Features
Joining in Psychosocial work back home in Sri Lanka
(Excerpted from Memories that linger…..My journey in the world of disability by Padmani Mendis)
When my memories come back to Sri Lanka they call out urgently, “Remember first the Psychosocial Project!” For the PSP was unique. It was implemented during the long conflict for our people affected by it in the northern and eastern parts of our country. Led by Gameela Samarasinghe and Ananda Galapatti with Harini Amarasuriya, Kusala Wettasinghe and others.
Later, but still also during the conflict, with some of these and other committed psychosocial workers memories of meeting needs this time of our “Ranaviru” or disabled soldiers. This was with the Ranaviru Seva Authority, RVSA, under the chairmanship of Dr. Narme Wickramasinghe with the able assistance of Dr. Visakha Dissanayake. The RVSA worked in the areas where our armed forces came from.
Within both the PSP and the RVSA I had the privilege of being invited to work with our psychosocial workers to see to the disability needs of civilians in the first project and of members of our armed forces in the second with whom they interacted. Those were difficult times for our people, but as always, our young professionals stepped forward to serve their fellow country women and men.
Introducing Community-based Rehabilitation to the NGO Sector in Sri Lanka
To continue with memories of my journey, I have to go back now to the year 1979 and the month of August, when I returned home after my first assignment for the WHO in Geneva. Whilst I was carrying out my task participating with so many others in the global development of the concept, strategy and technology of CBR (Community Based Rehabilitation), my thoughts were constantly of how these would fit so well in Sri Lanka to benefit our disabled people.
So, no sooner I returned to Colombo, I made an appointment to meet the Deputy Leader of the NGO Sarvodaya, which in Sri Lanka has been the most well-known NGO in community development. The work of Sarvodaya was based on social mobilisation, just as CBR is. I had come to know Mrs. Sita Rajasooriya when she was a Commissioner in the Girl Guide Movement and I was a teenage girl guide.
Over a chat about what I had been doing in Geneva, I gave her a copy of the WHO Manual and asked her whether she would look at it. She called me a year or so later to tell me that Sarvodaya was implementing a CBR Project in the district of Kalutara in the Western province. I have been there and elsewhere with Sarvodaya several times, visiting with them their people in their homes.
Over the next several years, other NGOs called on me to help them start implementing CBR in many parts of Sri Lanka – Fridsro in Kandy in the Central province, Navajeevana in Tangalle in the Southern province and SEED (Social, Economic and Educational Developers) in Vavuniya in the Northern province were some of the larger ones. All the projects had funding partnerships with outside donors. With evidence of visible and measurable impact, projects grew. In the long-term however potential growth was sometimes stunted by limited funding.
I shall come back to Fridsro later and its relationship with Government CBR programmes under the leadership of Gihan Galekotuwa. Fridsro sans Gihan Galekotuwa has now had to fade out of the realm of disability due to unavailability of sponsorship.
Sarvodaya, Navajeevana and SEED led respectively by Dr. A.T. Ariyaratne, and later his son Vinya, the late Kumarini Wikramasuriya and Ponnambalam Narasingham, together with many other NGOs continue their work in disability promoting CBR. The last of the three named above gave his formal name reluctantly when I asked him just now on the telephone, emphasising that he preferred being called “Singham”. This is what I had always known him by.
Time spent with these organisations so long ago are among my most memorable. With SEED it was focused on teaching their staff. SEED had been within sight of the conflict. We used for teaching the top floor of their three-storey building with a roof made of green metal sheets. Made the room very, very warm. But the breeze that wafted through its open sides compensated somewhat.
Here we had some of the most participatory of my teaching sessions in Sri Lanka. SEED staff were active, interested, motivated. Both the heat generated in the atmosphere and that in debate called for frequent ice breakers. These were innovative and enjoyable. But mostly I sat out, needing for myself a mental and physical break from all that dynamism around me.
