A Short history of Lanka

by Humphry William Codrington | 1926 | 48,606 words

Printed Edition 1926 Macmillan and Co., Limited St Martin's Street, London Web Edition 2000 Rhajiv Ratnatunga Pittsburgh. PA USA...

Chapter III - The medieval kingdom to the Chola conquest in the eleventh century (479 AD—1070AD)

THE history of the sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries is dull in the extreme; murder, revolution and civil war are the chief matters of interest. Yet the later chronicles mention twelve poets as flourishing in the reign of Aggabodhi I. (A.D sixth-seventh century). This king suppressed the Vaitulya heresy, which had been adopted again, nearly forty years before, by the Jetavanarama monks, and built Kurunduvewa, perhaps near Kurundanur-malai north of Pad awiya, besides restoring Mahasena's channel to Minneri, doubtless that known as the Elahera channel. His nephew, Aggabodhi IL, constructed fourteen tanks, including Kantalai and Giritale. In his time the king of Kalinga, horrified by war, fled to Lanka and became a monk: he seems to have been driven from his country by the Chalukya king Pulakesin II. (A.D. 609 - c. 655) possibly about A.D. 609.

King Manavamma (second half, seventh century) is of importance, partly because from him C who was skilled in the ways of justice, and born of a pure race, the fountain of all dynasties, and of the lineage of Prince Aggabodhi and his sons and grandsons, there sprang full sixteen rulers in Lanka,' and partly because of a synchronism. with Indian history. He was the son of Kassapa II., and on the overthrow of his family by Dathopatissa I. was obliged shortly after his marriage to fly to India, where he took Service with the Pallava king, Narasinhavarman I. (A.D. 630-668), and was present at the battle in which this monarch defeated `King Vallabha,' the Pulakosin II. already mentioned. This event took place in A.D. 642. Manavamma now was helped by the Pallava king to recover the kingdom of Lanka from Dathopatissa, but though he succeeded in taking Anuradhapura was compelled to return to India, where he remained during the three following reigns. Narasilhavarman claims that he conquered Lanka; his grandfather Sinhavishnu also is said to have defeated among others the Sinhala king (roughly A.D. 575-600).

It is stated that in the year 790 during the reign of Dapulu Sen there arrived, wafted across the sea to Dondra, the red sandal-wood image of Visimu, which afterwards was taken to Alutnuwara in Kegalla District, and still later to the Maha Dewale in Kandy. According to another tradition Dondra temple was built by Aggabodhi IV. (middle of seventh century). Polonnaruwa is mentioned first as a royal residence in this reign.

The next king of importance is Sena I., who according to a later chronicle came to the throne in A.B. 1362 or A.D. 819/20, a date apparently obtained by reckoning backwards from Parakrama Bahu the Great the reigns as given in the Pujavaliya. In this king's time the Pandyans invaded thylon in force, the Tamils resident in the country joined them, and Anuradhapura itself was sacked. The later chronicles state that the Tooth and Bowl Relics were carried off; but there appears to be no authorites for this. Sena returned to Anuradhapura, peace having been made with the Pandyans, but he afterwards left it for Polonnaruwa where he died, having reigned twenty years. Polonnaruwa from this time forward became the capital. The late king's nephew, Sena II. (ninth century), succeeded him, awl in his ninth year his general invaded the Pandyan country, took and sacked Madura, and set on the throne a pretender, the Tamil monarch having died of wounds received in battle. Sena suppressed various heretical sects, which had appeared in Lanka in his predecessor's time, and placed guards round the coast to prevent the entry of their adherents; he died in his thirty-filth year, leaving the throne to his brother Udaya I. who in his turn was succeeded by Kassapa IV.

