Connect with us

Features

Editors hauled up before bar of Parliament and a stranger in the House

Published

on

J.R.Jayewardene

(Excerpted from Memories of 33 year in Parliament by Nihal Seneviratne)

A few days before Prime Minister J.R.Jayewardene left Parliament to assume duties as the first Executive President of the country, he summoned me to his Chambers in Parliament. He then showed me a copy of the Ceylon Observer of January 30, 1978 which showed a picture of a man and a film actress in a boat and the caption beneath the picture read “The President of one of the leading industrial complexes in South Korea showing the Sri Lanka Foreign Minister Mr. A.C..S. Hameed, around the showrooms of the industrial complex.”

He then told me the editors of the Ceylon Observer were guilty of a breach of privilege of Parliament. In a tactful manner, I disagreed with him by saying this was only a printing and typographical mistake. He disagreed with me and told me to summon to the two editors to Parliament to explain their conduct. I then told him this was uncalled for and suggested that if it was a breach of privilege, the correct and proper action to be taken was to summon them before the Committee of Privileges which had already been established comprising both Government and Opposition members.

Though I argued Mr. Jayewardene disagreed adding that before he leaves Parliament in a few days he wants to see that proper procedure is followed as an example for the future. I still insisted that this was not the legitimate and proper manner to act but he refused to see my point of view. I then added that in the history of Parliament since 1948, never have any journalists been brought to the chamber. I told him I want to be sure that I follow the correct parliamentary procedure since there is no precedent at this stage.

Then he told me, “Nihal, if you have any doubt about the correct procedure to follow, you can consult my brother,” referring to H.W.Jayewardene who was one of his principal advisers. Straightaway I said, “‘The Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown and if I need any advice, I will consult him” adding that I know the present Attorney General, Shiva Pasupathi, who is always willing to help and advise me.

Following the Prime Minister’s strict instructions, I studied the subject very carefully and drafted the letter to be sent to the two editors to appear before Parliament for questioning. I was acting on the directions of Speaker Anandatissa de Alwis directing me to summon them. Ironically, the two editors, Harold Pieris and Associate Editor Philip Cooray were close friends of mine from my university days in Peradeniya.

The first item on the agenda on the morning of February 2,1978 was the Question of Privilege raised by Mr. Hameed who said that the appearance of the wrong caption in the Ceylon Observer is defamatory and had damaged his reputation and called for action to be taken, after an inquiry, against those responsible for the lapse. The Speaker said he is satisfied there is a prima facie case of a breach of privilege and called on the Leader of the House, Ranasinghe Premadasa, to move the motion ordering the two editors of the Ceylon Observer, namely Harold Pieris and Philip Cooray, to appear before the Assembly at 5.00 p.m. the same day and show cause why they should not be punished by the National State Assembly for a breach of privilege.

R.J.G. (Ronnie) de Mel , Minister of Finance and Planning, seconded the motion. I was then directed by the Speaker to take necessary action to summon the persons mentioned in the resolution to appear before the Assembly by 5.00 p.m.

At 5.00 p.m., when the House met to discuss the Question of Privilege, Mr. Premadasa moved a motion for the Assembly to form itself into a committee of the entire Assembly to investigate and report back to the Assembly on the complaint of a breach of privilege made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs A.C.S.Hameed. The relevant motion was put to the House and was carried unanimously following which the House formed itself into a committee of the whole Assembly. The Speaker functioned as the Chairman of the Committee and the quorum was set at 20. The Chairman directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring to the Bar of the Assembly the persons to whom notices had been served and Mr. Pieris and Mr. Cooray were conducted to the Chamber and asked to introduce themselves.

The Chairman then informed the two Editors that it has been alleged that they have committed an offence set out in Section 22 of the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act, as amended by Law No. 5 of 1978. “Have you any cause to show why you should not be dealt with and punished under Section 28 of the Act?”