The only hotel in Vavuniya was filled to capacity with families from the North fleeing the conflict. I stayed there only once. Having to jump over a smelly open sewer made so by disrepair to get into the hotel was off-putting. The disrepair extended to the inside of the hotel because such was the time. Compensating for this the management was concerned and kind, and had found for me a small room with many stairs to climb to get to it. I had all my meals here in my room because there was no other place for it. It was simply furnished with a bed, desk and chair.
There was no kitchen either and the hotel bought me my food from outside. An upset tummy on a few occasions indicated to me that I should find other lodgings next time. So on my following visits, SEED found for me a convent to stay at. Here, living with nuns, I felt cherished. I was their first paying guest. They were truly beautiful with their warmth and their empathy.
Other Experiences with NGOs
Many years later, and still during the long conflict, I was back North again twice on my journey. The first time I was in Jaffna. It was with Save the Children Fund (SCF), UK. They sent me so I could advise them how they could include actions for disabled children within their Northern programme.
Much of Jaffna district at the time was under the control of the Tamil Tigers. SCF had to obtain special permission for me to come to Jaffna, which, it turned out, they did quite easily. I believe it was easy because someone had got my name wrong. On the letter granting permission it was written “Pathmini”, the way it is in Tamil. I was given permission to travel anywhere I needed. I was not even stopped at checkpoints. Everywhere I went, it seemed as though I was expected.
The next work assignment in the North at this time included coming back to Vavuniya. I was here with Hameed of UNICEF as part of a series of teaching assignments I did to introduce to district and divisional officials issues related to disability in children. And to discuss with them how they may deal with such issues during the course of their work, so attempting to include childhood disability in development strategies during this time of conflict.
The series also covered Puttalam, Mannar and Trincomalee, stretching out across our island. As far as I know, those workshops were never followed up. I hope the seed had been planted in many an interested mind and would have taken root in some. It was a difficult time for all.
Before my memories of the NGO sector move on, there is another that asks for recall. Save the Children Fund, UK showed much concern for disabled children, making their work inclusive to the extent possible. With that in mind, they had me develop for them in partnership with teachers, parents, children and others, “A Guide for Preschool Teachers”. SCF had it published in all three languages and it was widely used, especially in CBR. It helped bring into the preschool mainstream many young children at an early age. This was a task that gave me much satisfaction.
This was soon after the Tsunami of 2006. Looking back, it is clear that activities of the International NGOs at this time was at a peak. Sri Lanka was the beneficiary of generous help from a caring world.
How CBR came to be in government
Dudley Dissanayake was the Director of the School of Social Work managed by the Department of Social Services. This was located on Bagatalle Road in a two-storied house. Rent was paid for by Government. One day I received a call from Dudley asking if we could meet. We met the next day. He told me about the reason for his call.
He said that quite recently he had found in the back seat of the pick-up truck that he drove, a photocopy of a book. He did not know how it had got there, but his staff shared the use of the pick-up truck. They used this also to transport students for official tasks.
The book had been made by WHO and was about disabled people. It had my name on the cover along with two others. Dudley wanted to know what it was about. I was of course only too happy to share with him the work I was doing in Geneva with my colleagues Gunnel Nelson and Einar Helander and with innumerable others spread throughout many countries.
This was now 1981 which the UN had declared as the “International Year of the Disabled”. It was customary for the UN to do such things on subjects that they felt required the attention of member states. To mark its significance, Dudley felt that students of social work should have an exposure with disabled people and disability. We discussed how this could be done.
The result was that two students expressed their wish to carry out their final year project study testing the usefulness of the Manual in Sri Lanka. Dudley asked me if I could help them, and I believe I was fortunate to be able to do so. I said that first I would have the Manual translated into Sinhala.
For this purpose, I obtained the willing help of two physiotherapists, formerly favourite students. By name Wettimuny Silva and Somadasa Mohettige. While they did the translation in their own homes in the evenings after work, we met at my dining table in my home in Swarna Road for joint sessions which, as you can imagine, were called for quite often. We had the Sinhala Manual ready in no time. Wetta and Some, as their friends called them, and I maintain the bond we established at that time and continue our friendship.
