Connect with us

Features

The Journey of the Relics

Published

on

The relic casket (centre) that held the relics.

by Shashank Sinha

The very mention of Sanchi, located about 50 kilometres from Bhopal, brings to mind a place where one can see the beginnings, efflorescence and decay of Buddhist art and architecture – from the third century BCE to 12th century CE. What is less known about Sanchi is the fact that it was also a site for an interesting and prolonged ‘battle of relics’ fought across continents. A number of relics and artefacts excavated by British archaeologists in India and elsewhere in the late 19th or early 20th century, eventually found their way to museums or personal collections in Britain. While some campaigns to get back Indian artefacts, such as the Amravati Marbles, have received a great deal of publicity, other successful efforts, like the one to retrieve the Buddhist relics, stayed below the public radar.

The manner in which the relics of Buddhist saints Sariputta and Moggallana were discovered at the sites of Sanchi and Satdhara (about 10 km west of Sanchi) and eventually sold to the Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A Museum) in London the protracted agitation by the Maha Bodhi Society which succeeded in getting them back from England; and the way in which the relics were taken on a tour of Asia before getting re-enshrined at Sanchi in 1952, is a fascinating story. More so because it highlights the interplay of several significant trajectories – colonial archaeology’s project of creating and museumising the Buddha by excavating sites connected to his life, the rise of subcontinental Buddhist nationalism, and the nation-building project.

Unravelling the journey

Alexander Cunningham, the first Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), mentions that the two celebrated Chinese pilgrims, Fa-Hien (399-411 CE) and Xuanzang (629-41 CE), who had come to India to visit the sacred sites related to the Buddha had reported that the relics of these two saints were also enshrined in a stupa in Mathura. Cunningham believed that these relics were as widely scattered as those of the Buddha himself and were distributed and enshrined in other stupas as well.

Two things become clear here – by the time Stupa three at Sanchi was constructed (around second century BCE), relic worship had become very prevalent in Buddhism and relics other than those of the Buddha were also being worshipped. What is not clear is how the relics in question reached Sanchi. Basing himself on the Buddhist source Asokavadana, Cunningham argued that the Mauryan emperor Ashoka had opened up the original eight stupas constructed immediately after the death of the Buddha and redistributed the relics between the several thousand stupas he built across the subcontinent. In the process, some may have reached Sanchi.

How the relics reached England

In 1849, Captain Fred C Maisey and Alexander Cunningham were employed by the Government of India to prepare illustrated reports on the stupas of Sanchi. In 1851, they excavated Stupas two and three and found relic caskets of Sariputta and Moggallana in Stupa three. The caskets, made of steatite, were placed in two stone boxes, each containing a small bone fragment, a garnet, lapis lazuli and crystal beads, and pearls. Sariputta’s casket contained two pieces of sandalwood, presumably from his funeral pyre. A similar set of relics of the two saints was found enshrined in Stupa two at Satdhara as well.

According to historian and Indologist Michael Willis, Cunningham and Maisey divided up the finds according to their tastes— while the former preferred the relics with inscriptions that were of archaeological interest, the latter took the pieces which were of greater artistic value. Cunningham transported his reliquaries to England on two ships, one of which reportedly sank off the east coast of Ceylon. Maisey made separate arrangements for the reliquaries in his possession to be shipped to England.

The small stupa at Sanchi here the relics were found

There is a debate among scholars on whether the reliquaries of the two Buddhist saints which were returned to Maha Bodhi Society and re-enshrined at Sanchi had been discovered there or at Satdhara. Some scholars believe that the reliquaries taken from Sanchi had gone to Cunningham, which means they sank along with the ship that was carrying them. Art historian Gary Tartakov and Michael Willis have argued that the relics that were eventually returned to India by the Victoria & Albert (V&A)Museum were those taken from Stupa two at Satdhara.

However, based on records related to filing and documentation of the concerned relics at the museum and Cunningham’s correspondence with the Sinhalese monk Subhuti (1835-1917), Brekke argues that the relics brought back to Sanchi had neither formed a part of Cunningham’s collection nor were found at Satdhara. According to him, they were part of Maisey’s collection from Sanchi which were initially lent to the South Kensington Museum in 1866 (it became the V&A in 1899), with his son’s niece, Dorothy Saward, selling the reliquaries to the V&A Museum for 250 pounds in 1921.

