.kUr is evidently a corruption of ruikr.
Further, the Mukkuva mercenaries who figure prominently in
the Na akkajappu-m iyam a ong the soldiers of Ngha were
from Ker4a, as we shall see presently.
Apart from the indication that the place names
provide about the original home of the new settlers, the
absence of Sinhalese elements in the majority of the names
may mean that the occu ation of the Vanni regions of northern
1. See upra, p. Zio
2. See upra, ,'. 2.D
3. J.P.Lewis, Nanual of the Van i Di tricts, p. 7.
361
Ceylon by the Dravidians was not as peaceful as it a ears to
have been in the case of the Jaffna peninsula. In these res ects
the p1 ce na es of the Vanni areas preserve valuable information
that may well o a long way in confirming the statem nts in the
Sinhalese sources that 1gha's army consited of many Ker4as,
that these mercenaries occupied several villages and were settled
here and there in Rjaratha and that their occupation was
far from peaceful. The caution that we have to exercise in the
use of to onymic materials which still await a proper examination
prevents us from drawing any definite conclusions. But it should
be stated that the evidence of these names and that of the
literary sources point in the same direction.
The archaeolo ical material, thou h disappointingly
small, also seems to confirm some of the above points. In the
Tamil Vanni districts only a few Dravidian-style aiva temples
of the thirteenth century have been foun , Among these the
temples at Tirukkvil, Kapuralla,and Nallatai-iakk m and the
- 1Saiva remains at Uruttirapurani and Kuruntanr are notable.
These certainly indicate the existence of Tamul settlements
in those places in the thirteenth century. But monumental
1. S.Paranavitana, 'Archaeolo ical Summary', C.J.Sc. II, p.160-i 1;
A.S.C.A. . for 1933, p. 19 ; A.S.C.A.R. for 1907, p. 27 ;
A.S.C.A. . for 195 , p. 0.
U')",
reiriains of a different type attest to the destruction wrou lit
by the invaders and the conversion of Buddhist institutions
into places of aiva worship, effected by the new settlers,
thus confirming thee of the statements in the Sinhalese sources.
The many scattered ruins of Bud hist monateries and temples all
over the Vanni region preserve the memory of the Sinhalese
Buddhist settlements that once covere these parts. Several of
the pilimag!s (image houses) attached to monasteries in places
like Kvilkdu, Iikai, mant al, Kaakarya-k4am, Ircnt frar-
ki4am, Ciappvaraca.k4am and I'iaukanda were converted into
aiva temples, often dedicated to Gaea Bud ha images or
inscribed slabs from the Buddhist structures were used to make
the Gaea statues A number of small aiva shrines have been
found in association with Buddhist reniins The destruction of
several of the Buddhist edifices and the conversion of pi1imags
into aiva temples may have begun in the time of IAgba. In the
North-central Province, too, we find evidence of such activities.
On the Ninnrya Road, close to Polonnaruva, were discovered a
few aiva edifices which were built of materials from Buddhist
1. J.P.L.ewia, Manual of the Vanni istricts, pp. 297, 30 -3 6, 311.
2. Ibid. , pp. 297, 303, 306.
3. I id.
3631 .structures. A door-jamb from one of the aiva shrines there was
found to bear part of an inscription of Parkramabhu I A broken
pillar sha't with Sinhalese writing of the tenth century was
recovered from the enclosing wall of 4$other shrLne In one of
the Viu temples of Polonnaruva, fragments of Niañksi Nalla's
stone inscriptions were foundtl In the same place, two fragments
of a broken pillar with Sinhalese writing of about the tenth
century served as steps to one of the Vaiava shrines A pillar
in the ma4 of iva D!vl! No.5 at Polonnaruva as diecdwered
with a Sinhalese inscription of the eleventh century on it In
iva Dv1 No.7 a square stone sana with an inscription of
Niañka Nafl.a was used as a base for a ].izga? Another of the
Saiva shrines unearthed at Polonnaruva yielded a pillar with
a Sinhalese inscription of Jayabhu I These examples leave us
in no doubt that materials from Buddhist structures were used
in the building of aiva and Vaiava temples. The date of most
1. A. .C.A. . for 19 2, pp. 7-13.
2. Ibid., p. 7.
3. Ibid., p. 11.
. A.S.C.A. . for 19 8, p. 9.
5. A.S.C.A. . for 19 7, p. 8.
6. Ibid., p. 5.
7. A. .C.A. • for 19 , p. 11.
8. A. . .A.I. for 193k, p. 16.
364
of the inscriptions found on the pillars anti slabs is the twelfth
century. The date of the construction of these aiva and Vaiava
shrines is cert inly later than that. It is not possible to
surmise that these were built before 1212, when Buddhist rulers
were on the thorne. Nor is it possible to date them after lgha
was ousted from Polonnaruva, for with that ecent this city
appears to have been abandoned by the 1.ligas, Tamils and
Ker4as althoIi it is possible that some of the settlers
continued to be there even after that. In all probability the
destruction of Buddhist edifices and the construction of several
at least of the aiva and Vaiava shrines took place in the
time of 1ha. In fact, this is the testimony of the Sinhalese
and Tamil chronicles, too In the light of the examples at
Polonnaruva we may not be wrong in surmising that some at least
of the Saiva shrines found in association with Buddhi t remains
in the Vavuniy district were the work of the invaders and
new settlers in the time of 1 ha. It is possible that some
were built of materials from an abandoned or ruined Buddhist
structure at a later date. Some may have been converted into
aiva temples at a time when the Buddhist po ulafion of the area
ceased to exist due t either slow mi ration or assimilation
1. See sura, pf..•.ci
3631to the Tamil population, as in Jaffna. The absence of Sinh lese
lemente in the names of many of the laces where such temples
have been found, which speaks against a ion survival of the
Sinhalese o ulation in tho e places, may preclu e t e last
possibilityin most of the cases. However, to some extent at
least, the archaeological evidence may be said to confirm the
information in the Sinhalese sources ab ut the occu ation of the
Tainil knd Ker4a mercenaries in the time of Ngha.
The main sequence of events that emerges from the
different types of evidence that we have discussed may be
summarised now. Till about the tenth century A.D. the Vanni
regions of Vavuniy, Trincomalee, Nul1aitvu and Batticaloa were
almost entirely populated by Sinhalese. By about the beginning
of the elventh century Tainil settlements were established
along the eastern coast nei hbouring Vavuniy district. In
the twelfth century there were notable Tamil settlements in the
area from Kurund! (Kuruntar) in the north to Trinco lee in
the south as far west as Padaviya and Kantay. These were,
however, scattered settlements. In the thirteenth century,
with the invasion of }gha, T mil and Ker4a mercenaries occupied
several parts of these istricts, particularly alon the eastern
1. See upra,
36
coast. Vaniy rs and Mukkuvas a ear to have been prominent
a ong these mercenaries. There seems to have been a visible
dislodgement of the Sinhalese po ulation from the Vavuniy and
}ullaitvu districts from this time. Some uddhist structures
were probably destroyed and aiva temples built in their places.
The conquered parts of northern and eastern Ceylon were probably
controlled by mercenary leaders. Presumably they were appointed
as chiefs by ha and his associates. These principalities were
the Vanni chieftaincies which later owed allegiance to either
the Sinhalese ruler in the south or the Tamil king of Jaffna.
These Vanni chiefs appear to have invited settlers from South
India and strengthened the Ker4a and Tamil elements in the
local population. This process of settlement may have gone on
well into the fourteenth century.
In these Vanni districts, the areas of Dravidian
settlement in the thirteenth century seem to have been mainly
confined to the Vavuniy, NullaitTvu and Trincomalee districts.
Neither the chronicles of Jaffna nor the Makkaappu-mmiyam
refer to extensive Tamil-Ker4a settlements in the Batticaloa
district or in the Nar district in the thirteenth century.
As we have seen earlier, there were a few Ca stron holds in1
the Batticaloa district in the eleventh century. Among these
1. See supra, p.j
36/Chaggxna (Skmam)finda mention in the C1lavaisa The others
are nt named. No inscription in Tami]. belonging to the Ca
period or, for that matter, to the twelfth century, has been
discovered here. Of the fortifications set up by the soldiers
of Ngha and Jayabhu, none is to be located in the Batticaloa
district. There are at least two of these fortifications which
have not been identified, namely Pulacceri and Debara atan,
and possibly these are to be located in the Batticaloa region.
A iva temple in the P4ya style of architecture has been
at Tirukkvil, a few miles from Sk.mam. On grounds of style
this temple has been dated o the thirteenth cezitury In the
traditions preserved in the Naakk4appu-miyam this
temple is associated with 1gha Probably it was built in the
reign of this ruler. There is another iva temple at ICa uralla
datable to about the same period Except for these, no significant
archaeological materials or inscriptions indicating DraTidian
settlements in the Batticaloa district in the thirte nth century
have been found. All the Tainil inscriptions of the Batticaloa
1. See supra, p.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'Archaeolo ical Summary,' C.J.Sc. (G), II,
pp. 160-161.
3 • Lee ------- ii' r 7c
k. A.S.C.A. for 1933, p. 19.
368area are of a later date. The place names here are largely
Tamilised forms of earlier Sinhalese names, as in Jaffna. But
unlike in the latter place, the earlier forms are readily
recognizable in these names. This seems to indicate the relatively
late date when the Tamilisation occurred, It would appear that
the Batticaloa district was not extensively settled by Dravidians
in the thirteenth century although }lAgha's mercenaries seem to
have occupied the area and becoae its chieftains. Extensive
Dravidian settlements here were probably established after the
thirteenth century.
In the Maakk4appu-nfrniyam the Mukkuvas figure
prominently among the mercenaries who were given chieftaincies
in Batticaloa by Zgha The Mukkuvas are an influential and
strong caste among the Taniils of Batticaloa in the present day.
Members of the Mukkuva caste are also found in the Jaffna, Vavuniy,
MullaitTu, Mar and Puttalaa districts. n analysis of the
social organization and legal institutions of this caste has
shown that there exists a close affinity between these Nukkuvaa
and the Ker4as of South India. The Mukkuva law, which forms a
separate code in the traditional law of the Tamils of Ceylon,
is largely based on the Narumakkattyam law of the Ker4
1. See supra, p.3'C
2. Cf., K. .Thambiah, The Laws and ustoms of the Tamils of Jaffria,
pp. 8-12 ;C.Brito, Mukkuva Law, Colombo, 1872.
369
The Ker4a origin of this caste is further confirmed by the fact
that the only area in South India where we find the Mukkuva
caste now is the Na].ayam-speRking westora]. littoral The name
Mukkuva, too, is of Malayjam origin, as we bhafl see in the
sequel. According to some traditions in Ker4a, the Nukkuvas,
like the Tiyars and avars of Kera3a, originated imihigrated there
from Ceylon But there are some other traditions which claim
that the Mukkuvas are the only indigenous people of Ker4a
The Mukkuvas, being a fishing caste, may have maintained
close and continuous cont cts with the coastal areas of Ceylon
and this may have given rise to a tradition in later times
that they migrated from Ceylon. The traditions among the
Mukkuvaa of Ceylon regarding their and date of their migration
are rather late and are clouded by attempts to enhance their
social position among the Tamils. One of these is the attempt
to relate their ancestry to Kuga, the ferryman who ap ears in
the Rnyaa as a friend of Rma. This is based on the final
syllable of the name Mukkukar (a variant of I4ukkuvar), namely
1. C.A.Menon, Cochin State Manual, (1911), p.10k;
J.Sturrock, Manual of South Canara, (189k), p . 169-170.
2. C.A.Menon, . cit., p. 20k.
L.Yore, Nalabar Law an Custom, p. ]..
370kukar (equated with Kuka = Skt. Kuga) Such attempts at claiming
descent from personalities appearing in the epics are co Ofl
among some castes of South India and Cey1on
The name Mukkuvar is to be derived from the
Malayam nkkuka, 'to dive' (Tamil Ma1ay4am zm4ukuka>
rnukkuka) Mukkukan literally means a divert Probably the
Mukkuvar were a caste pearl-divers who later took to fishing.
Some of the early foreign notices of this community confirm
their maritime profession. The Italianatravel].er Vartheina (1510)
and the Portuguese writers Correa (1525) and Barros (1552)
refer to the Nukkuvar of Ker4a as fishermen But it appears
that sometimes the term mukkuvar had a general application
1. S.Casie Chetty, Manual of the Putta].am District, p.2k.
2. See supra, p. tic> , the example of the Kurukulas who claim
descent from the Kurus of the Mahbhrata.
3. . urrow and LB.Emeneau, Dravidian Ety ologic 1 Dictionary, (1961),
pp. 337-338.
k. H.Yule,and A.C. urnell, Hobson-Jobson, London 1903, p. 592.
5. L.Varthema, The Travels of Varthema, Tr. T.W.Jones, (1863), p.1k2&
'The fourth class are called Yiechua, and these are fishermen';
E.J.Stanley, Thre Voyages of Vasco a Gama and is Viceroyalty,
fro the Len as In i of spar Correa, (1869), p. :
'Nacuas which are fishermen'; J. de Barros, 'Decadas de Asia, etc.,
Lisbon 1778 : 'ucuaria, a fisherman's village', quoted in
Hobson-Jôbsoh, . cit., p. 592.
371meanjn mariners or boatmen As a sea-faring community they were
considered to be a low caste
There is little reliable information in our sources
regarding the migration of the Mukkuvar from South India. They
do not find mention in our sources before the thirteenth century.
The earliest known reference is in the Dabadei-asna, where
the Mukkuva mercenaries of the time of Parkramabhu II are
mentioned The next references to them are to be found in a
number of Sinhalese and Tamil works of later times. The most
important among these are the Mukkaru-hatana, Vanni-upata,
RLiv4i-kathva and the Uarata-vitti and the iamil chronicles
of Jaffna and Batticaloa. In the Sinhalese works, there is an
account of an invasion by a people called the Kka Mukkaru,
identifiable with the Mukkuvar, in the time of Bhtika Tissa
(lkO-l6k) According to this account, Kka Mukkar was a Tamil
1. Pyrard de Lava]., Discours du Voyage des Francai aux Indes
Orientales, I, (1887), p. 3]Jf; 'These mariners are called Noucois';
2. A.T.Pringle, The iary and Consultation Book of the Agent,
Governor an Council of Fort St.George, 1st Series, III, p. 131:
'Naquas or boatmen'.
2. I4ahuan (A.D.].k09): 'The liukkuvas, the lowest and poorest of all',
quoted by V.Nagam Aiya, Travancore State !anua1, I, (1906), p.280.
3. Daffi a ei-asna, p. 1i.
k. Cf., Vanni-upata, (Cob bo Yiuseum }ianuscript), p. 15.
372who , with his chief N4a Nuda].iy and a host of Tamils,
appropriated the territory between the Ka1 Oya and the I Oya.
These Tamils are also called the Kka !kkaru. The above area
was peopled by Tamils, chief among whom were the }ukkuvar, in
the time of Portuguese rule. The account of the invasion of the
Kka Mukkaru is not found in any of the earlier Sinhalese
chronicles. It appears to have been based on a later event
connected with the settlement of the 1Iukkuvar in the north-
western coast. In the !a-vaipava-mlai, 'the fishers caUed
Mukkukar' are stated to have been settled in the ports and
coastal regions (karai-tu .aik4) of the Jaffna peninsula in the
time of Pau (k33-k38). On account of their disrespect for
and defilement of aiva temples, it is said, they were punished
by Pa4u and driven away to Batticaloa where they settled in
places likePPakai (PThama) and Valaiyiavu Ucuma, and Cnta,,
are mentioned as two of the Nukkuva chiefs who were punished in
this manner and who later established Nu.kkuva settlements in
Batticaloa. It is also stated that the places Ucuma-tuLai
and Cnta-k4am in Jaffna were two of the )iukkuva settlements
that were abandoned This story in the Y ia-vaipava-n1 ]. i
has certain similarities with the story of two Mukkuva chiefs
1. Yvm., pp. 9-10.
2. Ibid., P . 10.
373narrated in the Vaiy and the Vaiypal. According to this
story, a Pya ruler, desirous of obtaining a Nga diamong
from Ceylon for the enklet of Kaaki (sic), the heroine of
the epic Cilappatikrant, sent a chief of the Karaiyr conuuunity
called ?1ma to Ceylon. The latter defeated two Mukkiava chiefs,
V4i-araca, and r-araca, and obtained the Iga diamond.
The defeated Mukkuva chief went to Batticalo'and settled there
while the other chief settled in Vi$attal-tvu, also in the
Batticaloa district The account in the
is apparently a later fabrication based mn the story in the
other two chronicles. The author of the I a-vaipav -mlai
has carefully discarded the story of the Pya ruler obtaining
a diamond for the pnklet of Kaaki, an obvious contradiction
with the account in the Cilappatikram. Instead of the P4aruler and Nkma, he has introduced the Ceylonese ruler Pa4ii
into his story. In place of Veti-araca and ?1rã-araca, the
two pirates whose memory is still preserved in the folk tradition
of De].ft, Puttalani and Batticaloa, he has introduced two other
Nukkuva chiefs called Ucunian2 and Cnta. These two characters,
as Gnanapragasar has an ested, are probably creations of
folk-etymolo ists based on the place names Ucnma-tuai and
1. ., vv.53-55.
2. Ucuzna seems to be a Tainilised form of the Muslim name Usman
and many be associated with Muslim tra era at this port, i.e.
Ucunia-tuaj (Port of Ucuma).
374Cnta-k4am Furtherri the pa-v ipava-nilai states that
it was Pau's queen who sent troops to prevent K$akkzfta
from building a temple at Kvaraii& But the Trincomalee
chronicles have it that Iakacavuntari, who later married
Kuakka, was the queen who attempted to prevent the work of
K4aia at Trincomalee Presumably the author of the ppa-
vaipava-nlai was drawing from several sources when f bricating
the story of the Mukkuva settlements in Jaffna and Batticaloa.
This account has little claim on our confidence. The account
in the Vaiy and the Vaiypal is clearly based on the popular
tradition about the l4ukkuva pirate Jr-araca, sometimes known
as Veti-araca, and is probably related to a later peri.od.
In the N kka4appu-nmiyam , the Mukkuvar are
referred as those of the Kuka ku]A, the origin of which tradition
i Th*'rwe have aire dy explained.. '-lire said to have been military
leaders under 1gha. Their place of on in is given as Kikaam,
which may be a distorted form of Kikktu (Calicut) in Kera.a.
This tradition seems to preserve some element of truth in it,
for in the thirteenth century we hear from other sources of the
1. S.Gnanapragasar, _vaipava_ka11ni.r,a, p. 5.
2. Iv., p. 10.
3. ., 'Tiruk$a.kaa Patalam', v.2 ff.
4. -.-- Dr s-.... ,y.109.
375
presence of Ilukkuva mercenaries in Ceylon The Mukkuvaa being
Ker4as were probably among the Ker4a mercenaries of }ga.
As we have already suggested, this tradition may well be accepted
as true.
There are also other traditions among the }u.kkuvas
of Ceylon regarding their migration from India. There is one
recorded by Casie Chetty about the Nukkuva settlement under
Veçi-araca This relates to the western and will be discussed
later. Veti-araca may have been a historical personality
whose memory has been perpetuated in the folk traditions of the
Nukkuvas He probably belonged to a period later than the
thriteenth century.
Front the foregoing discussion it ap ears that the
}ukkuva settlement of Batticaloa began in the thirteenth century.
Other Ker4a and Taniil mercenaries of ?gha and other invaders
may also have settled there at this time. But it does not appear
that the Battialo" 1district bad extensive Dravidian settlements
before the fourteenth century. Probab]4 widespread settlements
of Tamils and Ker4as in this district took place in the fourteenth
1. Dabadei-asn_, p.
2. See infra, p.33D ; S.Casie Chetty, Ceylon Gazetteer, p. 278.
3. S .Gnauapra,gasar, -vaipava-vimarcan, p. k.
37iand fifteenth centuries, when for the first time Tarnil inscriptions
become available there.
There is a dearth of evideace regarding the Dravidian
settlements on the western coast in the thirteenth century. The
Taniil-speaking region from Mar in the north to Chilaw in
the south has no independent chronicle similar to those of
Jaffna, Batticaloa and Trincomalee. The ancient temples of
Tiru-ktvarani and Nuvarain on this coast do not seem to
have possessed any early chronilce or pura. The Muvaram
temple has a chronicle entitled i vara-nmiyam which is
of recent origiJ Some of the earlier sections of this work are
based on the traditions of the K&varam temple. Although no
formal chronicle of events has been preserved in this region,
there are still folk traditions concerning the Ker4a and Tamil
settlements there. Some of these have been collected and recorded
by British civil servants in the nineteenth century As in the
case of most folk traditions, these lack a pro er chronology.
This has resulted in a confusion early and later traditions.
and it is difficult to extricate the genuine traditions from
Z. F.Modder, A Manual of the Puttalam District, Colombo ;
F.)dder, azetteer of the Putta].am District, Colombo 1908;
S.Casie Chetty, Ceylon Gazetteer, Colombo, 183k.
37'the rest. Consequently we are not in a position to reconstruct
a satisfactory account of the Dravidian settlements on the western
littoral in the thirteenth century.
The island of Mar and the coastal districts of
?ntai and Puttalam were formed into Vanni chieftaincies in the
time of the Jaffna kingd. These owed allegiance to the rulers
of Jaffna. According to ueyroz, Putela (Puttalam) and Nantota
(Itoa or }ntai) were two of the kinglete into which the
territories outside the kin dom were djvide& at the
beginning of the period (beginning of the fifteenth century)
He mentions Puttalam among the smaller principalities rled by
the Vane.z (Vaiyrs) in the sixteenth century This is
confirmed by a copper sannasa of Bhuvanekabhu VII dated in
the Saka year 111.69 (A.D. 1511 .7) accoHing to which a Mukkava
chieftain called Navaratna Vanniyl was ruling in the Puttalam
region with his residence at Lunuvila He owed allegiance to
the ruler at and not to the ruler of Jaffna. However, it
appears that it was generally considered that on the western
coast Chil&6 (Chilaw) was the southern-most point of the 'lands
of the Vani (Vanni , which belong to the Kingdom of Jafanapata'
1. F.de Queyroz, The Temporal an Spiritual Conquest of Ceylon,
Tr. S.G.Perera, I ,( l930, p. 32.
2. Ibid.
3. Casie Chetty, Ceylon Gazetteer, pp. 190-191.
373
(Jaffnapatam, now Jaffria) In the Portuguese period, 'from
Nigumbo [Negonibo) to Jafanapata they speak the TanLil language
better' To this day this holds good to some extent. There are
still Tamil speakers in Chilaw and Negombo, many of whom also
speak Sinhalese.
As we have already seen , the settle ent of the
Dravidians on the western coast began at a very early ate
There were sporadic settlements at places like Pomparippu
and Mahtittha before the Ca conquest. Tamil inscriptions
attest to the settlement at Maht.ttha in the eleventh century.
Inscriptions of the twelfth century reveal the existence of
Tamil settlements in the region bordering on the Puttalam
district. But there is not sufficient evidence to warrant the
conclusion that the whole of the western coast from Nanr
to Chilaw was settled by Tamils or Ker4as by about the twelfth
century.
In the thirteenth century, the soldiers of lgha
and Jayabhu are stated to have set up fortifications in
nmatta, ?4annra,and }ahtittha According to the Maakkaj.appu-
1. F. de ueyroz, . cit., p. k7.
2. Thid., p. li6.
3. See supra, ppL1- if-
k. See supra, 2p1- 2l
5. See supra, p. 3c1.
37
xniyam, the Xaliñga ruler (!gha) gave the principality of
Naiu (I4qr) to 'those who bore the flag of the Tiru-kula
vamnicam' (Kurukula vaziaa) As in the other parts of northern
Ceylon, }gha and his associates probably created chieftaincies
in the Mar district, too. The Kurukulas who are the leading
caste in this region were probably among the Tainils who settled
there in the thirteenth century.
As mentioned earlier, some Sinhalese works of
later times and traditions of the Puttalani district refer to
the establishment of Nukkuva settlements on the western
littoral. According to the Sinhalese wors, the area between
the Kalya and the Mya was occupied by the Kk Mukkar
(Mukkuvar) in the time of Bhtika Tissa As we have pointed out,
it is unlikely that the I4ukkuva settlement on this coast
originated at such an early date. The Sinhalese works seem to
refer to a later event. A tradition recorded by Casie Chetty
seems to preserve a germ of truth regarding a !4ukkuva settle-
ment in the Puttalam district. It runs as follows:-
1. ±!• P . 75.
2. See upra, p. ?j11.
330When the coast of Na].abar was overrun by the Muhainmadanafrom Arabia, the natives were persecuted, with the viewof causing them to embrace the doctrines of the Koran;in order to avoid which the Nukwas transported themselvesto Ceylon, and established their residence in theMalabar Provinces amil provinceJ.
It appears that the place where the Mukwas firstlanded was Kudramalai, whence they emigrated to otherparts of the Island, and in course of time formed severalsettlements. Some time after the arrival of the Mukwasin the District [PuttaiamJ, their chieftain named VediArasan, had to contend wilh a rival called ManikkTaleivan Mikka Talaiva4, who them yresided over thepeople, denominated Karaiyr CKurukul , and possesseda settlement on the south side of the District. NanikkaTaleivan despatched some of his officers to Vedi Arasanfor the purpose of soliciting his daughter in marriage,but, meeting with a refusal, he collected a considerablebody of armed men and declared war against the Mukwas,threatening their total destruction. As the Mukwas wereat that time a weak and defenceless people, theyconcerted with a crew of an Arab vessel which was thenat anchor at Kudramalai, and with their assistanceslew the rival chieftain and put all his troops toflight. In turn for the service rendered them by theArabs, the whole of the Mukwas embraced the I4uhammadanreligion which many of their descendants renounced infavour of Christianity, through the influence of thePortuguese. After the defeat of the Karaiyars, theNukwas determined to send an embassy to the court ofthe emperor in order to ingratiate themselves into hisfavour. They accordingly made choice of certain individualsfor the pnrpose and despatched them to Sitawaka withmany costly presents. 'When these delegates reached thecapital and presented themselves to the emperor, hereceived them with uncommon kindness, and granted themseveral copper sannasas or receipts, whereby the land inthe whole District of Puttalamaand Kalpentyn were allottedto them for their maintenance as paraveniBesides the assignment of land, the emperor constituteda royal tribunal at Puttalam called Mutrakudam, andappointed ei hteen of the Mukwas to be members of thesame, under the authority of a Dissawa or Pro-Consul, whowas to be annually sent from the court ; and also conferred onthe said members the title of Wanniya, ......l
L. S.Casie Chetty, Ceylon Gazetteer, p. 278.
381This tradition seems to refer to a ukkuva settlement of the ItT
period (].k15-1505). It ap ears that the Mukkuvar had to contend
with the Kurukulas who were settled along the Puttalam-Chilaw
coast in that period. The Vanni chieftaincies of the Mukkuvar in
the western coast probably originated in the period. The
Sinhalese rulers of seem to have been acknowledged by them
as their overlords, although sometimes the Jaffna rulers, too,
seem to have claimed suzerainty over them. The Kf rulersappear to have assigned lands as parave1 to the Mukkuvar in the
Puttalam district, We know of at least one instance when a
ruler, Bhuvaneabhu VII, granted the region of Pomparippu to
the Mukkuva chieftain Navaratna Vanniya as his paravei in 15 7.The reference to the Muslim invasion of Ker4a and the subsequent
migration of the Mukkuvas from there may preserve the memory of
an earlier wave of Mukkuva mi ration in the fourteenth century
when the Muslims invaded South India. It is not known whether
the Nukkuva migration to the westórn coast of Ceylon had begun
earlier than the fourteenth century. In the thirteenth century
the invasion of }gha seems to have led to the occupation of
this part of Ceylon, too, by South Indian mercenaries. It is
stated in the C1avaisa th t Dami. warriors dwelt as they
1. See supra, p. 377.
382pleased in sin le villages in Iyratha and that Vijayabhu III
drove them a ay from there The Puttalazn-Chilaw region, which
formed part of Nyraha, was under the direct rule of the
Sinhalese rulers in DaThadeiya and it is doubtful that there erc-
Tamil chieftaincies in that region during the thirteenth century.
The place-name evidence in this coastal region
claarly indicates that at one time a large part of the present
Puttalam district was occupied by Tamils. The high percentage
of Tamil names along the coast may mean that there was a
concentration of Tamils there. One of the revenue divisions of
this district still continues to be called Demaa Hatpattu
(Seven Tamil Divisions) although a large section of this division
is now occupied by Sinhalese speakers. Traditions in this area
preserve the memory of Tamil chiefs having ruled in the
2Ravanni and Kunravanni Pattus of the Dema.a Hatpattu. This
was probably after the thirteenth century.
The vara-znmiyam contains a detailed account
of the Tamil settlements established by K4akk t a in the
region of varam, in the Chilaw district. According to
this account, akka after having completed the renovation
of the temple of Kvaram went to Nu.varam in the Kali
].. V., l:J.k.
2. S.Casie Chetty, eylon azetteer, p. 86.
383year 512 (2590 .c.) and undertook the renovation of the Mivaram
temple. After the completion of this work, the Brhaaa It1akaa
ivcriyr, hi8 wife Vislaki AmriAj. and several learn d
Br.haas were invited from the Ca country to con uct the
Kunibhb1i.eka festival. In order to ensure the continuance of
the various services in the temple, Kujakka decided to
invite settlers from South India. He, therefore, went to places
like Nadurai, To4aimyalam, Eraikkl, Tiruccirppa.i,
K'alUr NarufikIr, selected people from among the Pirmyar
(BrThmaas), Caivar (aivas), Ceis, Ve.3ar (cultivators),
VTra-niuti Cakmr (a class of VTra aivas), Ttar (Vaiava
mendicants)of the Sdra caste), Kollar (blacksmiths), Kar
(braziers), Tab (goldsmiths), Cipar (sculptors), Taccar
(carpenters), Ypi (minstrels), Eai-viyar (oil mongers),
Akampaiyr (Agampai mercenaries or servants of the inner
apartments), Nul1ai-Naapp4iyr, Caruku-Maappa4iyr, Cañku-
MaappaUiyr1 , Kaikkar (weavers, also temple officials and
Loldiers ), Cniyar C a class of weavers), Ilai-viyar (sellers
of betel-leaves), Viaku-vei (wood-cutters), Ttar (me sengers)
vitar (barbers), Va4r (washermen), Timilar (boatmen),
Valaifiar (caste of fishers), Varua Kulattr (those of the Va.ra kula),
1. See supra, p. 2'
2. See supra, p. ; Travancore Archaeological Series, VI,
pt. 2, p. 116.
381
Kuyavar (potters), I4aavar (Maava tribesmen), Paflar (a low caste),
Kattikkrar (swordsmen) and Paaiyar (drummers). These immigrants
were assigned different services in the temple and were granted
lands in the vicinity of the temple for their settlement.and
maintenance. A nobleman from Madurai, named
was appointed as their chieftain. The lands belonging to the
temple were divided thnto sixty-four villages. Twelve officials
from among the Cutta Ve j .ar (Pure Ve3as) and the AkRmpai
Ve3ar were appointed at Nuvaram and in ten of the villages,
namely Pampa3ai (Pambala), Pakala-pirmaa-t4uai (Pahala-
brThmaa-daluva), Kokkvil (Kokvi.la), Tampakal (Tabagala),
Curuvela (Suruvela), Pajamai (Pajama), Takampavai (Debambava),
Naalai (Ma4alna), Miikkt4ani (?4inikk4ama) and tikampitti
(Uhampiiya). The two who were assigned duties at Muivaram
were conferred the titles of Cantira-okara-mutali Pattañkai
(Sinh, Paabdi) and Pak4ti Kr.ai (Sinh. Paabdi Kra)
while the others were conferred the title of AttukkZr. i
(Sinh. Atukrja).