Mr. Harold Pieris spoke first and said he had a statement and the Speaker asked him to read it. He said that on January 30, 1978 he was away from office as it was his off day and Mr. Philip Cooray , Associate Editor, was acting as the Editor of the Ceylon Observer on this day. However , on January 30, he had come to office around 2.15p.m. as there was a staff meeting and then he had met Mr. Cooray who said there had been a mix up in one of the captions. The Ceylon Observer goes into print around 11 a.m. and the paper had only one edition each day and the very next day a correction and apology regarding this matter was inserted on the same page. Mr. Pieris also tabled copies of the newspapers which carried the correction.

Soon after Mr. Cooray gave evidence and explained that around 10.15 a.m. or so when the proof of Page 3 came to him, he noticed that the caption to Foreign Minister Hameed’s picture was mixed up and instructed the sub-editor to make the correction immediately. However, when the paper started printing, he had noticed that the correct caption to Mr. Hameed’s picture had not been made and immediately ordered the press to be stopped but by then 900 copies of the paper had been printed and distributed to the sellers.

He had corrected the error and the balance 4,000 copies of the Ceylon Observer were printed and distributed with the correct caption. He had also immediately informed the Chairman of Lake House Mr. R.Bodinagoda who had ordered an immediate investigation. Mr. Cooray also tendered an unqualified apology to Mr. Hameed for the error.

Thereafter many MPs including J.R.Jayewardene, Gamini Dissanayake, V.N.Navaratnam, R.Sampanthan, D.M.Chandrapala, R.Premadasa, Dr. P.M.B. Cyril, Ronnie de Mel questioned the Editors at length seeking clarification regarding this unfortunate incident.

The incident ended with the final statement by the Speaker. “I have to report to the Parliament that the Committee has unanimously resolved that, in the view of the explanation and unqualified apology tendered by those responsible for the defamatory publication, a fine of Rs. 1,000 each be imposed on Mr. Pieris and Mr. Cooray the fine to be paid to the Ceylon Deaf and Blind School before February 6, 1978. The appropriate correction and apology with full publicity will be published on Page 1 of the next issues of the Ceylon Observer.”

The Prime Minister said he would ensure that the fne would be paid by the Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd., and not personally by the editors.

Then J.R.Jayewardene, who was to assume office as Executive President two days later on February 4, had the final word when he said that he was glad that the Assembly had conducted itself admirably on the first occasion on which it was sitting in the capacity as a court. Thereafter the Speaker gave permission for the two editors to withdraw, and they left the Parliament Chamber. Thus ended the infamous incident, one that hasn’t been repeated thereafter.

Stranger in the House

Some happenings in Parliament are rather humorous like this one which took place during my early years in Parliament. It is rather trivial and not politically significant but remains an unforgettable incident for me. In the sixties there was to be the Opening Session of a new Parliament after the General Election. The staff and I were all busy with so many new MPs and those Members who had been re-elected trooping into Parliament accompanied by their friends and relatives. Our security staff checking the Members had apparently not been able to check each Member properly.

The quorum bells were rung and we, the Clerks, accompanied the Speaker into the Chamber. After the Proclamation was read out, the next item on the Order Paper was the swearing in of all the Members present. While seated at the Table of the House, a member summoned me and asked me to check on one particular new MP who appeared suspicious. So very cautiously I went across to the second row of the Opposition benches and asked him what his name was and which constituency he represented.

He made a fundamental mistake of saying that he represented Mulkirigala. I immediately knew he was speaking an untruth as I knew well it was George Rajapakse who had been re-elected to that seat. Cautiously and without making it an issue, I asked him to accompany me to the lobby and thereafter asked the Sergeant at Arms to keep him in his custody till the days sitting was over.

I returned to continue the swearing in of the Members. Once the sitting was concluded I took the person, clad in smart national dress, to the Speaker’s Chambers. The Speaker questioned him about himself and his background. We got the biggest shock of all when he blurted out that he came that morning from the Mental Hospital at Angoda! We immediately contacted the hospital authorities who confirmed this. We then asked the Sergeant-at-Arms to accompany him back to his rightful place.