The battle for the relics

On April 17, 1932, on behalf of the Buddhist Mission (the British Maha Bodhi Society) one G.A. Dempster wrote to the director of the Indian Museum (the Indian section of South Kensington Museum which officially opened in 1880 and was popularly referred to as Indian Museum till 1945). He requested the museum to hand the ashes of Buddha’s most famous disciples to the custody of the Mulagandha Kuti Vihara established in Sarnath, near Varanasi. Brekke says he was evidently inspired by the recent news of the return of the Buddha’s relics to India which had been re-enshrined in a purpose-built edifice in Sarnath.

Dempster was informed that the Board of Education was unable to authorize the V & A Museum to comply with the request. On October 18, 1932, E.W. Adikaram, honorary secretary of the Buddhist Mission, approached the V&A Museum to allow the Buddhists to worship the relics on the 2476th death anniversary of Sariputta, falling on November 13th 1932. He requested that the relics be sent to the Buddhist Mission headquarters for a few hours on the designated day. The museum authorities acceded to the request on the condition that the relics be venerated at the Indian Museum itself.

After a seven year-gap, in 1938, the V&A Museum received a request from a British Buddhist named Frank Mellor, requesting the museum to set up a seat in front of the relics for the Buddhists to worship. When his request was denied, Mellor, who became a “headache” for the museum authorities, followed up with a flurry of letters demanding that the relics be handed over the to the Buddhists. Archaeologist and historian Himanshu Prabha Ray points out that in March 1939, the trustees of the Shwedagon Pagoda in Burma also lodged a strong protest with the British government for allowing the relics to be exhibited in a museum rather than enshrining them in a pagoda. There were similar representations from other British Buddhists and soon the issue started attracting media attention.

In 1939, the museum received a letter from the India Office which, in turn, had received a letter from the Government of India, inquiring about the possession of such relics and the possibility of their return to the Maha Bodhi Society. The letter enclosed a resolution unanimously passed by the Buddha Society of Bombay, appealing for the return of the relics to the Maha Bodhi Society of Calcatta. With this letter, Brekke argues, the case assumed a new level of significance as the Government of India spoke on behalf of the Indian Buddhists; the English Buddhists got sidelined.

The issue regained momentum after the Second World War. On the 20 February , 1947, the relics were handed over to the Maha Bodhi Society representative, Daya Hewavitarne, by the Secretary of State for India. They were carried to Sri Lanka where they received a regal reception and were put on public display for two years. Soon it came to light that the relics that had been handed over were actually plaster casts of the original caskets. In June 1948, India’s high commissioner to Britain wrote to the under-secretary of state of the Commonwealth Relations Office, asking for the return of the original caskets containing the sacred relics of the two saints. On October 18, 1948, Sir D. N. Mitra, the high commissioner’s legal advisor, received the original caskets on behalf of the Government of India. The relics were sent to Sri Lanka and from there to India to be presented to the Maha Bodhi Society.

Sri Lankan monk Ven. Matiwella Sangharatna hands the relics to the Dalai Lama in Tibet

The act of wresting the relics from Britain, Brekke argues, represented “a mix of religious piety and a strong desire for international recognition for the case of Buddhist revival in Asia” from the end of the 19th century. It also generated a struggle for power and authority in the interface between British archaeology and Buddhist religious revival—a struggle between British administrators, collectors and museum authorities, and Buddhist leaders.

Journey of the relics in the subcontinent

The Prime Minister of Ceylon handed over the relics to India’s high commissioner in Colombo on January 6, 1949 and within a week’s time they were received on the naval vessel HMIS Tir by the Governor of Bengal, K. N. Katju. The occasion was marked by an elaborate state ceremony including a procession, guard of honour, cultural performances and a 19-gun salute. The relics were installed on a temporary altar at the Government House in Calcutta and the prime minister of newly-independent India, Jawaharlal Nehru, unveiled them before a gathering of diplomats, monks and senior politicians.