The assignment of villages for the settlement of
the different castes was as follows:- a) The Akampati Ve3ar
were settled at Elivei (Elivia), Kkkppa3i (Kk pa3iya),
Maavari (ianavari), Karavei (Karavita), Ka ikj (Gaanke),
Thala-pirmaia-t 4uvai (Ihala-brhmaa-daluva), } TTMtilvet tuva
385(Mugwiuvaavana), Villattavai (Vilattava), M alai (Maalna),
V!ra-koripan-t4uvai (Vra-komban-daluva), Pirap aiik4i (Pirappak4iya),
Ol].jtt4uvai (Olidaluva) ii Marutafikujam (Narudankulania) an
Tittakkaai (Tittakae); b) the Vrami Params were settled
at Pariyni1lai in Nivaram; c) the Ciperis were settled
in the southern part of Nuvararn; d) the blacksmiths were
settled in Karaveti (Karavia) and Va.kattaai (Bafigadeiya);
e) the Taccar were settled in Va..kattaai (Bagadeiya); f) the
Kar were settled in F'lakk4am (Plakuama) and Ca].pain (Chilaw);
g) the 1 akrar (drummers) and the Tvatcis (temple dancers)
were settled in Nuvaram and Chilaw; h) the Kuyavar were
settled in Vatakal ].ai (V 4akahagala ?) and Nu!svaram;
i) the Cua-viyar (lime sellers) were settled in Narave.i
(Maravila); j) the Kaikkar were settled in Chilaw and Nu6varam;
k) the K5trikkrar (wood-cutters) were settled in Pakalakamam
(Pahalagama) and Po.ki (Ponnankanniya); 1) the Timilar
were settled in Tmm.i].ai (Timilla); in) the Cr were settled in
Maakk4am; n) the Karuppakkaikkrar (jag ery makers) were
settled in Iikotav4i (Inigoavela); o) the Ca.ktis (conch blowers)
were ettle in Kkkp ai (Kkpafl.iya), Iluppatai (Iluppadetiya),
Ciy nip lakasv4i (Siy balagasvel ), Karukkuji (Karukki4iy )
an T,*nive.i (Di amy 1 ); p) the Nlai-kati (the arland makers)
were settled in uvaram and Timilai ( imilla); q) the Var
were settle in Muákant4uvai (Mnngandaluia) and Cempnkketti
38
(Sembukattiya); r)the Paaiyar were settled in rapiya
(V!rap4iyana)
The above account of the var#iTiyam is in
many respects untrustworthy. In the first place, it has fla rantly
incorporated traditions from the Trincomalee chronicles and
claims them as those of the uuvaram temple. The renovation
of the temple by K4ak the invitation of different castes
from South India, the assi nment of different duties to them
and their settlement in several villages surroundin the temple,
the invitation of Tai- A-ptT from Nadurai and his
appointment as their chieftain are elements from the Trincomalee
chronicles. Secondly, some other elements h ye been borrowed
from the Jaffna chronicles. For instance, the invitation of
the BrThmaa lakaa Sivcriyr, the BrThinaa la y Vislaki
Anun and other learned BrThmaas from the Ca country is
found in the Ypp -vaipava-mlai in connection with the story
of Vij ya The list of castes and the places from which they
came is very similar to that found in the aiy and the Vaiyp1
in connection with the Dravidian settlements in other arts of
the Vanni It appears that such pera nalities as Kuaka
and the Brhmaia a ivcriyr have be en associated
1. vara-mmiyam, pp. 8-li.2. Yv., pp. k,6.
3. See upra, p. 31i.
381with Nu&varam in order to give it a special sanctity and
anticjuity which it lacked in comparison with the temple pf
Kivaram. The appointment of Atukras is something based
on later knowledge. It is in the Sinhalese inscriptions of the
fifteenth century that we first hear of the officials called
Atukras Similarly the account of the settlement of the
different castes in the villages adjoining Mivaram seems
to be based on later knowled e. It is difficult to accept this
as authentic. It is possible that South Indian families were
invited to perform services in the temple and were settled
in the lands belonging to the temple. But the Dravidian settle-
ment at Munvarain, Chilaw and other nearby villages may not
be the result bt a policy of settlement followed by the temple
authorities. These settlements have to be treated as part of the
Dravidian settlements along the whole coast from Iar to Chilaw.
Thus, we see that neither the Linhalese traditions
nor the Taxnil traditions help us to know anything definite
about the Dravidian settlem nts alon the western coast. The
evidence of place names, though indicating extensive settlements
of Tamils along this coast, does not help us to fix the chronology.
All that we can day now is that the settlements of Nuk.kuvar
1. U.C. . •, I, pt. 2, p.739.
383Kurukulas and other South Indians was a process that seems to
have one on for a long period. New bands of inuni rants probably
settled down on the western coast in the thirteenth century as
well. As some of the traditions suggest, the invasion of South
India by the 1usli*s probably further migration of }lukkuvar
and Kurukulas in the fourteenth century. During the Kt
period there were Taniil Vanni chieftaincies in this region,
some of which were contr011ed by Nukkuvar. The Tamil chieftaincies
of the Puttalam-Chilaw region seem to have owed allegiance to
the rulers, although according to de Queyroz the lands
as far south as Chilaw belonged to the kings of Jaffna. This
coastal region appears to have been a bone o contention
between the Sinhalese and Tamil rulers owing to its in ortance
in the control of the island's pearl fishery. The ________
vaipava-mlai refers to the struggle between Ceyav1raciMqii
riya, one of the kings of Jaffna, and Bhuvanekabhu, probably
the fourth of that na e, over the control of the pearl banks
Another invasioa of ?yrattha, in which was included the
Chilaw region, by the Tamils from the northern part of the island
in the time of Parkramabhu IV (1302-1326) is alluded to in the
}Iranbdda inscription The Tamil chieftains of the Chilaw-Puttalam
1. Yv., p. k23 S.Paranavitana, 'The 4rya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p.22
2. U.C. .C., I, pt. E, p. 63k, fu. 7k.
389region may have been forced to change their alliances from time
to time. In the thirteenth century probably there were no Tami].
chieftaincies in the Puttalam district. But probably there were
such chieftaincies in the Nar district, here }gha and
JayabThu had established fortifications.
Outside the Northern and Eastern Provinces and the
Puttalam district, there were Vanni chieftaincies in the North-
central Province in the thirteenth century. This province,
which formed the central part of Rjaratha, was the scene of
much ravage and plunder during the occupation of Ngha. As we
have seen earlier, it was this region which was most affected
by the foreign invasions and the consequent drift of the Sinhalese
population to the south-west. The claim of the Clavaisa that
?1gha's soldiers seized tillages, fields and houses in Rjaraha
may not be wholly untrue. We have seen that there is some
archaeological evidence in Polonnaruva and Minnriya which
attest to the destruction of Bu dhist establishments and the
building of Saiva shrines by the invaders. We h ye also pointed
out that a good percentage of the place names in this province
is Tamil in origin. Certain traditions of the Nuvarakalviya
district of thi province indicate the aettl nt of T mu Vnniy s
in that re 1Ofl The Tmi1 an Ker4a soldiers of N ha as well
1. See upra, p.33
390
as the mercenaries of the later invaders like Chan rabhnu
probably established settlements in parts of the North-central
Province. The Clavawa has references to Sinhalese Vanni rinces
ruling in Rj raha in the thirteenth century. Probably there
were also Vanni chieft ins of the Taniils in this area at that
time. It is difficult to determine with t e evidence at our
disposal how extensive or strong the new Dravidian settle ents
were in the thirteenth century. The North-central Province was
lar ely abandoned after the thirteenth century by both Tamils
and Sinhalese and only a few pockets of Tamil and Sinhalese
settl ments seem to have been left. In the thirteenth century
the Dravidians were probably scattered all over the province in
small groupá. These settlers have not left behind Tamil inscrip-
tions or Dravidian-style temples. The only evidence of their
settlement is found in the local nomenclature. The disa earance
of the earlier Sinhalese names s eaks both for a su den and
a violent occupation of the area by the forei ners as well as
for settle ent by Tamils after the total abandonment of the
area by the earli r settlers. Th retention of the Taniil na es
by the resent-day opulation which is largely Sinbalese- eakin ,
shows that the Ta is, howev r small in number, bad continu d
to live in this province till the ti e of the Sinhale e resettlement-
1. .C. . •, I, pt. , pp. 713-71k.
391The wi e rea occurrence of Tamil p1 ce n s sugge te that
the province w s at one time extensively settled by Taxnils. This
was certainly not before the thirteenth century when the North-
central Province was the heart of the Sinhalese kingdom. Tamil
settlements on such a wide seal would not have taken lace
long after the thirteenth century wh n this region was ab n oned
to a great extent and was covered with jungle. The Tamii.l
settle ents that were res onsible for many of the new lace
names have to be dated to the thirteenth century. In conrse of
ti e several of the settlers ap ear to have drifted to the
Taniil kiagdom in the north, where there was soon a concentration
of Tamil population. But small groups seem to have lingered on
in the jungle viflages
In the Sirthalese kizgdom of the southi there is
little evidence of any Dravidian settlem nt in the thirteenth
century. The only evidence relating to the presence of Tamils
is that concerning the mercenaries. Tamil ercenary forces
continued to be in the service of Sinhalese rulers in the
thirteenth century as in earlier times. ih aba e'i-as a refers
to twelve thousand amil soldiers, doubtless an exagg rate
number, who drew their pay from the p u]. chest in the tim
of Parkramabhu 4ong theni were the Agamp i forces and
the Svlakkr s. 1.B.Ariyapa1a attempts to relate theto the
1. vidence of this found in the adzninistr tion reports of the
Dutch an British erio s.
2. Da adei-asna. p.
392
Cava.aikkrar, a caste of weavers in the Tinnevelly district
He also oints out the similarity betwe n the name Zvlakkra
and the Tamil Cav4akkrar, a class of fishermen or ferrymen
The Svlakkrar are not mentioned in the South Indian sources
among the mercenary bodies. Perhaps they were a minor body of
mercenarie • In the fourteenth century, oo, there were Tamils
in the army of the Sinhalese ings, as is evidenced by the
Gaaldei inscription of Bbuvaneka Thu IV (l3kl-l35l) No
Tarnil inscription of the thirteenth century has been found in
the area covered by the Sinhalese kingdom. But Tamil inscriptions
of the fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth centuries have been
found in some places there. There is, however, an inscription
written in the Sinhalese and Tamil scripts and datable to the
thirteenth century, found at ?iysnkndura in the Kamdehna Tea
Estate at Naniunukula, Badulla district The Tamil script has been
1. M.B.Ariyapapal, ociety in Medieval Ceylon, p. 161.
2. Ibid.
3. S.Paranavitana, 'Gaaldei ock Inscription of .bhuvanekabThu IV',
r.z., Iv, p. 106.
k. A.S.C.A.R. for 1952, p. 1f2.
393used in the inscription for 'words specialising magical power'
This is hardly evidence for any Tamil settlement in that area.
In the unsettled conditions of the thirteenth century few
Taznil settlers would have found their way into the Sinhalese
kingdom which was at war with the foreign invaders. The only
Tamil settlers there were probably the mercenaries. In the four-
teenth and fifteenth centuries when better conditions prevailed
in the south and new ports were epened up for foreign trade
the South Indians who were affected by the Muslim invasions
as well as Tamil traders seem to have settled in Ceylon, not
only in the Tamil kingdom but in the ports and towns of the
Sinhalese kingdom as well. This is attested to by the Tamil
inscriptions, Sinhalese literary sources and Saiva arcliaeolo ical
.2remains.
1. A. .C.A.R. for 1952, p.k2.
4. Tamil inscriptions: a) S.Paranavitana 'The Tamil Inscription
on the Galle Trilingual Slab', (1kb), .Z., III, p.335;
b) In cription from Nyimmra, A.D. lk22, see S.Pa.ranavitana,
Upulvan emple, Memoirs of the Archaeological urvey of Ceylon, VI,
pp. 71-75; inscriptions from Cob bo, Kalutara and Kurunigala
districts, S.Paranavitanal3 'Epigra hical Summary', C.J.Sc. (G), II,
pp. 189, 191, 212.
iva te les: a) H.C.P.Be].l, Kigalla eport, pp. 63-65;
b) S.Paranavitana, 'Epigra hical Summary', .J.Sc. (G), II, p. 191;
394
c) S.Paranavitana, Upulvan Tem1e, . cit., p.75.
Sinhalese literary references to iva temples: a) Kkila Sanda,
vv.00, .C.H.C., I, pt.2, pp. 768-769; Paravi anda, v.68,
U.C. .C., I, pt. 2, p. 768; Slalihini Sanda, v. 22.
395From the foregoing analysis it becomes clear that
the settlements of the thirteenth century mark the most important
stage in the course of the early Dravidian settlements in Ceylon.
From the beginning of this century for nearly dtoadee decades
a quick succession of foreign invasions, which brought into the
island fresh mercenary forceB, led to the establishment of new
Dravidian settlements. The nature of the invasions and of the
settlements that followed was in many ways different from that
of earlier invasions and settlements. While the earlier invasions,
including even the Ca invasion of 1017, could be treated as
episodes in the history of the island, the invasions of ?gha,
Chandrabhnu and the P4yas in the thirteenth century cannot
be dismissed as mere episodes. The settlements of th. earlier
periods, though not quite unimpressive, did not result in the
visible dislodgement of the Sinhalese population from any area.
As far as we can see, those were not the result of forcible
occupation of the lands of the Sinhalese. Those early settlers
may have become assimilated to the Sinhalese population in due
course. But it was the events of the thirteenth century that
prevented such an assimilation in the greater part of northern
and eastern Ceylon. The invasion of gha with the help of Ker4a
and Tami]. 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
393
Ceylon, the confiscation by Tamils and Ker4aa of lands and
properties belonging to the Sinhalese and the consequent migration
of the official class and many of the common peopleto the south-
western regions. These factors, more than any other, helped the
transformation of northern Ceylon into a region occupied b
Tami]. speakers and directly led to the foundation of a Tamil
kingdom and several 2mi.]. Vanni cbieZti1nies tbere. It may
be concluded that in the major part of the thirteenth century
it was the Tamil and Ker4a mercenaries who founded. the new
settlements. These were spread over a good part of Ijaraha.
Once the kingdom o Uaffna and the Vanni chieftaincies were
founded, it appears that Tamil rulers invited fimt11es from
South India for settlement. Towards the end of the thirteenth
and the beginning of the fourteenth century, therefore, a
peaceful migration of settlers from the Tamil and Kera3a
countries seem to have taken place. The prominent mention of
Ker4a mercenaries in the Sinhalese and Tamil sources and the
occurrence of Xer4a places among the original omes of the
new settlers, as listed in the Tamil chronicles, indicate that
there was a strong Ker4a element in the new population of the
northern districts. This is also revealed by the similarity pr
that exists between the social organizations of the Tamila of
Ceylon and the Nalayis of Kera3a and the affinity between the
397Marumakkattyarn laws of Kera.a and the Mukkuva and Th!sav4amii
laws. The settlement of peaceful migrants seem to have been
confined mainly to the nortbernmaet regions of the island.
The difference in character between the settlements in the Jaffna
district and those of the Vavuniy, Mullaitvu and
Nuvarakalviya districts is not only borne out by the evidence
of the literary sources but is also demonstrated by the place-
name evidence. Whereas in the Jaffna district we come across
a large percentage of place names with Sinhalese elements,
in the local nomenclature of the other districts the Tamil
element is predominant. The former indicates slow and peaceful
penetration of the Tamils and the latter a violent and sudden
occupation. The survival o Sinhalese place names, especially
of Sinhalese territorial names, in Jaffna tells against
a wholesale extermination or displacement of the Sinhalese
living there. At the same time, Tamil names of estates denoting
family settlement which are found scattered acroos the peninsula
remarkably confirm the evidence of Taxnil chronicles regarding
the settlement of prominent families from South India by the
early kings of Jaffna. The settlements of the orth-central
Province and of the major part of the North-western Province
did not last long and soon there was a concentration of Tami].s
in the Northern Province. The Trincomalee district of the
Eastern Province and the Puttalam district of the North-.estern
398were also areas bwere la8tiflg Tamil settlements were established.
Dravidian settlements in the Batticaloa district had also begun
in the thirteenth century although the bulk of the settlers
may have migrated to this district in later times.
399CHAP!ER VI
THE BEGINNINGS OF THE XINGDOX OF JAFPNL - I
)gha and Candrabhnu
After the drift of Sinhalese power to the south-
western parts of Ceylon, the only political authorities in the
northern regions about rhom we hear in the Pli chronicle are
the Vanni chieftaina If we had to depend solely on the
Clavasa for information, we should conclude that after about
the middle of the thirteenth century the whole of the former
Rjaraha was split into minor chieftaincies under Vanni rulers
who owed allegiance to the Sinhalese ruler at the capital in the
south-western region. But the Rehla of Ibn Batuta the Sinhalese
chronicle NiIya-sagrahaya3and the Sinhalese poems Slalihini-
sanda Gir-sanda and Kkila-sand!a6 as well as later
chronicles like the Rjvaliya and the Tamil and Portuguese
1. Cv., 88:87, 89:51.
2. The Rebla of Ibn Batuta, Tr. Nandi Hussain, Baroda 1953, p. 217.
3. p. 27.
k. Slalihini-sanda, ed. LC.Fernando, Moratuva 1956, v. 29.
5. Gir-sanda, ed. T.Sugathapala, Alutgama 192k, vv. 138_111O.
6. Kkila-sand ga, ed. P.S.Perera, Colonibo 1906, vv. 263-26k.
400works testify to the existence of an independent 1r{ndom in the
northernmost part of the island. The rulers of this kl-4gdom are
referred to in these sources as Ayri Shakravarti Iriya Sakviti
Ariyaxaca Varati3and riyar 1 . The first three are variants of
the Sanakrit ryacakravartin while the last is the Tainil formof the Sanskrit rya. The capita]. of these rulers, according to
the Sinhalese sources, was at flp-pauna (modern JaZfna)
Ibn Batuta visited this northern kingdom in A.D. 13k1. and his
notice is the earliest clear reference to the kingdom. Of the
Sinhalese references, the earliest is that of the Nikya-sagrahay-a,
written in the last decade of the fourteenth century We have,
therefore, definite evidence in our literary sources regarding
the existence of an independent kingdom in the northernmost
l..The Rehia of Ibn Batuta, p. 217
2. Kkila-sand!a, v. 263.
3. 1. de Queyroz, . cit., p. k9.
4..,pp. 25ff. ;Km.,p.6.
5. Kkila-sanda, vV. 263-26k.
6. U.C.H.C., I, ptl, p. 57.
401part of the ia].and in the fourteenth century
1. In the latest issue of the J.P.A.S. (C.B.), Paranavitana has
claimed the discovery of a Sanakrit inscription dated aka 1211
(A.D. 1289). According to him, it is 'inscribed in faint letters
on the earlier writing on a stone slab in the Abhayagiri-vihra
at Anurdhapura (Ep. Zey., Vol.8 , No. 20)' and 'refers to
the king who ruled at Subhapatana (Jaffna) on that date
with the full style of ripati Sri Sr ya-rryae Sri Candrabhnu
Nahrja' (J.R.AIS. (C.R.), N.S., VIII, pt. 2, p. 26k). This
would, therefore, be the earliest known reference to the
kingdom of Jaffna. But unfortunately the inscription has not
been published yet and considering the nature of the inscription
it is somewhat difficult to use Paranavitana's note with
confidence. The editor of the original inscription, over
which this inscription is claimed to be incised, has made no
mention of any later writing on the slab nor is any such
writing visible on the photograph of the estampage appearing
in the Epigraphia Zeylanica (Vol. I, No. 20 and not Vol. 8, No.20).
In a aper read at the University of Ceylon (see infra, pp45c ),
Paranavitana has stated that these later writings are of such a
nature that they may be totally overlooked when one's attention is
focussed on the original inscription. In these circumstances, it ispreferable to wait till the inscription is published by
Paranavitana before its evidence is used in a work of this nature.
- 402When did this independent kingdom originate and
who were its founders 2 These are questions which have led to
some amount of controversy among Ceylon historians in recent
years. The origin of the independent kingdom in northern Ceylon
or, to be more precise, in the Jaffna district has been traced
back to pre-Christian times, as far back as the fifteenth
century B.C.,by some while some others have traced it to the
eighth century A.D. The generally accepted theory is that the
k(ngdom was founded some time in the thirteenth century. The basis
for the first claim is a reference in the Mahbhrata as well
as some references in the PV.i chronicles of Ceylon and the
Tamil epic M$imkalai to a 1ga kingdom in northern Ceylon,
then known as NgadTpa, in the time of the Buddha The basis
for the second claim is the evidence of the Tamil chronicles
of Jaffna, especially the pa-vaipava-ir1!lai. In a learned
article contributed to the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
(Ceylon Branch) recently, Paranavitana has analysed at length
the spurious arguments brought forward by some writers in support
of these two claims In our opinion, he has convincingly set
1. C. Rasanayagam, . cit., p. 7 If.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The Xrya I1ngdom of North Ceylon', J.R.A.S. (C.B.),
N.S., VII, pt.2, 1961, pp. l7k-22k.
403
aside these arguments and shown that there is no reliable
evidence for the existence of an independent kingdom, ruled by
Tamile or others, in the Jaffna district during the period
preceding the fail of Po].onnaruva. It is not our intention,
therefore, to discuss these arguments here. But since these
theories have a direct bearing on our aubject, we shall briefly
outline them along with the counter-arguments before we proceed
on our inquiry.
C.Rasanayagam is the chief protagonist of the
theory of an independent ktndom having existed in the pre-
Christian centuries His argment that an independent kliigdom
of the Ngaa existed in Jaffna from the fifteenth century B.C.
is based on a reference in the Mhbhrata that Arjuna married
a princess of Maipura, a place beyond KalifLga. Rasanayagam has
identified Naipura with Jaffna, for the latter is sometimes
referred to in the Tamil works of the fourteenth century A.D.2as Maavai. He has argued that 'Maavai seems to be a contracted
poetical form of Maavr or Naipuram' and that, therefore,
Arjun.a married a ga princess from Jaffna Such an identification
1. C.Rasanayagaxn, . cit., p . 33 if.
2. Ccm., p. 80.
3 • C. Rae anayagam, . cit. , ft1 3 f 'f
401of place names without regard to chronology or relevant historical
facts is hardly acceptable. As ffrtber evidence of his theory
that there existed an independent kingdom in norbhern Ceylon
in the pre-Christian centuries, Rasanayagani adduces the reference
in the Mahvasa and the Mainikalai to a 1ga kingdom in the
Jaffna district In the Mahvasa there is a legend about two
Nãga kings of NgadTpa who fought over a gem-set throne and were
reconciled through the efforts of the Buddha The same legend
appears in the Taniil Buddhist epic Naim!ka1ai in which the
scene of the event is given as )1aipallavam, which is identified
by Raeanaygam as NgadTpa or the Jaffna district. We agree with
Paranavitana that these legends are not based on any historical
event and that 'in the Mahvaipsa and the Main1kalai, as indeed
in the ancient Sanskrit and Pli literature in general, the
Ngas are never represented as human beings, but as a class of
superhuman beings, who inhabited a subterranean world' ' We have
also pointed out earlier that Rasauayagazn's attempts to prove
that the gas of Ceylon were Tamil in language and culture and
that their independent kingdom is referred to in Tamil literature
1. C,Raaanayagam, p. 7 if.
2. Mv., l:kk-70.
3. Maimkalai, XKvII.
1• S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 181.
405as well are baaed on the erroneous identification of some
place names in the Saitgam texts Neither the visit of the
Buddha to Ceylon nor the existence of a Nga kingdom there
can be taken seriously on the strength of these legends.
Rasanayagain has argued the continued existence of
the northern kingdom in the seentb century A.D. on the basis
of a statement by Cosnias Indicopleuates, who visited Ceylon
in that century, that there were two kings in the island
This cannot be an argument for a kingdom in northern Ceylon for,
as Paranavtana baa pointed out, the account of Cosmas itself
indicates that by the two kingdoms he meant those of Anurdha-
pura and Rohaa
The Tamil cbronicles refer to a person called
Ukkiracii1ka as a ruler of some part of Ceylon in the eighth
century A.D. It is stated that be was a descendant of a brother
of Vijaya Rasan&yagam has argued that he was a ruler of northern
Ceylon and that he was a Eliga. He has also contended that
the Kaliga rulers with whom the Zinhalese kings from l4ahinda IV
bad alliances were actually the Kliga rulers of flaffna
1. See supra, :p.3J
2. C.Rasanayagam, . cit., pp. 120-121.
3. S.Paranavitana, 'The irya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 18k.
k. Yvm., pp. 13-23.
5 • C. Rasanayagam, . cit., p • 272 U.
dOG
There is, however, not the slightest evidence for a line of
1iñga rulers in Jaffna in this period Besides, as we shall
see presently, the legend of UkkiracifLka éannot ha relied upon
or the history of the northern kingdom.
While rejecting the chronèlogical baeis of the
account of 1Jkkiracifka,, Paranavitana has attempted to identify
this personage with Cifikakuzzra of the car-alveu
According to him, 'if we call have faith in the legend given in
the !car-kalvetu, the lion-faced king, Ukkirac1-ikp or
Ci1'1k9kun1rafl, may be taken to have flourished about the same
time as Igha, whether be was identical with the latter or not'
By making such a statement be does not seem to have much doubt
about the historicity of UkkiraciAka. But the authenticity of
he whole account o Ukkiracfi1,, as it appears in the Tamil
chronicles, is questionable. We have already briefly pointed
out that the story of Ukktrac{ik and. his queen ?rutappiravalli
is based on the Vifaya legend and has also certain elements
borrowed from folk-etymology. It has also been indicated that
there is a confusion between the legend of Ukkirac1ik#p and
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Lrya ingdorn of North Ceylon', p. 186.
2. Ibid., p. 191.
3. Ibid.
407the account of Ku!aa in some of the Tamil chronicles
Here we shall digress a little to show why the story of
Ukkracizka, has to be treated as just another of the popular
versions of the Vijaya legend.
The story appears in different versions in six of
the Taniil chronicles, namely the ppa-vaipava-mlai,
at akk4appu-nmiyam, Tri-1c.c ala-pitham, !c ar-kalve u,
Vaiyptal and the Kailyan1lai. It has hardly any historical
foundation and is clearly based on the Vigjaya legend. It appears
that the Vijaya legend found its way into the historical tradition
of the Tamils in this garbled version through the residents of
the northern regions who in course of time became assimilated
to the Taini]. population. The striking resemblances that one
finds between the UkiraciMr story and the story of SithabThu
as given in the Pli and Sinhalese sources cannot be explained
as mere coincidences. The different versions of the story
reveal the stages by which the story of Si4tiabhu became
transformed into that of Uracika.
The a-v&ipava-n1lai has the following version
of the story Ukkiracifika,, a prince of the line of Vijaya'a
1. See supra, pp.337f•.2. pp. 13-22.
403brother having a leonine face and a human trunk, invaded Ceylon
from North India in the Saka year 717 (A.D. 795) and conquered
half of the island. In the eighth year of his rule in Ceylon,
a Ca princess named rutappirava11i, who had an equine face
and was suffering frém a strange disease, came to Ceylon on a
pi1griine. On the advice of a sage, she bathed in the springs
of !rimalai, in Jaffna. As a result, she was cured of her illness
and her equine face became human. She tarried there for some
time and effected repairs to the temple at that site. One
night, when she was asleep in her camp outside the temple,
she was abducted by tTkkirac1tk who was enchanted by her beauty.
Ukkiraci)rs married her and ruled from Ceñkataka-nakari
(Senk4agala, i.e. Kandy). In time )1rutappiraval1i bore twin
children, a som named Nara-c( 1cs-rca( Skt. Nara-ai4ha-rja),
who had the tail of a lion, and a daughter named Capakvati
(Skt. Campakavat!). Naraci1rca married his own sister and
reigned from Ceñ.kajaka-nRknri after his father's death. It was
during his reign that a blind lutist or ______
came from the Ca country to Ceñk4 alre l.akiri, sang the praises
of the king and obtained the peninsula of Jaffna as his prize.
Thus be became the founder of the kingdom of Jaffna. The story
of Ukkiracifi1ca end8 abruptly with this event.
The character Ukkiracizka, (Skt. Ugra Si$ha) of
this legend, who is described here as a descendant of Si4.habhu,
409resembles in many ways the lion who is the father of Si*babThu
in the Vijayallegend. In the different versions of this story
one can distinguish the stages by which the lion of the Vijaya
legend becomes transformed into an ordinary hnm ii being. In the
Kailyamlai, on which the author of the a-vaipava-mlai
seems to have depended heavily for his story, we find this
character as a half-leonine and half-human being whose abode
was in a big cave in the hills (kla malai n muficu), to
which he carried away )rutappiravalli when he abducted her
The p!a-vaipava-nlai states that he as well as his son
bad leonine features, but it does not mention that his abode
was a cave In the Vaiypal we find that be is a normal hum'ui
being although his son is said to have possessed certain leonine
features In the Tir*-cala-puram even that elementdisappears altogether In the K!car-ka1veu and the Ma takkajappu
-nmiyam he is confused with K4a and flahsena respectively
With the exception of the last two sources, al]. the others
give the name of this personage as Ukkiraci?tka (Fierce Lion)
or use variants of this name, such as Uira-caciA1c , (Zkt. Ugra
Sena Ziñha and U kira-n-ca-cl , (St. Ugra )1ah Sena Siiha)!
1. tm., p. 2.
2. lviii., pp. 13, 21.
3. !;a. v.15.
e, supra, p.'37
5. y., v.17 ; ., Tampain&c r-patalam, v. 31.
410This also indicates the mi nner in which the lion of the original
story gradually became a person called Fierce Lion and later Sena
the Great Fierce Lion.
The transformation of the Vaz1.ga princess SuppdevT
of the Vijaya legend into IZrutappiravalli, or £akacavuntari
as she is known in some versions, can also be seen to an extent
in the Tamil versions. In the car-kalveu and. the Maakk4appu-
- 1miyam the Vañga princess becomes a lifiga princess. In the
Kail;anflai, a-vaipava-nilai and the Tiri-kc ala-
puram she becomes a Ca princess That she was 'very fair'
and 'very amorous', like the Vafiga princess is clearly stated
in the a-aipava-n1].ai and is also borne out by the
name £.akacavuntari (Skt. Faka Sundar) in some of the versions.
Just as it is said of £uppdevT in the Mahvaisa that 'alone
she went forth from the house, desiring the joy of independent
life', it is stated that rutappirvaUi went out with her
maidens and led an independent life, but, of course, with a
different mission Like Suppdevt, she was abducted and carried
away to a cave, or palace in some sources, where she bore twin
1. Kk., p. 32 ; p.30.
2. Tym., P . 15 Km., p.2 ; Tapainskar_paalam, v. 3.
3. Mv., 6:3.
k. Mv. 6:li.; Yvm., pp. 15-16.
411bhildren, a son and a daughter. In the Tiri-k;cala-puram,
car-kalveu and the Vaiypa1 the birth of only a son
is mentioned.
In a similar mxr1ner, it appears that the children
of Ukkiraciñka and )rutappiravaUi are no other than Sihabhu
and Si*hasTvalT, the children of the lion and SuppdevT in the
Vijaya legend. In the !4ahvasa it is stated that SiI?habThu's
1'hands and feet were formed like a lion'. In our sources, the
son of Ukkiraciks, is stated to have had the face and the
tail of a lion2 or only the tail of a lion His name is given
in the Iailyaxn1ai and the ppa-vaipava-n1lii as Nara-c1Mc,-
rca (Skt. Narasiâha Rja = Man-Lion King) in the Vaiypa].
as Ci!ka (Skt. Si$ha = Lion) in the )1aakk4appu-nmiy
and !car-kalveu as Ciñka-kuira (Skt. &ihakumra)= Lion
Prince) while in the Tiri-cala-puram his name appears
with the fulsome epithets CeyatuâIca Vira Pka Vararca Cik
(Skt. Jayatuiiga VTra Bhoga Vara Rja Si4ha)? In a].]. these names
1. !. 6:10.
2. ., v. 18 ;
3. Km., P . 3 ; Yvm., p. 23.
1, • 3; i!.!, p. 23.
5. !•' v. 18.
6. Kk., p. 35; Mm., p. 35.
7. Tampainakar-patalam, v. 32.
412the element ei*ha (lion) is preserved. Like S1ihabThn, this
prince married his own sister and attained kingship. Although
this prince is the counterpart of S4habhu in our legend,
certain elements of the story associated with Vijaya have also
been included in the story of this prince in the Vaiypal
and the Tirik cala-pur4am. The Vaiypal states that this
prince, Naracifikarca, sent emissaries to Nadurai and sought
the hand of the Pya princess. The princess arrived in Ceylon
with a large retinue of people belonging to the various castes
as well as sixty maidens This reminds us of the wooing of the
Pya princess of Madhur by Vijaya and the arrival of
'craftsmen and a thousand families of the eighteen guilds'
as well as seven hundred maidens The Tiri-cala-puram,
though not containing all these details, states that the son
of Ukkiracii'iktuj married a Pa princess This element in the
story further strengthens our contention that the legend of
tIkkiraci1ra is clearly based on that of Vijaya.
It is interesting to note the position occupied
by this legend in the traditional history of the Tamils of
Ceylon as it is recorded in the Vaiypal, Xai1yalai,
1. !E. TV. 21-22.
2. Mv., 7:55-57.
3. 2• Tanipainakar-paa1am , v • 33.
413and the avvaiapva-ifl!lai. In theBe sources it is associated
with the beginning of the independent Tamil kingdom in northern
Ceylon in much the same way as the Vijaya legend marks the
beginning of the Sinhalese kingdom in the Sinha].ese sources.