If we had not identified him then, he may very well have taken his oaths as a Member of Parliament and we would have been faced with a bigger problem of dealing with a fully sworn in Member of Parliament, in fact not being a Member of Parliament at all. This was certainly one of the most unforgettable incidents in my lifetime.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Democracy faces tougher challenges as political Right beefs-up presence

Published

on

An anti-Hamas people’s protest in the Gaza. (BBC)

It is becoming increasingly evident that the democracy-authoritarianism division would be a major polarity in international politics going forward. It shouldn’t come as a surprise if quite a few major states of both East and West gain increasing inspiration from the ‘world’s mightiest democracy’ under President Donald Trump from now on and flout the core principles of democratic governance with impunity.

It is the political Right that would gain most might in this evolving new scheme of things. Whether it be the US itself, France, Israel or Turkey, to name just a few countries in the news, it is plain to see that the Right is unleashing its power with hardly a thought for the harm being done to key democratic institutions and norms.

In fact, Donald Trump and his Republican hard liners led from the front, so to speak, in this process of unleashing the power of the Right in contemporary times. It remains a very vital piece of history that the Right in the US savaged democracy’s most valued institutions on January 6, 2021, when it ran amok with the tacit backing of Trump in the US Capitol.

What was being challenged by the mob most was the ‘will of the people’ which was manifest in the latter’s choice of Joe Biden as US President at the time. To date Trump does not accept that popular verdict and insists that the election in question was a flawed one. He does so in the face of enlightened pronouncements to the contrary.

The US Right’s protégé state, Israel, is well on course to doing grave harm to its democratic institutions, with the country’s judiciary being undermined most. To cite two recent examples to support this viewpoint, the Israeli parliament passed a law to empower the country’s election officials to appoint judges, while Prime Minister Netanyahu has installed the new head of the country’s prime security agency, disregarding in the process a Supreme Court decision to retain the former head.

Such decisions were made by the Netanyahu regime in the face of mounting protests by the people. While nothing new may be said if one takes the view that Israel’s democratic credentials have always left much to be desired, the downgrading of a democratic country’s judiciary is something to be sorely regretted by democratic opinion worldwide. After all, in most states, it is the judiciary that ends up serving the best interests of the people.

Meanwhile in France, the indications are that far Right leader Marine Le Pen would not be backing down in the face of a judicial verdict that pronounces her guilty of corruption that may prevent her from running for President in 2027. She is the most popular politician in France currently and it should not come as a surprise if she rallies further popular support for herself in street protests. Among other things, this will be proof of the growing popular appeal of the political Right. Considering that France has been a foremost democracy, this is not good news for democratic opinion.

However, some heart could be taken from current developments in the Gaza and Turkey where the people are challenging their respective dominant governing forces in street protests largely peacefully. In the Gaza anti-Hamas protests have broken out demanding of the group to step down from power, while in Turkey, President Erdogan’s decades-long iron-fist rule is being challenged by pro-democracy popular forces over the incarceration of his foremost political rival.

Right now, the Turkish state is in the process of quashing this revolt through a show of brute force. Essentially, in both situations the popular demand is for democracy and accountable governance and such aims are generally anathema in the ears of the political Right whose forte is repressive, dictatorial rule.

The onus is on the thriving democracies of the world to ensure that the Right anywhere is prevented from coming to power in the name of the core principles and values of democracy. Right now, it is the European Union that could fit into this role best and democratic opinion is obliged to rally behind the organization. Needless to say, peaceful and democratic methods should be deployed in this historic undertaking.

Although the UN is yet to play an effective role in the current international situation, stepped up efforts by it to speed up democratic development everywhere could yield some dividends. Empowerment of people is the goal to be basically achieved.