Kassapa V. (ninth-tenth century), born of the twice crowned queen' Sangha, was the son of Sena II., and was made sub-king at his birth. He was a man of learning, and wrote a Sinhala paraphrase of the Dhammapada which still survives. In his reign the Pandyan king Rajasinha unwisely made war on the Cholas, sad being routed asked for Kassapa's help. The Sinhala king thereupon sent an army, which returned to Lanka unsuccessful. He died according to the Mahavamsa in his tenth year His successor, Dappula IV. only ruled for a few months, and Dappula V. (early tenth century) had hardly come to the throne when the Pandyan king arrived in Lanka, flying from the Cholas. The Sinhala monarch was preparing to give him help when a sudden strife arose among the princes of the Island, and the Pandyan had to retire to Malabar disappointed, leaving, however, his crown and royal ornaments with the king of Lanka. The war between the Pandyans and Cholas seems to have taken place at the end of the reign of Kassapa V and at the beginning of that of Dappula V.; the invasion of Rajasinha and the king of Lanka actually is mentioned in a record of the Chola king Parantaka I. (A.D. 907-953) dated in his twelfth year, or A.D. 918/9. We see here the rise of the great Chola Empire, which first overshadowed and finally engulfed the Island kingdom.

After Udaya II. and Sena III. the Sinhala throne was occupied by Udaya III., who was `a drunkard and a sluggard.' Parantaka took advantage of this, and sent an embassy for the Pandyan regalia left in Lanka in the time of Dappula V. His demand being refused, he invaded the Island, Udaya flying with the disputed regalia towards Ruhuna, which the Chola army did not succeed in entering. The enemy then `returned to their own country, leaving the Island in great fear,' and Udaya took reprisals by destroying `the borders of the dominion of the king of Chola.' Parantaka's power was broken by the Rashtrakuta king Krishna III. about A.D. 942 /3,. and it seems likely that this was the cause of the Chola retreat and the counter-invasion of the Sinhala. Udaya died in his eighth year, while rebuilding a palace burnt by the Cholas.

Udaya's second successor was his nephew Mahinda IV. (middle of tenth century). He departed from former custom by marrying a princess of the ruling family of Kalinga, which in the twelfth century gave a dynasty to the Island. Before his ninth year, Lanka was attacked by King Vallabha, apparently the Chola king Parantaka II., whose general was slain in Lanka about A.D. 959. The enemy army landed at Uratota (Kayts). This was the last success of the Sinhala for many a long year, as Mahinda's son Sena V. foolishly murdered his general's brother, and the enraged officer took his revenge by assembling together the Tamils settled in Lanka and making over the country to them. This took place in the second year of the reign. The Tamils so oppressed the people that Sena made his peace with the general and returned to Polonnaruwa. Here, however, becoming addicted to strong drink, and `like unto a mad tiger,' he died while still young, in the tenth year of his reign, and was succeeded by his brother Mahinda V. or Udaya (tenth-eleventh century).



Mediaval Gold Coin.

The new king reigned at Anuradhapura but governed with difficulty, as the city was full of foreigners introduced by his late brother's general. In his twelfth year the revenue was withheld and the king was unable to pay his Malabar mercenaries, who mutinied. Mahinda thereupon fled to Ruhuna. leaving the country in the hands of the Malabars, Sinhala and Canarese. The opportunity was too good to be lost, and at some date between A.D. 1001/2 and 1004/5 the great Chola emperor Rajaraja I. (A.D. 985-101.2) conquered all the country, save the remoter parts which were still held by the Sinhala. The conquest was completed about A.D. 10 17 by the capture of Mahinda V. himself with his crown jewels and the Pandyan regalia left by Rajasinha. Lanka became a province of the Chola empire and Polonnaruwa was renamed Jananatha pura. It was at this period that miny of the Hindu shrines in the city were erected. Mahinda V. died in captivity in India.

The ninth and tenth centuries are signalized by a profusion of inscriptions, which in the later part of the period show some elegance of composition. As a whole, however, they give little historical information, and compare unfavourably in this respect with those of South India. The alphabet develops rapidly in the direction of the modern character in the ninth century and in the early years of the tenth. Fines were paid in gold bullion as on the mainland and money was scarce, but the period was' marked by the issue of a gold coinage, which, however, speedily degenerated in the fineness of the metal used. Medical establishments existed in the villages. On the whole the general impression left on the mind is one of prosperity, perhaps more solid than that of the superficially more brilliant reign of Parakrama Bahu I. As in Southern India the sovereigns bore alternately two! throne names, to wit, Sin Sangabo and Abha Salamevan (Abhaya Silamegha-varna), a custom which can be traced in Lanka as far back as the seventh century.