First Field Tests in Sri Lanka
Dudley had the necessary photocopies made. I was soon walking the two villages of Meegolla and Kahandawelipotha in the Kurunegala district with the two students of social work. They had selected between them 20 children who had disability all under the age of 14 years. At the end of the six months of the project, 19 of the 20 showed improvements. Some of those children still live vividly in my memory.
One was Mala, aged eight years, who had cerebral palsy. Her mother cared for her with utmost love. She bathed, dressed and fed Mala in the morning and sat her on a chair at a window. Mala spent her day watching passers-by on the road.
That was until the two students of social work came into their lives. Soon Mala was learning to walk using bars her father made in the garden using long bamboos. She was helping her mother in the kitchen. Children from the neighbourhood came to her house to play with her. Hopefully in a few months she would go to the village school. The students arranged for the local social service worker to come to see Mala. The social service worker will get a wheelchair for Mala.
Another was 11-year-old Nandani. She too did not go to school. Her parents could not see how she could do that, seeing she could not speak. But she could hear. Like Ntchadi in faraway Serowe in Botswana, she too looked on longingly when her young siblings went to school. Counselling from the students, an appointment with the principal and the education officer and Nandani was in school.
When we visited the school before the project ended, Nandani was already showing signs of leadership in the classroom. She was a bright girl. She will surely catch up with her peers before long.
Dudley shared with UNICEF Colombo the study and the results of the work of the students. He was able to secure from UNICEF formal support for the development of CBR as project studies for a number of his students over the next few years. But within three years UNICEF, with the Department of Social Work and the help of students, started a large CBR project in Anuradhapura district.
In time Dudley, climbing the administrative ladder step by step reached the Ministry of Social Welfare. It was first as Senior Assistant Secretary, then as Additional Secretary, and finally reached the peak as Secretary of the Ministry. Dudley took CBR there with him. Dudley had the Manual translated into Tamil and introduced its extended use in the North. From then on CBR grew within Government with generous allocations directly from the national budget.
Disability Studies Unit – Early Years in Sri Lanka
I shared with you in the section above how the University of Kelaniya, in 1993 with support from Sweden, set up the Disability Studies Unit or DSU and of my role in it. I also continued in that section to share with you my journey in disability during my time there, focusing on aspects of international work. This is a suitable time perhaps to reflect on my journey with the DSU in Sri Lanka.
It was Anoja Wijeyesekera, at the time a Programme Officer at UNICEF Colombo who introduced the DSU to the Ministry of Social Welfare. Viji Jegarasasingham was the Additional Secretary at the time. Mrs. J. was one dynamic lady with a mission. That mission was to ensure the effective functioning of her ministry and other institutions under her purview. She was later promoted as Secretary and held that post for many years until her retirement from Government service.
Viji Jegarajasingham, our Mrs J., set up within the Ministry a Resource Group on CBR with just five of us as members. One of them was Gihan Galekotuwa or Gale who was then the Disability Programme Head at the NGO Fridsro. Our Resource Group strengthened the relationship in disability work between this ministry and that of health and of employment. This was with the aim of planting the seed of multi-sectoral cooperation to benefit disabled people with a wider perspective of their rights.
Gale was convinced that CBR was the way to go if the rights of disabled children and adults were to be fulfilled with their inclusion and participation in their communities and in society at large. Fridsro had developed their CBR capacity by implementing CBR themselves in parts of the Central Province where they were located. Starting in Poojapitya Division and spreading to 11 others in the Kandy district. These were developed as learning and teaching areas.
Gale soon had Fridsro draw up an MOU with the Ministry of Social Welfare to provide technical and other support to the Ministry to improve their CBR programme both in quality and in coverage. This agreement and action continued for many years, even after I was no longer at the DSU.
Within a few years many disabled children and adults spread out in most of Sri Lanka’s districts had been reached. A change was being brought about in their lives, families and communities. Monitored continuously and evaluated at intervals by Fridsro.