Interestingly, the Trump administration could be seen as being in league with the Putin regime in Russia at present. This is on account of the glaringly Right wing direction that the US is taking under Trump. In fact, the global balance of political forces has taken an ironic shift with the hitherto number one democracy collaborating with the Putin regime in the latter’s foreign policy pursuits that possess the potential of plunging Europe into another regional war.

President Trump promised to bring peace to the Ukraine within a day of returning to power but he currently is at risk of cutting a sorry figure on the world stage because Putin is far from collaborating with his plans regarding Ukraine. Putin is promising the US nothing and Ukraine is unlikely to step down from the position it has always held that its sovereignty, which has been harmed by the Putin regime, is not negotiable.

In fact, the China-Russia alliance could witness a firming-up in the days ahead. Speculation is intense that the US is contemplating a military strike on Iran, but it would face strong opposition from China and Russia in the event of such an adventurist course of action. This is on account of the possibility of China and Russia continuing to be firm in their position that Western designs in the Gulf region should be defeated. On the other hand, Iran could be expected to hit back strongly in a military confrontation with the US.

Considering that organizations such as the EU could be expected to be at cross-purposes with the US on the Ukraine and connected questions, the current world situation could not be seen as a replication of the conventional East-West polarity. The East, that is mainly China and Russia, is remaining united but not so the West. The latter has broadly fragmented into a democratic states versus authoritarian states bipolarity which could render the international situation increasingly unstable and volatile.

Continue Reading

Features

Chikungunya Fever in Children

Published

on

Chikungunya fever, a viral disease transmitted by mosquitoes, poses a significant health concern, particularly for children. It has been around in Sri Lanka sporadically, but there are reports of an increasing occurrence of it in more recent times. While often associated with debilitating joint pain in adults, its manifestations in children can present unique challenges. Understanding the nuances of this disease is crucial for effective management and prevention.

Chikungunya fever is caused by the chikungunya virus (CHIKV), an alphavirus transmitted to humans through the bites of infected Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus mosquitoes. These are the same mosquitoes that transmit dengue and Zika viruses, highlighting the overlapping risks in many areas of the world. It is entirely possible for chikungunya and dengue to co-circulate in the same area, leading to co-infections in individuals.

When a mosquito bites a person infected with CHIKV, it ingests the virus. After a period of growth and multiplication of the virus within the mosquito, the virus can be transmitted to another person through subsequent bites. Therefore, the mosquito acts as a vector or an intermediate transmitting agent that spreads the disease, but not as a reservoir of the disease. The spread of chikungunya is influenced by environmental factors that support mosquito breeding, such as stagnant water and warm climates. Urbanization and poor sanitation can exacerbate the problem by creating breeding grounds for these mosquitoes.

The clinical presentation of chikungunya in children can vary, ranging from mild to severe. While some infected children may even be asymptomatic and be normal for all intents and purposes, others can experience a range of symptoms, including a sudden onset of high fever, a common initial symptom. Pain in the joints of the body, while being a hallmark of chikungunya in adults, may be less pronounced in children. However, they can still experience significant discomfort and this must be kept in mind during processes of diagnosis and treatment. It is also important to remember that joint pains can present in various forms, as well as in different locations of the body. There is no characteristic pattern or sites of involvement of joints. Muscle aches and pains can accompany the fever and joint pain as well. A headache, too, could occur at any stage of the disease. Other symptoms may include nausea, vomiting, and fatigue as well.

A reddish elevated rash, referred to in medical jargon as a maculopapular rash, is frequently observed in children, sometimes more so than in adults. While chikungunya is known to cause such a rash, there is a specific characteristic related to nasal discoloration that is worth noting. It is called the “Chik sign” or “Brownie nose” and refers to an increased darkening of the skin, particularly on the nose. This discolouration just appears and is not associated with pain or itching. It can occur during or after the fever, and it can be a helpful clinical sign, especially in areas with limited diagnostic resources. While a generalised rash is a common symptom of chikungunya, a distinctive darkening of the skin on the nose is a particular characteristic that has been observed.