The records of the period are mainly concerned with temples and we know little of the constitution of the realm. A council undoubtedly existed just as one did in the last days of the Kandyan kingdom, but we can only guess at its functions. Doubtless custom was all-powerful The succession to the throne normally seems not to have been from father to son, but from one brother to another, and then to the son of the eldest brother and his brothers. Next to the king came the sub-king (Yuvaraja, `young king,' Mapa or Mahaya), who usually held the `Southern Country' as his appanage. Ruhuna was governed by an Epa, a title held by more than one of the royal family. The `Southern Country' and Ruhuna appear to have been to a great degree autonomous. We also hear of the Senevirad or Commander-in-chief, a member of the royal family, and of Dandanayakas or generals: the army contained foreign mercenaries, usually Tamils. Anuradhapura was in charge of an officer, the Nuwara-ladda. The village communities doubtless enjoyed very great independence, as was the case in South India. Royal control was exercised by officials, who went on circuit annually, somewhat in the manner of the English assizes, to administer justice and collect the king's dues, and this was still done as lath as the early seventeenth century.

A feature of the time was the large extent of temple property. The temple administration was controlled by the priests through the means of lay wardens and a host of officials. The villages enjoyed considerable immunities; by these no royal officer could impress coolies, carts and oxen, or cut down trees, or remove criminals who had taken sanctuary. Varying provisions applied to murderers; in some cases they were driven out and arrested outside the village limits, in others they were to be tried and punished with exile In one instance provision wasP made that public officers might enter and demand their surrender only, and that on the expiry of every two years the royal officials on cirduit might require the persons of the perpetrators of `the five great crimes,' but riot others. Offeuders who had committed lesser offences seem to have had safe sanctuary. The privileges above mentioned touching forced service and felling of fruit trees, in one instance specifically given as palmyrahs and coconut-trees, form an illuminating commentary on the conditions existing outside the temple lands.

On the other hand, strict regulations existed for the control of crime in the temple villages. The headmen and householders had to give security. In the case of murder they were bound to enquire, record evidence, and have the murderer killed; in one of housebreaking they had to restore the goods to the owner and have the thieves hanged. If the criminals were not detected, the village on failure to have them punished within forty-five days was liable to a fine of 125 kalandas of gold, about 4 lb. troy, a large sum for those days. In cases of violent assault not involving loss of life the fine or `life-price' was 50 kalandas, which the village also had to pay on failure to punish the crime. The penalty for killing oxen was death; cattle thieves were branded under the armpits. Cattle could only be brought into the village after identification and the taking of security, while the effacer of brandmarks was compelled to stand upon red-hot sandals. Identification and security were also insisted on in the case of villagers coming from outside. Failure of the village in these matters, was dealt with by the royal officers on their annual circuit.

We may now consider the system of land tenure prevalent during the ninth and tenth centuries. The technical terms in the inscriptions would be scarcely intelligible but for the analogies offered by South India, and in particular by Malabar; the whole subject requires further study. In the Indian land system `traditionally there were two parties, and only two, to be taken into account; these parties were the ruler and the subject, and if a subject occupied land, he was required to pay a share of its gross produce to the ruler in return for the protection he was entitled to receive' : [1] in addition the village commonly supplied land, amount of unpoid labour (Uliyam) for the service of the king or lord. `Further, there were numerous grants of the revenue due from particular villages or plots of land in favour of temples, charitable institutions, or individuals. Such grants often were expressed in terms implying perpetuity, but `in practice they were always resumable at the pleasure of the ruler of the day; and under native rule there was a continual process of resuming old' grants, and granting new ones.[2]