The manner in which the Sinhalese legend came to assume this
position in the traditional history of the Tamils may not be
difficult to explain. The Zinhalese of the Jaffna district, as
we have already seen were at no time completely dislodged by
the Tamils. Many of them probably became assimilated to the
Tanzil population in due course. The story of Vijaya would have
been current among these people at the time of the Tamil settle-
ments0 When the Sinhalese became assimilated to the Tamil population,
a garbled versio@ of the Vi&ya legend would have still
lingered in their memory. At a time when their origins were
forgotten, these people may have used this legend to expktin
the origin of the Tamil kingdom instead of that of the Sinhalese
kingdom. The legend may also have been current among the other
inhabitants of the Jaffna district. Gradually it appears to
have undergone changes that would have made it more suitable
to explain the origins of the Tamil kingdom. Hence the representatiom
of Mrutappiravalli as a Ca princess and Ukkiraci'iii as a
1. See supra,
414Ca prince, in some of the versions. In the a-vaipava-
iIi and the Kai].yarnlai it ends abruptly and is used to
introduce the story of the blind lutist who is claimed to have
founded the kingdom og Jaffna. This is an attempt to combine
the Ukkiraciñka, legend with the story of the lutist based on
tolk-etymology In the Vaiypal it is used to explain the origin
of the Ta.mil settlements in northern Ceylon and of the Vanni
chieftaincies. Here the activities of some of the early rulers
of the Jaffna kingdom as well as those of the associates of
gha seem to have been attributed to Ukkirac1ik and his son
NaraciA1cnrca. This is why some are &nc]..ixied to think that
UkkiraciMt of the Tamil chroniles is gha Gaanapragasar
has attempted to identify him with JayabThu, the associate of
)gba
Among the other elements in the Ukkiraci?'ktin story
are those derived from folk-etymology. One of these is the
account of Xavi VTra Rkava (Poet Vira 4ghava), a blind
or (lutist). It is said that this lutist
visited the court of Naraci1rirca,, sang a panegyric on him
1. See infra, p.l-'-O
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The rya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 191.
3. S.Gnanapragasar, pa-vaipava-vimarcan, p. 6k.
415and obtained the arid peninsula of Jaffna as his prize. He then
invited settlers from South India, gave them lands in that
peninsula and ruled ever them, thus becoming the founder of
the Tamil kingdom of Jaffna. Since it was founded by a
the kingdom was named Thpam This is the traditional account
of the foundation of the kingdom of Jaffna. It has been rejected
by all serious scholars as lacking any historical basis We
are inclined to agree with Gnanapragasar that this story is
based partly on the popjlar etymology of the name T1pp 4am (Jaffna),
a Tamilised form of the Sinhalese name Tp-pauna, and o4 the
story of the blind South Indian poet Kavi V!ra Rkava, who
lived in the sixteenth or seventeenth century Unfortunately
the earliest forms of the name flppam are not known. This
makes it difficult to trace the process of Tamilisation. The
early forms of the name, as recorded in the South Indian
inscriptions are : a) Iy1ppam (lk35) b) flppam (1532 1)
flp 4am (i6Ok) c) ppa-paaaa (1685)? d) Iyalpa-tcam (l7l5)
. pp. 23-2k.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom of North Ceylon', pp. 176, 201-202;
S. Gnanapragasar, a-vaipava-vimaraa,c, pp. 15-19.
3. S.Gnanapragaaar, a-vaipava-vimarcan, p. 18.
14 S.I.I., VU, No.778.
5. LE.It. for 1916, No. 61k of 1915.
6.J.Burgess, Tamil and Sanskrit Inscriptions, Setupati Grant No.1, p.62.
7. Ibid., Setupati Grant No.9, p. 81.
8. Ibid., S tupati Grant N .L0,
416a) Ypia-tcam (173k) 1and g) !pam (173k) The earliest occurrence
of this name in the Sinhalese sources is around ].k50, in the
sanda poems of the time of Parkramabhu VI The form in
these poems is I-pauna. In all the Sinhalese works tifl
the British period this form has been retained without change.
In the Tamil chronicles the name occurs in the present form of
Yppam, except in one instance in the Vaiypal when the
form rAfram occurs' This exception is evidently a copyist's
erroz, for there are several orthographic mistakes in the
Vaiypal. In the Portuguese works the form Jafanapata is
common According to de ueyroz, 'its name without corruption
is said to be Jafana-en-Putalam, which means the 'Town of the
Lord Jafaxia', and is the name of him who first peopled it'
Jafana-en-Putalam has been restored as
(the Town of Tppa)? De ueyroz also mentions another
1. J.Burgess, Tarnil and Sanskrit Inscriptions, Setipati Grant No. 13,p. 90.
2. Ibid., Setupati Grant No.1k, p. 93.
3. Gir-sanda, v. 138; Kki1a-sanda, v. 263; Slalihini-sanda,
v. 29.
k. ., v.
5. F. as Queyroz, . cit., p.k7.
6. Ibid., pp. k7.-k8.
7. id., p. 11.7, fri. 1.
417derivation of the name and that is 'Jafanapatanature, which
means long harbour' It is not slear how Jafanapatanoture could
be interpreted to mean long harbour. S.G.Perera has suggested
that it may be Tva-paaattuLai meaning deep harbour
This is not very convincing. From the first interpretation
given by de Q3teyroz it appears that in the period of Portuguese
rule the legend of the or lutist was already current
among the people. In the Dutch records there are several forms
of the name, among which Jaffnapatam is common By the time
of the British rule the final element was dropped and the place
came to be known only as Jaffna. The present Sinhalese name of
Jaffna, namely seems to be a recent form derived from
Aflppam. It does not occur in any of the Sinhalese works
before the nineteenth century. We do not agree with Gnanapragasar
that fllppam is a Tamilised form of Tpan4.nd that the latter
form is a variant of np-paçuna Gnanapragasar 's opinion that
!p5-pauna is only a Sinhalese translation of the name Nalilir,
which is now applied to aprt of Jaffna town where the last
1. F.de Queyroz, . cit., p. k8.
2. Ibid., p. k8, fu. 1.
3. l4emoirs of Rijckloff van Goens, 1665, Tr, S.Pieters, Colonibo, 1910,
p. 105.
Ii. • S. Gnanapragasar, Y pa-vaipava-vimarc an, p • 18.
418rulers of the Tanill kingdom had their court, is also imacceptable
It seems improbable that the $inhaleee translation of the name
of a city founded by the Tamul rulere of Jaffna came to be so
popularly accepted by the Tamula who applied it not only to the
city but also to the whole peninsula and to the entire district.
From the early forms that we have shown above, it appears that
the £ixihalese Tp-pauna first became flppa-paaam, then
Yppam and then Yppam. By about the first bale of the
fifteenth century, when we get the earliest recorded form of
this name in Taniil, the form Ippam seems to have been current.
The earlier form Yppa-paa4am, however, continued to be in
use as late as the seventeenth century. Paranavitana's attempt
to derive in the name flp-pauna, from Jv is not
convincing The element y may be either the Sinhalese word
meaning good, as in flpahuva (Pli Subhapabbata), or the title
used by Sinhalese princes in medieval times, the variant of
In a medieval inscriptional document entitled Mgha-vttnta,
the discovery and contents of which were announced by Paranavita.na
1. S.Gnanapragasar, p. 18.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The Lya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 202.
3. U.C.E.C., I, pt. 2, p. 732.
419recently, there oceurs the name Subha-patana which is identified
as Jaffna The same name occurs, according to Paranavitana, in
a pa].impsest inscription from Anurdhapura dated aka 121].
(A.D. l289) Subha-paana is a direct translation of the
Sinhalese name Yp-pauna an& seems to provide a clue to the
meaning of this place-name. If subha is not just a wishful
rendering into Sanskrit of the Sinhalese element yp in these
inscriptions, then we may well accept the meaning of the place-
name as the 'good port'. But Paranavitana's account of the nature
of these records and the manner of their discovery throws much
doubt on their authenticity and even their exiatence Until
these inscriptions are peroperly edited and. published, it is
impossible to base any argument on their evidence.
1. S.Paranavitana, 'Newly Discovered Historical Documents
Relating to Ce1on, India and South-east Asia', Paper
read on k.l1.196k at the University of Ceylon, Peradeiya,
Ceylon (unpublished). See infra, p4..c2. S.Paranavitana, 'An inscription from Padaviya', J.R.A.S. (C.B.),
N.S., VIII, pt. 2, p. 26i, fn. 13; see supra, p. #.oI
3. See infra, p.4$i
42
Although we are inclined to believe that the Tami].
name Yppam is only a rendering of the Sinhaleae Tp-pauna,
it must be admitted that this derivation is not certain. The
earliest forms of this name in both Sinhalese and Tamil occur
around the same time, the Tanii]. form occurring nearly fifteen
years earlier than the first recorded Sinhalese form. It may
well be that the Sinhaleae name is just a Sinhalese rendering
of a Tamil name which may or may not be associated with the
term But this seems unlikely. It is more likely
that Y ppani is one of the large number of Tamilised forms
of Sinhalese toponyms in the Jaffna peninsula.
The other element that has gone into the creation
of the legend is the story of the blind poet Vra
Rkavar, wh lived in the sixteenth -or seventeenth century.
He is said to have visited the court of one of the laat kings
of Jaffna who bore the consecration name of Pararcackara,
1and received an elephant and a plot of land as gifts. While
the earlier work Kailyamlai does not mention the name of
the lutist or that he was blind, the a-vaipava-mlai
names him as VTra Rkavar and states that be was blind
1. S.Gnenapragasar, a-vaipava-viniarcan, pp. 16-18 ;
S.Kiim' racuvarni, 'Vaa }1katt4a Cila Iappeyarkaji Vara1u',
pa-vaiyava-kaumuti, op. cit., p. 127.
2. !vm., p. 23.
421This statement is evidently due to the confusion of the story
of the lutist created by popular etymologists and the later
story of the blind poet. The whole story of the blind otist
has to be treated as a mere legend devoid of any historical
basis O1tii.'r tt c.vtr4 o+L \Pçv.
Another element of folk-etymology in the UkkiraciMc
legend is the story of the equine-faced )TArutappiravalli. While
this charqcter is based on Suppdev of the Vijaya legend, certain
features in the story are based on the popular etymology of the
place-name Nvifapuram, in Jaffna. In the pa-vaipava-nilai
an ingenious derivation has been given to this place-name It
is stated that it was so named by Mrutappira'valli on account
of the miraculous change her equine face underwent near that
place (Tamil n= horse, vita = left, puram = city - The
City where the (face of the ) Horse Left). As Gnanapragaaar
has explained, }viapuram seems to be a Tnnrilised form of
the Sinhalese name M-vata-'rra The change of the Sinhalese element
v!ra into puram in Tamil is demonstrated in several names in
the Jaffna peninsula
Besides these main elements, several others drawü
from a number of folk tales can be found in the different versions
1. Tvm., p. 19.
2 • S . Gnanapragasar, a-vaipava-vimarc an, p • 13.
3. Ibid.
422of the Ukkiracika story. One of them, for instance, is the
story of the legendary Pya princess with three breasts named
Taftakai. In the versions where ?rutappirava1li's name is
given as *akacavuntari, she is said to have had the epithet
Mummulai (Three Breasted) This physical abnormality, the
Amazonian natire of the two princesses as well as the similarity
of the namTatakai and Aaka suggest some affinity between
the two legends As we have already pointed out, some other elements
in the story of iakaavuntari are based on the account of
VihradevT as found in the hvasa
In this mrner it could be shown that the story of
Ukkiraci.ka, in the Tamil chronicles baa no historical basis
and is only another garbled version of the Vijaya legend with
elements from popular etymology and several other folk tales.
In our opinion it has to be rejected outright. Any argument
for the existence of a Tamil kingdom in Jaffna before the
thirteenth century based on this legend is unacceptable.
Rasanayagam has further argued the continued
existence of the kingdom of Jaffna in the twelfth century on
1. ., p. 32.
2 • S . Gnanapragasar, a-vaipava-vimarc aam, p • 10.
3. See supra,
423the basis of certain references in the literary sources.
The Ariyadesa referred to in the Clllavaqisa as the place from
where a king named Vradeva invaded Ceylon in the time of
VikramabThu I (1111-1132) is identified by him with Jaffna
This reference in the Pli chronicle, as Paranavitana has indicated,
is to a country outside Cey1on Probably it was a kingdom in
India Rsanayagam' a argtments for the rule of Tamil kin€s in
Jaffna in the twelfth century, based on the late Tamil-nvalar-
caritai and the £a-matala-catakam, are also unacceptable. As
Paranavitana baa stated, neither of these works can be consideredifas having been written in the twelfth century. The reference
to Koumpu (Colombo) in the verses attributed to Pukanti
1. C. Rasanayagam, . P. 286.
2. S.Paramavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 187.
3. The C1avaisa states that V!radeva was a sovereign of
Palandpa, (Cv., 61:37). The only Paladlpa that we hear of
in our sources in this period is the Maldives, which are
re referred to as PaantIvu in the Ca inscriptions (s.I.I., II, p. 91)
But it is very unlikely that the two are one and the same place.
if. C.Rasanayagam, . cit., pp. 2811_286;
S.Paranavitana, 'The irya Kingdom of North Ceylon', pp. 187-188.
424in the Tamil-n!valar-caritai and the reference to Kai (Kandy)
in the other work showethat the evidence of these works is
unreliable for the events of the twelfth century, for both places
were known by that name only after the ixteentb century
Rasanayagan's identification of Zbg with Jaffna in order to
argue for the existence of an independent kingdom in Jaffna in
earlier than the thirteenth century is also erroneous Zbg
of the Arab writers, as is well known to students of the history
of South-east Asia, corresponds to Jvaka (Sumtra or Nalay
Peninsula) and. not to a place in Ceylon.
Certain Ca inscriptions of the eleventh century
refer to the defeat of death of six Ceylonese kings at the
hands of the Ca rulers. These kings are Yikramabhu (Ilaikaiyar-
kn -King of the Ceylonese) Vikrama-pçiya. (I1a.kcura -
Lord of Ceylon) VTra-cai1nka (Cik4attaraica, - King of
SiAh$a C!rvailava-mataarija, (attaraica - King of Ceylon)
1. C.Rasanayagam, . cit., p. 287 ;
2. Ibid., pp. 81, 192.
3. S.I.I., III, p. 5k.
k. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
d2
Vra-ca1nika, (Ka1ifikar-ma - King of the Ka1igas) 1 and
1parata (I1atkaiyarkkiaiva - Lord of the Ceyloneee)
It has been possible to identify the first three kings as
three of the rulers of Robaa mentioned in the Cttlavaisa
The identification of the others presents some difficulty.
Rasanayagam and Gnanapragaear have attempted to overcome this
difficulty by arguing that they were rulers of Jfffl
But
there is no justification for such an identification. Nowlire
in the Ceylonese o South Indian sources do we get any reference
to the existence of a kingdom in Jaffna which reáisted the Ca
occupation. On the other hand, after A.D. 1017, the northern
half of the island was securely in the hands of the Cas and
it was in the south that they encountered opposition. The
rulers mentioned in the Ca records were probably in control
of parts oS southern Ceylon. As we know from the Ctllavarjisa, there
were several petty rulers in the south during the period of
Ca rule, offering resistance to the foreigners The fact that
1. S.I.I., III, p. 61.
2. Ibid.
3. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, pp. kl8-k20.
k. C.Rasanayagam, .cit., pp. 278-28k ;
S.Gnanapragasar, a-vaipava-vimarcan, pp. 52-53.
5. Cv., 56 & 57.
426some of them are not mentioned in the Clavasa is no argument
to treat them as rulers of a kingdom in the north, the existence
of which is nowhere mentioned.
The arguments of Rasanayagam and Gnanapragasar for
the existence of an independent kingdom in Jaffna before the
thirteenth century are, therefore, untenable. Rasanaysgam's
methods of historical analysis are wholly unsatisfactory and,
therefore, it is unnecessary to examine all his other arguments
besides those pointed out above. Many of these are based on
erroneous identification of place-names on the strength of
superficial similarities without regard to chronology or relevant
historical facts, as shown by some of the examples above. A
number of unidentified or unnamed places in some of the literary
sources and inscriptions are used as evidence for his theories
by a process of argument that they have been' or 'ought to
have been' Jaffna. ror instance, it is stated in the VTdileri
plates of Clukya KTrtivarman II, dated A.D. 757, that
Vinayditya Satyaraya levied tribute from the 'rulers of Kvera,
Praika, Sih4a and other islands ' According to Rasanayagam,
'by the words 'other islands' were meant ¶Jaffna and its dependent
islands' and it can be inferred that a separate king was ruling
over th5Ifl' This is a conclusion unwarranted by the statement in
1. L.Rice, 'The Chalulyaa and Pallavas', l.A., VIII, Jan. 1879, p.28.
2. C. Raeanayagam, . E • p. 239.
427the inscription. Similarly, the conquest of the 'old islands of
the sea numbering twelve thousand' by Rjarja I, lie says, 'Lust
indubitably refer to the Jaffna is1ande' In. his opinion, the
Maldives and the Laccadives were the dependent islands of JafZna
Such methods of historical analysis, it is needless to say, need
not be taken seriously.
The paucity of references to the Jaffna region in
our sources may suggest that this area was not of much significance
in the island. The few references that we come across in the
Pli chronicle seem to suggest that it was part of the Sinhalese
kingdom till the twelfth century. The authority exercised by
DevThampiya Tiasa over this region in the third century B.C.
is indicated by the account of his reign in the Mahvaisa
The port of Jainbukola in the Jaffna peninsula was under the
control of the Sinha].eae monarch and it is stated that he built
the Jambukola vihra there. There is no mention of that region
having been ruled by any other independent monarch at that time.
Ls Paranavitana has suggested, it appears that this northern
region, whicli was then known as NgadTpa,was administered by
1. C.Rasanayagam, . £•' p. 239.
2. Ibid., p. 262.
3. flv., 11:23, 38; 18:8; 19:23 ff., 60; 20:25.
428a provincial governor who seems to have held the title of
Tparja The evidence for this is the reference in the- 2Sammohavinodan! to a prince ca].ledDTparaja ruling over N5gadpa.
There is also a reference in one of the pre-Christian BrhmI
inscriptions at Mihintal to a certain DTpara who was the son
of a king of Anurdhapura DTparja was probably the title of
the governor of Ngadpa. That Ngadpa was undoubtedly a
province of the Anurdhapura kingdom in the second century A.D.
is clearly established by the gold plate inscription found at
Vallipuram in Jaffna This inscription informs us that in the
time of Vasabha (67-111), Nakadiva (1 acI!pa) was administered
by a minister (amete) of that king. In the P.li chronicle there
are only a few references to NgadTpa. Sometimes for long periods
there is no mention of this palce at all. Such silence is explained
by Rasanayagam in an incredible m1iner. To him, 'the presuiirption
therefore, is that in those years the northern principality was
quite independeiit and quiet' It is a well-known fact that the
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 189.
2. SammohavinodanT, P.T.S. ed. , p. k43.
3. U.C.H.C., I, pt.]., p.229. In No.231 of 1930/31 (M.E.L for 1930/31)
a subordinate of I?Ajendra I is called DTpattaraiya (Skt. dv!parja).It is not known whether he as associated with Jaffna in any way.
li. See supra, p.'1O-
5. C. Raaaiiayagam, 2. • p. 66.
429P11 chronicle deals mainly with the rulers at Anurdhapura and
the later capitals and does not inform us of what happened in
the other parts of the island, except when the affairs of these
parts affected the course of events at the centre. The silence
of the CbroniJ,e on matters regarding gad!pa, Rohaa and
Ka].yIi is no argument to say that these regions of the island
were independent. From time to time, when the rulers of Anurdha-
pura built a vihra or sent troops either to suppress rebellions
or to repel invaders, the northern district finds mention in
the Chronicle. In the seventh century, for instance, when
Aggabodhi II (60k-6ik) presented the Ualomagbra temple to
the Rjyatanadhtu vihra and an umbrella to the 4mlacetiya,
both in NgadIpa, the event was considered to b& important
and has been recorded in the Chronicle In the time of Silt-
meghavaa (619-628), when Siringa attempted to take possession
of Uttaradesa, of which adtpa formed a part, the king
promptly advanced to that district and regained control of it
In the time of Nahinda II (777-797), when the district chiefs
of Uttaradesa revolted, they were immediately crushed by the
king At this time Uttaradesa appears to have been under a
]..Cv., 42:62.
2. Ibid., 44:70-75.
3. Ibid., 48:83-85.
430prince of Anuridhapura, who had the title of Idipda In the
time of Nahinda IV (956-972), when a Vallabha ruler invaded Ngadpa,
the king sent an army from &nurdhapura to fight him. Nahinda' a
troops were able to free that part of the kingdom from the
South Indian invader In the eleventh century, Vijayabhu I restored
the ancient Jambukola vihira in N gadpa These references in
the Pli chronicle show that the northernmost part of the island
was considered to be an integral section of the Sinhalese
kingdom and treated as such by the rulers of Anurdbapura and
Polonnaruva. The evidence of the later inscriptions also shows
that in the twelfth century, too, Jaffna was under the control
of the Polonnaruva rulers. In that century, Parkramabhu I had
strong naval bases at ttuai (rtoa now layts), MaivLL
(Naffuvil) and VallikAmam (Val(kmam), all situated in the
western part of the Jaffna peninsula, According to the Tiruvlañgu
inscription of jdhirja Ca II (1178), Parkramabhu built
ships and assembled troopsin these places in order to launch
an attack on the Ca kimgdom A Tamil inscription from NaitTvu,
L. Cv., 448:155.
2. Ibid., 511:12-15; W.N.LWijetunga, 'Who was Vallabha, the invader
of North Ceylon', TJ.C.R., XX, pt.2, Oct. 1962, pp. 287-291.
3. Cv., 60:60.
44. V.Venkataaubba Liyyar, 'Tiruvalangadu Inscription of Rjdiiirja II',
E.I., xxxi, pp. 86-92.
431an island off the peninsula of Jaffna, contains an edict promulgated
by Parkramabhu These inscriptions attest to the autbority
wielded by Parkramabhu over the northernmost parts of the
island. Thus we see that whatever little evidence is available
to us regarding the Jaffna district indicates that it was part
of the kingdom ruled by the kings of Anurdhapnra and Polonnaruva.
There is no evidence to suggest that it was independent at any
time during the historical period before the thirteenth century.
We are informed by the Sinhalese sources that in
the thirteenth century gha had fortifications at rtoa
(Pli Sllkaratittha), besides several others in northern eylon
This would mean that in the early part of that century Jafmna
was under the rule of the monarch at Po].onnaruva. ?gha was
the last ruler of Polonnaruva who wielded authority over the
whole of RIjaraba. Re is known to have been ruling at Polonnaruva
at least till l236 We may, therefore, reasonably conclude that
at least up to 1236 there was no independent kingdom in the
Jaftna district. The earliest definite mention of the kingdom
of Jaffna is in the travelogue of Ibn Batuta, who visited the
1. E.Indrapaa, . cit. p. 70.
2. See supra,
3. See infra, -p.4.
432kindoin in 13kk It must have been, therefore, founded before
that date Hence we have to place the foundation of the kingdom
of Jaffna between 1236 and 13 L 4. An emination of the events
of this period should help us to narrow down these limits and
to understand the circumstances that led to the rise of the
new kingdom.
We have already pointed out the significance of the
invasion of I4gha and of the events of his regis in the bistorl
of the island !gha began his rule at Poloanaruva in 1215.
It is agreed that he was still ruling there in 1236 when
Par]cramabThu II ascended the throne at Dabadeiya But there
has been some amount of difficulty in determining the date
of his defeat and the duration of his reign. The CUavaisa
gives the length of his rule as twenty-one years In the
Pjva1iya, too, it is generally given as twenty-one years, but
in one version it appears as nineteen (ekunvisi) years It has
1. See supra, p. L-0.
2. See infra, p.Ji ; if the palinrpsest inscription of
Ca.ndrabhnu at Anurdhapura, discovered by Paranavitana, is
authentic, the lower limit for the foundation of the kingdom of
Jaffna can be advanced to 1289.
3. See supra,
lf• tT.C.H.C., I, pt.2, pp. 616, 8119.
5. Cv., 80:79.
6. Pv., p.109; U.C.K.C., I, pt.2, p. 8119.
433
been suggested that this may be an error for twenty-one (ekvisi)
This explanation is palusible for the Pt!jvaliya, in another
place, seems to imply that }gha was in occupation of Ijaraha
for twenty-one years when Parkrarnabhu II ascehded the throne2(1236)
If we are to accept the evidence of the chronicles, we have
to conclude that Ngha's reign ended in 1236, some time after
the accession of Parkramabhu II. It is not stated in our sources
how gha met his death or how his reign came to an end. In the
account of Parkramabhu's campaign against the Dami.a a2d
Ker4a forces, it is claimed that the mercenaries were completely
routed but no mention is made of the fate of ?gha What then
happened to Igha 2 Did he die in 1236 or later 7 Was he defeated
by the Sinhalese army or did he meet his death before the final
debc1e2 These are questions to which our sources do not provide
any definite answer. It has been suggested that ?gha's rule did
not end in 1236, although the C1lavazsa and the P1!jva1iya have
allowed him only a reign of twenty-one years According to this
view, ParkramabThu II, unlike his father,Vijayabhu III,
proclaimed himself as the sole monarch of Ceylon in 1236.
1. U.C.E.C., I, pt.2, p. 8149.
2. Py., p.116 ; aae_.iu,.-.
3. Cv., 83.20 ff. ; Pv., p. 117.
U.C..C., I, pt.2, pp. 620, 621, 8k9 ; A.Liayauagamag!, 'Decline
of Polonnaruva and the Rise of Da1tbadeiya', thesis submitted
to the University of London, 1963.
434It is, therefore, explained that the 'historians who wrote under
Parkraniabhu II would thus have reckoned }1gha'e reign as
having terminated with the accession of their sovereign, even
though IZgha continued to maintain his position in the Rjaraha
for several years after This seems to be a reasonable e
explanation, for the silence of our sources regarding the fate
of Igha casts some doubt as to whether his reign really ended
in the year when Parkramahãhu's accession took place. 1f
?4gha had died or left Ceylon in that year, the chronicles
would not have failed to mention this. It is, therefore, very
likely that gha continued to rule even after 1236, although
the Sinhalese historians did not recognise him as a legal ruler
of Ceylon after that date.
This brings us to the question of when }Zgha's rule
really ended. Paranavitana and Liyanagamage are inclined to
think that )gha continued to rule in Polonnaruva until 3255
and that he was finally defeated by the Sinhalese armies in that
year Paranavitana bases his arguments on two considerations.
Firstly, he says: 'the Pjvaliya definitely states that igha
bad been ruling at Polonnaruva for forty years before he was
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. 8119.
2. Ibid., p. 621 ; A.Liyanagarnage, .
435obliged to abandon it ' This would mean that 'Zgha abandoned
Polonnaruva in or about l255' But there is room for doubting
that the figure 'forty' in the Pvaliya statement is •orrect.
In the first place, the campaign against the Dem4a and N$ala
forces, in connection with which the reference to the forty-year
occupation oceurs, is dealt with in the PJvaliya before the
the campaign against Candrabhlnu, which took place in l2i7.
The Ctt].avasa, too, deals with the two campaigns in this order.
If we assume that the campaign against gha's forces took place
in 1255 after the invasion of Candrabhnu, it is difficult to
explain why the two chronicles chose to deal with them in the
reverse order. It is not possible to argue that at this point
'the chronicles do not follow a chronological order in dealing
with the various campaigns' for the P!jIvaliya specifically
states that the invasion of Candrabhnu took place at a time
when the island of LAk was freed of the foreign enemies and
rehabilitation was being undertaken in the country (mes Lakdiva
parasaturan sdh raa samruddha karave min jti kalhi) This
shows that the chroniclers was consciously placing the defeat
1. TJ.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, pp. 620-621.
2. Ibid., P. 621.
3. Ibid.
Pv., p. 117.
43iof Ngha's forces before the invasion of Candrabhnu. Secondly,
the C!fllavaisa judiciously avoids any mention of the forty-year
occupation, although this work is later than the P'jvaliya
and its accouut of the campaign against the forces of )gha is
remarkably similar to that of the P11jvaliya. This, too, casts
some doubt on the validity of the Pjvaliya statement. It is,
therefore, possible that the figure 'forty' in the statement of
the P11jva1iya is a mistake. It may also be possible that
MAgha was ousted from Polonnaruva before l2k7 but his forces were
not completely routed till 1255. The forty-year occupation may
refer to the presence of the enemy in the northern parts of
Ceylon and not to MAgha's rule in Polonnaruva.
Parana'uitana's second argument in favour of 1255
as the date of MAgha's defeat is that
If we take that Polonnaru and the Rjaraftha wererecovered by Parkramabhu before l2k7, in which yearthe invasion of Candrabhnu was repulsed, he had no enemiesto contend with until the second invasion of Cand.rabbnu,which, as will be shown later, occurred in or about 1260,and the P4ya invasions, the first of which was in orabout 125k. He was, therefore4 free on this supposition,to realise his ambition of being crowxied at Polonnaru,and of restoring the Tooth Relic to its ancient shrineat that city. But, for about ten or fifteen years afterthe first defeat of Candrabbnu, Parkramabhu paid noattention toolonnaru. All his religious and otheractivities during these years were in the MAyraf a, orin the south-western or central districts of the Island.The reason for this must have been that Polonnarurwasstill in the hands of the enemy, who abandoned it afteran occupation of forty years, as stated by the PUjva1!,in 1255. 1
1. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 621.
43?This is not quite convincing. During the whole period of his r
reign, Parkramabihu had to contend with a number of enemies.
First ?1gha, then Candrabhnu and possibly the Pyas as we
shall see later, gave constant trouble to the Sinhalese ruler.
If one asks why Parkramabhu failed to hold his coronation at
Polonnaruva between 12k7 and 125k when there were no foreign
invasions, one may also ask why he failed to achieve that
between 1255 and 1260 when, according to Paranavitana, Parkrama-
bhu bad freed Polonnaruva of the enemy. The date of Candrabhtnu's
second invasion is not definitely known to be 1260. Some place
it in 1262 and some others later on If we accept 1262, the time
lapse between 12k7 and 125k is almost the same as that between
1255 and 1262. If during the seven-year period between 12k7
and 125k Parkramabhu was pnevented from realising his ambition
by !gha'a presence in Polonnaruva, what prevented him from
achieving his aim during the seven-year period from 1255 andb.CAtler
1262, whenIgha o2, any other enemy was at Polonnaruva I It is
not possible , therefore, to argue that )gha was ruling at
Poloxinaruva till 1255 on the basis that Parkramabhu failed
to hold hid coronation in that city before 1255. As we shall
aee later on, whether )Zgha was defeated in 1255 or before 12117,
what is important is that the Sinhalese rulers could not get
1. A.Liyanagmge, 2•
438rid of the foreign enemy from northern Ceylon after the fall
of Polonnaruva. The enemies were there even after 1262. Northern
Ceylon had permanently slipped out of the hands of the Sinhalese
rulers in 1215. As we shall see in the sequel, what made it
possible for Parkramabhu to enter Polonnaruva in 1262
was apparently the temporary subjugation of the enemy in northern
Ceylon by the Pyas. This, more than any other factor, prevented
ParkramabThu not only from holding his coronation but also
from restoring Polonnaruva to its pristine position.
We are, therefore, inclined to think that the
defeat of ?gha and his forces took place before the first
invasion of Candrabhnu in 12k7. )gha was ousted from Polonnaruva
possibly not long before that event. Hi forces may have continued
to resist in their fortifications in Rjaraha even after that
date.
The inha1ese sources do not inform us that ?gha
was killed in battle by the Sinhalese. It appears that )1gha
was only dislodged from Polonnaruva but not ousted completely
from Rjaraffha. However, we have no evidence at all as to
what happened to gha or about the events in Rjaraha
after his defeat. In a].]. probability, }gha and his associates
established their authority somewhere in the northernmost part
of the island. In 12k?, some time after the defeat of }1gha,
Candrabhnu invaded Ceylon. He was defeated by ParkramabThu
439and driven away from the Sinhalese kingdom We do not know what
Candrabhnu was doing between this event and hi second abortive
attempt to capture power in the Sinhalese kingdom, which probably
took place in l262 Between the defeat of gha and the second
invasion of Candrabhnu certain important events seem to have
taken place in northern Ceylon. The Sinhalese chronicles mention
nothing of these events. But the information contained in some
o the contemporary P4ya inscriptions, inadequate though it
may be, helps us to extent in conjecturing the course of events.
The inscriptions of Javarma, Sundara Ipya I,
from the year 1258, refer to a P4ya invasion of Ceylon whichpresumably took place before 125S No details of this invasion
1. The invasions of Candrabhnu have been discussed in great
detail in the unpublished thesis of A.Liyanagamage mentioned
above.
2, Paranavitana dates this event in 1260 (U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p.621),
Krom in 126k (Ned. Kon. Akad. van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde,
Deel 62, Serie B. Nd.5, pp. 8-9) and Coed&s in 1256 (B.K.I. ,
83, pp. 1f59-472). Liyanagamage (. cit.) has discussed
these views and dated the event in 1262. We are inclined to
accept this.