Working with me at the DSU was Somadasa Kodikara, a former student of mine at the School of Physiotherapy. Representing the DSU “Kodi” and I worked with the Ministry and with Fridsro as a threesome to reach disabled people in more than 50% of Sri Lanka’s districts during those few years. The DSU had roles in both teaching and in monitoring. We soon learned that Sri Lanka government workers were loath to submit written reports. As for us, we were happy monitoring through field visits. For us it was any excuse to go to the people.
During our years together at the DSU, Kodi and I continued to evaluate the WHO Manual in the two languages with periodic revisions and continuous improvement. Fridsro provided financial support for publishing them in both languages for field use. Kodi and I also produced and published through the DSU much teaching-learning material for both community workers and for their divisional and district supervisors.
Soon after the DSU was born, we were invited to link up with the Global Disability Database maintained jointly by Uppsala University and AHRTAG in London. Before I left the DSU in 1998, we had an agreement drawn up with the International Health Unit of London University and the Hospital for Children, Great Ormond Street to start the Education of Speech and Language Therapists or SLTs.
. The DSU has come a long way. And it will continue its own journey as it grows unendingly.
Features
Combining local resources,traditional knowledge and science to build a food-secure Sri Lanka
World Food Day 2026: Innovating today for a better food future
by Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
What will be on the Sri Lankan dinner table ten years from now? Will our children be able to get nutritious food at a price their families can afford? Will farmers be able to grow enough despite changing weather and rising costs? And how much of the food we produce will actually reach the consumer, instead of being lost or wasted along the way?
These questions can’t wait. A farmer faces unpredictable weather. A family faces rising food costs. Fruit goes unsold after a good harvest. Some children do not get enough nutrition. The future of food is tied to the future of Sri Lanka itself.
World Food Day 2026 is a chance to look beyond the immediate problems and ask whether we can build a food system that feeds our people well, gives farmers better opportunities, protects the environment and makes better use of what we already have. The answer can be yes, but we will have to think differently.
We are not starting from zero. Sri Lanka has diverse crops, fisheries, traditional food knowledge, indigenous varieties, research institutions, universities and a young generation able to create new solutions. What we need is to bring these together and act. Producing more will not secure our food future on its own. It will depend on how intelligently we produce, process, preserve, distribute and consume food.
Making more of what we already have
Innovation does not always mean inventing something new. Often it means finding better uses for the resources we have.
Sri Lanka grows traditional rice varieties, kurakkan, green gram, cowpea, jackfruit, breadfruit, cassava, sweet potato, coconut and palmyrah. All of them have great potential for modern, nutritious, value-added foods. Jackfruit and breadfruit can be made into flour and other convenient products. Traditional rice varieties can go into new foods that suit changing consumer needs. Palmyrah, with its strong cultural heritage, can create new income through better processing, packaging, quality assurance and market development.
The aim is to connect our traditional food knowledge with modern consumer needs and technology, while keeping our food heritage.
Stop wasting the food we produce
Reducing food loss and waste should be a major priority. Seasonal fruits such as mango, banana, papaya and pineapple can be lost in large quantities when production exceeds demand or when storage, transport and processing facilities are inadequate. With suitable technology, these fruits can become dried products, pulps, powders, beverages and other shelf-stable foods.
Agricultural and fisheries by-products are resources too. They could be turned into food ingredients, animal feed, bio-based products and other useful materials, which would move us toward a more circular food economy.
Technology alone is not enough. We need stronger local processing facilities, cold storage, efficient transport, collection centres and market information systems, especially close to where food is produced. Cutting food loss raises the value of what our farmers and fishers already produce.
Nutrition and food safety come first
Food security means more than having enough food. People also need food that is safe and nutritious.
Sri Lanka can develop affordable, nutritious foods from local pulses, grains, vegetables, fruits and fish. Children and other vulnerable groups should get particular attention. Schoolchildren in particular deserve a focus: safe, nutritious, locally sourced products for school feeding programs would support child nutrition, local farmers and domestic food industries at the same time.