The following day, a grand reception ceremony was held at the Calcutta Maidan during which Nehru handed over the sacred relics to Shyama Prasad Mookherjee, president of the Maha Bodhi Society. In an evocative speech, Nehru highlighted the message of peace and goodwill and ahimsa preached by the Buddha and Gandhi. Brekke argues that the relics of the two saints “were used by the governments in both Ceylon and India to legitimize state power.” Further, “Nehru used the Buddhist relics in his programme of secular, multi-religious nation-building from Independence in 1947.”

On the other hand, scholars like Philip C. Almond point out that Brekke misses the core issue of the involvement of the colonial state and the Archaelogical Survey of India (ASI) in its project of creating a ‘historical’ Buddha. This project was further legitimized through the archaeological excavations relating to the time of Mauryan ruler Ashoka who played an important part in the spread of Buddhism and is credited with the distribution of Buddha’s relics among 84,000 stupas. Ray argues that in the search for relics and statuary, Cunningham and the ASI “filled museums with collections of sculptures and coins, but left the stupas as heaps of rubble.”

After being displayed in Calcutta, the relics were taken on a tour of South and Southeast Asia– Ladakh, Orissa, Bihar, Assam, Sikkim, Tibet, Nepal, Burma and Cambodia. They were brought back to Calcutta on March 22, 1951 from where the relics were taken by a special train for a tour of several parts of the country. In November 1952, the relics were finally re-enshrined at a special vihara built at Sanchi for the purpose. Every year in November, a special fair is held at the spot where the relics are displayed. And, as the journey of the relics of Sariputta and Moggallana is relived, it offers yet another opportunity to understand the making of such stories against the backdrop of constantly evolving junctures.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Building a sustainable future for Sri Lanka’s construction industry

Published

on

Sri Lanka’s construction industry has long been a central pillar of sustainable development. From roads and bridges to homes, schools, and hospitals, construction shapes the country’s physical landscape and supports economic progress. As the nation continues to rebuild and modernise, the demand for construction materials and infrastructure keeps rising. However, this growth also brings a significant environmental cost. Cement, steel, bricks, aggregates, and timber all require energy, resources, and transportation, contributing to carbon emissions and environmental damage. If Sri Lanka continues with traditional construction practices, the long-term impact on the environment will be severe.

The encouraging news is that Sri Lanka has many opportunities to adopt more sustainable construction practices while still maintaining the highest standards of quality and safety. Sustainable construction does not mean weaker buildings or lower standards. It means using sustainable materials, reducing waste, improving design, and choosing methods that protect the environment. Many countries have already moved in this direction, and Sri Lanka has the potential to follow the same path with solutions that are practical, affordable, and suitable for local conditions.

A promising option

One promising option is the use of Compressed Earth Blocks (CEB), which are different from the concrete blocks commonly used in Sri Lanka for the past 25 years. CEBs are made from soil mixed with a small amount of stabiliser and pressed using machines. Unlike traditional fired clay bricks, CEBs do not require high-temperature kilns, which consume large amounts of firewood or fossil fuels. This makes CEBs a low-carbon alternative with a much smaller environmental footprint. In Sri Lanka, CEBs are already used in eco-resorts, community housing projects, and environmentally focused developments. They offer good strength, durability, and thermal comfort, making them suitable for many types of buildings. By expanding the use of CEBs, Sri Lanka can reduce energy consumption, lower emissions, and promote locally sourced materials.

Recycled aggregates also offer significant potential for sustainable construction. These materials are produced by crushing concrete, demolition waste, and construction debris. In Sri Lanka, recycled aggregates are already used in road construction, particularly for base and sub-base layers. They are suitable for non-structural building work such as pathways, garden paving, drainage layers, landscaping, and backfilling. Using recycled aggregates reduces the need for newly quarried rock and aggregates, decreases landfill waste, and lowers transportation emissions. With proper quality control and standards, recycled aggregates can become a reliable and widely accepted material in the construction industry.

Timber and sustainability

Timber is another important area where sustainability can be improved. In the past, timber for construction was often taken from natural forests, leading to deforestation and loss of biodiversity. Today, this approach is no longer sustainable. Instead, the focus must shift to legally sourced timber from managed plantations. Sri Lanka’s plantation-grown teak, jak, and kubuk can provide high-quality, legally sourced timber for construction while protecting natural forests and supporting rural economies. Using plantation timber ensures that harvesting is controlled, trees are replanted, and the supply chain remains legal and ethical.