3. There is no evidence to date this event to 125k.
440are given except for the fact that Sundara P4ya exacted tributefrok the Ceylonese ruler The Sinhalese chronicles make no mention
of this invasion. It has been surmised by Paranavitana that
there was an alliance between the Sinhaleae and the Pyas
and that Sundara Pya invaded Ceylon to give assistance to
Parkramabhu against gha According to him, 'the silence of
the monks who chronicled these events with regard to the
assistance which their patron received atrom a great Tamil
power for subduing a band of Thmil and Nalayi mercenaries
is easily understandableZ Ee also contends that Ngha was in
league with the Cas ' But there is hardly any evidence for
such alliances between Ceylonese and South Indian rulers at
this time. In support of his conclusion Paranavitana adduces
the statement in the chronicles that the monarchs of foreign
lands bad come under the influence of Parkramabbu But it
must be remembered thatParanavitana himself has stressed that
the account of Parkramabhu's campaign against 1gha in the
chronicles, 'given by monks who wished to glorify their patron,
1. Sen Tainil, IV, pp. 51+-5l6; K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The
Kingdom, p. 162 ; LE.R. for 189k, No. 166 of 189k.
2. TJ.C.H.C.,I, pt. 2, p. 621
3. Ibid.
4 Ibid., . 622.
5. Ibid., p. 621.
441is meant for those who were accustomed to believing without
iuestion anything stated by the+nd does not carry conviction
to a critical historian of toda.y' In the light of this
much credence cannot be attached to the statement that foreign
monarchs came under the influence of Parkramabhu. Further
Paranavitana tries to identify the Ceylonese prince Parkramabhu,
who died fighting for the Cas in South India in 1230, with
Parkramabhu Niafika MaU.a of the Pa44uvasuuvara Tamil
inscription The latter is termed i1añkaikk (King of
'South Ceylon') in this inscription. On this basis Paranavitana
argues that 'if the ruler of South Ceylon took the side of the
enemies of the C2a empire, it is reasonable to infer that gha
ranged himself on the side of the Coas' The unlikelihood
of this contention has been fully demonstrated by Liyanagamaget
It has also been pointed out in an article on the Pai4uvasnuvara
inscription that Parkramabhu Niik' Nalla of that record
is no other than the K1iiga ruler NlMai3.ka Nalla who reigned
in the twelfth century When the Pauvasnuvara inscription
1. U.C..C., I, pt.2, p. 620.
2. Ibid., p. 622.
3. Ibid.
k. A.Liyanagamage, £. £•5. X.Kanapathi Pillai, 'A Tamil Inscription From Pa4uvasnuvara',
U.C.R., XVIII, No.1,3 & 11, July-Oct. 1960, p. 157 ft.
442expressly mentions that the Parkramabhu in whose reign it
was set up had the surname Niki Malla it is not clear why
Paranavitana prefers to identify him with another ParkramabThu
who is known to us only from a South Indian inscription. 'om
his Siniialese inscriptions we know that Ni Aka Malla had the
name ParAkrainabThu as wel1 Since it has been discussed elsewhere
in detail, we do not propose to enter into a discussion of this
point. But we would like to point out here that it it erroneous
to take Teilakai to mean the southern part of Ceylon and, on
that basis, to build up a theory of the ruler of South Ceylon
ranging himself on the side of the enemies of the Cas and the
ruler of North Ceylon tk1-rg the side of the Cas. Tei1afkai
has been used in Tamil literature as well as in inscriptions
1. S.Paranavitana, 'A Slab Inscription of NitaM )ialla at Polonnaru,
wrongly attributed to Viayabhu II', E.Z., V, pt.2, p.202.
2. a) Tiru-flacampantar Tvra Tiruppatikaikaj, Ka 1aka ed., No.243,
p. 520 (7th century); b) Cuntarar Tiruppatikam, No.147 (c.8th century
c) ikkavcakar Tiruv'cakam, ed. C.Pillai (Mad. 1949), p. 326j
Cc. 9th century); 4) M.E.R. for 1923, No.505 of 1922 (12th century);
e) M.E.R. for 1915, No.406 of 1914 (13th century); f) mid., No.407
of 1914 (13th century); g) ., Ciappuppyirani & v.k, p.k (c.l5th
century); h) Km., P . 6 (c.l6th century); i) ., vv.90 , 91 (c.l6th
century); j) ., pp. 18, 170 (c.l8th century); k) Mni., Tta.,-
ka1veu, p. 18 Cc. 18th century).
443almost always in poetry, for a long time since the seventh
century. In all these instances this name stands for the whole
of Ceylon and not for any part of it. The name IlsAki was also
used for some places in south India, besides Ceylon The
prefix tea,, meaning south, was used to distinguish Ceylon from
the other Ila.kais. In the early centuries of the Christian
2era, one of the South Indian Ilañkais had the prefix n (-ilki).
In the Ca period, we find that it had the prefix uttara,
meaning north (Uttara Laz.k) The Lek in the south was, therefore,
known as Te-ilakai (Lañk in the South). Perhaps the best
example that one can show to prove that Te-ilkii does not
stand for the southern part of Ceylon only is its occurrence
in the ailyanilai. In this Tamil chronicle of Ceylon, one of
the kings of Jaffna with the throne or consecration name of
Cekarcacka.ra is styled CekarcaTei1añkai mapav (Cekarca,
the king of Teilakai) No one would contend that the king of
the northern part of the island is here referred to as the king
of southern Ceylon. What is really meant is that the ln.g of
Jaffna is the monarch of the whole of Ceylon. Teilafkei, in
1. See supra, p. 32.
2. Thid.; there was also a }yilafigai in }'sore, E.G., III, pp.1k7-].kB.
3. M.E.R. for 1913, No.77 of 1913; K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Cas,
p. kk3, n83.
k. Km., p. 6.
441this instance, stands undoubtedly for the whole of Ceylon. In
the Pauvasnuvara inscription, too, as in all the other instances,
it stands for the whole island. It is, therefore, difficult
to accept Paranavitana's theory that Parkramabhu of the
South Indian inscription, mentioned above, was a king of
southern Ceylon who aided the enemies of the Cas. Consequently
there is no basis for the theory that the P4ya invasion that
took place some time before 3258 was aimed at assisting Parkrama-
bhu Iiagainst Ngha, the aUeged Ca ally.
The silence of the Sinhalese chronicles on the
ff'a invasion and the true significance of this event ma
be understood to some extent if we analyse the evidence of
some P4ya inscriptions of 1263 and 126k, which refer in detail
to another P4ya invasion of Ceylon under Jat varma V!ra
P 4ya I (acc. 1253). In one of his inscriptions of 1263, Vra
Pya is credited with the feat of having taken 'Iam and the
CAvaka's crown together with his crowned bead' In an inscription
of 126k, a detailed account of the campaign in Ceylon is givex&
1. N.E.R. for 1911, No. 588 of 1916+ LA.Ni].akanta Sastri,
'The Ceylon Expedition of Javarman Vra Pya' , Proceedings
and Transactions of the Eighth AllThdia Oriental Conference,
Bangalore 1937, p. O9.
2. Ibid., pp. 523-525.
445The text of this inscription from Kuumiyma1ai is corrupt at
certain places and the details are, therefore, not quite
intelligible. In the words of Nilakanta Sastri,
we can see that there was corns dispute in Ceylon, thatone of the ministers had invoked Pyan intercession,and that the king's aim was to uphold in proper formthe ancient practive of royalty (araiyal va,akkam
ippaa n uñipp4 ). Then we learn that amongthe kings of Ceylon one was killed in the battlefieldand all his troops, treasures and parapherhalia confiscated(araiu keAu dyam aaia van), after which the doublecarp (the Pya emblem) was put upon the fine flagswaving on the Kamalai and the Tnikagini, anotherkixig(of Ceylon) was compelled to sur;ender his elephantsas tribute. Finally, the son of the Evaka, who badformerly disregarded commands and ev±nced. hostility,came and prostrated (before Vra Pya) and was dulyrewarded. The tex is difficult here and so far as I canmake it out, the Svaka's son was presented with theanklet of heroes (vrakka), was taken round nprocession on an elephant and was permitte& to proceedat once to Lnunipuri because it was thought (by VtraPya)that it was only proper that the son shouldrule the vast land of Ceylon formerly ruled by his father. 1
The two inscriptions are generally taken to refer to the same
expedition and rightly so. The expedition is not mentioned in
Vra Pya's inscription of the early part of l262 It appears
to have taken place either in the latter part of 1262 or in 1263.
As we shall see later, it took place probably in 1262. These
Pya inscriptions inform us that around 1262 there were two
kings in Ceylon and that one of them was a Cvski (Jvaka).
1. LA.Nilakanta Sastri, 'The Ceylon Expedition of Javarman
V!ra Pya', . cit., pp. 511-512.
2. l'.E.R. for 1929-30, iqo.k8o of 1930.
44'iThe campaign of Sundara Pçtya, some time before 1258, was
probably directed against this Cvaka and this may be the reason
why the Sinhalese chroniclers took no notice of it. The reference
in the Ku4uzniymalai inscription to 'the son of the vaka, who
bad formerly disregarded commnnds and evinced hostility' seems
to support this conclusion. For, the person who was recalcitrant
was the Jvaka and not his son, as some are inclined to take.
The phrase 'who had formerly disregarded comrnnds and. evincedS S
hostility' qualifies Svaka and not the 'son of the Zvaka'.
The Jvaka was killed in battle in or about 1262. Then the son
was placed on the throne by the Pya ruler. Before this
event, the P4ya's conim ds would have been directed to the
father and not to the son. It is not possible that the son is
accused in our record of having formerly disregarded commands'.
It is the father who would have disregarded commnnds earlier
and paid for it with his life. Once the father was punished,
the son was given full royal honours and placed on the throne,
'because it was thought that it was only proper that the son
should rule am, surrounded by the vast sea, which was ruled
by his father' It folOows, therefore, that it was the father
and not the son who was recalcitrant earlier. For the elder
1. Nili1ranta Saetri's rendering of this phrase is not quite
accurate; 'which was formerly ruled by his father' should
read 'which was ruled by his father'.
4471vaka to be accused of having been recalcitrant, have
submitted to Pya authority on an earlier occasion and rater
failed to be submissive. When did this happen 7 It seems to
have occurred some time before 1258, when Sundara P'ya
claims to have obtained tribute from a ruler of Ceylon. The silence
of the Sinhalese chronicles regarding any Pya invasion of
the Sinhalese kingdom suggests that it was the Jvaka and not
ParIkramabhu II who was subdued by the PI4yas. On the evidence
of the Pya inscriptions we may, therefore, say that some time
before 1258 Sundara Pya invaded Ceylon and exacted tribute
from a Jvaka king who was ruling part of Ceylon, that this
ruler soon became recalcitrant and was killed by Vira P4ya
in 1262 and that the son of that Jvaka was then placed on the
throne by VTra Pya"because it was thought that it was only
proper that the son should rule am, surrounded by the vast
sea, which was ruled by his father'.
Now, we have to identify the Jvaka of the Pya
inscriptions and. the kingdom ruled by hint. The Sinhalese
chronicles refer to the activities of only one Jvaka in Ceylon
at this time, He is Candrabhnu, whè is recorded to have invaded
the Sinhalese kingdom on two occasions. The defeat and death of
this invader on the second occasion enabled the Sinhalese princes
to enter Polonnaruva and start restoration work there Since
1. A.Liyanagamage, .
443the Pya inscriptions refer to the defeat and death of a
Jvaka in Ceylon around the same time, it has been rightly
surmised that these inscriptions and the Sinhalese chronicles
refer to the same incident Paranavitana, who supported this
view earlier, has lately attempted to identify the Jvaka of
the P4ya inscriptions with )gha This change of opinion
has been due to his new theory that gba hailed from 'l4alaysia'
and not from Kalifiga, in In&ia, as recorded by the Sinhalese
and Tainil aources We find this theory unconvincing and agree
with Nilakanta Sastri that it is based mainly on 'vague surmises
kand plays with phonetic similarities' • Recently Paranavitana
has claimed to have discovered epigraphic materials which
conclusively prove his theory until these materials have been
published, we will not be in a position to offer comments on
this theory. For the present, we are inclined to accept the
statement of the chronicles that lgha came from Kalifiga in
India. Consequently, we believe that the only Jvaka known to
1. A.Liyanaganiage, . cit. ; LA.NilAknta Sastri, 'The Ceylon
Expedition of Javarma.n i'a P4ya', . cit., p.520,
2. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 627 ; S.Paranavitana, 'The irya Kingdom
of 1orth Ceylon', p. 19k.
3. S.Paranavitana, 'Ceylon and Malaysia in Medieval Times',
J.R.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., VII, pt.l, pp. 11I2.
k. K.&,N.Sastri, 'Ceylon and Sri Vijaya', JR.A.S. (C.B), N.S.,VIII,p.12
5. See supra, p. JoI
449have been active in Ceylon in the third quarter of the thirteenth
century is Candrabhnu. It may not be wrong to conclude,
therefore, that the JAvka of the Pya inscriptions was
Candrabhuu, that be was ruler of a kingdom in Ceylon for some
time and that he met his defeat and death in 1262, the year
in which the Sinlialese princes entered the old capital, Polon-
naruva It has been mentioned earlier that the campaign of
V!ra Pya in Ceylon can be dated either in the latter part
of 1262 or early in 1263. Since the death of Candrabhnu, on
the basis of the Sinhalese chronicles, appears to have taken
place in 1262, V!rapPya's campaign against the J'ãvaka ruler
has to be dated in 1262 and not in 1263 As Paranavitana and
Liyanagamage believe, the Pyaa were probably the allies of
Parkramabhu II The Pya inscriptions are not clear on
this point. The Kuuniiyma1ai inscription refers to the request
made by a minister, presumably to intervene in the war in
Ceylon between ParkramabThu and CandrabhAnu. It is not stated,
as has been claimed sometimes, that the minister came from Cey1on
1 • A. Liyanagamage, . cit.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid. ; U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 627.
k. U. .H.C., I, pt.2, pp. 627, 685.
45k)Re could very well have been mfnister of V!ra P4ya himself.
But probably he was a ninister of Parkramabhu who appealed
to the Pya ruler to intervene in the Ceylonese war. Such
an appeal would have been made to the Pya ruler because, as
we have indicatedk earlier, Candrabhnu was probably a tributary
of VTra Pya, at least in name if not in fact. The Pya
inscriptions claim that after the Jvaka was killed, V!ra
Pya ].evied tribute from the otber king' If this other king
was Parkramabhu, it would mean that the Siniialese ruler was
treated only as a subordinate ally. Raving successfully intervened
in the war and punished his recalcitrant tributary with death,
V!ra Pya raised the Jvaka's son to the throne of his father.
It is clear that the Pya monarch did not intervene in the
Ceylonese war as an ally of Parkramabhu with the intention of
conquering the vaka'a kingdom for the Sinhalese ruler. He
appears to have been settling a dispute between his own tributary,
who had become refractory, and. another subordinate ally, who too
was probably one of his tributaries. This is how we could possibly
interpret the evidence of the Sinhalese chronicles and the Pya
1. !ai vntanaj (ojher king) is the phrase used in the
Kuumiyn1ai inscription, LA.Nil&nta Sastri,'The Ceylon
Expedition of Javarman VTra Pya', . cit., p. 52k.
451inscriptions regarding the events of the period, between 12k 7 and
1262.
If the little evidence we have favours the identi-
fication of the Jvaka of the PIQya inscriptions with Candrabbnu
the next question we are faced with is the location of his king
dom. The Linhalese sources do not inform us of the existence of
an independent kingdom in southern Ceylon, other than that
ruled by ParkramabThu II, in the middle of the thirteenth
century. ut we do not know whether there was any independent
kingdom in northern or eastern Ceylon, which at this time was
not under the control of the Sinhalese monarch. Candrabhnu'a
activities prior to his second invasion of the Dabadei;a
kingdom were confined to the northern part of the island. He
is stated to have landed at Mahtittha with Tami]. mercenaries
from the P14ya and Ca countries and 'brought over to his
side the STh4aa dwelling in PadT, Eurund and other districts'
1. Paranavitana has claimed that a certain Candrabhnu Nahrja
is mentioned as the ruler of Subhapajana (Jaffna) in 1289 A.D.
in an inscription found at Anurdhapura. If this record is
authentic, this ruler may be the son of Candrabhnu, the invader.
This may confirm the identification of the vaka of the
Pya inscriptions with Candrabhnu. See infra,
2. Cv., 88:63-6k.
452Pad! and Kurund, as we have noted earlier, are Padaviya and
Kuruntanttr in northern Ceylon. Possibly not az€L the Taniil
mercenaries of Candrabhnu were from South India. Re may have
recruited some from the northern parts of Ceylon, oo. If
Candrabhnu had a kingdom in Ceylon, this must have been in
the northern region of the island rather than in any other
part. It was probably the forerunner of the Tamil kingdom of
Jaffna which was ruled in the fourteenth century by a lineof lnga called the Aryacakravartins. The evidence of certain
place names in the Jaffna district, revealing Jvaka association,
also points to the conclusion that it was in northern Ceylon
that the vakas had some sort of authority at any time in
the history of the island. There are at least two village
nawes in the Jaffna district with the element Jvaka.€..,,Jivy)
Cvaka-cri (Jvaka-cri = Jvaka settlementand CvkVçai
(Cvaka k tai - Jvaka kai = Jvaka fort). These two names,
stifl in use, find mention in the the
Kkila-sanda and in some of the Linhalese Kaaimpotas (Boundary
Books) It appears that the Jaffna pen4nula and some parts of
the Jaffna and Hullaitvu districts had the territorial name
Jvagama. This name OCCU8 in one of the Sinhalese Kaaimpotas
1. Yvm., p. 60; Rkila-sanda, y.Jo ; Tn Siha Kaaim saha
Vitti, ed. A.J.W.I.rambe, 1926, p. 21. 5. 1acv"I, )-o4..
2. Tn Sii.ha Kaaim saha Vitti, op. cit., p.21.
453Paranavitana takes JAvagama to be derived from Jvaka, through
Taniil, 'just as Sinhalese nA4agama is derived from Sanskrit
nAaka through Tamil' This is plausible, although it need not
necessarily be so. It it is derived from Jvaka, it indicates
JAvaka rule in the northern regions more than the other two place
names.
Paranavitana has adduced further evidence in support
of the conclusion that the JAvakas were the predecessors of
the Aryacakravartins in the kingdom of Jaffna In a fourteenth
century Sinhalese inscription found at davala a personage
named }rttA 4anL Peruniun, who entered into a treaty with
VikramabAhu III (1357-137k) is mentioned. He has been identified
by Paranavitana with IrttAa Cifikai Ariyag, one of the Arya-
cakravartins of Jaffna mentioned in the ppAia-vaipava-n1lai.
In this inscription, he is given the epithet Sav4u-pati.
Paranavitana is inclined to equate the word sava4u with Jvaka.
He argues that 'JAva is pronounced in Tamil as CAva or SAva,
to which A., 'person', has been added on the analogy of
Ma].ayA1i from Malaya + On this basis, he says, SAVA]. or
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 195.
2. Ibid., pp. 197-200.
3. Ibid., p. 199.
451Svii would denote a person of Thvaka race. 'The final vowel
ii (in sav4u) suggests the influence of Telugu which is known
to have been the language of the rulers of the vaka kingdom
in the Malay peninsula' Having thus derived Sav4u front Jva,
Paranavitana explains the m yrner in which An Iryacakravartin
came to bear the title of Sav4upati.
If, as we have demonstrated, )gha came front Malaysiawith a following of Malay warriors, and if he foundeda kingdom in the North, the ruling class of that kingdomwould have been Jvakae or And further, if anIriyan fro Rmvaram became master of this kingdomas a result of a matrimonial alliance, the Jvakaa or
or Sav4u people would have referred to thisLriyan and his descendants as their lord. 2
This seems to be a far-fetched theory. In the first place, the
identification of ?rttam of the ?davala inscription with
an ryacakravartin of Jaffna is not certain. Even if this is
granted, the derivation of Sav4u-pati from Jiva is rather
ingenious. It is true that Jiva is pronounced in Tamil as
Cva or SAva. But the analogy on which this is made the
first element of SAvAji is certainly wrong. MalayAi is
not derived from the two words Malaya and , but from MalaAam,
the Tamil name for Ker4a, meaning 'valley', in the same way
as Vki (BeñgAi) is derived from Vk.am (BagAa - Bengal).
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The irya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 199.
2. Ibid.
455
No one would say that the latter is derived from Vaiticø (VaAga)
and , although it would appear quite logical. The derivation
of Sav4u, occurring in the Sinhalese works, is disputed by
scholars. Various other interpretations have been given to it
It does not occur in any Tamil work and it is doubtful whether
any ryacakravartin bore this title. Further, the inscription
in which it is claimed to occur as the epithet borne by a certain
Mrtt4am is badly damaged. Paranavitana admits that 'the
record is badly weathered, and from its sixth line, only a
few letters are legible here and there' and. that even 'some
letters in the first five lines are also indistinct' The term
Sav4u-pati occurs in the fourth line and two letters of this
word, namely va and ti, are not clear. Under these circumstances,
one cannot be sure that the epithet is Sav4upati and not some
other word. Thia evidence adduced by Paranavitana in support
of the rule of in northern Ceylon is, therefore,
unacceptable, although it does not go against our conclusion
arrived at from other evidence.
1. D.B.Jayati].aka, Shitya Lipi, 1956, p. Wi ; E.LCodrington,
'The Gampola Period of Ceylon Bistory', J.R.A.S. (C.B.),
XXXII, No. 86, p. 301.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The 4rya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 197.
In the light of the meagre evidence that is available
to us w may not be wrong in locating the kingdom of Candrabbnusomewhere in the northern part of Ceylon. In all probability,
it was the kingdom of Jaffna which the 4ryacakravartins inherited
1. The Saziskrit inscription from Anurdbapura mentioned earlier
(see supra, p.43 ) refers,to a Candrabhnu as the ruler of
Subhapatana (Jaffna). If this is an authentic record and if
Candrabhnu is identified as the son of the vaka who invaded
the Sinhalese kingdom, the identification of the Jvaka's
kingdom with Jaffna will be beyond dispute. See infra, p. 4c9In the Vaiypal (v.36) occurs the following reference:-
'Tanikkal eum varaiyatail Cakarr eurn Kar!r enruin
nta kula v'ar patai_uta!_ki tara ilCkXum_njil'
(1ihen the Cka, with the army of low caste hunters called
Cakarr and Karr, were ruling this world from TaikkAl).
The only manuscript of the Vaiypal now extant, from which
this chronicle has been edited, and published, is full of copyist's
errors. The words Cka vum can be emended as Ckavarum
by adding one letter ra
which would then mean 'being ruled by the Ckavar' (a varia nt
of Cvakar). If this is admissible, the reference here may be
taken to preserve some memory of Jvaka rule in Taikkal, in the
Northern Province. But we cannot be certain that only this
emendation is possible. Cka vum is obviously an error.
457
If, as we have suggested earlier, the invasion of
Javarman Sundara Pya I, some time before 1258, was directed
against this new kingdom, its foundation has to be placed before
that date. We have already laid down that the upper limit for
the establishment of an independent kingdom in northern Ceylon
is 1236. The lower limit may now be reckoned as 1258. Our
sources do not mention anything about the events in northern
Ceylon between these two dates, except for the defeat of gha,
which, we believe, occurred some time before 12k7. In the present
state of our knowledge we can only resort to conjecture in recons-
tructing the course of events that led to the foundation of
the new kingdom in northern Ceylon. The only basis for our
conjecture is the vague evidence of the Tamil chronicles.
Although gha was ousted from Polonnaruva some
time after 1236, be seems to have continued to exercise
authority further north. The Linhalese monarch was in no
position to recover the whole of jaraha or even to secure
his position at Polonnaruva for a long time. The reason for
ParkramabIhu's failure appears to have been the presence of
the enemy in the northern part of the island. The failure of
the Sinhalese to oust the foreigners from the island was an
important factor that led to the rise of the new kingdom in
453the north. 1gha presumably 5et up a new capital somewhere in
northern Ceylon, probably in Jaffna, and exercised authority
in that region. We do not know what fate eventually overtook him
and it is useless to surmise on this point. He probably died a
natural death and was succeeded by someone else. In all
probability this new kingdom of northern Ceylon is the same
as that ruled by the Tvaka prince around 1262. It is not known
how a Jvaka came to be on the throne of a kingdom in northern
Ceylon. As we are inclined to identify the Jvaka of the
Pya inscriptions with Candrabhnu, it is possible to
conjecture that this I'a1ay ruler, after his defeat at the bands
of the Sinhalese, fled to the northern kingdom. In course of
time, by some means he was in a position to succeed to the
throne.there. Probably he won the favour of Mgha, if he was
still living at that time, and succeeded him. Or, it is possible
that be was able to wrest power from the ruler of the northern
kingdom. If such was the course of events, it would appear that
it was as ruler of the northern kingdom that Candrabhnu launched
his second attack on the Sinhalese kingdom, which turned out
to be fatal to him. After his death, his son ascended the throne
as a feudatory of the PIyas with the blessings of Jatvarman
YTra Pya. This reconstruction of the events in northern
Ceylon seems to fit the meagre and vague information that we are
able to extract from our epigraphic and literary sources, chiefly
4591
the T mi1 chronicles.
1. In his contribution to the TJ.C.H.C. (I, pt.2, P . 627),
Paranavitana held that 'the independent kingdom in North ceylon
appears to have originated with Candrabhlnu'. Later, be
changed this view and attributed the foundation of the kingdom
to gba and agreed that it was 'possibly also ruled for
sometime by Candrabhnu' (J.R.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., VII, pt.2, p.19k).
But in a paper read at the University of Ceylon recently, he
claims to have discovered an epigraphic document entitled
Mgha-vttnta_(which he sometimes calls Ngharja-vttnta)
which deals inter aiim with the 'foundation o the kingdom of
Subhapatana (Jaffna) with Ga4agopla, }Zgha' a son as its
first ruler, under the protection of the Pyaa, the career
of CandrabbThu, the son of Gaagop.la, ....., the relations
between Candrab1inu of Subhapaana and Pa4ita ParkramabThu
of Kurungala, the supplanting of gha's descendants at
Subhapaana by Rjaputra hakusa from RAmevara (rya Cakravarti)...
(S.Paraxiavitana, 'Newly Discovered Historical Documents
Relating to Ceylon, India and South-east Asia',
Although the light thrown by such a document would alter our
picture in many ways, it would confirm the connections of gha
and Candrabhnu with the northern kingdom. However, until the
new document is published no comments can be offered on this
matter.
4BiIn the Tamil chronicles , as we have already Been,
the foundation of the kingdom of Jaffna is attributed to a
blind minstrel. It is said that this minstrel died without
an issue and that Jaffna was without a king for some time.
Eventually one of the nobles went to Nadurai and invited a
prince called Ciiki Liya (Irya of Si4ha(nagara) ) aliasKafkai 4riya or Vicaya silcai Cakkaravartti to be the
king of Jaffna. The invitation was accepted and Vicaya
KU]i3kn i Cakkaravartti became the first prince to rule Jaffna.
This is the account found in the Kailyanflai and the
a-vaipava-nlai As we have discussed earlier, it is
stated in these chronicles that several noble families as
well as members of the different castes were invited from
South India in the time of the king Vicaya nCi Cekkaravartti
and given lands in the Jaffna peninsula and the Vanni districts
to settle down There are some reasons to believe that this
first princely ruler of Jaffn4wae no other than Mgha. In
the first place, we are inclined to agree with Gnanapragasar
that the name Vicaya KlMc!ni may be a corruption of
Vicaya K]i?ilcq (Vijaya Kliiga) gha, as we know from the
1. !vm., p. 25; ., p. 6.
2. See supra,
3 • S. Gnanapragaaar, ppa-vaipava-nlaiga, p. 65.
461,.&+ra k.'roNia-sagrahaya and the 4tbavagalaviraaa, had al8o
the name Kliiga Vijayabhu This name could be easily rendered
into Tamil as Vicaya Klia. Here the second element of the
name Vijayabhu is dropped and the name Kliñga is used at
the end, in the same ner as Ca or Pya in Tami1
Gnauapragasar has explained that in tha manuscripts K].iikp
or its variant Ilixkai may have been mistaken for ____
Since aikai makes no sense, it may have been altered to
KU4ksi (crippled hand) in course of time. Hence the explanation
of the author of the that the king got
kthis name because one of his hands was disabled. But the posibion
1. ks., )•t7 ; &Yw
2. Rjarja Ca, V!ra Pya, etc. Vijaya is. written as
Vicaya in Tamil and Klifia as Klika or IVlifdcai.
3. In the cursive style of the ola manuscripts, where an angular
style is avoided to prevent the ola from splitting, 111P1kR
would have been written thus: 9nJL' . This could have
been easilyymistaken for P,4YV'Ua (I't!.ai.ka).
Li.. p. 30.
462of IC 1aô.kai after Vicaya suggests that it may not be a nickname.
If it were, it would have been used in fromt of Vicaya, the
surname (akai Vicaya Cakkaravartti), as in the case of normal
nicknames in Taniil Gnanapragaaar explanation sems to be
plausible but it is rather unlikely that sich a well-known
name like K1ifga was misread as IVt!añka. The corruption of
Kliga into Ktax.ka may have occurred in some other way.
That ki is a mistake for ICliga is confirmed by the evidence
of the ?4a akk4appu-xnnm ya. This chronicle of Batticaloa
deals mostly with the history of the Eastern Province of the
island, but in one place it gives an account of the manner in
which the riyas came to establish their rule in Nkatvn
(Pii Ngad!pa - Jaffna district) While the Ypp;a-vaipava-
nlai and the Kailyamlai introduce the story of the blind
lutist in between the story of Nara-cik-rca and that of the
first rya ruler of Jaffna, the M akk4apu-nfmiyarn has no
reference to the Ypi legend Instead, the story of the first
riya ruler follows that of Cii'ikR-kuIxra (Nara-cifika-rca
of the pia-vaipava-mlai). According to this account,
1. ., Antaka (Blind) Kavi VTra Rkavar, Kaikkl (Short-legged)
Irunrpoai, Taikka (Ele hant-eyed) Cy.
2. Mm., pp. 36-37.
3. See supra, p.4-O
463a Ca prince named lit'iki riya, went from iriya-nu to
Nkatvia (Jaffna district), invited several families from
riyantu to settle down in that region and became their king.
The name of the first Iriya, ruler of Jaffna is thus preserved
in the Maakk4appu-rn iyam as ljkai Iriya which corresponds
to KaiUcai iriya of the a-vaipava-lai This strengthens
our supposition that KtT]añkai is a mistake for Kl4i3ki.
Vicaya 1ki appears to be Vijaya Klif&ga or ?gha, who,
as we shall seepreaently, has been confused with the first
Lyacakravartin in the Tamil traditions.
Secondly, it appears that Gikai Iriya was not
the name of Vicaya K] 1c i but a later addition of the
chroniclers. Cikai Iriya (4rya of Cifkai) was the dynastic
name of the Lyacakravartins who ruled Jaffna in the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries' In the list given in the
vaipava-ni1ai, there are ten rulers after Vicaya K1afi.kai
who bear this dynastic name and they all have their personal
names prefixed to it But in the case of the first ruler,
Vicaya Kaikai, there is no personal name prefixed to the
1. Yvm., p. 30.
2. See infra, ; i?ikii is an abridged form of Ci?dci-n&tr
(Siha-nagara) which was the capital of the Aryacakravartins.
3. , ulackara Cikai Ariyaa, Ku)ZttuiTh Ci.kai Ariya.
461dynastic name. He is just called C4i1ca1 Iriya in the Xailyanflai.
and the At the end of the account of his
reign the a-vaipava-nilai gives Vic&ya K'tI]añkai CaJ dca-
vartti and Kafikai Ariya as the other borne by Cii3.kai Iriya.
This confusion is not difficult to explain. In the historical.
traditions of Jaffna the Aryacakravartins have overshadowed all
earlier rulers of the Jaffna kingdom. At a time when these early
rulers were being forgotten, the name of Vicaya K%1'ikni may
have been still, lingering in the memory of the story-tellers,
who, ignorant of the identity of this person, may have identified
him with the first Ariya of Jaffna. We agree with Paranavitana
that the chronicles of Jaffna were 'written when the CiMti
riya,s had ceased to exist, at a time when, after the dynastic
name had been attached to the rulers of Jaffna for about three
centuries, the belief had gained ground that all rulers of that
kingdom bore that name' As a result of tn1drg Vicaya añkM
identical with the first Aryacakravartin, the accounts of their
two reigns bave also been mixed. It appears that somehow the
personality of 14gha, under the name of Vicaya ati, had
survived in the traditions of Jaffna.
I.. S.Paranavitaaa, 'The Arya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 203.
The Vaiypal also refers to Kkai as an riya, v. 57.