The tenth century system seems to have been in no way different from that of the mainland. The body Of the tenants (kudin) in a temple village held land on `instrument' (kere) tenure, and paid a proportion of the crop to the lord.' The `instrument' perhaps was analogous to' the running statement of account (patta) in Mysore. Presumably the kudin were tenants-at-will, as was the ease in India in theory until recent days, but the Mihintale Tablets forbid the removal of `cultivators' who held their fields by `Cultivator succession.' Thus heritable holdings `among tenants had already begun. sas might be expeoted the policy of non-interference with succession is found first in the case of the peasant, who was too insignificant for the lord's notice. The process was a gradual one, and even at the end of the Dutch period the more important lands held by service tenure were still not heritable, while the holdings of $he village servants and others had become so, provided, of course, that the service was performed. In the tenth century the lord's officials and the village headmen (kemiyan) were paid for their service by `maintenance' (divel) lands, as were also the temple slaves and village servants. The ordinary holding of a mason in such a village was 1 1/2 kiriyas (6 acres) of paddy land, an enclosure or dwelling garden, and a plot of high land. Kebeli (`pieces') are frequently heard of, apparently divisions of the village or manor. The creation of such by temples is usually forbidden in the grants.

Above these tenures we find Patta or Gam-patta. Details are lacking, but the holders, if the Gam-laddan of the inscriptions, clearly held a superior position. From the analogy of the Malabar kana-pattam, we may conclude that the land so held paid assessment, but that the tenant was in possession for a number of years, and could obtain renewal of the lease.

The superior tenures were Pamunu (`possession') and Ukas (`mortgage `). Pamunu were granted by the king, or, in his principality by the sub-king, under seal, and included all grants to temples and charitable institutions as well as those to important chiefs; in the case of the last named a small quit rent was often, if not always, imposed in the forth of a payment of oil to the Tooth Relic or to some temple. Pamunu holders had complete ownership as then understood. Judging from Indian practice it would depend on the wordilig of the grant whether the land conveyed was alienable or heritable or both. The Ukas has to be compared with the Malabar Otti or usufructuary mortgage. Outright sale is considered disgraceful; hence a mortgage, under which the payer of the money enters into possession of the land, while the original owner retains an indefinite right of re-entry on payment of the debt. Outside temple villages and those similarly alienated there are still in Travancore lands in which the State is in the position of constructive mortgagor. Though the tenure survived in some Tamil districts it has disappeared from the Sinhala country. We know practically nothing of the land tenure outside the temple villages, but `there can be little doubt that in the main features there was no difference and that the king merely took the place of the priestly overlord.

It is convenient in this place to complete our review of the land tenures of Lanka. In the twelfth century we find both mud and high land subject to taxation. That on paddy fields `was known in Sinhala as ketvat-aya, `field revenue,' or simply aya, `revenue.' Nissanka Malla claims to have reduced the excessive demands of his predecessors and fixed the revenue at 1 3/4 amunams on the amunam sowing extent for the best paddy land, at if for that of medium quality, and at 1 1/4 for the poorest; the additional cash payments were fixed at six, four, and three aka' coins respectively. The Hindu law books regard the demand of 1/5 or as reasonable, a tax of 1/4 being sanctioned only in emergencies. Taking the average yield of the best paddy land other than under the great tanks as fifteen-fold, we find that Nissanka's revenue therefrom amounted to 11 per cent. At the same time he appears to have exempted from taxation chena land, that is, jungle land periodically burnt and cultivated. Of course his regulation did not bind his successors, and we know that chena land paid its quota in the early seventeenth century.

History often recounts the grant of men and women slaves with other movable property to temples. The unpublished documents connected with the dedication of land to Pepillyana Vihara in the fifteenth century show that these slaves were, largely artisans, blacksmiths, potters, lime-burners, and the like, and doubtless the slaves of' the tenth century already referred to performed similar duties. The tenants of the king's villages in the early seventeenth century are definitely stated to, have been slaves, and their presence in the royal and temple villages, though long forgotten, accounts for the low esteem in which the tenants on those properties are still held.