In some rare instances, particularly in infants and very young children, chikungunya can lead to neurological complications, such as involvement of the brain, known as encephalitis. This is associated with a change in the level of alertness, drowsiness, convulsions and weakness of limbs. Equally rarely, some studies indicate that children can experience bleeding tendencies and haemorrhagic manifestations more often than adults.

Diagnosis is typically made through evaluating the patient’s symptoms and medical history, as well as by special blood tests that can detect the presence of CHIKV antibodies (IgM and IgG) or the virus itself through PCR testing.

There is no specific antiviral treatment for chikungunya. Treatment focuses on relieving symptoms and allowing the body to recover on its own. Adequate rest is essential for recovery, and maintaining hydration is crucial, especially in children with fever. Paracetamol in the correct dosage can be used to reduce fever and pain. It is important to avoid aspirin, as it can increase the risk of a further complication known as Reye’s syndrome in children. In severe cases, hospitalisation and supportive care may be necessary.

While most children recover from chikungunya without any major issues, some may experience long-term sequelae. Joint pain can persist for months or even years in some individuals, impacting their quality of life. In rare cases, chikungunya can lead to chronic arthritis. Children that have suffered from neurological complications can have long term effects.

The ultimate outcome or prognosis for chikungunya in children is generally favourable. Most children recover fully within a few days or a couple of weeks. However, the duration and severity of symptoms can vary quite significantly.

Prevention is key to controlling the spread of chikungunya. Mosquito control is of paramount importance. These include eliminating stagnant water sources where mosquitoes breed, using mosquito repellents, wearing long-sleeved clothing and pants, using mosquito nets, especially for young children and installing protective screens on windows and doors. While a chikungunya vaccine is available, its current use is mainly for adults, especially those traveling to at risk areas. More research is being conducted for child vaccinations.

Chikungunya outbreaks can strain healthcare systems and have significant economic consequences. Public health initiatives aimed at mosquito control and disease surveillance are crucial for preventing and managing outbreaks.

Key considerations for children are that some of them, especially infants and young children, are more vulnerable to severe chikungunya complications and early diagnosis and supportive care are essential for minimising the risk of long-term sequelae. Preventing mosquito bites is the most effective way to protect children from chikungunya. By understanding the causation, clinical features, treatment, and prevention of chikungunya, parents, caregivers, and healthcare professionals can work together to protect children from this illness that could sometimes be quite debilitating.

Dr B. J. C. Perera 

MBBS(Cey), DCH(Cey), DCH(Eng), MD(Paed), MRCP(UK), FRCP(Edin), FRCP(Lond), FRCPCH(UK), FSLCPaed, FCCP, Hony. FRCPCH(UK), Hony. FCGP(SL)

Specialist Consultant Paediatrician and Honorary Senior Fellow, Postgraduate Institute of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.

Joint Editor, Sri Lanka Journal of Child Health and Section Editor, Ceylon Medical Journal

Founder President, Sri Lanka College of Paediatricians – 1996-97)

Continue Reading

Features

The Great and Little Traditions and Sri Lankan Historiography

Published

on

Prof. Obeyesekere

Power, Culture, and Historical Memory:

(Continued from yesterday)

Newton Gunasinghe, a pioneering Sri Lankan sociologist and Marxist scholar, made significant contributions to the study of culture and class in Sri Lanka by incorporating the concepts of great and little traditions within an innovative Marxist framework. His theoretical synthesis offered historians a fresh perspective for evaluating the diversity of past narratives.

At the same time, Michel Foucault’s philosophical intervention significantly influenced the study of historical knowledge. In particular, two of his key concepts have had a profound impact on the discipline of history:

1. The relationship between knowledge and power – Knowledge is not merely an objective truth but a manifestation of the power structures of its time.