Food safety must stay at the centre of food innovation. Good hygiene, quality control, laboratory testing, traceability and appropriate food safety systems are what make new products safe as well as attractive and nutritious.
A food system that can cope with climate change
Climate change is already affecting agricultural production, water availability, crop yields and food prices. We need food systems that can handle changing conditions. That means climate-resilient crops, efficient water use, soil and water conservation, better storage and resource-efficient food processing.
Traditional knowledge matters here. Generations of Sri Lankan farmers have developed practices suited to local climates and ecosystems. Combining that experience with modern science can give us solutions that fit local conditions and are sustainable. Technology alone will not build the future of food. Science, experience and local knowledge together can.
Give young people a bigger role
Sri Lanka’s universities have an important part to play in shaping our food future. Young people should be encouraged to identify real problems in the food system and work on practical solutions in areas such as food waste, sustainable packaging, nutrition, food safety, modernising traditional foods and digital technologies.
A good research project should not always end as a research paper. Where appropriate, research should be supported to move on to products, technologies, enterprises and community solutions. That needs stronger partnerships between universities and industry, along with mentoring, research funding, business support and market connections. If young researchers and entrepreneurs can turn their ideas into viable food innovations, both consumers and producers will benefit.
A pathway designed for Sri Lanka
We do not need to copy food-system models from other countries. We can build a pathway that suits our own resources, culture and needs. It would bring together local resources, traditional knowledge, scientific research, appropriate technology and entrepreneurship, with farmers, fishers, universities, research institutions, food industries, entrepreneurs and policymakers working side by side.
The goal goes beyond selling raw materials. We need to create more value, reduce waste, improve nutrition, generate jobs and strengthen rural livelihoods. This matters especially for small and medium-scale food enterprises, which can drive local economic development when they get the right technical, financial and market support.
The choices we make today
The food future will not create itself. It will be shaped by what we grow, what we research, what we process, what we consume and what we choose not to waste.
So, the question for World Food Day 2026 is this: what can we do today so that every Sri Lankan has safe, nutritious, affordable and sustainable food tomorrow?
The answers are already around us, in our farms, fisheries, food businesses, universities, laboratories and communities. We have the resources, the traditional knowledge, the scientific expertise and talented young people. What we need now is to connect them and act.
A better food future begins with the choices we make today.
Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
Senior Lecturer, Department of Biosystems Technology, Faculty of Technology, University of Ruhuna
Features
20th Anniversary of Digampathana blast – the day Sri Lanka Navy cried
By Admiral Ravindra C Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc
(Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan
The Digampathana suicide truck attack on 16th October 2006 remains the deadliest single strike in Sri Lanka Navy history, leaving scars that time cannot erase.
It was a seemingly ordinary Monday morning on 16 October 2006, but the calm of that day would soon be shattered in a way none of us could have imagined. As the Commandant of the Naval and Maritime Academy and Flag Officer Commanding Naval Fleet at Trincomalee, I was aware that a number of my cadets were travelling that morning, part of a convoy of fifteen buses carrying naval personnel from Trincomalee, Colombo, and other bases, heading toward Dambulla to rendezvous with another group. The convoy also included trucks and escort vehicles, a routine movement planned and coordinated with the army to ensure the roads were clear. The morning started quietly. Some personnel greeted friends, handed over their weapons, or strolled to a nearby tea shop. It all seemed so ordinary—too ordinary for what would come next.

Sri Lanka Navy sunk LTTE Ships carrying arms, ammunition and warlike materials thousand miles away from Sri Lanka in Indian Ocean in September and October 2007.