463The conclusion that Vicaym 1ci of the Jaffna
chronicles is gha is further strengthened by other considerations.
In the Sinhalese chronicles it is stated that Ngha settled
several Tamils and er4as in northern Ceylon In the Tamil
chronicles, Vicaya K . Mrai is said to have been responsible
for the settlement in northern Ceylon of people from India But
more important than this is the consideration that the adoption
by the Jaffna rulers of the couchant bull (nandi) as their royal
insignia, Gaâga as their vaisa or kula name and Cifikai-nakar
(Siha-nagara) as the name of their seat of government indicates
the Kliga origins of the northern kingdom The emblem of the
couchant bull (nandi or vabha lfichana), with the crescent
moon above it, was used by the Eastern Gaágaa of Kaliñga, as is
1.evidenced by the seals of their copper plates as well as by
their inscriptions The kinEs of Jaffna used the same emblem
on their flags and coins On these coins, not only do we find
1. See supra,
2. See supra, ; Tvnt., p. 27 tX.; Mm., p. 37.
3. S.Gnanapragasar, !,pa-vaipava-vimarcan, pp. 60-61.
14• E.I., III, p. 130.5. ., IV, p. 192.6. !•' p. 3k; Km., p. 5; ., p. 7; Ki4jai-vifu-t' tu , v.152;
S.Gnanapragasar, 'The Forgotten Coinage of the Kings of Jaffna',
C.A.L.L.V, pt.4, pp. 172-179.
IA.
the couchant bull but also the crescent moon above it. In the
Tamil literary works produced in the Jaffna kingdom, the rulers
of that kingdom are sometimes referred to as those of the Gazga
country (K__kai-n)1 or simply as 4ryas of Gazga (Kdkai-
Ariyar) In the Kai].yanilai some of the noblemen who served
under the first ruler of Jaffna (Vicaya ii1i) are stated
to have belonged to the Gaga kula (Kazk-kula) These
references seem to reveal the Gañga connections of the
founders of the Jaffna kingdom. We agree with Paranavitana
that the Kaliâgas who touiided the norbhern kingdom must
have regarded their Gaxga connections with pride and that
the 4riyas who inherited the kingdom might very well have
continued these traditions. Gaga in these epithets seem to
1. Ciappuppyiram, v. 11;
Ciappuppyiram.
2. Irakuvammicani, I, v.223, XIII, v.107.
3. ., p. 12. This term may refer to the Vefla castecalled Xkai-kulam .
467
denote some connection with the Eastern GaAgas. Paranavitana
originally expressed the opinion that the 'claim of the
riya rulers to be of the GaAga lineage can be upheld if they
are taken as successors of the Jvaka kings of the aliAga-vaiaaZ
and that when the KaliAgas founded a kingdom in northern Ceylon
'they must have regarded their Gaiga connections with sentiment
and pride' But in a subsequent article, while attempting to
refute the view of Ni1aknta Sastrits, he has argued against
his own conclusion above. Here he baa stated that KaAkai
is the form that the Sanskrit Gag, and not Gafiga, assumes
in Tamil and that CaiThsi may be ta.ken to be the name of a community.
He then quoted from the Madras Tamil Lexicon, in which Kafikaikulam
is explained as a Ve4a tribe who claim to have migrated
from the Gangetic region. 'As the Jaffna tradition refers to
*rya Cakravartis who had Ve3a consorts', he has argued,
'it is very likely that Kafikai in both these epithets is used
with that meaning' It is true that normally GaAga takes the
form K.fl1ca in Tamil. But just as Kalifiga sometimes assumes
the form Kaliñkai and Sifiha becomes Ciiki, Gañga can take
the form Kaflkai. The name GaAga-.p!4i, for instance, often
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Kingdom of North Ceylon', p. 201.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'Ceylon and Malaysia', J.R.A.S. (C.B.), NZ.,
VIII, pt.2, pp. 370-371.
463
occurs in the Tantil inscriptions as KMc-pi, but sometimes
it was also written as Kaikaippi, as in the Pya inscription
found at VmbatT!, in Trichinopoly district The fact that
one of the epithets, mentioned above, refers to i-nu
(the Gafiga country) shows that Kaii.kai, in this instance at
least, does not refer to a Veja community. For the kings
of Jaffna to have used the epithets Ka.kai riyar and. Kax.kai
Nar, it is more likely that Kei ksj was the name of a dynasty
rather than that of a caste into which they married. ut it
must be admitted that we cannot be certain that Ksik4- in these
epithets used by the Jaffna kings refers to the Eastern
GaAgas only.
The capital- of the early rulers of the northern
kingdom was known as CiAkai-nakar (Siia-nagara) or _____
Consequently the ryacakravartins who ruled from there
were known as Ciftkai Iriyar or C1ki-nakar iEiyar The capital
seems to have been named after the aliAga city Sifthapura.
Zifihapura was the 6eat of one of the dynasties of Kaliñga in
the fifth century A.D't After about the sixth century LD.
1. M.E.R. for 1923, No. 366 of 1922.
2. See infra, p.2i.
3. See infra, p.c/"•
k. The Classical Age, ed. R.C.Yajumdar, (Bhratya Vidya Bhavan),
pp. 212-213; E.I., IV, p. 143.
463
nothing is known about this city from the Indian sources.
In the Sinhalese inscriptions of the twelfth century, the
liga ruler Niafi1ca Mall4laims to have gone to Ceylon
from Shapura, the capital of his father Jayagopa, in
KaliAga om this it appears that as 'ate as the twelfth
century Si*hapura was the capita]. of a dynasty in Kaliñga,
probably a minor branch, which had escaped notice in the
Indian sources. gha and some of his associates probably
hailed from Sihapra, like Ni1c Ma].la. The new capital
founded by the invaders in northern Ceylon was probably named
after their city in Kaliñga. liere, too, we agree with
Paranavitana that )gha 'would have nanied the capital of
his new kingdom after the city which was the home of the
Kaligaa! although we do not support his contention that
the home of the KaliAgaa was in 'Malaysia' These considerations
lead us to think that the kingdom established in northern
Ceylon in the thirteenth century had its origins in a dynasty
which was connected with the Eastern Gafigas of Kalii3.ga.
1. D.M.de Z.Wickremeinghe, 'The Slab Inscription of Krti
NiAka Mafla at Ruvanv.li Dgaba, Anurdhapura', E.Z., II,
pp. 80, 85.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya kingdom of North Ceylont, p. 201.
470These ICZiI l-ga origins of the northern kingdom
must date from a period before 1262. There is no evidence of
a Ka1izga invasion of Ceylon after that of gha. Prom at
least 1262 the northern Jr(ngdom appears to have been ruled
by JvRk who seem to have enjoyed the protedtion of the
powerful Pyas At the turn of the century, the Iryacakravartine
of South India inherited this kingdom It is unlikel7 that
there was aXaliAga invasion of Jafmna between 1262 and the
date of the cession of the first 4ryacakravartin, which is
not definitely known. This was the time when Pya influence
seems to have been at its height in northern, and even in
southern, Ceylon. Kaliga rule in the independent kingdom
of northern Ceylon should, therefore, be dated to a time
1. Some place names in the Jaffna peninsula 4 seem to preserve
these Kaliga origins. There is a place called Kal4rs-
rIya-cTma and another called
The persona]. names Xa].iAk-rya, (Ka1ia Rja) and
a-kkp-rya, (Coa-gafiga-rja), which form the first
elements in these names ma denote their association with
people from the Kaliñga country. But we cannot be too sure
of this, for both these personal names were used as titles
in the Tamil country.
2. See sura, p.
3. See infra, çt.-vjJ
471before 1262. As we know, between 3236 and 1262, the X1iigas
who wielded power in northern Ceylon were Mgha and his
associates, among whom there seems to have been at least
one probable Gaiga prince, Coaga
In the light of these considerations, the foundation
of a kingdom in northern Ceylon by Igha and his followers
after their defeat by the Sinhalese seems to be a strong
possibility. The beginnings of this new kingdom are shrouded
in obscurity. The earliest rulers have not left behind any
datable coins or inscriptions. The chronicles of this kingdom
are very late and do not seem to preserve many genuine
traditions about its beginnings. With the meagre evidence
that we have, it is ot possible to.assert anything with
any degree of certainty. Basing our assumptions on the
course of events in the middle of the thirteenth century,
as reflected by the Sinhalese chronicles and the Pya
inscriptions, it appears that )gha and his associates and
the Jvaka invaders were closely connected with the beginnings
of the northern kingdom and that Igha and his associates
rather than the vakas were responsible for its fpundat ion.
1. See supra, ç4-
472We may now sumniiriae the main conclusionsoof the
foregoing discussion. In the first place, the date of the
foundation of the Jaffna kingdom cannot be traced exactly.
That this took place between 1236 and 1262 appears to be
more or less certain. It was probably between 136 and 1258,
possibly between 1236 and 12k7 that it was founded. Zgha and
his followers who seem to have been defeated some time after
126, in all probability, shifted their seat of government
further north to the Jaffna peninsula, and founded a new
kingdom. The Jvaka invader Candrabhnu appears to have
found his way to the throne of this kingdom some time after
12k7. Re was probably subdued by Sundara P4ya around
1258. and killed by V!ra Pya in 1262. It was probably his
son who was allowed to be crowned in full regal style as
the ruler of the northern kingdom in 1262, under the
protection of Vtra Pya.
Whatever the uncertainties regarding the begin.nings
of the northern kingdom may be, the circtunstances that led
to its foundation are 14 .d.ifficult to understand. In the
first place, the foreign invasions of the thirteenth century
played a significant part in paving the way for the rise of
an independent kingdom in northern Ceylon. The invasion of
gha led to the control of northern Ceylon by Ier4a and
Tmil elements and possibly some from Kalizga like Coagaiga.
473These invaders could not be ousted from the inland, although they
were defeated and driven away from Polonnaruva. Once they lost
Polonnaruva, the pext natural step would have been to set up
another capital and continue their hold on northern Ceylon.
If 1gba and his associates were led, by their loss of Polonnaruva,
to found a new kingdom, the vaka invaders who came next seem
to have found refuge in this kingdom and helped to consolidate
its position. The Pyas, who invaded the island after the
Jvakas, seem to have given the new kingdom flU recognition
and protection, thus rendering it difficult for the Sinhalese
rulers to wipe it out. In this m pnner, the invasions of the
thirteenth century, while being fatal to the Polonnaruva kingdom
and. limiting the power of the Dabadeiya kingdom, helped the
rise and consolidation of a new kingdom in northern Ceylon.
The foreign invaders of former times were able to wield power
in the island only for short periods. On all the earlier
occasions Sinhalese princes were in a position to drive the
enemies out of the island after some t&.ine. But in the thirteenth
century, when enemy after enemy sacked the country, the Sinhalese
kiTiga were in no position to oust them completely from the islad.
gba and his Ker4a-Tamil forces left Polonnaruva but not the
inland, The vakas were defeated but were apparently allowed
to find refuge in the north. Thepansion of the Pyae could
not be contained by the Sixihalese. They were allowed to reduce
474the new kingdom in the north to the position of a tributary
and thus give it recognition, dashing the hopes of the Sinhalese
to wipe it out. If Parkramabhu II,invited the help of the
P 4yas , which he probably did, against Candrabhnu and if be
had any hopes of annexing the new kingdom and re-unifying
Ceylon, the results showed that the Pyas were only: willing
to keep the peace in the island but not to allow the annexation
of the northern kingdom which was tributary to thei.
The fall of Polonnaruva and the drift of Sinhalese
power to the south-west were also notable factors that helped
the rise and survival of a kingdom in northern Ceylon. With the
shift of the Sinhalese capital to the south-western parts of
the island effective control of northern Ceylon was lost. This
made it easier for an independent kingdom to emerge in that region.
The foreign elements, who were driven to that part of the island,
exploited the circumstances to found a new kingdom. With the
abandonment of the region around Polonnaruva, the northernmost
regions were virtuafly cut off front the south, The chieftaincies
in the southern part of the formex RAjaraha acted as a buffer
between the northern and southern kingdoms. The re-unification
of the island became difficult even on occasions when either of
the kingdoms was subjugate the other, as they did in the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries. In the thirteenth century perhaps
the abandoned regions of Rjaraha may not have provided such
a barrier to the subjugation of the north. But it would have
473
given protection to the new kingdom from the Sinhalese capital
which now lay farther south. The political conditions of the
first half of the thirteenth century were, therefore, favourable
in many ways for the rise of an independent kingdom in northern
Ceylon. The conditions in the second half helped to consoliiate
its position.
The power of the Dravidian elements in northern
Ceylon, with whose support the invaders held that area under
their controi, is a facbbr that cannot be overlooked in this respect.
In the thirteenth century, the Dravidian elements were more powerful
than ever before. They bad grown from strength to strength
with almost every invasion that rocked the island since the
onslaught of the Cas. There was a steady increase of the
Dravidian element in the island, especially in the northern
parts, from the time of the Ca invasion. The invasion of
1gha let loose in the island a further band of Ker4as and
Taiwtls whose leaders established their authority in.imany parts
of northern and eastern Ceylon. These were the elements that
provided the greatest strength to the anti-Buddhist regime of
)1gha. More South Indians seem to have been invited for settle-
ment at this time. The inevitable culmination of the forces that
were at work there was the establishment of an independent authority
that enjoyed the support of the Dravidians. Those South Indian
Ipl,.41(0
leaders who established petty chieftaincies in the Vanni districts
seem to have acknowledged the authoriti of the new kingdom.
However, the northern kingdom was not a Tamil kingdom at the
beginning, ,though Tamils and Ker4as probably formed a substantial
section of the population. It was with the advent of the
Aryacakravartins that it became a kingdom ruled by a dynasty
from the Tainil country and. gradually evolved into a kingdom of
the Tamil-speaking people.
477CHAPTER VII
THE BEGINNflGS OP THE XIDOI4 OP JAPPNL - II
The Dynasty of 4ryacakravartlns
The Tamil chronicles do not mention any Klizga or
J5vaka ruler as having ruled over the northern kingdom. It is the
ryacakravartins who are described as the first princely rulers of
this kingdom and. are given the credit for its establishment on a
firm footing. In his paper entitled 'The Lrya Kingdom North
Ceylon', Paranavitana has dealt with the origins of the dynasty
of ryacakravartins and their rule in northern Ceylon This paper
forms the latest contribution to this subject and revises in many
ways the views held earlier by Rasanayagam and other writers on
the history of the Jaffna kingdom. We are inclined to agree in
the main with the conclusions of Paranavitaua, aLthougb we find
some of his arguments unacceptable. His contention that the
4ryacaJavartins of Jaffna came from Rnfvaram in South India
is convincing and is supported by evidence not adduced by him.
The earliest source in which an ryacakravartin is mentioned
is an inscription from ChaturvdixnafLga.am, in the Tiruppattr
1. J.RA.S. (C.B.), N.S., VII, pt.2,, 1961, p. 17k-22k.
473
tluk of the Rmnd district The astronomical data in this
record has been worked out by Swe m1 kkinnu Pillai as being probably
equivalent to September 9, l27l But since it was inscribed in
the fifth regnal year of IAavarma Ku1akhara I, who ascended
the throne in 1268, this inscription may be dated to 1272.
'An agent of the chief Ariyachakravartig4' is referred to in this
record Another inscription, from Sivapuri in the same tluk and
dated in the same regna]. year, mentions a certain Dvar 4riyaccakkara-
varttika Re was probably the same as the chief mentioned in the
first inscription. The astronomical data in this record, according
to SwmUdcnnu Pillai, correspond to September 5, l27k But this
seems to be a mistake. The third inscription, which Paranavitana
erroneously quotes as the first record mentioning the Xryacakravartins,
is found in rTrai.gam in the Trichinopoly district and is dated
in the tenth regnal year of ravarxna Kulakhara, which is 1277
1. M.E.R. for 1927/28, No. 290 of 1927/28.
2. Ibid., p. li6.
3. Ibid., p. 57. As the record is unpublished, no details are available.
If. I .E.R. for 1928/29, No. 21 of 1928/29. Unpublished.
5. Ibid., p. 53.
6. I'LE.R. for 1936/37, No. 7 of 1936/37, pp. 8, 75.
479
The astronomical details in the record, which correspond to
December , 1277, confirm this date It reoords the grant of a
plot of land by one Matitu lca (Natitufiga) who bore the title
of Iryacakravartin as well as the epithet Tai niu vea perun1
('the chief who stood alone and wthn)). He bailed from Cakkaravartti
Nallr, in Cevvirukkai-nu. Cevvirukkai-nu has been identified
2as a territorial division in modern Ramnad distr&ct. A fourth
inscription from Truvaraigu.am, in Pudukktai, 'registers
a political compact between Iba, Iryacakaravartin and Srya2
on the one sáde and AiyrkunaUnd Kuppai on the other'
The record is dated in a regna]. year of V!ra P3yadva. But
since it is damaged, neither the year nor the throne name of
the monarch is clear. There were two Vra Pyas in the period
of the second Pya empire. Both had the throne name Javarma.
One ruled between 1253 and 1268 and the other between 1296 and
l3k0 There was also a prince called V!ra Pya whose rule was
confined to the South Arcot district, as is evidenced by his
inscriptions He may not be the same as the V!ra Pya of our
1. M.E. T . for 1936/37, p. 48.
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The rya Kingdom in North Ceylon', p. 207, fn.127.
3. M.E.L for 1915, No. 276 of 191k.
4. K.A.Ni1sknta Sastri, The Pyan Kingdom, pp. 174, 201, 240.
5. Ibid., pp. 233, 245 ; T.V.C.Pantarattar, Piyar Vara1z2, p. 147.
48
inscription, which is from PudukkVai. The latter may, therefore,
be either Javarma Vira Pya I or II. Lastly, there are
two inscriptions from Tiruppul1i, in the Bamnad. district,
mentioning the jryacakravartins One of them is dated in the
thirty-eighth regnal year of Z"avarma, Kulakhara I, which
is either 1305 or 1306 It registers a grant by var 4riyacakkara-
varttik4. He is identifiable with var £riyaccakkaravarttik4
of the second inscription mentioned above, which is also from the
same district and belongs to the same reign. The other inscription
from Tiruppulli, which is badly damaged, gives the names of
two personages, Teyvaccilaiy Aaka, alias Ariyaccakaravartti
and Irma alias Va. • kkai *riyacc akkaravart ti, the amm of
Parkkirama Piya (Parkrama P4ya) Unfortunately the date
of the record is not known. But the fact that one of the persons
mentioned here is called. an ainn (uncle or father-in-law) of
Parkrama P4ya may help us in the dating. We know of at least
five Paräkrama Pyas who ruled in the southern territories
of Panmad and udukkfai in the fourteenth century, after the
fall of the second empire The first of them, Jatvarma Parkrama
1. N. .R. for 190k, No. 110 of 1903; S.I.I., VIII, Nos. 396 & 398.
2. .1.1., VIII, no. 39G.
3. Ibid., No. 398.
4. LA.NilskRnta Sastri, The Pyan Kingdom, pp. 215 - 246.
481Pya I, began his rule in 115 and the last of them ruled till
at least 1k15 There are certain considerations which lead us
to think that this inscription belongs to the earty part of
the fourteenth century. This record is from TiruppuUi, in
the Rannad district. The other inscription from the same site
mentioning an Aryacakravartin is dated 1305/06. Further, all
the other inscriptions from the Pimnad district referring to
the Aryacakravartins are datable to either the latter part of
the thirteenth century or the early part of the fourteenth
century.There was no Pya ruler called Parkrama in the thirteenth
century. It is 1 therefore, likely that our inscription belongs
to the time of Javarma Parkrama_P4ya I, who lived in
the early part of the fourteenth century. Irm alias Va..kkaiAriyacc&ckravartti was probably the anim of this Pya ruler.
The evidence of these six inscriptions is practically all th*t
we learn about the iryacakravartins from the IncIia.n side.
That the 4ryacakravartins were niiior chieftains
is clear frog the information we get from the rrafgam inscription
1. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, The Pyan Kingdom, p. 2k5. The five
P74 rulers are: a) Javarma Parkrama Pya, 1315-13k?;
b) avarzna Parkrama Pya, 1335-1352; c) Javarma
Parkrama Pya, 1357- c.1380; 4) Parkrama P1ya, 1367-
till after 1387; and e)Paiikrama Pçtya, c.].38k- till after 1k15.
482about one of them. As Paranavitana has remarked, 'the title
'Devar' applied to this Xrya-cakravarti, the fact that his
order is called a tirumukam (verbal order) and that there was
an officer whose duty it was to write down his orders, indicate
that he was a ruler; but his record being dated in the regnal
years of the Pya emperor establishes that he was a feudatory'
Al]. the other inscriptions, except the last one,are also dated
in t'egnal years of the Pya kings. The last inscription, from
Tiruppulli, shows that some of them were related to the Pyas,
presumably through marriage. From the Sinhalese sources we learn
that in or about 128k there was a Pya invasion of Ceylon
under the command of an Iryacakravartin This, too, supports
the conclusion that the iryacakravartins were subordinates
under the Pyaa. It is, therefore, clear that they were
feudatory chieftains of the Pya country. The fact that two
persona with the name ryacakaravartin are mentioned in one
record, namely that from Tirnppu11i, map indicate that this
name was used as a family title or name, unless the two persons
mentioned here are of different generations. This is not clear
from the record.
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The irya Kingdom in North Ceylon', p. 207.
2. Cv., 90:k3-k7; Dalad-sirita, ed. Sorata Nayaa Thera, 1950, p.1+5.
483
Of these six inscriptions, four are from the Pamnad
district. Of the other two, that from Trichinopoly gives the
home of the iryacakravartin mentioned in it as Cevvirnkkai-nu,
which was an bid terr&torial division in the Raiinad district.tLct -
The sixth,from Puduktai, does not indicate that the Aryacakra-
vartina held authority there. This inscription records a political
compact that an Iryacaiq,avartin and another person entered into
with two others Such a compact was probably made at the end
of a battle or a political mission in which an ryacakravartin
was representing his PIya overlord, as an Iryacakravartin
did in Ceylon, or which be conducted himself as a petty chieftain.
The details are not known owing to the damaged nature of the
record. We do not get information regarding any iryacakravartin
in any other part of South India. We are, therefore, inclined to
agree with Paranavitana that it is reasonable to conclude
that the home of the Lyacakravartins was in the Ramnad district,,
as is indeed claimed by one of them in the inscription from
Trichinopoly They probably bade their chieftaincy in that district.
Of the six inscriptions under discussion, the four
datable ones belong to the period between 1272 and 1306, which
1. See supra, p.47q
2. See supra, p.4)1k.
484
is in the reign of Iavarma Ku1akhara I (1268-1310). Of
the other two, that from TiruvaraJa4am may very well belong
to this period if the VTra PIp4ya nientined. in it is Javarzna,
V!ra P44ya II If be is the first of that name, whose accession
took place in 1253, this inscription woizld be a few, at themoBt nimmeen, years earlier than the four datable ones. On
the other hand, if the inscription belongs to the latter
part of the reign of V!ra P4ya II (1296-l3kO), it would belater than the others by a few years. The sixth inscription,
as we have already seen may belong to the early part of the
fourteenth century. We see, therefore, that most of the South
Indian inscriptions mentioning the Aryacakravartins, or probably
all of them, belong to a period of about four or five decades
in the latter part of the thirteenth and the early part of
the fourteenth century. It is in tha same period that the
Siithalese sources refer to an ryacakravartin who led invasions
on behalf of ?avarzna, Eulakhara I. It is interesting to
néte that all the datable inscriptions in which the 4ryacakravartins
find mention belong to the reign of ?avarma Kulakhara I.
It appears that the ryacakravartins belonged to a short-lived
dynasty of fendatory chiefs who held away in the Rmriad district
in the reign of Zavarma, Ku1akhara and possibly a little longrr.
1. See supra, p. 1.'V
2. See supra, p. i1.3(
485
Their inscriptions are not found in the Ramnad district after
this period.
As mentioned earlier, Paranavitana is right in
tracing the origin of the ryacaicravartins of Jaffna to this
family from Ramnad. Apart from the fact that the latter are the
only other ryacakaravartins th t we know of, there are other
considerations that lead ud to this conclusion. The chronology
of the iryacakravartins is in favour of such a conclusion. The
last reference to the iryacakravartins in South India occurs
in the inscriptions of the early part of the fourteenth
century. The first definite reference to an Iryacakravartin ruler
of Jaffna is made in l3kk not long after the South Indian
references. But more important than this, as Paranavitana has
indicated, is the fact that the Aryacakravartins of Ramnad and
Jaffna used the word ctu in their records in the manner of a
benediction, as is evidenced by the Tfruppulli inscription of
an ryacakravartin of Ranxnad and the Koagama inscription of an
Aryaeakravartin ruler of Jaffna The word ctu was also inscribed
on the coins of the Aryacakravart ins of Jaffna They probably
1. See supra, p. 400
2. S.I.I., VIII, No. 396 ; H.C.P.Bel]., Report on the Kgalla
District, p. 8.
3. S.Gnanapragasar, 'The Forgotten Coinage of the Kings of Jaffna',
A C)
had this word inscribed on their shields as well, for de Queyroz,
while describing the defeat by the Portuguese of one of the last
kings of Jaffna, mentions that be 'had a black inscription on
his white ahield' The Aryacakravartins of Jaffna had also
the title ctukvala ('protector of the ctu') C!tu (= darn
or causewa) is the name applied to Ir.mar Lai ('Rnia's Bund'
or Adam's Bridge), the narrow coral reef that ionnecte the
island of Nanr with that of Rmvaram on the Thdian side.
Ctu is also applied to the temple of Rnivara4zid it is in
this sense that it is better known, The Aryauakravart±ns of Jaffna,
till the rise of the 6tupatis of Raninad, considered themselves
as the protectors or custodians of the temple of nvaram
The occurrence of ctu in their records shows that the
Aryacakravartins of Ramnad also had a special association with
the temple of Rni!varam which, being situated in Ranuiad,
probably came under their protection.
Further, there were traditions in Ceylon which
connected the ryacakravartina of Jaffna with Rxx1varam. In
the Cekarca-ckara-nlai, one of the earliest Tami]. works
1. F.de Queyroz, . cit., p. 366.
2. v. 86; ., Ciappupp7iram.
3 • S. Gnanapragasar, pa-vaip ava-vimarc an, p • 62.
48?produced in Jaffna, the ancestors of the ryacakravartius of
Jaffna are said to have been Brhmaa rulers of antamtaam
It is stated that Rma, after his campaign in Ceylon, want
to Kantanitaam, established a shrine there after his own name
(inivaram) in honour o Siva. and invited five hundred and twelve
Pupata BrThmaas to perform service in the temple. Two of
them were made kings and given the title of '4riya-vntu'
(Lya king) together with the insignia of umbrella, Brahmanic
thread and the bull standard. Kantamtaam is the name given
in the literary works of South India to a hill in the vicinity
of R iiivaram 1.de Queyroz, too, records a tradition that the
ancestors of the kings of Jaffna lived in nvaram Although
the late ,a-vaipava-mlai claims a Ca descent for the
4ryacakravart ins, the earlier work KaiIyanlai states that
the first ryacakravartin came from the P4ya country and that
be was a Pya prince We have mentioned earlier that some of
the iryacakravartins of Ramnad were related to the P4yas,
presumably through marriage. But there is no evidence to suggest
,. Tvai U1, vv. 179, 220 ; Kampa Rmyaaxn, VI, Yutta-ktam,
Paikkci Patalam , v.15, 1'fftci Paa1am, v. 168; Kantapuram,
Makntira Kam, I, v.18.
t. Ccm., Citappuppyiram.
. F.de Queyroz, . cit., pp. k8-49.
k. Km., p. 6; Yvm., p. 25. The Yvm. states, however, that he came
from Nadurai, the P14ya capital.
483that they were scions of the PIya family. The Kai1yalai
statement may be an exaggeration. That the ancestors of the
Iryacakravartins of Jaffna cxnae from the Pya country is further
etidenced by certain traditions relating to them which are
recorded in the Cekarca-ckara-nlai • In the jappupiram
(introductory section) of this work, an eulogistic description
of the achievements of the ancestors of Cekarca-ckara, the
Jaffna ruler in whose time this work was composed, is given.
In this account, there is an allusion to 'the king who fought
and defeated the KrunI Lkar (1Car1as) at Antaravalli' (ce
Karunakarai Antaravalliyil porutu ceyitta vntu) 1 and to 'the
king who, having dismembered the trunk of the rutting elephant
that dashed angrily towards him, defeated the Pc4a, (Boysaja)'
(i varum mata vam karam tuittu Pc4ai_katinta_vntu)
These two statements appear to be allusions to the achievements
of one person. It is not known that a ruler of Jaffna ever got
involved in a battle against the Hoys4as, the last of whom
ended his rule around l3k3 It is not possible that a ruler ofi1-
Jaffna carried out a succesful expedition against p powerful
Koys4as. The reference is evidently to an 4ryacakravartin of
1. Ccm., v.6.
2. Ibid.
3. K.A.Nilakanta Sastri, A History of South India, 1958, p. 231.
489
Ramnad who, as the ally of the P4yae, probably won certain
victories over the Eoys4as. This was probably before 1310, for
by that date there were internal dissensions in the Pra kingdomand the Piya princes were in no position to attack their
neighbours The epigraphic sources inform us of victorious
P4ya campaigns against the Hoys4aa only after the accession
of 11avarma, Sundara P4ya in 1251. In an inscription of
his seventh regna]. year, Sundara P4ya claims ba have inflicted
a severe defeat on the aoys4as Following this success, the
Pfras seem to have been in occupation of Kaaür, the
Hoys4a capital, for quite some t1me The second time we hear
of a campaign against the ops4as is in the time of }avarma
Ku1akhara I (1268-1310). In an inscription from Tinnevelly,
Ku].akhara claims the subjugation of the Uoys4as After this
we do not hear of any successful Pya campaigns against the
Hoys4a neighbours. The Iryacakravartin, whose achievement in
a battle against the Hoys4as is alluded to in the Cekarca-
ckara-n1ai, may have been fighting on the side of the Pyas
in one of these campaigns. Probably he was involved in the
1. K.ANilakanta Sastri, The Pyan Kingdom, p. 201 ff
2. Ibid., p. 161 If. ; .E.R. for 1 9k, No. 166 of 189k.
3. LA.Ni]akanta Sastri, he P.yan Kingdom, p. 16k ; El., III,pp.11f
11. . . for 1926/27, No. 29 of 1927.
49k)
battle of the time of Kulaflhara for, as we know from the
Cflava4sa , it was in the latter's reign that an Iryacakravartin
led some of the PIya campaigna The allusion in the Cekarica-
c!kara-nl!lai seems to be a genuine tradition preserved in the
courts of the iryaca1cravartins of Jaffna. In the light of afl.
these considerations, the conclusion that the Iryacakravartins
of Jaffua were descended from those of Panmad becomes irresistible.
In his paper on the kingdom of northesin Ceylon,
Paranavitana has made some interesting comments on the origin
of the Iryacakravartins of Pinmad. Arguing on the basis that
the word 'Ariya (Irya) has a distinct connotation in T2nil
literature', namely that 'it denotes the language, literature
and people of North India, as distinct from those of the
Dravidian lands', he baa euggest.d a North Indian origin for
the Iryacakravartina Be argues his case as follows: -
Even if, as stated in the Cekarca-cTkara-nilai andreported by de Queyroz, the rulers of Jafina were called1riyaa due to descent from a Bralimin of .ni!varam, itis not the fact of this ancestor being a Brahain, butof his belonging to a particular class of Brnhmlnn,namely Iriya Brahins, that would have conferred onthem the titi. of 4riya. For there are still at
1. Cv., 9O:k3-k7
2. S.Paranavitana, 'The 4rya Ifngdom in North Ceylon', p. 2O+.
491Izvaram a sect of Brhm{ns called 4riyappirlm4ar,
who hay, special rights in the temple and who claimto be immigrants from North India. The North Indianorigin of the Brahmins to whom the 1riyaa of Jaffna tracedtheir origin is admitted also by the CeIcrca-ckara-nfElai, for it says that they came with Rma. A strayverse, ascribed to Puka2nti, included in the anthologycalled Tami-n1valar-caritai, seems to support theNorthern origin of the rya kings. This stanza, whichexpresses the poet's grief at the death of an lrya king,refers to him by a phrase which, in the printed text,is given as vaal ri r-kThifAp,. The compound vaalIriyarcan only be analysed as vaal+L'iyar. But the first ofthese two words, according to the Tamil Lexicon meansbanya, and gives no sense in this context. As v
can be confused with ]. in Tamil manuscripts, thecorrect reading appears to be avriyar-knf, theking of the Northern Kryas. De Queyroz definitely mentionsthat these Brahmons of RInvaram came from Gufar1twhich, together with the adjoining regions, is called&riaka (Iryaka) by classical geograpber8. De ueyrozfurther states that these Irya Br.hmirn claimed royaldescent. This is rather puzzling, for the rigidity ofthe Hindu caste system of those days would not havepermitted a qatriya being accepted as a Brhmin. Itis possible that originallythere were at RLfl!varamand its neighbourhood Br2h mine as well as KSatrlyaawho called themselves lryae, and that, at a laterdate, when the Brahmina alone_succeeded in preservingtheir separate identity, all 4riyas of Rn1varamknown to tradition were held to be Br.hm(ni. The factthat the rya rulers of Jaffna wore the sacredthread need not necessarily prove that they were of Brahminorigin; the qatriyas, too, were entitled to wear it. 1
Having thus argued in favour of a North Indian, and possible
EatrLya, origin for the Iryaca.kravartins, Paranavitana proeeda
to 'ascertain who the Arias were' For this purpose he takes
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Zrya Kingdom in North Ceylon', p. 20i4 205.