2. The necessity of considering the ‘other’ in any conceptual construction – Every idea or framework takes shape in relation to its opposite, highlighting the duality inherent in all intellectual constructs.

These concepts challenged historians to rethink their approaches, prompting them to explore the dynamic interplay between knowledge, power, and culture. The existence of Little Tradition prompted historians to pay attention to ‘other’ histories.

The resurgence of ethnic identities and conflicts has brought renewed attention to the dichotomy of culture, steering the discourse in a new direction. The ethnic resurgence raises three key issues. First, the way non-dominant cultures interpret the past often differs from the narratives produced by dominant cultures, prompting the question: What is historical truth? Second, it underscores the importance of studying the histories of cultural identities through their own perspectives. Finally, and most importantly, it invites reflection on the relationship between ‘Little Traditions’ and the ‘Great Tradition’—how do these ‘other’ histories connect to broader historical narratives?

When the heuristic construct of the cultural dichotomy is applied to historical inquiry, its analytical scope expands far beyond the boundaries of social anthropology. In turn, it broadens the horizons of historical research, producing three main effects:

1. It introduces a new dimension to historical inquiry by bringing marginalised histories to the forefront. In doing so, it directs the attention of professional historians to areas that have traditionally remained outside their scope.

2. It encourages historians to seek new categories of historical sources and adopt more innovative approaches to classifying historical evidence.

3. It compels historians to examine the margins in order to gain a deeper understanding of the center.

The rise of a new theoretical school known as Subaltern Studies in the 1980s provided a significant impetus to the study of history from the perspective of marginalised and oppressed groups—those who have traditionally been excluded from dominant historical narratives and are not linked to power and authority. This movement sought to challenge the Eurocentric and elitist frameworks that had long shaped the study of history, particularly in the context of colonial and postcolonial societies. The writings of historians such as Ranajit Guha and Eric Stokes played a pioneering role in opening up this intellectual path. Guha, in particular, critiqued the way history had been written from the perspective of elites—whether colonial rulers or indigenous upper classes—arguing that such narratives ignored the agency and voices of subaltern groups, such as peasants, laborers, and tribal communities.

Building upon this foundation, several postcolonial scholars further developed the critical examination of power, knowledge, and representation. In her seminal essay Can the Subaltern Speak?, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak questioned whether marginalized voices—especially those of subaltern women—could truly be represented within dominant intellectual and cultural frameworks, or whether they were inevitably silenced by hegemonic. Another major theorist in this field, Homi Bhabha, also focused on the relationship between knowledge and social power relations. His analysis of identity formation under colonialism revealed the complexities of power dynamics and how they persist in postcolonial societies.

Together, these scholars significantly reshaped historical and cultural studies by emphasising the voices and experiences of those previously ignored in dominant narratives. Their work continues to influence contemporary debates on history, identity, and the politics of knowledge production.

The Sri Lankan historiography from very beginning consists of two distinct yet interrelated traditions: the Great Tradition and the Little Traditions. These traditions reflect different perspectives, sources, and modes of historical transmission that have influenced the way Sri Lanka’s past has been recorded and understood. The Great Tradition refers to the formal, written historiography primarily associated with elite, religious, and state-sponsored chronicles. The origins of the Great Tradition of historiography directly linked to the introduction of Buddhism to the island by a mission sent by Emperor Asoka of the Maurya dynasty of India in the third century B.C. The most significant sources in this tradition include the Mahāvaṃsa, Dīpavaṃsa, Cūḷavaṃsa, and other Buddhist chronicles that were written in Pali and Sanskrit. These works, often compiled by Buddhist monks, emphasise the island’s connection to Buddhism, the role of kingship, and the concept of Sri Lanka as a sacred land linked to the Buddha’s teachings. The Great Tradition was influenced by royal patronage and aimed to legitimise rulers by presenting them as protectors of Buddhism and the Sinhala people.