Beyond materials, sustainable construction also involves better design and planning. Buildings that are designed to maximise natural ventilation, daylight, and energy efficiency can significantly reduce long-term operating costs. Simple design improvements such as proper orientation, shading devices, roof insulation, and efficient window placement can reduce the need for artificial cooling and lighting. These measures not only lower energy consumption but also improve indoor comfort for occupants. Sri Lanka’s tropical climate offers many opportunities to incorporate passive design strategies that reduce environmental impact without increasing construction costs.

Waste reduction is another key component of sustainable construction. Construction sites often generate large amounts of waste, including concrete, timber offcuts, packaging, and soil. By adopting better site management practices, recycling materials, and planning construction sequences more efficiently, contractors can reduce waste and save money. Proper waste segregation and recycling can also reduce the burden on landfills and minimise environmental pollution.

Promoting sustainable construction

Public projects such as schools, hospitals, and government buildings can play a leading role in promoting sustainable construction. When government projects adopt greener materials and designs, the private sector follows. This creates a positive cycle where environmentally responsible choices become the industry standard. Public sector leadership can also encourage local manufacturers to produce sustainable materials, improve quality standards, and invest in new technologies.

Sri Lanka also carries a proud and remarkable history in construction, with achievements that continue to inspire the world. The engineering brilliance behind Sigiriya, the advanced urban planning of Polonnaruwa, the precision of the Aukana Buddha statue, and the sophisticated water management systems of ancient tanks and reservoirs all demonstrate the deep knowledge our ancestors possessed. These historic accomplishments show that innovation is not new to Sri Lanka; it is part of our identity. As the world moves toward 2050 with increasing sustainability challenges, Sri Lanka can draw strength from this heritage while embracing modern technologies and sustainable practices. With the combined efforts of skilled professionals, industry experts, academic researchers, and strong government support, the country can introduce new systems that improve efficiency, reduce environmental impact, and strengthen resilience. By working together with determination and sharing knowledge across generations, Sri Lanka’s construction industry can build a future that honours its past while leading the way in sustainable development.

Foundation of sustainable development

Sri Lanka’s construction industry has always been a foundation of sustainable development. Today, it also has the chance to take a leading role in sustainability. By choosing sustainable materials, reducing waste, improving design, and supporting responsible sourcing, the country can build a future that is both modern and environmentally responsible. Sustainability is essential for Sri Lanka’s long-term goals of reducing carbon emissions and limiting the impacts of global warming. As Sri Lanka moves forward, the construction industry must embrace sustainability not only as an environmental responsibility but also as an opportunity to create stronger, smarter, and more resilient buildings for future generations. Sri Lanka has the talent, the heritage, and the technical capacity to shape a more sustainable future, and with the right national direction, the construction industry can become a model for the region. If professionals, policymakers, and communities work together with a shared vision, the country can transform its construction sector into one that protects the environment while supporting long-term progress.

About the Author: P.G.R.A.C. Gamlath Menike,

BSc (Hons) Quantity Surveying (University of Reading, UK), MSc Quantity Surveying (University College of Estate Management, UK), MCIArb, Doctoral Student, Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, is a Senior Quantity Surveyor: Last Project (2022 -2025) Hong Kong International Airport Terminal 2 Construction Project, Gammon Engineering Construction (Main Contractor).

By P.G. R. A. C. Gamlath Menike

Continue Reading

Features

Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka – 1

Published

on

Palm leaf manuscripts

Palm leaf manuscripts have been in existence in Sri Lanka since ancient times. The two oldest palm-leaf manuscripts found in Sri Lanka today are the Cullavagga Pâli manuscript of the H. C. P. Bell collection, which is held at the Library of the National Museum, Colombo, and the Mahavagga Pâli manuscript in the University of Kelaniya collection. Photocopies of both are available at the Library of the University of Peradeniya. Both are dated to 13 century. Cullavagga manuscript has wooden covers richly decorated in lac with a design of flowers and foliage.

Karmmavibhâga

However, the oldest known Sinhala palm leaf manuscript in the world is the Karmmavibhâga which was found in a Tibet monastery in 1936 by the Indian scholar Rahul Sankrityayan. Rahul Sankrityayan, (1893–1963) former Kedarnath Pandey, was an Indian polymath, who searched out rare Buddhist manuscripts on his travels abroad. Sankrityayan visited Sri Lanka as well. Vidyalankara Pirivena is mentioned.