By late morning, both convoys had reached the small ground at Digampathana, near the Sigiriya junction, and personnel mingled briefly, unaware that a carefully orchestrated act of terror was waiting. Then, suddenly, an empty half-truck veered directly into the convoy. It exploded with a ferocity I can still recall as if it were yesterday. Nuts, bolts, and high explosives tore through the air. Pandemonium erupted instantly. I later learned that 107 of our naval personnel were killed on the spot and another 153 critically injured. The scene was indescribable—bodies scattered, vehicles mangled, personal effects strewn across the ground. I remember later hearing that the head of the suicide bomber was recovered more than 100 meters away from the blast, a grim testament to the sheer force of the explosion.
I was in my office at the Naval and Maritime Academy when my mobile phone rang. A young midshipman from the 21st intake called, his voice trembling: “Sir, there was a huge explosion at the convoy point! Many are dead … my batch mate Wijesundara is among them.” I immediately jumped into my jeep with my escort Chief Petty Officer and driver and rushed to Digampathana, relying on every ounce of my driving skill to reach the scene. The journey, which usually took little more than an hour, felt endless that day, each passing mile weighed down by dread.
When I arrived, I was confronted with a sight that no training can prepare you for. The injured were being rushed to Dambulla Hospital, where doctors and nurses worked tirelessly, improvising in ways that saved lives despite the overwhelming chaos. I went back to the site after visiting the hospital. The remains of our naval personnel were scattered across the ground, and someone had begun collecting weapons and protective gear. I immediately contacted Surgeon Rear Admiral Nico Jayasekara and received his instructions: collect all body parts in separate bags and transport them to the Trincomalee Naval Hospital mortuary. This gruesome work had to be done with care and dignity, and it filled the icebox in my vehicle. Through DNA testing initiated by Rear Admiral Nico, we were able to identify every naval personnel lost that day, bringing some closure to grieving families.
The Navy Commander at the time, Vice Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda, was devastated. I had worked closely with him and knew how deeply he cared for his men. He ensured that the fallen were honoured with full ceremonial naval funerals at Welisara Naval Base, attended by families and comrades. Sixty-seven funerals were conducted in a single day—a number that still haunts me.
The Digampathana attack remains the largest single loss of naval life in our history. It was a day of sorrow, but also a day that reinforced our resolve. The tragedy galvanized the Navy to target the LTTE Sea Tiger wing with renewed determination and reshaped our maritime operations forever. Every time I think of that day, I remember not just the lives lost, but the courage, professionalism, and dedication of those who survived, those who treated the injured, and those who ensured the fallen were honored properly. May the souls of our naval hero’s rest in peace, their sacrifice guiding us and inspiring generations of naval personnel to come.
Features
‘Murder at Whitby Abbey’
Tales of Mystery and Suspense – 24
I was intrigued by the title of a book I found in a book drop at the condominium of a friend, Murder at Whitby Abbey, and I brought it home with me though I will not be able to return it in the near future. It was described on the cover page as ‘a standout in the crowded medieval mystery field’, though I fear I do not know of other books in this field, apart from the Cadfael series, which I have dealt with earlier.
The book, by Cassandra Clark, is set during the reign of Richard II and has as a backdrop his precarious position, which led to his being replaced, and murdered, by his cousin Henry, who reigned as Henry IV. It is a gloomy book, the action taking place in the twelve days of Christmas leading up to the Epiphany. And the gloom is pervasive, even though this is supposed to be a time of festivity, with mummers performing, and many of those in the guest house where the heroine stays going to town to enjoy themselves, with much drinking and much music, which also fills the guesthouse.
The heroine Hildegarde is a nun, sent to try to acquire a relic being sold by Whitby Abbey, though this was also a penance set by the Abbot of the monastery that governed her abbess because she had had sex with a man. Soon after she and her companions reach the Abbey set high on a cliff, she finds that there are other bidders, and soon suspects that the hierarchy, not perhaps the Abbot who seems a weakling, but his rapacious bursar, is determined to make money, and not above creating false relics to sell to several aspirants.