2. Ibid., p. 205.
492
two independent references to Iryas in the sources relating
to the thirteenth century and, on their basis, attempts to
identify the iryae as RIpute. The first reference is that
in the C!!1ava to 4riyk-Ichattiya (Irya-katriya) warriors
who were mercenaries in the service of Vijayablhu IV (l27O-1272)
These iryakatriya soldiers have been identified by Co&rington
as RIjputa The second reference is that in the inscriptions
of Ja1varma, Sundara PIya I (l25l-c.l270) In this record,-
certain £ryas are mentioned as the 11feeèf MudugUr. Irishna
Sastri identified these Iryas as the Cas, as it was believed
at that time that the ryas of the CUlavasa references were
CVas Disagreeing with Saetri, Paranavitana argues
But,_aa it has now been established. beyond doubt thatthe Aryas of the CUlavqtaa were Bjputs, the Aryas whofought iwith the Telugue must also be similarly identified.In later writings, the Irya families of Jaffna areassociated with a place named 11aap4i, the name ofwhich was borne as a title by the descendants of thelast king of Jaffna. A place of this name is said. tohave existed in the domi nion of,the XTkatTyae, whichis called the kingdom o l4otupal].i by )arco Polo. It ispossible that the Iryas referred to in the inscriptfonof Javarman Sundara Pya as the allies of the Teluguslived in this place, and later, after the conquest of
1. £.' 90:1 ff.
2. H.W.Codrington, 'Notes on the Dabade.i Dynasty', C.A.L.R., X,
p.88.
3. M.E.L for 191k, lbs. 332, 3k0 and 36]. of 1913.
ii. Thid., pp . 91-92.
493
the 7katTya kingdom by the Muslims, they migratedsouthwards and joined forces with the Irya-cakoavartiaof RInvaram, to be mentioned in the sequel, andultimately fount their way to Ceylon. It was at thistime, or somewhat earlier, that the Rljpit kingdomsin North India collapsed under repeated attacks byMuslim invaders, and bands of warriors who surviv•dthe disasters, but were not prepared to lead a dishonourabl.existence under the yoke of the foreigners, might verywell have come southwards seeking new homes, and takenservice under rulers of Indian faiths and culture whowelcomed them and were ready to take advantage of,and pay for, their military prowess. I! these Rljputexiles came as far as Ceylon, they might as well havesought their fortunes under theirulers of South India.And. there is epigraphical evidence for the presence cZin the country near RIzfl!varam of chieftains namedIrya-cakravartis about the close of the thirteenthcentury. 1
Whatever the possibility of the Aryacakravartins having been
Rljput in origin, Paranavitana's arguments in favour of it is
not quite convincing and the evidence he adduces is not always
correct. In the first place, ho puts forward five arguments
to establish the North Indian origin of th. Iryacakravartine.
The first argument that the word irya has a special connotation
in Ti1, in that it denotes the language, literature and the
peopl. of North India is generally correct. But there seem
to have been aertain exceptions to this ma'i-• An inscription
from KuttUa.a, in the Tinnevelly district, dated in the fifth
year of )avaraa Vikrama Pa (1288), refers to two Tmi1
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The 4rya ingdom in North Ceylon', pp. 207-208.
491riyar, Lakkum4a DvanIya)cn, and Lekkum4a Iapijii They
were assigned a certain extent of laud by the local village
assembly and required to cultivate it and pay taxes to the
temple at Tiru-kuttilam. Ws do not know who the Tem{. iriyar
were and how they got that name. But the fact that they were
called T&flLt I 4riyar shows that some people from among the Tmila.
were also known as 4riyar in the thirteenth century. Therefore,
one cannot be too sure that the element Irya in the name
*ryacakravartin denotes North Indian origin beyond any doubt.
The second srgument of Paranavitana that it is the fact of
their ancestor belonging to the class of irya BrThmaas that
would have conferred on the 'Zryacakravartine, if they were
Brhn4as, the title of riya, is certainly a possibility,
although it is only an assumption. Thirdly, his coutentiom
that the North Indian origin of these rulers is 'admitted
also by the Cekar1ca-ckara-nilai, for it says that they came
with Pma', is wrong. This Tamil work clearly states that
Rma built the temple of RImvaram on his way back from
Ceylon, 'invited five hundred and twelve PIupatas'(Pcupatark4
1. ?4.E.R. for 1918, No. 1126 of 1917. The astronomical data in this
record corresponds to October 29, 125k, but there seems to be
a mistake somewhere for )avarma Vikrama PIyas accession
was in 1283 (Ibid., p. 112).
495
aii2rir.ii pairuvarai varavalaittu) and r.queated theni to performservice at the temple (ptcaai cey ini, nr ea karuai purint*)
It is not stated from where the Brli m.4as were invited. In any
case, on. cannot attach much importance to this legend. lourthly,
he takes a stray Terse in the Tamil-nvalar-caritai, makes his
own emendatiozi to a phrase in it and uses it in support of hi.
argument. Th. following ar. the first two lines of the verse
in which the verse, given by him as vaailriyar kThn and
emended as avriyar occurs:-
A I vitiy ,al Ariyar k3n
E valar;l iranta2
(1hZ Is this fate I (Cure.) th. day the valiant king
of the Iriyar died at the hands of the messengers
(of Death) ).
The phrase in question is actually al Iriyar k5n and not
a). iriar In the above verse, the word aa]. is preceded
by vitiy. When the initial vowel a ('9') of aa1 combines with
the final vowel! () of yitiy, th. consonant v (ii) is
introduced for euphonic reasons, in accordance with Tamil
gr.mm*tical rules. The whole line would then read as
1. 2 . TV. 1-4.
2. Tn" i2-nIvalar-caritai, ed. T.XannRuntarampillai, Mad. 1921, p. 52.
496
A I
When the words are separated, they would rea& as in the Vera.
quoted above. That the word which qualifies Iiyar- is
aal and not vaaL is further demonstrated. by the fact that
the initial letter of this word, namely a ()4), a1U.terat.s with
the first letter of the whole line, in keeping with the rules
of the pj metre Aal, me.nlng strong, 'valiant', 'tough'
or 'ability to kill', is a very common epithet for h or
heroes, elephants, lions and armies, and has been in use from
1. Note the elliteration in this verse:
A I vitiy aal riyai, kn
E Ivalar*l iranta nI - O
Tarukk4ilum kulirnta ta4i tan'cu ia
Tirjum_cuunf_ti?
The alliteration:
-
I ---------j------0 (vowel-vowel)
a
E1
497
very early tim.e We see, therefore, that there is no reason to
1. 1) gi_nikI, 11, , v. 16 (ad. Cuv1' l-Ita Paitar,
Mad. 1909); 2) Piâkala-nika , X, stra 15, (Rippon Press,
Madras 1917); 3) aa1 kari (valiant elephant) in }dirv'carksr
Tiruvcakam , Ilittal Vi4 appam , v.32, p. 182 (ad. Cuppir.aViya
PiD ai , Mad. 19119); 11) aal an (valiant lion) in N!lak!ci,
Tarumavurai Carude m, V. 55 p. 2k (ad. L.Chabavarti, Mad, 1936);
5) aa1 !y matann earam (the fatal dart of Cupid) in Kanpa-
rinflya, PIla-kaiu, Ka(m4a Paalain, v.11, P. 83k
(ed. V.WIGopIla ri4anicIriyar, Mad. 1953); 6) aal arakid
(th. strong Rkasi), ibid., Ir.4iya-krLam, CUrppaakai'UI
Paa1a', v.]Q, p. 54 (1953); 7) a] Irva4 (the valiant
RIv.4a) , ibid., Cuntara-kIam, Poil-irutta Paalam, v.20,
p. 53k (1955); 8) aealvaliarakkan (the Rkasa with strength
and the ability to kill), ibid., Yutta-kaa, Irv4axj, Yatai
Paa1an, v.18, p. '+8 (pt.2) (19k8) ; 9) aa]. kein tit
vran (the hero with strong broad shoulders), Kant a-puniam,
- Mak!ntira-k4ani, VTravku Kantantaan Ccl Paalaa, v.22, p.111,
(ad. M.T.flukavi, Mad. 1907); aa1 katir vl (the
valiant kiig with the shining spear), Puk4Tnti,
r,litoar..k7am, v.37, p. 386, (ad. K.RghavcIri and
T.C.PirttacLati, Mad. 1938).
498
emend the epithet of 4rirar k5a in the abovs vere. and to clai
North Indian origin for the riyacaavartina on that basis.
Besides, the authenticity of the veres under diectesion is open
to question. It would not be inappropriate to quote here
Paranayita.na's own comments, in an .arlier section of the same
article, on this and another verse attributed to Puka3nti in
the Tami].-nva1ar-carit ai:
it may be stated that the anthology in question is arecent compilation in which stray verses attributed tby tradition to various poets, together with anecdotesabout the poets, have been collected togeth.r. It is awork of the same tpe as the Sanakrit Bhojaprabandha,and in the attribution made in suck works have to becritically .rm(ned before they are accepted as correct.Th. verses in qi.stion do not occur in any of the workswhich are attested to be of Pu]anti .............Nilknta Sastriialso admits that works with littleor no claim to literary merit have been fathered onPuk flnti. It thus follows that the verses attributedto Pn1rnti are not beyond question from the hand ofthat poet, and that his date too is a matter of controversy,literary crtticG being inclined to place him in thelat. thirteenth century. 1
In addition to the doubt that has to be cast on the authenticity
of the verse, there is nothing in it to indicate that the
Iriyar knf referred to then, was none other than an lryacakra-
vartin. Finally, Paranavitana adduces th. evidence of de Queyroz
who mentions that the Br1a ancestors of the ryacakravartina
came from Gujanit. In this instance, despit. th. many obvious °'
1. S.Paranavitan&, 'The irya Xiugdoa in North Ceylon', p. l7.
499"4-
found in his workAaeema to b• recording a genuine tradition
for we learn from inscriptions in Gujar&t that there was a
community of peopl, known as Iryas in th. time of the Pratihiras.
A Sansbit inscription of Kakkuka of the PratThlra dynasty,
dated in the Samvat year 918 (A.D.861) and found at GhaiyV.I,
a few miles north-west of Jodhpur, mentions 'that lciilrp
obtained great renown in the countries of Trava!, lTalla, Ma,
amongst (the people known as ) rya, in Gurjjattarl, and in Parvata
in the La country' Another inscription has a reference to
the AjJa, which D.R.iandarkar has equated with the L'ya ot the
first inscription It is possible that some of these Irya people
migrated to RImvaram after the Muslim invasions and the
Iryacakravartins may have been among the descebdants of these
people. Of the arguments put forward by Paranavitana in favour
of a North Indian origin of the Lyacakravartine, that based on
the evidence of do neyroz is the only convincing one.
The case presented by Paranavitana for the
identification of the ancestors of the ryacskravartins with
Rljputs rests entirely on th. identification of the Liy.kirhittiyas
of the C5lav4ia with Rjput mercenaries. The latter identification
1..., IX, Inscription No.38, pp. 277-281.
2. Ibid., p. 278.
500
need not be questioned. Codrington's identification that the
Liya mercenaries vho were in the service of VijaabThu IV
were Ijputa ma well be accepted. As Paranavitana has stat.d,
it is quite poeøible that there were jput soldiers in South
India, too, at this time. But Rljput$ were not the only
Iryas known in South India in the thirteenth century. The
South Indian inscriptions refer to different grotipe of people
who were known as Iryas, all of whom cannot be identified as
Rljpnts. As mentioned earlier, an ii$ecription from Iuttlam
refers to two Tamil riyar, who appear to have been cultivators
Another from Taujore, dated in th. fifth year of Eu]Zttu.dga
Ca, probably the third, refers to the Mah5vara Iryas who
were attached to a. templ. Besides the inscriptions of
JaraYarma Sundara Piya mentioning th. ryae of Xudugr,
another record of th. same monasch, found at Cidambarani, alludes
to the defeat of the 'fierce army of riyar' (Tern paai riyar)
Another Piya record x.fers to order authorising certain
Iriyar to guard the gold treasury (kval) of the temple of
1. See eupra, P.
2. M.E.R. for 1918, No. 23 of 1918.
3. N.E.R. for 1893. No. 172 of 1092.
501
rTraAgam All these ryae of the South Indian inscriptions,
belonging to the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, cannot
be identified as Rljpute on the ground that the Iryas mentioned
in the C!lavasa were Rljpute. It is clear from the evidence of
the South Indian inscriptions that there were several groups
of people who were known as Iryas. The Mhvara &ryas, for
instance, were a. class of Brhms$aa. In the CV2a inscriptions
we get several references to these 1Qivaraa in connection with
the administration of temples and Brhm a s.ttlenients We do not
know the identity of the army of Iriyar mentioned in the inscription
from Cidambaram and of the riyar who were temple guards at
rTrañgam. Judging from their occupation, the last two groups
may very well have been Rjput mercenaries. The foregoing
evidence, shows that it is not easy to trace the origin of
the element Irya in the name Iryacakravartin to Rljputa.
An analysis of the little evidence that we have
shows that there are several ways in which the origin of theryacakravartina can be exL4ined. The first possibility is
the Iryacakravartins belonged to a commirnity of people called
the lriyar who lived in the southern parts of the PIya country.
1. kLR. for 1938/39, No. 84 of 1938/39.
2. M.E.R. for 1923, No537 of 1922; M.E.R. for 1926, No.9k of 1926;
M.E.R. for 1927, No.279 of 1927; X.A.Nilnta Sastri, The Cas,
pp. 11.27, k91.
502We have seen .arli.r that the home of almost all the 4ryacaa..
vartins mentioned in the South Indian inscriptions could b.
traced to the P mnId district Although the titi. Of lryacakza-
vartin seems to hay, gone out of us. in this region after about
the early part of the thirteenth century, we come across some
other titles, with the element irya, which were used ir ths
Remnaci and inneveUy districts in the thirteenth century and
later. One such title was Ayya, (irya), as in Ayya MaavarIya
Cc. thirteenth century) 2 and Ayya Nayi (A.D.l582) Another
was riyapperun occurring in an inscription from rT-villiputtt!r
in the Pamnad diatrict It is dated aka 1k82 (A.D.1560). About
the same time, a territorial division called Iriya-nIu) (rya
country) is mentioned in the inscriptions of Pnmad district
and of the adjoining district of Tinnev.11y. For instance, one
inscription from SrT-vilhiputt!r, in the Rrnad district, records
the gift of a pio of land in a village in 1riya-nIu But a
large number of inscriptions mentioning riya-nu are found in
1. See supra, p.4t3.
2. LE.R. for 1918, No. 428 of 1917; E.I., W, p. 72.
3. LLR. for 1918, No. 600 of 1917.
4. M.ER. for 1926/27, No. 531 of 1926.
5. Ibid., No. 524 of 1926.
503
Te 1c!iRi tluk, in the Tinn.v.11y diatrict Most of them belong
to the sixteenth c.ntury In many of them the variant ri-nIu
is used instead of riya-nu, together with the prefix (south)
or vaa (north) • That Iri-nu is a variant of 4riya-nIu is
established by the mention of certain villages as being situed
in Iri-nIu in some inscriptions and Ariya-nau in some otbers
The mention of Puliyili TeRi Tiru-kuLLLa$ ?!lIgaram' and
other villages all situated in modern Tek.i tiluk of th.
Tinnevelly district, as being situated in Zrya-nIn helps to
locate this old territorial division in the modern Tinneveily
district. The reference to Ariya-nu in the inscription8 of Rp.pd
district indicates that this territorial division covered parts
of the modern Pnmed district as well. In this connection it
should be noted that the inscription referring to Iriyar
states that they were from Tiru-kuIlam, which was in the
1. LE.L for 1918, No.. 397, 1+01, 1+03, 407, 409, 1+10, 1+12,
1+16, 417, 1+18, 529, 639, 532, 582 and 603 of 1917.
2. There is at least one inscription dated aka 1202 (A.D. 1280)
belonging to the reign of a certain Parkrama PIya, who may
be identified with Parlkrama Pya 1be1i Vlnldirlya. M. E. B. for
1918, No. 401 of 1917 ; K.A.Nilakenta Saatri, The PIran Kindorn,
p. 187.
3. M.E.R. for 1918, 529 and 603 of 1917.
4. Ibid., No.. 397, k0lIO3 f 407 Q9,.4l0, 1+12 and 1+16 of 1917.
504£riya-nu division The occurrence of at least three titles,
one territorial name and the name of a community or a body
of persons with the element £ry a in the Tinnevelly-Pamnad
region suggests that there must have been some association with
this region of some people calle d Iryas. These Iryas may hays
been a fmi1y of chieftains from North India, possibly from
Gujart, as de Queyroz informs us, who established their authority
in that region, or may have been Brhm4aa , possibly lrya
Br h as, whose descendants are to be found still in RIn!&varam,
who wielded political authority there. The Iryacakravartine
may have been their leaders or may have sprung from these fmi1ies.
In this connection, there is an interesting reference in the
Maak4appn-xnmiyam, which may throw some light on our problem.
This Battica].oa chronicle refers to the first Iriya, who established
his authority in Jaffna as having hailed from riya-nIu If this
place is the same as the Zriya-nIu in South India, its name may
be connected with the 4riyar who became rulers of Jaffna. On the
other hand, the riya-nu of the Battica]oa chronicle may refer
to North India. But this is unlikely, for the chronicle states
that the first iriya ruler of Jafmna settled in that region
1. See eupra, p.1j4..
2. ., p. 36.
505people from ya-nZu These settlers, according to the chronicles
of Jaffna, came from th. Tamil country.
A second possibility is that Iryacakravartin was
just a title conferred on certain chieftains of the Raiiia&
region and Jaotes only a fictitious connection with ryaa.
In some of the South Indian inscriptions belonging to tb. t
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries we hear of such cakravartin
titles being borne by officials and cçhi.ft4a. For instance,
in an inscription dated in the fourth year of a. V!ra PIyadva,we come across the title ) uva-c ldr1r avartti, which was borne
by an official. in the PIya count ry In a similar the
title PIya-cakravarti was borne by some persona in the K,nn4a
country who had no authority over the PIya 1ringdoni Another
Piya inscription refers to a person with the titl. of
G4ita_ci idrsravartti' It is, ther.for., possibi. that Iryacakra-
vartin was also a sirilar title conferred on certain cbieftLi
in Rnd by the PIya rulers. But this seems unlikely. The
TamI1 chronicles of Jaffna repeatedly refer to the Zryacakravartina
1. Mm., p. 37.
2. M.E.R. for 19128/29, Ne. 413 of 1928/29.
3. Ibid., Nos. li 75 and 488 of 1928/29; LLR. for 1930/31,
No. 360 of 1930/31.
4. M.E.R. for 193]J32, No. 104 of 193]/32.
506
as Iriyaa and 1 ngs of the riyar (iriiar tarn which may
suggest that their name was more than a title.
A third aM strong possibility i. that the 4rya-
caIavartins belonged to a BrThm ir4a community. We know from th.
Ca inscriptions that Brhma4as served in the army as comnenders
As Nilaknta Sastri baa commented., 'it is remarkable that many
of the leaders (senatis) in the army were of Brahmin extraction'
It may be that one such eenji distinguished h1ielf in battle,
earned the title of lryacakravartin and was granted a chieftaincy
in the 1?p"mad district by one of the PIya kings of the thirteenth
century. It may also be that one of the BrIimea chieftains of
the Ramna4 region earned the title in the service of the PIya
rulers. We have already seen that at least one 4ryaca,kravartin
was .n the service of avarma, Xulatkhara I as a eenpati?
There is a strong possibility that this eenpati was the first
Lyacakravartin. l.a discussed earlier, the earliest datable
source mentioning an iryacakravartin is an inscription of the
fifth year of )avarma Kulakhara I (l268-l3lO) Around 1284,
1. LA.Jile1 aiita Saatri, The Caa, p. k6.
2. Ibid.
3. See supra, p. (1t2
4, See supra, p.411
507
nearly ten years after the date of this inscription, an Iryacakra-
vartin who was a senati in the service of )avarma, Kn1akhara
led an invasion of C.ylon ince the date of the first mention
of an Aryacaavartin is very close to that of the invasion of
Ceylon by an 7ryacakravartim, the identification of the latter
person with the former seems possible. That the ryacakravartins
who ruled in Jaffna were of Brih m a extraction is stated by
de Queyroz as well as the author of the CekarIca-ckara-nIlai,
a work produced in the time of an Iryacakravartin. According to
de Qneyroz, the rulers of Jaffna were 'Brsnes, natives of
Guzarate, called Arus, who claimed Royal deecent' The Cekarica-
c!kara-mflai refers to the ryacakravartin in whose time it was
composed as a Brhm4a from i, who belonged to the Xyapa
of the Iltylyana stra and who knew the truths of the four
Vedae The evidence of this Tamil work cannot be set aside easily.
1. See supra, p.
2. P.de Queyroz, . p.48.
3. Ccm, v.20k. Vaiya "ann KItya,a clitrattu
nniya Rc 1pm kVtzat4aruvu k4mai
Ceyya catur maai v5ymai ci vanta
CekarIca-ckaram Iti
Tuyya puka2 p'!!cura mz[avar
508
If the Iryacakravartins were Eatriyae, the author of the Tam(1
work could not have aiade a mistake in caU 1hia patron a Brhmia
ruler. If the ryacakravartiu in whose time the Cekarca-ckara-
.lai was composed were a Brhmia, his ancestors must also have
been Brlhma4aa. They were probably Irya Brahma4as and hence
the name riyar.
We are, therefore, inclined to believe that the
Iryacakravartine were Brhmaas, probably L7a Brhm4as, who
may have hailed from Gujart, as is cla(m.d by de ueyroz. We
have seen that in Gujarit there were at this time a people called
The ancestors of the Iryacakravartins were probably
from this community. As 4rya chieftains they may have used the
title of iryacakravartin.
How and when the Iryacakravartins of South India
became masters of the kingdom of northern Ceylon is not clearly
known, The Ti mI 1 chronicles state that the first 4ryacakravartin
was invited by one of the nobles of Jaffna, called PIi Maavaa,
to rule over the northern kingdom, which was without a ruler for
some time This is rather doubtful. It is unlikely that the
kizmen of the previous rulers would haie kept quiet without
1. See eupra, p.
2. XI!• p. 25 ; !!. P. 7.
509attempting to seize power. Do Qu.yroz has recorded another tradition
about the in which the Iryacakravartina became kings of
the northern kingdorn According to him, the Arue (ryas) of
uacor (PInvaram)
began to have trade and friendship with the binge ofJafanapata, and one of them married a daughter ofthat King; and finilly his descendants became heirs tothat kingdom. Of these th. first that tried to freehimself from the subjection t the ring of Cota (Xotte,was iriaxaca Varati (ryacakravartin) who being naturallyproud and not brooking the haughtiness of the officersof that King, took the life of one who governed there....2
Paranavitana accepts this tradition and concludes that an Zriya
from RIiI!varam espoused a princess who was a descendant of the
Jvaka prince who-was- ruling the northern kingdom in the
thirteenth centur7 In support of this conclusion be cites an
inscription front Idavala. In this record, a personage named
}rtt1am-perunun-vahanse, with th. title Sav$u-pati, is
mentioned. Paranavitana identifies him as )rttIa Iryacaicra-
i'artin of Jaffna and puts forward 1ge far-fetched hypothesis
on the basis of the title £av4u-pati, which he interprets to
mean lord of the JIT_R According to his argument
1. 1.d. Queyroz, . s.i.. p. L.9,
2. Ibid.
3. S.Paranavitana, 'The 4rya Xingdom in North, Ceylon', p. 197.
Lf. Ibid., p. 199.
510
if an Iriya from Rn&varain became master of thiskingdom as the result of an matrimonial a1].iance, theJ1v,1r gr £1vIi or Sav4u people would have referredto this Ariya and hi. descendants as their lord. Theepithet 'Sav4u-pati' applied to an Ariya-caicravarti inthe )davala inscription can thus be satisfactorilyexptiined on the hypothesis that the rèyal femlIy- intowhich the Iriya married was that of the 1
As we have pointe& out earlier, Paranavitana's interpretation
of the titi. of Sav4upati cannot be accepted Consequently
there i. no evidence in the }d.avala inscription regarding a
matrimonial alliasce between the ryacakravartins and the
f41y of their predecessors in Jaffna; and de Queyroz's
information stands uncorroborated. Under these circumstances
ws can take this matrimonial alliance to be only a possibility.
Another possibl• manner in which the Iryacakravartins
of Ramnad gained comtrol of the northern )rtngdom in metrm
is by conquest. The successful invasion of an ryacakravartin
around 128k resulted in the eubjuèation of the Sinhalese kingdom
in southern Ceylon by the PIyas It is not known whether the
general ryacakravartin invaded northern Ceylon, too. His troops
presumably landed in northern Ceylon. The ruler of northern
Ceylon possibly continued to be a f.udatory of the PIyas and,
therefore, there was no need. to wage a war against him. If that
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Irya Kingdom in North Ceylon', p. 199.
2. See sura,
3. See enpra, p.
511was the case, the invasion of Iryacakravartin may not have resulted
in any control of the northern ldiigdom by him. On the other band,
if the northern ruler had been recalcitrant, the Piya genera].
may have subjugated him, oo, and begun to extend his authority
there. Thee. are matters of speculation. The suggestion that
this ryacakravartin. who invaded the Sinhalese kingdom around
128k was already a ruler of Jaffna is not acc.ptable The C!lavasa
specifically states that this general was 'sent with an army by
the five brothers, the kings who held sway in the P.4u realm'
and, having seized the Toots relic as well as other co.tly
treasures, he 'returned *th them to the Pa4 Ir4iigdom' The
PI].i chronicle clearly mentions that he was a 'Damia generai.'
If the L'yacakravartins did not capture power in northern Ceylon
around 128k, this event has to be dated to the time of the
Muslim invasion of the Pya country, when the forces of }ik
KafUr rode triumphkntly down to 1 !varani This was in 1310.
As Paranavitana has stggeeted, in the fateful years between the
first Muslim invasion of South India and. the establishment of
the Nadura Sultanate in 13k'i, the political confusion brought
1. C.Rasanayagam, . cit., p. 3kk.
2. Cv., 90:k3.
3. Ibid., 90:44,
4. K.A.Nilakta Sastri, The PIyan Kingdom, p. 206 if.
512about by these event4ay have led the £ryacakravartine to seek
their fortunes in Ceylon. The eall and probably weak kingdom
in northern Ceylon would have been a tempting target for their
designs. This is, however, another possibility. In the present
state of our knowledge we cannot be certain about the "sjer
in which the ryacakravartins came to occupy the throne of Jaffna.
Prom the account of Ibu Batuta, we find that the
4ryacaavartina were firmly established on the throne of northern
Ceylon by l3kk and were in contmnd of the sea around, which was
infested with their piratica]. boats Their rule in the island
must, therefore, have begun some time before l3kk. In the absence
of any evidence regarding the date of the accession of the
first Iryacakravartin ruler, we can place this only within
rough Itinite. It certainly took place before l3kk, probably in
the first quarter of the fourteenth century. possibly in the
last quarter of the thirteenth.
The independent ki-gdom of northern Ceylon that
emerged in the thirteenth century continued to be in existence
till 1620, when the laat of the Tamil rulers was beheaded by the
Portuguese and the k4ngdom became part of the Portuguese possessions
in the island This medieval kingdom has been commonly known
1. The Rehia of Ibn Batuta, . cit., pp. 217-22k.
2. T.de Queyroz, . cit., pp. 628 ft, 691.
513
to historians as the kingdom of Jaffna. Commenting on this,
Gnanapragaear has the following to say: -
It is an anachronism to call the North Ceylon of theTemil period by the name of Jaffna. Nor is it correctto say that any Ruler of the North of the Island wasking of Jaffna.- The name Jaffna, now designating theentire peninsula, was first given to the new town inNallur in the 17th cntiry. The kings, whose briefhistory is to be rec1Ied in the following pages,reigned first at 51i1r1 Nagar, a town situated probablyon the sea-shore near Point Pedro,aud then at Nallur,till their downfall. Their k4gdom was known in theirown days as that of T1m, a ne given also to the wholes1an& of Ceylon. As this old name is no more in use,and as "Jaffn.a" has come to indicate the northernlringdom, we conform to modern usage in calling our ancientrulers the kings of Jaffna. 1
This seems to be a fair criticism, although it is wrong to say
that the name Ja.ffna was first used only in the seventeenth
century The Tamil form of Jaffna, namely flppi4am, does not
seem to have been used for the northern. k{ngdom.in the early
period of its existence. Like the Sinhalese rulers in the d
south, the rulers of the north considered themselves to be the
kings of the whole island. The South Indian inscriptions refer
to the northern ruler as one of the kings ot am or Tlt4b2i
(Cey1on) The Tam4l works of Jaffna, written..be1or th fall
of the kingdom, also refer to him as the king of Ceylon
1. S.Gnanapragasar, 'Sources for the Study of the Kiatory of Jaffna',
Tamil Culture, II, Nos. 3&k, Sept. 1953, P . 303.
2. See supra, p.
3. See infra p. .i.ç
Ii.. S.. infra, p. cit
514The titles of the Iryacakravartina gen.rally refer to their
overlordship of the city of C4ki, as for instance, ClMral-
riyaA (Iriya, of Ch1ri) C1t'ki-takum-Iriy.z-kV (King of
the Iryas who resides at Ci] cai)2 and Cl r i-em-k5n (Our
Sovereign of C(Mriil) But there are a few other titles
occurring in the earliest Tamil works of Jaffna which may give
a clu. to the names by which the northern 1 ngdm. w.- npwn.
In the medical work entitled CekarIca-ckaram,ritten 1n the
time of an ryacakravartin who had the consecration nam. of
Cekarica-ckara, (Skt. Jagat-rja-ekhara) and atable to
about the fourteenth century, refers to this ruler as 'Ceyam
u Ci ai-nI, Cekarca-cftara,' (th. victorious CekarIca-ckara
of Ci i-u) This is the only occurrence of tha name
Cliflr.i-nIu (Country of C4iri). It is obviously a reference
to the kingdom ruled by Cekarca-cUara,, the capital of which
was Ciñkai. Thia practi.. of extending the rame of the capita].
to the whole kiigdom is common in Tamil literatmre and tradition,
as it is in several other countries, too. The naeKa4i.niu
1. ., CiappuppIyiram, p. 7.
2.., v. 36.
3. IbId., v. 76.
1 Cekarca-c!karam, quoted in p. xiii.
ws v - t. Ltir 'v.4.f-i éc.y.. 'vi -
51
and !I.ppam for the kingdoms of Kandy and Jaffna, for instance,
are both derived from the names of their respective capitals.
CiMii-ziu was, therefore, one of the names applied to the
northern kingdom after the capital c4ty, but it is not known
whether it was commonly used. Perhaps it was used only in literary
works. Another title of the Aryacakravartina that provides a
clue to the name of the northern kingdom is the one based on
the name Ma4vai. In the Cekarca-ckara-mlai, the Xxyacalcravartin
in whose time the work was written is caUed Maavai lriya
Va.rtayag (rya Vardaya of M.4avai) 1a4avaiyar-kVn Cekarica-
c!kara-ma (King Cekarea-ckara, Monarch of the people of
Ma4avai)2 and Ma4avai-tanta-nlI]. (the Lord produced by Naavai)
Scholars differ regarding the identification of the place
)4a4avai. Some take it to be a place near Ini!varam and. conclude
that the Cekarca-ckara who bore the above titles was born in
Ma4avai , in South Iudia1 But the title Ma4avaiyar-k, meaning
'Monarch of the people of Maavai' may suggest that Ma4avai was
not dust a small viflage but a larger territory over which
1.. v. 158.
2. Ibid,, v. 269.
3. Ibid., v. 173.
If. U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 698.