Sankrityayan visited Tibet several times to collect manuscripts from the Buddhist monasteries there. In May 1936 on his second visit to Tibet, Sankrityayan visited the Sa-skya monastery. The Chag-pe-lha-khang Library in this monastery was specially opened for Sankrityayan.

He stated in his autobiography that when the clouds of dust which greeted this rare opening of its doors had subsided, they beheld rows of open racks where volume on volume of manuscripts were kept. “After rummaging around, I came across palm-leaf manuscripts. They were not wrapped in cloth, but were tied between two wooden planks with holes through them.” Sankrityayan found several important manuscripts he had been looking for, in that collection.

Sankrityayan catalogued fifty-seven manuscripts bound in thirty-eight volumes. The thirty-seventh volume was written in the Sinhala script. Sankrityayan records that this volume contained ninety-seven palm- leaves each of which measured 18 1/4 by 1 1/4 in. (46 x 3 cm.) and that there were seven lines of writing on each folio.

According to Sankrityayan, these Sinhala texts originally belonged to a Sri Lankan monk called Anantaśrî who had come to Tibet in the time of ŚSrî Kîrttidhvaja (Kirti Sri Rajasinha). Analysts noted that Sankrityayan does not give the source of this information and the manuscript makes no mention of Anantaśrî.

Sankrityayan had taken with him to Tibet, one Abeyasinghe, (Abhayasimha) to help him with copying manuscripts. They made hand-copies of the important manuscripts. Abhayasimha had copied about 250 to 350 strophes each day. But he fell ill due to the extreme cold and was sent home in June. Abeyasinghe had written letters home during his stay in Tibet.

Photographs of the manuscripts found during Sankrityayan’s expeditions in Tibet are preserved at the National Archives in Colombo. There is also a copy in Vidyalankara pirivena library The Historical Manuscripts Commission In its 1960/1961 report, drew attention to this manuscript, known as Sa-skya Codex, describing it as “a unique document.” (Annual Report of the Government Archivist 1960/61, 1963)

Sinhala scholar P.E.E. Fernando examined photographs of the Sa-skya Codex at the request of the Historical Manuscripts Commission and assigned it to the 13th century. The Historical Manuscripts Commission, dated it to either twelfth or the thirteenth century.

The Historical Manuscripts Commission observed that this manuscript was of great value for the study of the development of the Sinhala script. Ven. Meda Uyangoda Vimalakîrtti and Nähinne Sominda in their edition of the Karmmavibhâga published in 1961 agreed that the Sa-skya Codex represented an early stage in the evolution of the Sinhala language.

Mahavamsa

The Mahavamsa is considered a unique historical document. There is nothing like it in South Asia, and probably all Asia, with the exception of China. Mahavamsa provides a historical account of events, with emphasis on chronology and dating. This, it appears, was rare at the time.

However, Mahavamsa is not a political history, though that is the popular perception of it. It is a religious history. It was written to record the introduction and entrenchment of Buddhism in the country. Other Buddhist countries, such as Cambodia, Burma and Thailand value the Mahavamsa for this reason. They held copies of the Mahavamsa and used events from it in their temple frescoes.

But Mahavamsa is also an important reference source for reconstructing the political history of Sri Lanka. Political and social facts are included in the Mahavamsa narrative when describing religious events, and this makes the Mahavamsa important for historians. This tradition of history writing, beginning with the earlier Sihala Attakatha and Dipawamsa, it is suggested, started in Sri Lanka in 2nd or 3rd BC.

Today, the Mahavamsa has become a major source of historical information, not only for dating kings, temples and reservoirs, but also for reconstructing ancient Sinhala society. The fact that Kuveni was seated beside a pond, spinning thread has been used to indicate that there was water management and textiles long before Vijaya arrived. Dutugemunu (161-137 BC) paid a salary to the workers building the Maha Thupa. This shows that money was used at the time.

Copies of the Mahavamsa have been treasured and looked after in Sri Lanka for centuries. They have been copied over and over again. The manuscripts were held in temple libraries because the subject of the Mahavamsa was the entrenchment of Buddhism in Sri Lanka.