After Hildegarde and her Cistercian companions – Whitby is a Benedictine Foundation – two monks, Gregory and Egbert, and a young priest Mark, reach the abbey, they find that Aelwyn, a monk they had met on their way to the guesthouse had died. This was in the apple store, and they realize, when they find the surplices of novices stuffed into the air vents, that he had been left to suffocate in the overwhelming scent of apples.
The Cistercians are asked to look into the death, perhaps because they are likely to get no cooperation from the Abbey folk, but perhaps because those in charge are keen to know what happened. And the infirmarer, an old monk, suggests Hildegarde talk to a man called Edred who worked for the bursar, and had been a friend of Aelwyn’s. But Edred too is killed, before he can keep an appointment he had made with Hildegarde, drowned in a pool near the farmhouse of the Abbey.
Meanwhile tensions arise between the fisherfolk and the abbey for the bursar wants to charge them for using the beach that technically belongs to the abbey to dry their fish and their nets. This leads to physical battles, when the guards used by the abbey, under the command it seems of the bursar whose determination to make money is not resisted by the abbot and the prior, try to storm the area where the fishermen live.
Hildegard finds out more about what had happened through two youngsters, one of whom Torold is the son of Aelwyn by a woman who worked as a prostitute for a cartel, and with whom Mark fell in love. The other works on the farm and had seen Edred meet someone near the pool, after which that someone left the place by himself. And the boy had also found in the pool a sort of dagger with the seal of the abbey.
He and his dog, and Torold who follows her, rescue Hildegarde from a man at arms who has waylaid her and tries to rape her earlier. Escaping into the abbey she was nearly been raped then by the bursar, but she managed to escape, in the process setting fire to him and the muniments room, which led, when he was rescued, to the discovery of a box with the money he said had been stolen, blame being cast on both Aelwyn and Edred.
Matters come to a head when the fisherfolk try to storm the abbey, being resisted by the men at arms stationed on the towers. But then Hildegarde realizes that behind the murders was the bursar’s clerk, whom she pursued to the cathedral. There is great drama then as she escapes from him when he tries to kill her, and then from the man at arms who had tried to both rape and kill her, but they both fall from the scaffolding she had climbed, the latter coming from a tower where he had been stationed.
Both of them think they run the rapacity of the abbey, the latter claiming to work for the nobles opposed to Richard, who is presented throughout the book as devoted to his subjects, not to power or money. But though the villains die, the bursar continues, having got over the hysteria the fire had caused and his acknowledgment then of guilt – and though the abbot and the prior seem less vicious, whether they will be able to assert themselves is questionable.
Before the climax, when the others in the guesthouse were leaving, Hildegarde found that two of them were in possession of the relic, for which they seem to have paid well. Hildegarde herself had made a derisory offer, but before she leaves the abbot gives her the relic, perhaps in gratitude for what she and her fellow Cistercians had discovered, the abbey having made as much money as it needed and more from the gullible other buyers.
Mark’s inamorata is saved from the stews because she moves in with Edred’s widow whom the bursar had thrown out of the rooms he occupied when her husband was found dead. Hildegarde had paid for lodgings, in a house run by the man who ran the brothels, but he had a kindly side and was going to finance them to make nets for the fishermen.
So, the Cistercians set off for their home as swiftly as they can to get there on the day of the Epiphany, having stopped en route to pray for King Richard whose birthday it was.
-
News6 days agoSri Lanka escalates anti-graft drive with Shiranthi’s jailing
-
Latest News5 days agoFarhan and Sadaqat help Pakistan seal series in style
-
News6 days agoIranian ships stranded, Lanka fears US sanctions
-
Latest News4 days agoNissanka’s return headlines Sri Lanka’s Test squad against Pakistan
-
Features5 days agoIntake 16: 45 years of duty and honour
-
News5 days agoMalwathu Chapter issues statement on talks with President over Gnanasara Thera’s robes
-
News6 days agoNavi Pillay’s Lankan affairs in focus as she wins 2026 Nobel Peace Prize
-
News5 days agoCP alleges NPP has taken the blame for illegal US sanctions on Iranian vessels