With the Portuguese administration the Sinhala land system is seen in all its detail. The village usually consisted of the holdings (wedawasam, cued), possessed by the cultivation headmen or mayorals and the village servants, such as the blacksmiths, potters and the like. These holdings were indivisible, often heritable in the male line only, and liable t eseheat to the Crown or to the lord in default of performance of service. The balance of the village was divided among the rest of the population, who paid a share (ottt) of the produce of their fields, varying with the locality from one to two amunams on each arnunam sown; the highest yield given in the Tombo is twelve-fold. These lands were heritable and alienable and seem to have descended in the male or female line. In addition in many villages there was the home demesne (muttettu) of the king or lord, cultivated free of cost by certain tenants. The villages in most eases were given to individuals for life or for a term of lives, when the temporary lord, enjoyed the produce of the home demesne, was entitled to the services of the people, and received various paymeuts at their hands as well as the ot share. The holder of the village paid a foro or rent to the Crown, calculated at twelve percent. of the revenue. The holdings both of the temporary lord and of the tenants other than payers of otu were known to the Portuguese by the name of `comedia,' or `maintenance.' Gardens in some cases were taxed at the rate of one silver fanam on every ten coconut trees, an impost which was supposed to equal a tenth of the produce; it may, perhaps, be presumed that these gardens formed part of the holdings of the otu-paying population, while those which paid nothing belonged to the service holdings proper. The chenas also paid their quota. As in India all land paid in kind or in service.

In Jaffna, where the older' system survived, the people paid a share of the produce, rendered labour, and paid a poll tax. Certain lands were given by the king for life, and in these and others which had eseheated a marala or death duty became inherent, and was exacted at every succession for a re-grant to the heir. A marala, amounting usually to one-third of the deceased's movables, or, if no male heir had been left, to' the whole, was levied in the Sinhala country on all estates. This custom was not peculiar to Lanka, and in India told with much severity on the great men, all of whose movables usually were seized by the king at death. The principle underlying this impost was the royal claim to the soil, a claim also seen in' the Tamil and Sinhala countries in the recovery of the `soil-burning' fee (bim palutu) before the cremation of a dead body was allowed. In its origin it seems to have been analogous to the renewal fees on pattam leases in Malabar. In Lanka, however, it practically became a tax on succession. In the Kandyan country it was not levied on women, and was abolished about the middle of the eighteenth century, though the last king revived it in its most severe form at least on the death of one chief.

The two features of the Sinhala system, as developed by the seventeenth century, were firstly the complete merger of the lands paying a share of the crop in the service tenure system, and secondly, the gradual conversion of the great majority of holdings into heritable {paraveni) tenure, subject to performance of services and payment of succession duty and in many eases to considerable limitations in the disposition of the property. It was the otu payers, not being liable to service involving technical knowledge peculiar to one class, who benefited most.


The 7th century Vatadage{Circular Relic House} is believed to be the oldest monument in Polonnaruwa

The colonization of the North and East of the Island by Hindu Tamils seems to have been due quite as much to peaceful penetration as to war. In many places it is sufficiently recent to have, preserved the Sinhala village names in a form which cannot be older than the Middle Ages. Presumably during the period under review as in later times trade was in their hands and in those of the local Muhammadans, now known by the Portuguese designation of Moor. Muslims are first heard of in Lanka in the late seventh century, and gold coins of most of the dynasties of Egypt and Hither Asia from that time, but in particular of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, are found in the west of the Island. It was during these two centuries that the Muhammadans attained the height of their commercial prosperity and political influence in Southern India. The presence of Chinese traders is attested by coins dating from the tenth to the thirteenth century

In concluding this chapter we may note the periodical recrudescence of Mahayanist forms of Buddhism, which in particular infected the Abhayagiri community. It is perhaps to the influence of these doctrines that the worship of the Hindu gods in the popular Buddhism of the present day is due.


For general history see century and Puj.