The Mahavamsa manuscripts did not pop up suddenly during British rule as people seem to think. The British did not ‘discover’ the Mahavamsa. It was there. When the British administration started to take interest in the history of the island, the sangha would have directed them to the Mahavamsa, in the same way that they directed HCP Bell to the ruins in Anuradhapura and the Sigiriya frescoes. HCP Bell did not discover those either.

The British administrators saw the value of the Mahavamsa and copies were sent to libraries abroad. The Bodleian library, Oxford has a well preserved Mahavamsa manuscript, taken from Mulkirigala, which Turner used for his translation. Cambridge has two Mahavamsa manuscripts. The two copies at India Office library, and the copy in East India Library are probably in the British Library today. The Royal Library, Copenhagen, has a copy, consisting of 129 sheets, 12 lines to a leaf, written in good handwriting.

In Sri Lanka there are several copies of the Mahavamsa in the Colombo Museum Library. One copy, known as the ‘Cambodian Mahavamsa ‘is in Cambodian script. University of Peradeniya has at least three copies.

It is interesting to note that the Mahavamsa was known to the Sinhala elite and some had copies in their private libraries. The Historical Manuscripts Commission of the 1930s said in its first report that five copies of the Mahavamsa and a 19th century copy of the Dipawamsa were found in private collections.

The temple libraries had many copies of the Mahavamsa. Some were of very high quality. Wilhelm Geiger had looked at the copies held at Mahamanthinda Pirivena, Matara and Mulkirigala vihara. Asgiriya, Nagolla Vihara and Watagedera Sudarmarama Potgul vihara, Matara, are three of the many libraries that held copies of the Mahavamsa.

Sirancee Gunawardene examined the copy at Mahamanthinda Pirivena, Matara, very closely. She says that it is a very old manuscript. According to its colophon, the manuscript was first copied 400 years ago. It is in a very good state of preservation. It has 232 folios. Each 50 cm long 6.25 wide. Nine lines on each side, in Pali metric verse.

The writer of the manuscripts said that his version was an improvement on the copy. He wrote, “I will recite the Mahavamsa which was compiled by ancient sages. [their version] was too long and had many repetitions. This version is free from such faults, easy to understand and remember. It is handed down from tradition, for arousing serene joy and emotion’ .

The Mahamanthinda manuscript records the continuous history of 23 dynasties from 543 BC to 1758 AD. It refers to the principle of hereditary monarchy as 39 eldest sons of reigning monarch succeeded their fathers to the throne. It highlights the fact that fifteen reigned only for one year, 34 for less than four years, 22 kings were murdered by their successors, 6 were killed during battles, 4 committed suicide, 11 were dethroned.

Mahawansa  as a World Heritage document

An ola manuscript of the Mahavamsa, held in the Main Library of the University of Peradeniya has been recognised by UNESCO as a part of World Heritage. UNESCO announced In 2023 that it has included the Mahavamsa as one of the 64 items of documentary heritage inscribed in the UNESCO’s Memory of the World International Register for 2023. The manuscript is dated to the early 19 century.

The certificate declaring the Mahawansa as a world heritage document was handed to the Chancellor of Peradeniya University by UNESCO Director General, who visited the University in 2024 specially to do so. She also unveiled a plaque marking the declaration.

The story began much earlier. The National Library of Sri Lanka and the Ministry of Buddha Sasana had jointly appointed a 6-member committee headed by Prof Malani Endagamage, to find the best preserved copy of the Mahavamsa in Sri Lanka. This would have been in 2000 or so. For two years, this team had examined copies from over 100 temples nationwide.

Temples around the country yielded copies, crumbling to well-preserved, reported Sunday Times. There was one from the Ridi Vihara that almost made the cut, but four other copies were shortlisted. One from the Dalada Maligawa, Kandy and three manuscripts from the Main Library of the University of Peradeniya. Three academics from the University’s History Department, Professors K.M. Rohitha Dasanayaka, Mahinda Somathilake and U.S.Y. Sahan Mahesh examined the three Peradeniya manuscripts

Dasanayaka said, “We poured over the copies together, and it became clear that one copy stood out. While the other two had numerous inconsistencies, this one, written in a curvy hand, was neat and beautiful. After more than two centuries, the manuscript was still very attractive, with a ‘flaming cinnamon orange’ cover and elegant lettering.