In contrast, the Little Tradition represents oral histories, folk narratives, and local accounts that were passed down through generations in vernacular languages such as Sinhala and Tamil. These traditions include village folklore, ballads, temple stories, and regional histories that were not necessarily written down but played a crucial role in shaping collective memory. While the Great Tradition often portrays a centralised, Sinhala-Buddhist perspective, the Little Tradition captures the diverse experiences of various communities, including Tamils, Muslims.

What about the history of those who are either unrepresented or only marginally represented in the Great Tradition? They, too, have their own interpretations of the past, independent of dominant narratives. Migration from the four corners of the world did not cease after the 3rd century BC—so what about the cultural traditions that emerged from these movements? Can we reduce these collective memories solely to the Sokari Nadagams?

The Great Traditions often celebrate the history of the ruling or majority ethnic group. However, Little Traditions play a crucial role in preserving the historical memory and distinct identities of marginalised communities, such as the Vedda and Rodiya peoples. Beyond caste history, Little Traditions also reflect the provincial histories and historical memories of peripheral communities. Examples include the Wanni Rajawaliya and the Kurunegala Visthraya. The historical narratives presented in these sources do not always align with those of the Great Tradition.

The growth of caste histories is a key example of Little Historical Traditions. Jana Wansaya remains an important source in this context. After the 12th century, many non-Goigama castes in Sri Lanka preserved their own oral historical traditions, which were later documented in written form. These caste-based histories are significant because they provide a localised, community-centered perspective on historical developments. Unlike the dominant narratives found in the Great Tradition, they capture the social, economic, and cultural transformations experienced by different caste groups. For instance, the Karava, Salagama, and Durava castes have distinct historical narratives that have been passed down through generations.

Ananda S. Kulasuriya traced this historical tradition back to the formal establishment of Buddhism, noting that it continued even after the decline of the Polonnaruwa Kingdom. He identified these records as “minor chronicles” and classified them into three categories: histories of the Sangha and Sasana, religious writings of historical interest, and secular historical works. According to him, the first category includes the Pujavaliya, the Katikavatas, the Nikaya Sangrahaya, and the Sangha Sarana. The second category comprises the Thupavamsa, Bodhi Vamsa, Anagatha Vamsa, Dalada Sirita, and Dhatu Vamsa, along with the two Sinhalese versions of the Pali Hatthavanagalla Vihara Vamsa, namely the Ehu Attanagalu Vamsa and the Saddharma Ratnakaraya. The third category consists of works that focus more on secular events than religious developments, primarily the Rajavaliya. Additionally, this category includes the Raja Ratnakaraya and several minor works such as the Sulu Rajavaliya, Vanni Rajavaliya, Alakesvara Yuddhaya, Sri Lanka Kadaim Pota, Kurunegala Vistaraya, Buddharajavaliya, Bamba Uppattiya, Sulu Pujavaliya, Matale Kadaim Pota, Kula Nitiya, and Janavamsaya (Kulasuriya, 1978:5). Except for a few mentioned in the third category, all other works are products of the Great Historical tradition.

Over the last few decades, Gananath Obeyesekera has traversed the four corners of Sri Lanka, recovering works of the Little Historical Traditions and making them accessible for historical inquiry, offering a new lens through which to reread Sri Lankan history. Obeyesekera’s efforts to recover the Little Historical Traditions remind us that history is never monolithic; rather, it is a contested space where power, culture, and memory continuously shape our understanding of the past. By bringing the Little Historical Traditions into the fold of Sri Lankan historiography, Obeyesekera challenges us to move beyond dominant narratives and embrace a more pluralistic understanding of the past. The recovery of these traditions is not just an act of historical inquiry but a reminder that power shapes what we remember—and what we forget. Sri Lankan history, like all histories, is a dialogue between great and little traditions and it is to engage both of them. His latest work, The Doomed King: A Requiem for Sri Vikrama Rajasinghe, is a true testament to his re-reading of Sri Lankan history.

BY GAMINI KEERAWELLA

Continue Reading

Trending