Aggabodhi I. The list of the poets appears in Puj. and derivative works. But Kurunduvewa possibly may have been Giants' Tank or Akattimurippu as the lower course of the Malwatu Oya was known as Kurundu Oya (Knox, Relation of Ceylon, part iv. chap. x.), and the Kurundu country seems to have been in this neighbourhood; see C.A. x. P. 94.

Aggabodhi II. For Pulakesin II. and his relations with Kalinga see Jouveau-Dubreuil, op. cit. p. 93, who places the conquest in 609.

Manavamma. For his dealings with Narasinhavarman I. see Hultzsch, op. cit. pp. 527 If. The identification of the Pallava king with Narashihavarman II. (630-668) is almost Certainly wrong, as it would make the period between Manavamma and Sena I. far too short. For the claim of Sinha Vishnu see S.I.I ii. 356.

The date of the foundation of Dondra by Dampulu Sen. is given in a Sanskrit sloka, which works out correctly after an obvious emendation.

No certain remains of a palace can be traced at Anuradhapura except those of a mediaeval building, and the occupation of Polonnaruwa as a royal seat may have been due to the overwhelming predominance of the priesthood and the consequent desire for freedom on the part of the king. This supposition would account for Ptolemy's description of Anurogrammon as `the royal city' and of Maagrammon as `the metropolis.' The name Maagrammon of course corresponds with the modern Mahanuwara, `the capital.' I have already thrown out the suggestion that Maagrammon may have been in the neighbourhood of the later Polonnaruwa. But Maagrammon and Polonnaruwa may have stood in the same relation to Anuradhapura as Nillambe, Hanguranketa and Kundasale to Kandy.

The date of the accession of Sena 1. is given in N.S. For the ninth year of Sena II. see inscriptions at Ellevewa, A.I.C. 116; Bilibewa, E.Z. ii. No. 8; Etaviragollewa, ib. No. 9.

Varagunavarman, son of Sri Vallabha, apparently the Pandyan king who invaded Lanka under Sona 1., came to the throne between March and November AD. 862. This does not necessarily mark Sena II.'s ninth year, as the prince set on the throne of Madura by his general may not have been a son of the deceased king. For the pedigree and date mentioned see Sinnamanur Plates (A.R.E. 1907, para. 6 if.), Velvikudi grant (ib 1908, para. 15 if.), and Epigraphia Indica, xi. No. 24, p. 253.

Kassapa V. and Dappula V. For Rajasinha and Parantaka see A.R.E. 1907, pp. 72, 73, and Udayendiram Plates, S. 1.1. ii. 387 For Krishna III. see Ep. Ind. iv. No. 40, and `Critical Notes on the Epigraphia Zeylanica,' C.A. iv. pt. i. p. 35.

Mahinda IV. For the ninth year see Vessagiriya inscription, E.Z., i. No. 2. `Vallabha' was a Chola title, and I am now inclined to the identification made in the text rather than to that with Krishna III. put forward in CA. iv. pt. i. p. 35. For the general of Parantaka II. see A.R.E 1914, p. 90.

Sena V. The Puj. dates. the commencement of Tamil rule from the sixth of the waxing moon of Durutu of this king's second year.

Mahinda V. He may be the Udaya mentioned in Mhv. liv. 58. The Sorabora-vewa pillar inscription, now in Badulla, of the reign of Siri Sang Bo Uda may be of this period from the epigraphic point of view. For the Chola conquest see S. 1.1. iii. 6 and 52 an inscription of the twenty-seventh year of Rajaraja I. is at Padawiya. For Chola records in Lanka see AS. 1907, 1909, and for the Chola name of Polonnaruwa, ib. 1906, p. 27; 1909, p. 27.