The first section of the manuscript ends with Mahasen (274–301 AD), written by the monk Mahanama. The second part ends at 1815. The author is given as Ven. Thibbotuwawe Buddharakkhita but he was dead by 1815. The final part was probably done by an acolyte. He has done a very neat job, seamlessly adding his bit, concluded Dasanayake.

This manuscript was acquired by the Library of University of Peradeniya when K. D. Somadasa, was the Librarian (1964 – 1970). It is held in the Main Library and its Accession Number is 277587.

National Library & Documentation Services Board of Sri Lanka, which administers the National Library of Sri Lanka submitted a nomination to UNESCO on behalf of this manuscript. UNESCO responded positively to the application.

UNESCO said the Mahavamsa was recognized as one of the world’s longest unbroken historical accounts, presenting Sri Lanka’s history in a chronological order from the 6th century BCE. The authenticity of the facts provided in the document has been confirmed through archaeological research conducted in Sri Lanka and India.

It is an important historical source in South Asia, said UNESCO. It was the first of its kind in South Asia, initiating a mature historiographical tradition. It has contributed singularly to the identity of Emperor Asoka in Indian history. The existence of a number of manuscripts of the Mahavamsa in several countries as well as the transliteration and translation of the text to several Southeast Asian and European languages stand testimony to its immense historical, cultural, literal, linguistic and scholarly values, .” UNESCO press release said.

Further, UNESCO found that this manuscript was correctly conserved at the University Library. The university and its library maintained high standards in safeguarding the palm-leaf manuscripts, preventing deterioration, declared UNESCO. (Continued)

REFERENCES


https://archives1.dailynews.lk/2021/02/25/local/242520/ola-leaf-mahavamsa-be-declared-world-heritage

Sirancee Gunawardana Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka . 1977 p 41,44-47 , 253 290 292, ,

N. E. I. Wijerathne Methods, Techniques and Challenges in Deciphering the Sa-skaya Codex. Vidyodaya Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (2025), Vol. 10 (01) https://journals.sjp.ac.lk/index.php/vjhss/article/view/8571/6001

First report of the Historical Manuscripts Commision.1933 SP 9 of 1933. p . 53, 95, 96

https://journals.sjp.ac.lk/index.php/vjhss/article/view/8571/6001https://www.austriaca.at/0xc1aa5572%200x00314cc3.pdf

 https://leftword.com/creator/rahul-sankrityayan/

 https://www.reddit.com/r/IndianHistory/comments/1oc5tc2/in_his_autobiography_meri_jeevan_yatra_rahul/

 https://www.sundaytimes.lk/230910/plus/in-search-of-the-perfect-mahavamsa-531513.html

 https://www.dailymirror.lk/breaking-news/Mahawansa-declared-a-world-heritage/108-287528

 https://mfa.gov.lk/en/visit-of-unesco-dg/

 https://sundaytimes.lk/online/education/UNESCO-ready-to-support-digitalisation-of-Ola-leaf-books/290-1146314

 https://media.unesco.org/sites/default/files/webform/mow001/53_131%252B.pdf

by KAMALIKA PIERIS

 

Continue Reading

Features

A new Sherlock Holmes novel

Published

on

Tales of Mystery and Suspense – 1

“The House of Silk” is set in a grim Victorian winter, and moves from Baker Street to a luxurious suburban villa, from dingy pubs to elegant London clubs, from a correction school for boys high on a hill to Dr Silkin’s House of Wonders, which provided noisy low life entertainment. Holmes and Watson went there in search of the House of Silk, a name they had heard when looking into the death of one of Holmes’ Baker Street irregulars (slum children who ferreted out information for him) .

I do not think highly of sequels to books written by highly regarded writers, though I must admit that this dislike is based on just a few samples. But while in England I was given by my former Dean, with a forceful recommendation, a book about a Sherlock Holmes mystery, supposedly written by Dr Watson. I began on it soon after I got back home, and found it difficult to put down, so I suppose I will not look on Anthony Horowitz as an exception to my rule. I may even look out for his efforts at continuing the adventures of James Bond, though I suspect Fleming’s laconic style will be less easy to emulate.

“The House of Silk” is set in a grim Victorian winter, and moves from Baker Street to a luxurious suburban villa, from dingy pubs to elegant London clubs, from a correction school for boys high on a hill to Dr Silkin’s House of Wonders, which provided noisy low life entertainment. Holmes and Watson went there in search of the House of Silk, a name they had heard when looking into the death of one of Holmes’ Baker Street irregulars (slum children who ferreted out information for him). They had asked Holmes’ brother Mycroft for help in finding what and where this was, but he had warned them off, having been himself told by someone very senior in government that it might involve those in very high positions, and further inquiries might prove dangerous.

Needless to say, Holmes does seek further, and is lured to an opium den where he is drugged, to be found outside with a gun in his hand and the body of a girl beside him, the sister of the murdered boy Ross. A passer-by swears he had seen Holmes fire the shot, and the owner of the opium den and a customer swear that Holmes had taken too much opium and left the den in a demented condition. A police inspector who had been passing promptly arrests Holmes and Watson, and even their old acquaintance Inspector Lestrade finds it difficult to get access to him.

Watson eventually gets to see him when he is in the infirmary, after he has been told by a mysterious man that Holmes was going to be murdered before his case could be taken up. The man said he had earlier tried to get Holmes to investigate the House of Silk by sending him a white silk ribbon, such as had later been found tied round the hand of the murdered boy. But, as a criminal himself, he said, he could not reveal more, though he himself was horrified by the business of the House of Silk, which gave criminality a bad name, which is why he wanted it all stopped.

Holmes escapes from the infirmary, with a little help from the doctor whom he had once assisted earlier, right under the nose of the nasty Inspector Harriman. He then joins up with Watson, and having with the help of Lestrade overcome the men designed to kill him at Dr Silkin’s House of Wonders, he sets off, with an even large posse of policemen, to the House of Silk.

After much suspense, the habitues of the House of Silk are arrested, the Inspector having broken his neck in the course of a chase downhill, having fled when his misdeeds were exposed. The mastermind claims that he will not face a trial because of the important people involved, but instead falls down a staircase while in prison and breaks his neck. One of the noblemen involved commits suicide, but another, and the medical man who had sworn he saw Holmes kill the young lady, get off without charge.

But then we revert to the original story, which had involved an art dealer who came to Holmes because he was being followed by someone he thought was an American gangster out for revenge. This was because he had shipped some pictures to an American buyer, and these had been destroyed when a train was held up by an Irish gang and the coach with the safe in it dynamited. The buyer and the dealer had got a private agency to investigate, and this had ended with the gang being killed in a shootout, though one of the twins who led it had escaped. The buyer had subsequently been killed, and Mr Carstairs feared that the twin who survived had followed him to England.

Holmes and Watson went to Carstairs’ house, where they met his wife, whom he had met on the boat back from America, and his sister. Their mother had died some months earlier, when gas had filled her room after the flame had gone out. It transpired that there had been a break in, and some money and a necklace stolen from a safe, and it was in tracing these, through a pawnbroker, that Holmes and Watson had found the American murdered in the hotel where he had been staying.

The leader of the irregulars had come to tell Holmes that they had traced the man to the hotel, and Ross had been left on guard. He seemed terrified when Holmes and Watson and Carstairs turned up, but said he had seen nothing. When the boys had been dismissed, and the room opened up, the man was found dead, the murderer obviously having gained entrance through a window.

Holmes assumed the boy had seen someone he recognized, but he could not be traced, until he was found dead, horribly tortured. The silk band around his wrist then led Holmes to pursue the House of Silk. One of the boys at the school where Ross had been mentioned that he had a sister at a pub, and she, when confronted, asked in fear if they were from the House of Silk and then, having lunged at Watson with a knife, ran off – herself only to be found dead outside the opium den, which prompted the arrest of Holmes.

After the drama at the House of Silk, Holmes and Watson go to the Carstairs household, where he explains exactly what had taken place, identifying the murdered man as not a member of the gang but the head of the private agency which had investigated them. As my Dean told me, Horowitz then ties up all the loose ends with consummate skill, connecting with a fine thread all the malefactors, of various kinds.

Continue Reading

Trending