516
CekarIca-ckara wielded authority. In Paranavitana's opinion,
Z4a4avai may have been an alternate name of Ci 1 i i If we turn
to the Tamil chronicles of Ceylon, we find that the ancient
Tm{1 name of the Jaffna peninsula was J(aai, ?aial
or N aijar. All three ar. variants of the same name. Parana-
vitana and some other writers on the history of the Jaffna
kingdom have stated that M4alr and NaavUr also occur as
variants of these names But no references are given to the sources
where these occur. We have not been able to trace these two
variants in any of the Tamil chronicles. The pa-vaipava-
mlai gives two of these forms, namely Ka4ar.a1 and I4aaiar
The akka4p-iya gives the two forms Naai and Maaiar
In addition, it gives two other names of the peninsula, namely
Naipuram and the older name IkatTpam (Pii 1gadTpa) The form
N4ari also occurs in a poem called ti-nlai-pfu This
form is evidently an abridgement of 1a4aiar or Naarial.
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The rya Xingdom in North Ceylon', p. 202.
2. Thid. ; C.S.Nayaratnam, Tamils and Ceylon, p. 75.
3. !z.• p. 9, 2k.
k. Mm., pp. iii, 14, 56.
5. Ibid., pp. J7, 51.
6. CItivnlaipiftu, quoted in A.Muttuttampi Pillai, !4a-carittiram, Jaffna, 1912, p. 1.
51?Ma4arial is a compound of two words, ma4al and tia1 (sand + mound).
Tiar is another form of tifal. How tbs name came to be appliedto Jaffna is not known. It is possible that it is a translation
of the Sinhalese name VIli-gama, which was applied to a part of
Jaffna as early as the twelfth century, when it first occurs in
a C5a record and is now applied to the western half og the
peninsula. The Tsinhl translation of Vili-gama would be Naal-Ur,
which is also considered to be one of the names applied to the
peninsula. N4aial may be a variant of this Tamil form. Possiblythe name Viligama was applied to the major part or the whole of
the peninsula at one time, although it is now restricted to
only one half of the region, in much the same way as Nigadipa,
which was once applied to the whole of-_the moern. JaLfna district,
is now restricted to an island off the pe rInRula. Whatever th.
origin of the name I aial, it appears that Naavai -may
have been a variant or an abridged form of this name, just as
Taficai is a shortened form of Tafic1v11r Naavai and Maaia].
may have been applied to the entire kingdom in the thirteenth
and fourteenth centl.ries. If these names represented only a
Tamil rendering of the Sinhalese name VIli-gama, their disappearance
1. See snpra,
2. Cf., Intftain> }nt ai, yamputtr> vai, AurItapuram > &urai,
C1t1ren1rjis )C4?r1.
518
is not difficu].t to explain. The Tamil rendering of the Sinhalese
name would have been used only in literary works while the old
Sinha].ese name would have continued to be used by the orthary
people in its Tamilieed form of Vl4i mai, which is still
current. Such a practice is in keeping with Ind{n literary
tradition. In the Ceylonese chronicles, we find that very often
Sinhalese names are rendered in Phi, as for instance Mahltittha
for Etoa. However, neither C4ra1nIu nor N aiçal and its
variants appear to have been commonly used as the name of the
northern kingdom. Th*r disappearance in the later literary
works supports this conclusion. We are inclined to agr.e with
Gnanapragasar that this northern kingdom was lmown as am or
Ili Akai, without any special epithets to distinguish it from the
southern kingdom. The Taki4a-kailIca-1,uriam refers to a
CekarIca-ckara,, one of the rulers of Jaffna, as the king of
IlpMr2i The Kai1hyanlai calls the first $rya ruler as
Teilei-m2mava (ling of IlMi in the South) The
Kuumiymz1ai inscription mentioned earlier refers to the ruler
of the northern kingdom as one of the kings of Ceylon We have
1. Tkp., Ciappupphyirain.
2. ., p. 6.
3. See supra,
519
also seen that the aa of the inscriptions of )avarma Sundara
PIya I may refer only to the northern {ndoa The inscriptions
of the Vijayanagara period, too, refer to the nortber{'dom
of Ceylon as am From about the beginning of tb lnof
Earihar* II (acc. 1377), JaZfna was subdued by_the Vlj&yanagara
rulers. But the subjugation of Jaffna is regard& in_the earlier
inscriptions and literary works, anch as the Nria4T-vilIsam,
as the conquest or re-conquest of Cey1on But in the fifteenth
century, the name flppIam came to be applied to the northern
kingdom and am was reserved for the Linhalese kingdom in the
south. Thus, we see for the first time a Vi4ayngara.i4scription
from Iakri, dated aka 1357 (A.D. 1k35), referring, to the
northern and southern kingdoms as IIppIam and. am.respectively
The name TIppem suBt have gained currency in the liLteenth
century. In all the grants of the Setnpatis of Bmnad the
northern bingdom is referred to as !1ppIam or flppa-tcam
(the land of !ppiam) In the Portuguese works, the ugdoa is
1. See supra, p.
2. LE.R. for 1918, Woe. 128 and 13k; M.E.R. for 1923, No. 92 of 1923.
3 S.Krishnaswamy A.iyangar, Sources of Vifayanagara History, p. 153;
U.C.H.C., I, pt. 2, p. 687.
k. LE.L for 1901, No. 128 of 1901; S.1.1., VII, No. 778.
5. See enpra, P"i-iC
520often referred to as Jafanapata The Sinhalese literary works
of the fifteenth century refer to tb. 4ryacakravartins as the
rulers of flp1pauna (the Sinhalese form of JafZna) flpIpauna
certainly designated the capital of the northern kingdom. This
is clear from the context in which it occurs in the Sizihalese
owrks But whether it was applied to the whole of the nothern
kingdom as well is not clear. Probably it did. The evidence of
the Sinhalese Nampota suggests that the whole of the Tamil
kingdom, including parts of the modern Trincomalee district,
was also known to the Sinhalese as Dem4a-paanama. In this
work, a number of villages which are now situated in the Jaffna,
I4uflaitTvu and Trincomalee districts, namely Ngak'vila (NkarkZvil),
Kadurugoa (Kantarfai), Telipola (Tellippali), Malligama (Mal].kam),
Ninivañgamu (VTm1cnuin), Taini-divsyina (Kayts), Mni-divayina
(&alai-tTvu), NIga-divayina (NIkatTvu or NayiI-tvu),
Puvagi-divayina (Pwi$u-tTvu), £ra-divayina (Krai-tTvu),
)4olliylvala (N43iyav4ai), TrikiTm1 aja (Trinoozna].ee), Vilgam-
vehera (NItar-kvil or Vilgam-vihra), Tiss mahavebera and
Ilandago4a, are mentioned as places in Dem4a-paanama1
1. F.de Queyroz, . cit., p. k8.
2. See supra, p. o.o
3. See eupra, p. lj.00
k. Nampota, pp. 5-6.
521Dem4a-paaji.ma (Tamil Port) was probably first applied to the
seat of the Tamil rulers in the northern region and then extended
to mean the whole of the Tamil kingdom. There is also another
Sinhalese name for the Tamil kingdom in an old K4aimpota (Book
of Boundaries). In this work, the whole of the northern kingdom
is referred to as J1vaama, as mentioned earlier This is the
only work mentioning this Tleme. Perhaps it was not widely used
by the Sinhalese.
The capital of the florthern kingdom, which we may
now call the Jaffna kingdom for purposes of convenience, is often
given in the early Tamil works of Ceylon as Ciiea1 or C4kai
nakar. These works, the Cekarica-ckara-mlai, Cekarca-ckaram
and the a-kai1ca-nlai, mgkp it clear that Cl ?ks( was
the place where the Xryacakravartins r.eided The only Tamil
inscription in the island mention4 ng an Xryacakravartin alsorefers to C41ki-nakar as his seat Cikii is also mentioned,
along with Aurai (Anurldhapnra) in the inscriptions of
Arikari Parkrama PI 4ya (].k22-lk6l) 1 It is clear from these
references that ClMi or Ciki-n,kar was the capital of the
1. See aupra, p. lF&3
2. Ccm., v.36; Cekarlca-c!karam, quoted in the Cern., p.xiv,b. ;
., p.78, v. 109.
3. See supra, p. 4w-
k. M.E.R. for 1912, No. 1i of 1912.
522Jaffna kingdom in the early period of its existence. The later
chronicles, however, do not mention Ci-Mai as the capital of
the Taniil.kingdom, although these refer to the Iryacakravartins
as C lcpi Ariyas The ppa-vaipava-n1ai and the Iailyanlai
give Na111r as the capital of the first iryacakravartins Na1].r
is not mentioned in any of the earlier Tamil works or in inscriptions.
It has, therefore, been suggested that C1?ik2i-nkr was the first
capital and. NallUr the second capital, established in the fifteenth
century after the conquest of the 11ngdom by Sapumal EunrayI
The Linhalese works of the fifteenth century refer to the seat
of the Jaffna rulers as TIppauna The fourteenth-century traveller
Ibn Batuta states that he visited an ryacakravartin at Battala,
which some have attempted to identify with Putta].am, on the
western coast of the island But the topographical details
furnished by the Muslim traveller show$ that this town was
somewhere to the north of Manr. Probably Ibu Batuta was referring
to !IE1pauna. The element una in this name has the variantsanama and ffa1ama_in Sinhalese In fact1 de Queyroz gives
1. Tym., p. 27.
2. Ibid., p. 26; !!• p. 7.
3. S.Gnanapragaaar, pp. 106-107.
k. See supra, p. 1frD.
5. S.Gnanapragasar, pa-vaipava-vimarcana, p. 88.
6. S.Paranavitana, 'The Irya ingdom in North Ceylon', p. 211, fn.136.
523
Jafana-en-putalain as a variant of Jafaua-pata5 Battala of Ibm
Batuta, like the putalam in the name given by de Queyroz, may
be related to alama. However, it is not impossible that Ibm
Batuta met the ruler of Jaffna at a place which was not the
capital. The Portuguese sources inform us that at the time of
the arrival of the Portuguese in the island, that i. in the
first decade of the sixteenth century, the seat of the rulers
of Jaffna was Na11ttr Thus, we have Ci %Jri-n.kir, npip4una or
!Ilppaa and Na11x' being mentioned in the literary works and
inscriptions as the capital of the Jaffna klngdom. Whether theme
three names refer to the same city or not is a matter of some
controversy. Since Sinhalese literature contemporaneous with
the 4ryacaavartins refers to their capital by the name of
Tpipauna, Paranavitana is- inclined to presume that 'the
name Ci?'ical- or C1#i{-naker was restricted in its use to court
circles and literary men, as GagIsiripura for Gaip4a, for
instance, and. that 'Yipipaçuna' was the popular name' Natesan
has suggested that it is possible that C1?ir,i-nakar was re-named
as NaUtr in later centuri.st Rasansyagam and Gnaiiapragaear hav
1. Y.de Queyroz, . £i• ' p. 47.
2. Ibid., p. 47.
3. S.Paranavitana, 'Tb. 4rya Kingdom in North Ceylon', p. 201.
4. U.C.E.C., I, pt. 2, p. 695.
524maintained that NallUr was founded in the fifteenth century
after the invasion of Sapumal Kumray1 of the KT kingôom
and that C1ki-nkar was the earlier capital, to be located in
the region of Vallipuru, near Point Pedro According to these
writers, the ancient potsherda and brickbate near the sea at
Vallipuram indicate that this place was the anciant capital of
the 1d-ngs of_Jaffna. This is not an acceptable argument. The
occurrence of ancient artefacts in a place does not necesmarily
prove that that place was the seat of kings. VaUipurwn, where
a gold plate of the time of Vaeabha (67-111) was discovered, is
the site of an ancient vibra, as evidenced by the go]4-plate
inscription But there is no evidence to indicate that it was
the capital of the kings of Jaffna.
Lf we group the different references chronologically,
we find, that the Tamil works datable to the fourteenth century
mention C(1Thski-nakar as the capital. The Loagama inscription,
datable to the fourteenth century, also refers to the 4ryaa of
Jaffna as the *ryaa of Ci1 1r i-ne l ar. The Sinhaleae works of the
fifteenth century give flpIpauna as the capital of the T.i1
rulers. In the sixteenth century, when the Portuguese weiit to
1. C.Rasanayagam, . cit., pp. 117-118;
S. Gnanapragaear, a-vaipava-vimarca, p. 67.
2. S.Parsnavitana, 'Vallipuram Gold-plate Inscription of the Reign
of Vaaabha', E.Z., IV, p. 237.
525
the island, it was Na11Lr that was the capital of the Jaffna
kingdom. Is it possible that the kings of Jaffna changed their
capitals Be often ? This is unlikely. Un l11re th. south-western
region of the illand, where the Sinhalese kings at this time
changed their capitals frequently, a change of capitals in a sm1l
flat area like the Jaffna peninsula would not have afforded
any real strategic advantages. Further, there is no archaeological
evidence in support of such a change of capitals. So far the only
place where evidence of secular buildings datable to the tine
of the kings of Jaffna is found is Nall'ar. When the Portuguese
went there in the sixteenth century Na11r seems to have been
the only city worthy of mention in the peninsula. In the words
of de ueyroz, 'they never had any other city save Ne].ur (Naillir)
which is not half a league distant from the town and praça of the
Portuguese' The latter is the port of Jaffna which later grew
into the modern Jaffna town. This port is identifiable with the
flplp4una (Port of Tipi or good Port) of the Linhalese sources
and the fllpp4a-paffa4am of the Setupati grants Na11r, where
the royal palace was situated , was within two miles of this
town in the sixteenth century (today Nalfltr comes within the
limits of the Jaffna Municipality). It is possible that original-ly
1. 7. de Queyroz, . ., p. 50.
2. See supra, p.
rn
the royal palace was also in the port of Jaffna and that it was
later shifted towards the interior to Nallr. The foudation of
NallUr is sometimes attributed to Sapiim.l KurayI who conquered
and ruled the Jaffna kl-ngdoa in the middl, of the fifteenth
century This view is based on *evidence that associates him
with th. building of the £kknda templ. at NallUr. A formula
called the kaiyam which is recited by the priests in the
temple refer to a person named SrT Saghabodhi BhuvanekabThu
Ue is identified as Sapwnal Kunray who, after his rule in
Jaffna, became the ruler of with the name of Bhuvanekablhu
(VI, lk70-lk78) The ppa-vaipava-iflhlai also credits aperson called Puvanftavku (Bhuvanekablhu) with the building of
the Skanda temple at NallUrti Be is described in this chronicle
as a BrThmaa minister of the first Iriya ruler and is also
credited with the building of the outer city walls ef Nal1Ur
A stray verse, published along with the Kai].Uym1ai, attributesthe building of the Skanda temple at NallUr and of TIppa-ni1reri
(the City of lIppan) to a certain Puvaakavku The verse
1. S. Gnanapragasar, a-vaipava-vimarcag, pp. 106-107.
2. S.Paranavitan.a, 'The 4rya Kingdom in North Ceyloa', pp. 192-193;
U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, p. 695; C.Raaanayagam, 22• cit., p. 332.3. Ibid.
I. lvii., pp. 31-32.
5. Ibid.
6. ., p. 23; lvii., p. 32, fn. 1
527
does not state whether he was a minister ox' a king. Both this
verse and the a-vaipava-nlai dat. these activities of
Bhuvanekabhu to Saka 870 (A.D. 9148). The Puvan!kavku of the
stray vers, and of the pa-vaipava-mlai is evidently the
same as rT Sa4ighabodhi BhuvanekabThu mentioned in the iyam
of the Skanda temple. A recitation preserved in the form of
a formula and recited regularly it the temple for centuries is
likely to be more authentic than the late Taniil chronicle and
the stray verse. The title rI Saghabodi used in the kaiyam
f or Thuvanekabahu indicates that he was a ruler of the Sixihalese
kingdom, for this title, as far as we know, was used only by
the Sinhalese rulers as their consecration name. The oni;
Bhuvanekabhu who bad any association with the Jaffna kingdom
was Bhuvanekablhu V or Sapumal Kunfirayl, who ruled there for
some time before be ascended the throne of It is, therefore,
reasonable to identify Bhuvanekabhu of the kaffiyaiu as Sapiinil
KunrayI. The TIlppa-vaipava-n1lai has evidently confused him
with a minister of an 4ryacakravartin. The date given for the
building of the temple is also unreliable. If, as i.e claimed in
the a-vaipava-nlai and the stray T2mil verse, BhuvanekabThu
had anything to do with the building of the city of Na1].r or
fl 1ppia-n i r'.ri, it is possible to conjecture that he may have
been responsible for the shift of the court from Jaffna (town)
to NaUUr. It is not possible to hold that he shifted the capital
52d
from some other place to Jaffna, as it.intained by Gnanapragaaar,
for the latter place was weU known as the seat of the 4ryacaa-
vartina before the time of Zapnml EunrayI's occupation. The
Linhales. eand!a poems composed at the time of this occupation
refer to Sapnml KuiflrayI's sack of flplp4una, which is described
as th. seat of the Iryacakravartins A Vijayanagara inscription
dated Saka 1357 (A.D.1k35), nearly fifteen years before the
occupation of Sapnmal KuuIrayI, mentions th. campaign undertaken
by I ldr46a D.4anyaka to destroy IyI]ppIam (Jaffna) It is,
therefore, clear that in the fifteenth century, certainly in
the first halt of the century, TIppauna or IIppIam (Jaffna)
was the capital of the northern kingdom. When the Portuguese
went to the island, NaUr was the place where the ruler of
Jaffna resided. As we have suggested, it was probably in the
time of &apllmRl Kumlrayl that the court was shifted to
It may not be necessary to treat this as a change of capitals,
considering the close prori-4ty of NallI!r to Tppia-paa4am.
As indicated above, C(1ri-nakar is mentioned as the
capital of the ryacakravartina in the Tamil works of th. fourteenth
century. This is confirmed by epigraphic evidence as well.
1. S.. supra, p ç t4OO
2. S.I.I., VII, No. 778.
529
But till very recently there was no contemporary evidence regarding
the capital of the northern kingdom in the thirteenth century,
that is, during the early decades of its existence. But the
Sanskrit inscription from Anurdhapura, recently deciphered by
Paranavitana as we have already noted, refers to Subha-pkana,
identifiable with Jaffna. Subha-pafana is the £anskrit rendering
of flpIpauna and, if we are to accept the decipherment of
Paranavitana, we have to conclude that in the early years of its
existence, too, the capital of the rulers of the northern
kingdom was flpIpauna or flppam. This would mean. that in
the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries flIp4una was the capital.
In the fourteenth century it was Cif&kai or Ci-fikLi--nakar. Was
C1-k1, therefore, another name for flpIpauna I The answer
seems tobbe in the affirmative. Inscriptions of.4.rikari
Parkrama PI.ya (lk22-].1+6l), belonging to the period between
11149 and 11+51+, refer to the victories won at c{Mei and. Aurai
(Anurdhapura) It would appear, therefore, that in the middle
of the fiftbenth century the capital of the Jaffna kingdom
continued. to be C(MC1. Since the Sinhalese works of the fifteenth
century and a Vijayanagara inscription of 11+35 refer to the
capital as flppaina or IyIppIam, it is reasonable to conclude
1. See supra, P.tp)
2. Travancore Archaeological Series, VI, pp. 89-91; l.A., XLIV, p. 251+;
M.LR. for 1891+, No, 17 of 1891+; M.E.R. for 1907, No. 395 of 1906;
LE.R. for 1922, No. 561+ of 191.
53t
that C1rai was another name for TIpIpauna. But there is one
difficulty. The mention of Aurai, which in these inscriptions,
as in the Koaga.ma inscription, evidently refers to the Sinha.lese
capital of the time of the epigrapha, shows that C1jai could.
very well have been the name of an earlier capita]. of the
Jaffna. kingdom applied by South Indians, by mistake, to flplp4una
as well. This is possible but unlikely. The evidence of de
queyroz appears to go against such a possibility. According to
him, when the Portuguese landed at Koumputtuai, about two miles
from Jaffna town, in 1590 and marched towards Nallr, they had
1to get past a stockade by the name of Chunguinaynar. We are
inclined. to agree with Gnanapragasar that this name is a corruption
of CiMr ii-nakar Thia may indicate that Ci1i-nakar was in thevicinity of Nallr. In the sixteenth century, the name C(1c.1nakar
was probably zised only for a fortified section of the capital.
Before the court was shifted to Nallar, the Jaffna rulers may
have held. their court in this place. Ci ?kii and IIpIpauna may,therefore, be considered as one and the same place. The silence
of the later chronicles regarding tbeexistence of a capital called
C4-'ai-nakar also points in the same direction. It i. not likely
1. P.ae Queyrom, . ., p.k52;
2. S.Gnanapraga.ear, pa-vaipava-vimarcan, p.68.
531that CiA1t2ink,r and flpipafuna were two different plac.e and
that the capital of the Jaffna kidom was shifted. from the
latter to the former place in the fourteenth century and back
to the latter place in the fifteenth century. It seems more
likely that Cik,i-n*kar, like NallUr, was another fortified
place in the vicinity of the port of Jaffna. C4ai-nakar,
NallUr and flppauna have to be treated as sections of the
same city rather than as different places. Probably the court
of the Jaffna rulers was held in all three places at different
periods. The capital of the northern kingdom has, therefore, to
be located in the region of the present-day town of Jafmna.
The emblem of the kings of Jaffna, as we know from
their coins, was the couchant bull or nandi. That this emblem
was used on their flags, too, i.e evident from the references
in the Tamil literary works These works are the CekarIca-ckara-
mlai, Kailic a-Dure4 Takia-kailc a-pur 4am, Kaillyainllai
and ai-viu-tUtu. But in the account of Ceyavra Cifzkai-
in the ga-vaipava-iai, it is said that this
Iryacakravartin brought the whole is1rid under his mitup,a I21i
(Mitu,a lute Zlag) This raises the question whether the kings
1. Ccm., v. 76 ; KailIca-purlam, CiappuppIyiram ; ., Ciappup-
pyiram ; ., p. 5 ; Ki#ai-vitu-ttn , v. 152.
2. Nitua (Gemini) lute is one of several kinds of lutes need
in India.
532
of Jaffna used the lute emblem on their flags at any time.
Gnaxiapragasar has drawn our attention to the reference in the
Kal11I1rpttn-para4i to the v!;ai ( £kt. v1 - lute or lyre)
flag which was among the many flags that were lowered by the
Cae when their tiger flag was raised everywhere Guanapragasar
has posed the question whether this would mean that the lute
emblem was used oi the flags of the Jaffna rulers in the eleventh
century, since we do not know of any other Indian dynasty
having used that flag As there is no evidence that an independent
kingdom existed in Jaffna in the eleventh century, it is not
possible to suggest that the lute flag was that of the Jaffna
rulers. But there is iinm1takable epigraphic evidence that points
1. ICalikattu-para4i, v. 18, p. 25 ;
al ffii kalai yIli vai cilai
Keai e!Jaiya pal koi
a M!ruvil uyartta Cempiyar
i pu].i koi ta1a{1dv.
The single tiger flag of the Cempiyar (Cas) that is planted.
on the )Zru rises high, as the boar, plough, deer, lion, lute,
bow and fish flags and others are lowered.
(Boar - Cllukyas, plough - fldavaa, deer - Pilas, lion - Zinhalese,
bow - Clrae nd fish - PIyas).
2. S.Gnanapragasar, ppa-vaipava-vimarcap, p. 50.
533
to the use of the vT4 flag in Ceylon in the twelfth century.
An inscription of the second regnal year of Kul5ttuñga C5]a III
(1.180) mentions the vTai-koi_Cik4ar (the Sinhales• whose
flag is the v) There is no reference to the vT flag in
any of the Sinhalese sources. Since the i1ant bad been unified
by 1180 under Parlkramablhu I, it is not possible to surmise
that the reference in the South Indian inscription is to one of
the minor rulers of the island. It would, therefore, appear
that the Sinhalese ruler. 5the v41 flag in the
twelfth century, although it was not probably considered to
be the main banner. The reference in the Kali.kattu-pare4i isprobably to the Sinhalese. Paranavitana is inc1ind to believe
that the vt flag of the Sinhalese must have been used by the
Kaliga rulers of JaZfna. He argues that the 'Xaliâga kings of
Polonnarnva claimed in their inscriptions to be the legitimate
successors of ParamabThu I' and that they, after founding
the northern kingdom, 'must have continued to use the royal
insignia of the Polonnaru kings, which included the lyre-flag'
This, however, remains only a possibility. Since the evidence of
the earlier Tamil works and of the coins of the 4ryacakravartina
1. S.I.I., V, p. 269.
2. A.Paranavitana, 'The rya Kingdom in North Ceylon', p. 222.
534
clearly inform us that the couchant bull (nandi) was the emblem
of the Jaffna rulersand since it is reasonable to presume that
)gha and his associates, who seem to have founded the kingdom,
introduced the emblem of their home-land, we may conclude that
the main emblem of the Jaffna. kingdom was the couchant bu1l The
lute flag may also have been used as one of the minor banners
of the kingdom.
The exact li'n4t* of the Jaffna kingdom are somewhat
difficult to determine with the evidence at our disposal. It is
only in the time of the Portuguese occupation that we get proper
information of the boundaries of the various kingdoms. A valuable
description of the territories of the Jaffna kingdom is given
by dc Queyroz:-
The modest kingdom is not confined to the littledistrict of Jafanapata, because to it are also addedthe neighbouring lands, and those of the Vani tVanni]which is said. to be the name of the Lordship which theyheld before we obtained possession of them, separated fromthe preceeding (ale) by a salty river, and connected onlyin the extremiby or isthmus of Pachalapali accilai-p4aJ ,within which were the lands of Balig&mo Tai Ucmam1,Temerache e-marcci) , Bedamrache aa-marccj) ,and Pachalapalt }accilai-p4a for ing that pe4nsula,and outside it there stretch the lands of the Vanicrosswise, from the side of Manar to that of Triquilem.].rincomaleeJ , being sepaated also from the country of
Nantta nt5ffam or Nahtittha] in the jurisdiction ofthe Captain of Nanr MaIr by the river Paragali;
1. See supra,
535
which (lands) end in the River of the Cross in the midstof the lands of the Vanl and of others which stretch asfar as Triqnilemal, which according to the map appearsto be a large tract of country. These lands are dividedinto Patue and the first near the River of the Crossis Tanamavaraddi eM mi'a-viiJ , a very fine country,but almost uninhabited because of war, and because itwas thenroute of our arrayale, the husbandmen who escapedfrom the war bet1c1-ng themselves to the woods, leavingver few for cultivation. Prom thence to the side ofI4anar is the Province of Muliauali ufliyav4ai] , whichconsists of three p8tus, Varcama, Valadadi and )!lpatu.This Province is th. principal one of all the lands ofthe Vant, and is fruitful, though badly peopled onaccount of war and because it is unhealthy. Next comesCarnaptu tjCarunvai-pattij1 and the province calledPanag.mo krmaiirJ, the ne of the Vani who residedthere. It consists of the P&tu of Urugare and of Valaviwhich border on the lands of NantSta, and along the coastof the sea or gulf of Ceylon there are the villages ofParangali, Uerauil Punari, and others of lesser importance. 1
This evidence of the Portuguese writer is generally corroborated
by the Sinhaleae and Tamil works. Prom the references in the
a-vaipava-mlai and the VaiyIpIal it is clear that the
kings of Jaffna directly ruled over the peninsula of Jaffna and
the adjoining islands. The villages that were assigned, according
to the ppj$a_vaipava-ntlai, to the nobles from South India
by EMti Ckkaravartti, the first princely ruler of the kingdom,
are all in the Jaffna penlnula and the adjacent islanda But
it is often entioned that the seven Verni chieftaincies outside
the peninsula were subordinate territories of the Jaffna kingdoin
1. 7.d. Queyroz, . cit., p. 51.
2. See era,
3. Tm., pp. 38, kO.
53
Whenever these revolted ag{Tist the authority of the Jaffna ruler
and attempted to support the Sinhalese rulers, the former took
necessary steps to subjugate them The Sinhalese Kaainrpotas
(Boundary Books) of about the fifteenth or sixteenth centurl
refer to the territorial divisions of the northern kingdom and
and mention that stone pillars with Ta il writing on them were
set up as boundary stones in those divisions But these works
give neither the boundaries of the Jaffna kingdom nor a full
list of all the territorial divisions .f therCa%eaterritorial
divisions of the Jaffna district are usually given along with
the other divisions of the whole of Pihiiraa (former RjaraHha).
But one of these Kaainrpotas, the Tn Si1ha Kaaim saha Vitti,
has a reference that appears to be useful to our inquiry. This
work mentions that in Jvagama there were five ham districts,
namely Javariparaa, )rac c i-naa, Balat a4i-.raa, I4udundu-ma lliyI..raa and K41kkii-r4a Some manuscripts give the form Cvagacri
or Civagatcini for Javaripa This has enabled the identification
of Java.riparaa with the Clvakaccri region of the Jaffna peninsula.
1. pp. 38, 'io.
2. Tn Si$h4! Kaaim saha Vitti, ed. A.J.W.Narambe, (1926), P. 21;
Sini-lak Kaaimpota, ed. Sri Charles de Silva, (1961), pp. 22-23
3. Tn Siha! Kaaim saha Vitti, . cit., p.
k. S.Paranavitana, 'The Irys. Kingdom in North Ceylon', p. 195.
537
Mracci-r4a has been identified as the area now comprising the
two revenue divisions of North and South Marlcci in the eastern
half of the Jaffna peninsula Balata4i-raa is to be located in
the vicinity of M4iyav4ai, in the Mullaittivu district. This
location rests on the reference in de ueyroze Conguista to
Valadadi, identifiable with Ba].atai, as one of the three Ptus
(pattus - divisions) of the district of }fuliauali O44iyav4ai)
Madundu-m.11iy-r4a appears to be the present MuUiyav4ai
division. There are certain considerations for this identification.
In the first place, Mudundu-mallij-raa occurs with lat4i-raa
and Ie4u1dc1i_raa which can be located in the areas adjoining
Muiya-v4ai. The element mafliy seems to be a variant of
• Further, in the VaiyipTal, Muiyav4ai is called
)i-nf-nakar as well as Mi_ma anutai_n' r Mudundu may be
a corruption of )-maanuai. In view of these considerations,
the Mudundu-me11iy-raa of the Kaa1nipota may be identified
with the modern Muiyav4ai division, in the Mullaittvu district.
Ka u {i-raa is, of course, the same as modern Kaukk!i,
referred to in the VaiyIpIfal ma Kauk i—nskar1 in the same
1, S.Paranavitana, 'The 4rya Kingdom in North Ceylon', p.195.
2. F.de Qneyroz, . cit., p. 51 ;
P.E.Peirie, Celon: The Portnguee Era, II, p. 152.
3.!•' YT. 35, k2.
I. Ibid.
538
district. Thus, the five main districts of Jvagama, mentioned
in. the Kaaimpota, can be located in. the Jaffna and )4ullaitTvu
districts of the Northern Province. This raises the question
whether Jvagama was another name for the Jaffna 1 ngdom. Parana-
vitana is inclined to think that Jvagama is a Tamil form of
Jvaka, 'no doubt due to the reason that the region was under
the rule of Jvaka princes' This is possible, though by no means
certain. Whatever the origins of the name, it probably stood
for the northern kingdom. In that case, it would appear that
the kingdom was mainly confined to the Jaffna peninsula and some
parts of the MullaitTvu district that adjoins it. An earlier work,
the PL]lvaliyp, refers to the domains of the Tamils as lying
beyond Salgal-kaMura It has not been possible to identify this
place. It is generally considered to be somewhere north of
Polonnaruva. It is, however, difficult to define the exact l4m{t
of the Jaffna kingdom and it is unlikely that it ever had any
well-defined limits. It is certain that the Jaffna peninsula and
the adjoining islands formed the main. section of the 1ngdom.
The V yini chieftaincies of the rest of the modern. Northern_Province
usually owed allegiance to the kingdom and. were considered to
1. S.Paranavitana, 'The Arya Iingdoa in North Ceylon', pp. 1914-195.
2. Pv., p. 111.
539
be subordinate territories of it. The Mar region, judging
from the evidence of Ibn Batuta and of the !ppla-vaipava-fflE.ai,
which refer to the control of pearl bnkR by the ryacakravartins,
may have also been directly under the rule of the Jaffna kings
But the region of the pearl bsnkR appears to have remained a
bone of contention between the Sinhalese and the Tamil rulers
It is not clear whether the Trinconialea area was also considered
to be part of the Jaffna kingdom. In the a-kailIca-pur ,
one of the Iryaca.kravartins is closely associated with the temple
of Kvaram at Trincomalee This may mean that the Jaffna
rulers had some sort of jurisdiction over the affairs of that
region. The Nampota, as we have seen , includeá Triku$m1aya
(Trinconialee) and Vilgam-vehera (NtaIr-k'5vil) in ihe list of
places in Dem4a-paanama which were sacre& to the Bud.dhists1
As we have pointed out, Dem4a_pat .numa appear&to have, been
another name for the kingdom of Jaffna. Possibly Trincomalee
was considered to be part of the northern kingdom.
We have seen that in the Tamil works of the fourteenth
century and later the kings of Jaffna are given the epithet
1. The Rehla of Ibn Batuta op. cit., p. 217 ff• ; Tvm., pp.k2-43.
2. , pp. k2-k3.
3. ., Tiruakara Carn1dcm, v.107 U.
k. Nampota, p. 6.
540Ctn-Ivalar, meaning 'Protectors of the CTtu' (RImvaram)
In th. Ta4ia-.kaiIIca.-pn±4am, an 4ryaca1avartin is referred
tp as Tvaiyinma ( King of Tvai, i.e. RImvaram) and C!tu
uyar karai kva1 vnta ( the Guardian King of the Nigh Coast of
C!tu) Tradition has it that the kings of Jaffna used to send
flowers and milk for the daily services at the temple of RIn!varam
from some of the illands of! the coast of Jaffzia The epithets
Ctu-kivala and T!vaiyi-ma, say not imply any control of the
Rimvaram area by the rulers of Jaffna. We are inclined to
agree with Paranavitana. that these were inherited from the
earlier Iryacakravartins ofT!!Iad. Tb. rulers of Jaffna probably
continied to be closely associated with the temple at RZntvaraa
and considered themselves to be its lawful protectors.
We may, therefore, conclude that the Jaffna kingdom
was mainly confined to the peninsula of Jaffna and the islands
adjolnlr g it. It had some sort of suzerainty over the Vanni
chieftaincies of northern Ceylon, probably those that th
were in the modern Northern Province.
Thus, with the advent of the iryacakravartine, a
stable Tamil ringdom came into existence in the northernmost part
of Ceylon. As we have mentioned, earlier, the foundation. of this
1. See aupra,
2. ., Tiruna1rara Carnkksm , iv. 107, 116.
3. A.}uttuttampi Pillai, 4a-carittiram, (1912), p. 52.
541
kingdom marks the cul mination of the forces that began to work
in the northern part of the island with the C5]a occupation in
the eleventh century. Gradually the Dravidian elements, chiefly
the Tamils and the Ker4as, increased their numbers and influence.
The invasion of )1gha and the downfall of Polonnaruva soon led
to the emergence of a kingdom in the northern part of the island,
which, though at first controfled by )gha and then by the
vkas, remained their sphere of authority for over three
centuries. From there they attempted to control the rest of
the island and at times met with partial success. The Sinhales*
who remained behind in the northern areas were in all probability
assimilated to the Tamfl population and by the time of the
Portuguese occupation the present Jaffna district had been
transformed into a predominantly Tamil-speH ng area.
542CORLUS ION
We have seen in the foregoing chapters the stages
by which the Dravidian-speakera from the neighbouring subcontinemt
settled in Ceylon and the circumstances under which a new kingdom,
dominated by theBe South Indians, emerged into existence in
northern Ceylon. The Dravidian settlements that began at the
turn of the tenth century gradually covered several parts of
northern Ceylon and culminated in the rise of the Tamil kingdom.
We have, therefore, considered the foundation of thiB kingdom
a convenient point at which to stop.
As we have seei, two main stages can be distinguished
in the course of these settlement8. The first begins about
the tenth century and extends till the end of the twelfth
century. The process of settlement during this stage may be
said to have reached a fairly notable scale in the eleventh
century. The Ca conquest of the island was certainly responsible
for this. Although there is evidence of several settlements
in northern Ceylon, it cannot be said that there was a mass
scale migration of peaceful settlers in the wake of the C2a
conquest. The mercenary and the mercantile bodies appear to
have been the predominant elements among the Dravidians present
543in the island in this period. The main areas of settlement lay
outside the Jaffna district which in later centuries bad the
highest concentration of Tsimils. In fact several of the places
which yield, evidence of Tamil settlement in this period are no
more occupied by Tamils.
Four main areas of settlement can be seen in this
period. One is in the north-eastern littoral, another in the
western region or what is now known as the North-western Province
and the other two are in the region of Anurdhapura and Polonnaruva.
There is also evidence of Tamil settlement in the main ports,
eapecial].y Mahtittha and rbba. The most important feature
of these settlements is the presence of a number of trading
communities, such as the Aiffffuvar, Nakarattr and
Ceis, and mercenary bodies like the 11drar and the
Aganrpa4is.
In the first stage of the Tamil settlements, therefore,
the main areas of settlement were still outside the Jaffna
and Batticaloa districts. Of the present-day Tamil areas, only
the upper half of the Eastern Province and parts of the western
coast had Dravidian settlers in the eleventh and twelfth centu-
ries. The main stage in the process of Tamil settlement which
eventually led to the transformation of the present Northern
Province into a predominantly Thmil-speaking area had not yet
544been reached in the twelfth century. This stage was reached with
the conquest of ?gha and it is doubtful that the Tamil settlements
of the period before the thirteenth century would have resulted
in. a permanent division of the country into two linguistic
regions. cept during the period of Ca occupation, migration
from South India seems to have been slow though steady. The
bulk of the settlers in. this first stage appear to have gone
to the island within the half-century of Ca rule. The predominant
elements among the settlers appear to have been mercenaries and
traders. The absence in the Tamil chronicles of traditions relating
to the C]a period may also suggest that the settlements
were founded in the period after the twelfth century.
The second and most important stage of the Dravidian
settlements is covered by almost the whole of the thirteenth
century. tn this second stage, two different phases can be
distinguished. The first phase covers roughly the first half
of the thirteenth century and the second almost the whole of
the latter half. As in the first stage, the arrival of fresh
mercenary forces and a quick succession of invasions from the
mainland led to the establishments of new settlements in the
first phase. But the nature of the invasions and of the settlements
that followed wamein many was different from the nature of
the earlier invasions and settlements. While the earlier invasions
could be treated as episodes in. the history of the island,
545
the invasions of )!gba and the Pya rulers in the thirteenth
century cannot be dismissed as mere episodes. The settlements
of the earlier period did not result in the vidible dislodgement
of the Sinhalese population. As far as we can see, those were
not the result of the forcible occupation of lands belonging to
the Sinhalese. Those early settlers may have become assimilated
to the Sinhalese population in due course. But it was the events
of the thirteenth century that prevented such an assimilation
in the greater part of the northern and eastern districts. The
invasion of )Tgha with the help of ier4a and Tamil mercenaries
was far more violent than the earlier invasions. Its chief
importance lies in the fac that it resulted in the permanent
dislodgement of Sinhalese power from northern Ceylon, the
confiscation of lands and properties belonging to the Sinhalese
and the consequent migration of the official class and several
of the common people to the south-western regions. These factors
more than any other helped the transformation of northern Ceylon
into a Tamil region and directly led to the foundation ofçkingdom
there, which soon became a kingdom of the Tamlia.
In the second phase, with the foundation of an
independent kingdom and several chieftaincies, a deliberate
policy of settling South Indians in the Jaffna district and the
Vanni regions seems to have been followed by the northern rulers
546
and chieftains. This led to a migration of peaceful settlers
from South India. It was this peaceful mogration that was largely
responsible for the Tamil settlement of the Jafina district,
The settlement of Dravidians in the northernmost regions may,
therefore, be said to have been radically different in cbaracter
from the process of mercenary or military settlement in parts
of the present North-central and North-western Provinces.and
Vavuniya district. This is demonstrated by the evidence of
literary works and place-name materials. Whereas in the Jaffna
peninsula we come across a large perceatage of place-names with
with Sinhalese elements, the Tamil element is predominant in
the local nomenclature of the North-central Province and the
Vanni regions. The former indicate a slow and peaceful penetration
of Tamils in Jaffna and the latter a violent and sudden occupation
of the other areas. The survival of Sinhalese place-names, especially
of Sinhalese territorial names, in Jaffna tells strongly against
a wholesale extermination or displacement of the Sinhalese living
there. At the same time, Tamil names of estates denoting family
settlement which are found scattered across the peninsula, confirm
the evidence of the Tami2. chronicles regarding the settlement
of prominent Xml1ies from South India by the early kings of
Jaffna.
The settlements of the thirteenth century, therefore,
mark the most important stage in the course of the early TRWIil
and other Dravidian settlements in Ceylon. The political conditions
541of the thirteenth century favoured the rise of an independent
kingdom in northern Ceylon. There is little doubt that the
Dravidian elements were the force behind )4gha and his associates
when they founded the new kingdom. With the establishment of
the Jaffna kingdom and the Vanni chieftaincies of the ortbern
and Eastern Provinces, the first steps towards the division of
the island into two linguistic regions were taken. The process
of settlement and assimilation did. not end with the fotuidation
of the northerh kingdom. Tamil settlers continued to n.grate
to Ceylon and presumably most of them went to the Tamil kingdom.
But there were also several Tamils, traders and others, who
settled in the Sinhalese areas as is indicated by the Tamil
inscriptions and Sinhalese literature and traditions. These
settlers were evidently assimilated to the Sinhalese population
in due course. In the Jaffna kingdom a similar assimilation seems
to have gone on in the centuries after the foundation cZ the
kingdom. Here many o the earlier Sinhaleae settlers seem to
have been assimilated to the Tamil population.
The emergence of an independent kingdom and some
minor chieftaincies in the northern and eastern regions of theisland and the lack of intimate intercourse between the Tamil
and Sinhalese kingdoms as a result of the abandonment ef the
North-central Province were factors that led to the division
of Ceylon into two linguistic regions. The Sinhalese kings, as
a rule, did not show any interest in subduing the northern
43
kingdom and unifying the whole country. Even when a prince
from the Ee kingdom succeeded in conquering the Jaffna
kingdom in the middle of the fifteenth century, he ruled it
as an independent kingdom. The Ke rulers were aati8fied
with receiving nominal all.giance Ifrom the rulers of Jaffna.
It was after the arrival of the Europeans in the island that
the Sinhalese and Tamils were brought together, though the
country was not unified politically and administratively till
the nineteenth century.
If. Cint.ma4i-nikau,
5. Kailyam].ai,
6 • Kalinkattu-paraj,
7. Kamparmya,
8. Kantapuram,
9. car-ka1veu,
549
A SELT BIBLIOGRAPUT
I. Primary Sources (Printed)
A, Tami].
1 • C d.ka-ilakkiyam (Complete afigam works),ed. S.Vaiyapuri Pillai, )Ldras 19k0.
2, Cekarca-ckara-m1aj,ed. I,C.Irakunata Aiyar, Kokkuvi]. 19k2.
3. Ci1appatikrani,ed. V.P.P.M.Kaci Vicuvanatan, Madras 1950.
ed. Cuvaminata Pantitar, Madras 1909.
ed. C.V.Jampu].iñkani Pillai, Madras 1939.
ed. Puliyur Kecikan, Madras 1958.
ed. V.M.Gopa].a Krian.amacaryar, Madras 19k8-
M.T.Panukavi, Madras 1907.
ed. A.Canmukarattina Liyar, JaZfna 1909(Appended to the Takiia-kai].ca-purpam )
10. )ikkavcakar Tirnvcakam,ed. Cuppiramania Pillai, Madras 19k9.
11. Maakk4appn_inThmiam,ed. F.X.C.Nataraca, Colombo 1962.
12. Musvara-nfnmiyam,r! Vavmpik Sata Muantasvmi
Tvastam Kiyarccaai Malar, Coloznbo 1961.13. N4a-vep,
1k. lT1akci,, ed. LRkavacarj, Madras 1938.
15. Patuppn, ed. A.Cakravartti, Madras9l936.
ed. U.V.Caminata Aiyar, Madras 1918.16. Piflkala-n{ktu,
- ed. Rippon Press, Madras 1917.17. Takja-kailc a-puram,
ed. P.P.Vaittiyalinka Tecikir, Pt. Pedro 1916,18. Tami].-nva1ar-caritai,
e d • T • Kanakacunt arampillai, Madras ,3.921.19. Tiri-kc a1a-puram,
ed. &.Canmukarattina Aiyar, Jaffna 1909.
550
20 • Tiru-fia-c amp ant ar Tv!ra Tirppat ikafik4,Tami 1Ka 1akazn, Madras
21. To1kppiyam,I,ed. B.Vaiyapuri Pillai, )Iadras 193k.
22, Vaiy!,ed. S.Gnanapragasar, Jaffna 1921.
23. Vaiypa1,ed. J.W.Arutpirakacam, Jaffna 1921.
2k. pa-vaipava-in1ai,ed. K.Capanatan, Colombo 1953.
B. Sinhalese and P1i:
1. Cilava,ed. W.Geiger, 2 vols., P.T.S., London 1925,1927tr. W.Geiger, tr. from the German intoEnglish by C.Xabel Rickmers, 2 pte.Colombo 1953.
2 .Dabadei-asna,ed. D.D.Ranaainha, Colombo 1917.
3. Da1ad-sirita,ed. Sorata Nayaka Thera, Colombo 1950.
k. Dthvaisa,ed. and tr. B.C.Law, Lahore 1925.
5. Eu-attanaga1uva1sa,ed. P.Aryaratna, Colombo 1932.
6. Gir-sandaya,ed. T.Sugathapala, Alutgama 192k.
7, Hat thavanaa11a-vihra-vaçwa,ed. C.E.Godakumbure, P.T.S., London 1956.
8. Katikvat-sagar,ed. D.B.Jayatilaka
9. E1ci1a-sand&aya,ed. P.S.Perera, Colombo 1906.
10, Nahvaipsa,ed. and tr. W.Geiger, assisted LH.Bode,Colombo 1912, Reprinted 1950.
11. )1ayra-s and aya,ed. W.LLDharmavardhana, Colombo 1960.
12. Nampota,M.D.Gunasena & Co., Colombo 1955.
13. Nikya-sathprahaya,ad. D.P.R.Samaranayaka, Colombo 2.960.tr. C.Llernando, revised ad. D.Y.Gunawardhana,Co].ombo 1908.
1k. Paravi-sandaya,ed. Ziri Sunandasabha Mahathera, Natara 1925.
551
15. PLTva1iya,ed. A.V.Suravira, Colombo 1961.
16. RLva1iya,ed. B.Gunaseka c i, Colombo 1953 (2nd,ed.)
17. Saddharm1añkraya,ed. Bentara Saddha Tissa Thera, Colontbo 1951.
15. Saddbaramaratnkaraya,ed. I.Nanavlmla Thera, Coloinbo 19k8.
19. S1a1ihini-sand!aya,ed. M.C.Fernando, Moratuva 1956,
20. Sammohavinodan!,ed. A.P.Buddhadatta, P.T.
21. Siàh4a-smitya-lipi,S. London 1923.
ed. D.B.Jayatilaka, 14a.h22. Siri-1ak-kaa1m-pota,
aragama 1956.
Sri Charles de Lilva, Colonibo 1961._________ ____ aha Vitti,
ed. A.J.W.Marambr, Randy 1926.2k. Vaisatthapaksinj,
ed. G.P.Malalasekera, P.1.5., London 1935,1936.
C. Others:
1. Batuta, Ibn,The Rehla of Ibn Batuta, tr. Nandi Eussain,Baroda 1953.-
2. Cosmas Indicopleustee,Christian Topography, ed F.O.Winstedt.
3. 6e ueyroz, Ferna,The Temporal, and. Spiritual Conquest of Ceylon,11tr. &.G.Perera, Colombo 1930.
k. Krishnaswaniy Aiyangar (compiler),Sources of Vijayanagara Bistory, Madras 1919.
5. Pring].e, A.T.The Diary and Conu1tation Book of the Agent,Governor and Council of Fort St.George,let Series, III, Madras 1b95.
6. Rijckloff van Goens,Memoirs of Rijckloff van Goens 1665, tr.S.Pietere, Coloinbo 1910.
7. Varthema, L.The Travels of Vartheina, tr. T.W.Jones, 1863.
552
II. Manuscriptss
(in the National Museum Library, Colonibo)
1. Vanni Rjvaliya
2. Vanni Upata
III. Epigraphic and Archaeological Sources
1. Ancient India, Bulletin of the Archaeological Surrey of India.
2. Archaeological Survey of Ceylon Annual Reports, 1890-196k.
3. Ceylon Journal of Science, Section G, I & II, 1928-1933.
4. Epigraphia Carnatica , I -
5. Epigraphia Indio, I -
6. Epigraphia Zeylanica, I-V.
7. Inscriptions (Texts) of the Pudukkoai State, 1929.
8. Eharot1iI Inscriptions, (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, II)
S.Konow, Calcutta 1929.
9. Madras Epigraphical Reports, (Annual Reports on South Indian
Epigraphy), 1887-1945.
10. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of Ceylon, I.yVI.
11. Memoirs of the Colonibo Museum, Seiies A, No.1, Colonibo 1914.12. Nellore Inscriptions , see Butterworth, A. under modern works.
('13. Tamil and Sanskrit Inscriptions, ed. J.Burgesa, tr.
I(Archaeological Survey of South India, IV, Madras 1886).14. Travancore Archaeological Series, I - VI.
15. South Inj Thriptions,v.la. I-Till.
553IV. Modern Works
(Articles on epigraphic and archaeèlogica]. materials ae
included in this section).
1. Appadorai, AEconomic Conditions in Southern 'India, 17& II,Madras 1936.
2. Ariyapala, M.B.Society in Medieval Ceylon, Colombo 1956.
3. Balendra, W,'Trincomalee Bronzes,' T.C., II, No.2, Ap. 1953,PP . 176-198.
k. Bashan, A.L.The Wonder that was India, London 195k.
5. Bell, H.C.P.
6. Brito, C. Report on the Kga1la District, Colonibo 1892.
Mukkuva Law, Colombo 1872.Burgess, James1
Tamil and Sanskrit Inscriptions, (ArchaeologicalSurvey of South India IV tr. S.}1.Nateea Sastri,Madras 1886.
Butterworth,A. and Venugopal Chetty, V.A Collection of Inscriptions on Copper Platesand Stones in the Nellore District, 3 pta. Madras1905.
Casie Chety, SimonCeylon Gazetteer, Colombo 183k.'On the History of Jaffna, from the EarliestPeriod to the Dutch Conquest', J.R.A.S. (C.B.),I, No.3 , 18k7-k8, pp. 69-79.
Chanmugam, P.1.'Anthropometry of Sinhalese and Ceylon Tamils',C.J.Sc. (G), IV, pp. 1-18.
Civanatan (no initials)PQa-kutiy , Pt.1, Kuala Lunxpur, 1933.
Codrington, H.W.'The Inscription at Fort Frederick, Trincorna1ee,J.R.A.S. (C.B.), No.80.'Notes on the Dabadei Dynasty', C.A.L.R., X,pp. 37-53, 88-89.'The Gampola Period of Ceylon History', J.R.A.S.(C.B.mTI,No,86, PP . 258-309.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
554
13. Collingwood, R.G. and Myree, J.N.L.Roman Britain and the English Settlements,(Oxford History of En1and, I) , Oxford 1936.
1k. Coomaraawamy Anauda K.Bronzes from Ceylon (Memoirs of the ColomboMuseum, Series A, No.1), Colombo 191k.
15. Cox, H.F.A Manual of North Arcot, I, reviAed by H.AStuart,Madras 1895.
16. de Laval, Pyrard,Discours du Voyage des Francai aux Indes OrientalesI, 1887.
17. Derret, J.D.M.The Hoysalas, Madras 1957.
18. Ekwail, E.'The Celt&c Element', Introduction to the Surveyof English Place-names, ed. A.Mawer and F.N.Stenton,Cambridge (England) 192k.
19. Fernando, P.E.E.'Palaeographical Development of the Brhni! Scriptin Ceylon', U.C.R., YII No. 11, Oct. 19k9.
20. Fleet, J.P.'Sanskrit and Canarese Inscriptions', l.A., VI,May 1877, pp. 136-1k2.'Inscription at Nanag.i', E.I., V, 1898-99, pp.9-31
21. Godakumbure, C.E.'Bronzes from Polonnaruva', J.R.A.S. (C.B.), N.S.,VII, pt.2, Pp . 239-253.
22. Geiger, Wilhelm'Die Vannis', Sitzungsberichte der BayerischwnAkademie der Wissensohaften, II, Heft k, Juni 19k1,131nohen, pp.3-il.
23. Culture of Ceylon in Medieval Times, Wiesbaden,1960.A Grammar of the Sinhalese Language, Coloabo 1938.
23. Gnanapragasar, S.Ya-vaipava-vimarcan, Aocuvli 1928.'The Forgotten Coinage of the Kings of Jaffna',C.A.L.R., V, pt.k, pp. 172-179.'Ceylon Originally a Land of Tamils', T.C., I,No.1. , Feb. 1952.'The Tamils Turn Siiiha1Lese', I, No.2, June1952.'Begilninge of Tamil Thile in Ceylon', T.C., I,No.3,Sept. 1952.'Sources for the Study of the History of Jaffna',T.C., II, Nos.3&k, Sept. 1953.
30.
31.
32.
33.
555
2k. Indrapa].a, Karthigesu'The Nainativu Tamil In8cription of Parkramabhu 'U.C.R., XII, No.1, April 1963.
25. John, S..a-carittiram, Jaffna (American Ceylon Missi.
1a79.26. Kanakasabhai, V.
Tamils Eighteen Eunred Years Ago, Madras 1956)first edition 190k.
27. Kanapathi Pillai, K.I1afikai-v1 Tamilar Varalr, Peradeniya 1956.'A Pillar Inscription fro Moragahawela',U.C.R., XVIII, Jan-Ap. 1960.'A Tmil Inscription from Pa4uvasnuvara',C.R., XVIII, Noa. 3&1+, July-Oct. 1960.
'Maik;ai Inscription of GajabThu II',U.C.R.., XX, No.1, Apr. 1962.
28. Kumaracuvami, S.'Vaa mkattujja Cila Iappeyark4i Vara1u',
ppa-vaipava-kaumuti by K.VeluppiAlai,Vas yi.A, Jafina 1918.
29. Lewis, J.P.Manual of 'che Vanni Districts, Colombo 1895,' .ohaeo1ogy of the Vanni', J.R.A.S. (C.B.), No.11-5,1891.
Mahalingam, T.V.South Indian Polity, Madras 1955.
?4ajumdar, R.C.Corporate Life in Aticient India, Calcutta 1922.ed.Classical Age,(History and Culture of the IndianPeople)11), Bombay 195k.
Matiyaparanam, K.Y,pa-prvika-vaipavam, Jaffna 1927.
Mawer, A. aad Stenton, g.M.An Introduction to the Survey of English Place-Names, Pt.1, Cambridge England 1929.
3k. Menon, C.A.Cochin state Manual, 1911.
35. }iinakshi, C.Administration and Social Life under the Pallavas,Madras 1938.
36.Nodder, F. A Manual of the Puttalam District, Colombo
37. Moore, L. Gazetteer of the Puttalam District, Colombo 1908.
Nalabar Law and Gust oml,1 Madras 1900.38. Murphey,Rhoads,
'The Ruin of Ancient Ceylon', J.A.S., XVI, pp.181 ff
556
39. Muttuttampi-piilai, A,pa-carittiram, Jaffna 1912,
140. Nagam Aiya, V.Travancore State Manual , I, 1906.
h i. Narayana Rao, C.'The Brhn Inscriptions of South India',N.IIA., I, Sept. 1938
142.Natesan, S.'The Northern Kingdom', U.C.H.C., I, pt.2, pp.691 fZ
143.Navaratnam, C.S.Tamils and Ceylon, Jaffna 1958.Vanni and the Vanniyars, Jaffna 1960.
14k. Nicholas, C.W.'Historical Topography of Ancient and MedievalCeylon', J.R.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., Vt, 195g.
k5. Nicholas and Paranavitana, S.Concise History of Ceylon, Colombo 1961.
46. Nilakanta Sastri, K.A.The Cas, Madras 1955 (Revised ed.).The Pan Kingdom, London 1929.'A Tamil Merchant Guild in Sumatra', TijdschriftVoor Indieche Taal-, Land-. en Volken Kunde,LXXII, 1932, Batavia.'The Ceylon Expedition of Jara'varman VT.ra Pya',Eighth All Indjan0riental Conference Proceedingsand Transactions, 1937, pp. 50b-526.'Vijayabhu I, the Liberator of Ceylon',J.LA.S. (C.B.), LS., IT, 19.'Parkramabhu I and. South India', C .H. 3., IV,pp. 32-51.
'Ceylon and rI Vijaya', JR.A.S. (C.B.), N.S., VIII,pt. 1, pp. 125-l+0.
A History of South India, 1958.147.Pantarattar, C.V.Cataciva
Piyar VaralHri, Madras 1956 (3rd ed.)148.Paranavitana, Senarat
Art and Architecture of Ceylon - Polonnaruva Period,Arts Council of Ceylon, o1ombo 195k.Sigiri Graffiti, I, London 1956.The Shrine of Upulvan at Devundara, Memoirs ofof the Archaeological Survey of Ceylon, VI,Colombo 1953.The Stpa in Ceylon, Memoirs of the ArchaeologicalSurvey of Ceylon, V, Colombo 1914-6.
557
k8. Paranavitana, Senarat (contd.)'The Polonnaruva Inscription of Vijayabhu 1',E.I., XVIII, 1926.'A Tamil Slab Inscription from P4amai',E.Z., IV,pp. 3.91-196.'Ga1apta Vibra Rock Inscription', E.Z., IV.'Vallipuram Gold-Plate Inscription of the Reignof Va8abha', E.Z., IV.'Gaa1dei Rock Inscription', E.Z., IV.'The Tamil Inscription on the Galle TrilingualSlab', E.Z., III.'Ktip Slab Inscription', LZ., V, pp. 157-158.'A Fragmentary Sanskrit Inscription from Trinco-malee', E.Z., V.'Pa4kauva Copper-plate Charter 6f Vijayab.hu I',
L.& . V, pt.1.'Colombo Museum Pillar Inscription of Kassapa IV',
III,'Polonnaruva Council Chamber Inscription ofAbhaya Salamevan', E.Z., IV.Giritale Pillar Inscription of Udaya III'
III. —'Two Tami]. Inscriptions from Budunnittva',E.Z., III.'An Inscription from Padaviya', J.E.A.S. (C.B.),N.S., VIII, pt.2.'TamilUouseholders' Terrace ', A.B.I.A., XIII, .13:Epigraphica]. Summary', C.J.Sc.(GI, II, pp 17-29;
99-128; 175-228.'Archaeological Summary', p.J.Sc. (G), II,pp. 160 ff.'A Bas-relief_at Isurumuni', Artibus Asiae, XIX.'anxples of Andhra art recently found in Ceylon',A.B.I.A.,XI, pp. 15-18.'Evidence of Earliest Sinhalese Art', Ceylon Observer
11 .2.1950, p. 6.'The Irya Kingdom in North Ceylon', J.P.A.S. (C.B.),N.S., VII, t.2, pp. 1711-22k.'Ceylon and Malaysia in Medieval Times',J.R.A.S. (C.B), N.S., VII, pt. 1, pp. l-k2.'Ceylon and Malaysia', J.R.A.S.(C.B.), N.S,, VIII,'pt. 2.'Newly Discovered Bistorical Documents Relatingto Ceylon, India and South-east Asia', Lecturedelivered at the University of Ceylon, Peradeniya,on k.11.l96k (unpublished).
51.
52.
53.
5k.
a
558
If 9. Parker, Henry'Irrigation in the Northern Province',Papers Laid Before the Legislative Council ofCeylon (Sessional Papers), No.XI, 1886, pp. 105-116.
Peiris, Paul E.Ceylon: The Portuguese Era, II , Colombo 191k.'gad!pa and Buddhist Remains in Jaffna',J.R.A.S. (C.B.), XXVI, No.70, 1917, pp. I1O67.
Ra.ghavan, M.D.The Karva of Ceylon, Colombo 1961.
Rae anayagam, C.Ancient Jaffna, Madras 1926.
Ray, Hem Chandra (ed.)University of Ceylon History of Ceylon,I, 2 pts. Colombo 1959 and 1960.
Rea, A.Catalaogue of Prehistoric Antiquities fromdichchana11Ur and Perumbair, Madras 1915.
Rice, L.'The ChaJ.ukyas and Pallaas', l.A., VIII, Jan. 1879,pp. 23-29.
Saletore, B.A.Social and Pè3itical Life in the VijayanagaraEmpire, 2 vole., Madras 193k.
Satasiva Pillai, VV.ppa-vaipavam, Madras, 188k.
Sircar, D.C.'Karfas Outside Kara', J.N.Banerjea Volume,Calcutta 1960.
Srinivasan, K.R.'The Megalithic Burials and Urn-fields of SouthIndia in the light of Tamil Literature andTradition', Ancient India, Bulletin of theArchaeological Survey of India, No.2, July 19k6,pp.9 fZ.
Srinivaan, LR. and Banerjee, N.R.'Survey of South Indian Megaliths', Ancient India,No.9, 1953 special number, pp. 113 ff.
Sriskantaraca, A.'TiruImlai Vara1u Tirnick!carIlaa Kumppika Malar, Trincomalee 1963.
Stanley, E.J.s of Vasco da Gama and His Viceroa1
55. Sturrock, J. das da India,of Gaspar Correa, 1tS69.
Manual of South Canara, 189k.56. Subramanya Ayyar, K.V.
'The Tirumuk.ka]. Inscription of Vrarjndra',XXI,
50.
5]..
52.
53.
k.
55.
56.
57.
8.
559
57. Taylor, William,Catalowue Raisonn of Oriental
ernment Library, 4L, iaras .00u.tion and Analysis of the Mackenzl
Manuscripts, Nadra8 1b.58. Tenneht, Emerson
Ceylon: An Account of the Island Physical,Historical and Topographical, London 1860.
59. Thambiah, LW.Laws and Customs of the amils of Jaffna, Colozubo
60. Thiagarajan, N.A Manual of the Pudukottai State, Puthkottai 1921.
61. Vaithianathan, KanthiahTiruketheesvaram Papers, Colombo ,1957.
62.Veluppillai, .Ya-vaipava-kaumuti, Vasavilaii Jaffna 1918.
63. Veluppillai, T.K.Travancore State Manual, II, Travancore 19140.
64. Venakatasubba Ayyar, V.'TiruvLafig4u Inscription of Rjdhirja II',E.I., XXII, PP . 86-92.
65. Vogel, J.Ph.'Ngrjuakoa Inscriptions', E.I., XX, pp. 1-37.
66. von FUhrer Haimendorf, Christof'New Aspects of the Dravidian Problem,' T.C., II,No.2, pp. 131 ff.
67. Wickrsmainghe, Don Nartino de Zilva'Po1onnar*va Xnau1und.va Slab Inscription',E.Z., II,T baganiuva Inscription of Vijayabhu I', E.Z., II.'The Slab Inscription of 1rti Ni&afika Maflaat Ruvnv1i Dgba, Anurdhapura', E. Z., II.'Bpii Slab Inscription of Xa1yavtT', . ,II,pp. 190-192.'Anurdhapura Slab Inscription of Mahinda IV',E.Z., I, pp. 29-38. D'The Slab Inscription Marked of Queen LflvatT',E.Z., I, pp. 176-182.'Polonnaruva Slab Inscriptions of the V.{kkras',E.Z., II, pp. 242-255.'Kant4ai Ga1-sana Inscription of Eitti Ni?ikaMalla', LZ., II, pp. 282-290.
68. Wijesekera, N.D.People of Ceylon, Colombo 1951.
69. Wijetune, W.M.K.'Who was Vaflabha, the invader of North Ceylon VU.C.R., XX, No.2, Oct. 1962, pp. 287-291.
70. Wilson, KJ. - - -Mackenzie Collection, I, Calcutta 1828.
1.
2.
3.
if.
5.Board
1960.
56
V. Unpublished MoflOr'i1s
1. Kanapathi Pi].la.i, K.A Study of theJJ. L&
Thesis submitted to the University of Londonfor the Ph.D. degree, 1936.
2. Liyanagma,ge, AmaradasaThe Decline of Polonnaruva and the Rise ofDabadeiyaThesis submitted to the University of Londonfor the Ph.D. degree, 1963.
3. Marr, J.R.tholoies with svecial refere
Thesis submitted to the University of Londonfor the Ph.D. degree, 1958.
if. Wickramasinghe, SirimaThe Age of Parkramab.hu IThesis submitted to the University of Londonfor the Ph.D. degree, 1958.
5. Wijetunge, W.LK.The Rise and Decline of CN.a Power in Ceylon
VI. Reference Works
Cintniai-nika4uCd. Cuvi 1Iilnata Pantitar, Madras 1909.
Dictionary of Pli Proper Names, 2 vole.G.P.Malalasekera, London 1937, 1938.
Dravidian Etymological Dictionary,Burrow, T. and Emeneau, LB. Oxford 1961
Encyclopaedia of Buddhism - Volume of Specimen Articlese • -in-chief G • P. Nalalasekera, Colombo
Gazetteer No. 119; CeylonOfficial Standard Names Approved by the U.S.on Geographic Rames, Office of Geography,Department of the Interior, Washington D.C.
6. Hobson-JobsonYule, K. and Burnell, A.C.
7. Imperial Gazetteer of India, Vol. XVIII,
8. Madras Tti"1 Lexicon,S.Vaiyapuri Piflai, Madras 192k-
9. Sanskrit-English Dictionary14. l4onier-williama
London 1903.