The order of succession to the throne is deduced from Mhv. The Yuvaraja normally seems to have been the next brother of the reigning king, or in default the eldest prince of the next generation. For the Nuwara-ladda see the Basavakkulam inscription of the nineteenth year of Sena II., now in Colombo Museum. For the azzises and temple immunities, E.Z. i. pp. 244-53 et passim, may he consulted; similar immunities appear in a grant to a layman subject to payment of a quitrent to a temple (E.Z. ii. No. 4). The fruit trees are mentioned in the Kapuru Vedu Oya inscription, published in J.R.A. .2., CS., xxvi. No. 71, pt. i. p. 53. The collapse of the old village community perhaps was gradual and the individualistic tendency encouraged by the movement of the population from the dry zone, where the village still is an agglomeration of houses close to the tank bund, to the wetter country, in which each man sat `under his own fig tree.' But even in the early nineteenth century communal responsibility survived in certain cases. Thus the village was fined when a man committed suicide in an inhabited area, but not when he did so in the jungle.

Land Tenure, The Cambridge history of India (p. 475) with reference to the Maurya Empire says, `Apart from the royal domains . . . the ultimate property in the land appertamed, in the sense which has since prevailed, to the King: that is to say, the King was entitled to his revenues therefrom, and in default could replace the cultivator in his holding. This does not precludcalienation or subdivision by the occupier, the royal title persisting through each change.'

Example of resumptions of grants in Lanka are Gilimale, once dedicated by Vijaya Bahu 1., for the supply of food to pilgrims th Adam's Peak, and Kendangamuwa, given by Parakrama Bahu VT. to Aramanapola Vihara. Both under the Kandyan Government were royal villages.

Pattam in Malayalam and modern Tamil is `rent'; in older Tamil it is ' assessment tax.' It exactly equals the Sinhala `badda,' which has both meanings, and illustrates the difficulty of `disentangling the conception of private right from political allegiance which has made so much progress during the last century' (Moreland, op. cit., p. 96). For the holding of a mason see E.Z. i. No. L For grants to laymen see E.Z ii. No. 4, and the Doratiyawa tudupata (twelfth century) in J.R.A.S., C.B. xxix. No. 77. For the technical terms see E.Z i. Nos. 7 and 8; and for Nissanka Malla's taxation, E.Z. i. No. 9. The words utte, menda, and pesse, which I have rendered by `best,' `medium,' and `poorest,' are found in the Pepiliyana documents in the expressions utte taramin, medde taramin, and pesse taramin; the use of maddama tarama in Wellassa shows that we must understand these words with reference to irrigation facilities. Nissanka's exemption of chena lands from taxation is not devoid of difficulty. The language used in the series of documents in which the concession is recorded seems to imply that it was limited to cases where jungle was felled for the purpose of forming rice fields. Further investigation is desirable. For the slaves in the royal villages see the petition from the Sinhala in 1636 given at length in De Q. p. 834. For polaya, the garden tax, see the Portuguese. Tombo, and Valentyn, Oud en Nieww Oost Indien., v. 268. Fdr the Marala see De Q. pp. 41, 42, 76, 80, 842; Documentos remettidos da Indid, ii. pp. 82, 136; Valentyn, pp. 10, 269, 270; Knox, interior of Ceylon pt. ii. chap. iv. v. and pt. iii., chap. vii.; for Jaffna, the Foral. For the comedias in general see De Q. p. 80. The Portuguese Tombo marks holdings as paraveni (hereditary) but rarely, but the great majority were popularly claimed to be of this tenure, judging from, the use of the word in Ribeiro, Fatalidade Historica and in the petition of 1636; see also instructions from the Governor General, Government Press, 1908, pp. 40, 61. In the Portuguese Tombo paraveni is distinguished' from purchased land. The late Kandyan system as given by D'Oyly is reproduced in the Report on the Kegalla District, Sessional Papers, xix. 1892, pp. 107 if. The `headmoney' (is-ran) directed by the Dalada Sirita to be paid to the Tooth Relic may represent the Jaffna poll tax.

For the Mahayanist teachings see N.S. Also A. M. Hocart, `The Thuparama Temple at Anuradhapura,' Notes and Queries, in J.R.A.S. C.B. xxviii. No. 73, p. 57. The so-called Kushtaraja statue at Weligama is supposed tp represent Avalokitesvara

Footnotes and references:


India at the Death of Altar, W. H. Moreland, 1920, p. 96.


2. System of Land Tenures in various Countries, Cobden Club, 1870, p. 148

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: