Centralized rule in ancient and medieval Sri Lanka

KAMALIKA PIERIS

R.A.L.H. Gunawardana says the first rulers of ancient Sri Lanka were local chiefs. Their rule was based on personal power. Large chiefdoms, spread widely across the island had appeared by 3rd Century BC. Then came territorial boundaries. Inscriptions dating from 1st Century BC to 3rd Century AD contain references to territorial categories.

The idea of a single ruler for the whole territory had developed, I think, by the time of Devanampiyatissa (250-210 BC). Centralized rule became a reality under Dutugemunu. (161-137 BC). The Anuradhapura kingdom extended over the whole island. The island was ruled thereafter from a single dynastic centre.

The location of the royal capital changed over time but the concept of a single centre did not. Foreign emissaries went to the capital city to present their credentials to the king. Invaders always tried to take the king in his capital. Chandrabanu attacked Yapahuwa. Jaffna invaded Gampola. I think that is why kings left the Capital when invasions began.

Inscriptions confirm the existence of centralized rule. They contain royal edicts. Kondavattavana inscription of Dappula V lays down rules for the administration of the village. The immunity grant pillars give the lineage of the reigning king, the regnal year, list of officials assembled to grant the immunities and the officials affected by the immunity. The order came from the King’s Council.

Centralized rule was achieved through the usual methods. The royal family was roped in. Udaya I (797-801) gave titles and duties to his sons and daughters. There was a King’s Council and royal officers. When Parakramabahu II fell ill, State affairs were looked after by Chief Minister Devapatiraja until the king’s eldest son was able to take over. There was the usual mix of centralized and decentralized services. Taxes were collected directly by the king’s officers. The law courts were decentralized. Local matters were handled by local authorities, but the king could call for a report.

Pathmanathan notes that centralization was possible because of Sri Lanka’s manageable size. Its physiographic features permitted control over a major part of it from a single dynastic centre. There was a network of roads connecting the capital with the rest of the island. Roads led North, South, East and West from Anuradhapura. Sri Jayawardene pura had roads leading out from it.

The Sinhala king followed a policy of accommodation. Pulindas (ancestors of the modern Veddahs) never came under State control, but survived within the centralized state for Centuries. The Vanni principalities in the medieval period were ruled by petty chieftains called Vanniyars. Some were appointees of the king, others were autonomous rulers of undeveloped and sparsely populated areas. The principalities were small, often not more than a few dozen square miles. Starting from the South of Mannar, they went across North Central Ceylon, down the Eastern coast past Yala and Panama to Kotte. Apart from a few principalities near Jaffna, the Vanniyars paid tribute to the Sinhala king. Parakramabahu II however, announced that he had vanquished all the Vanni chieftains dwelling in mountains and wilderness.

There was also the interesting tradition of ‘brother kings’. The sons of king Vasabha (67-111) shared the kingdom and ruled amicably. The five sons of Vira Parakramabahu VIII (1477-89) and the three sons of Vijayabahu VI (1513-21) did the same. One brother was designated the Head of State.

Contemporary Sri Lankans scoff at the notion of centralized rule in ancient Sri Lanka. They call it a myth. They say it was the British who unified Sri Lanka and gave it centralized rule. The infrastructure needed for centralized rule such as roads and technology was provided by the British. Before that there were only sporadic instances of central rule. These critics have not looked carefully at Sinhala rule. They have also not been adequately briefed. They mix up historical periods and their statements contain howlers. Kandy is listed before Kotte, Vanni kingdoms before Dutugemunu.

Historians say that from the 13 Century onwards, the Sinhala kingdom started to decline and central rule started slipping. Multiple kingdoms came up and by the 16th Century, Sri Lanka was ruled as three kingdoms, Jaffna, Kotte and Udarata. I suggest an alternative interpretation.

Firstly, the Sinhala king was not all that weak. Invasions by Chandrabanu, Ariyachakravarti and Vijayanagara were successfully repelled. Dambadeniya dynasty, started by Vijayabahu III in 1232 continued through the Yapahuwa and Kurunegala periods, up to the reign of Parakramabahu IV (1302-1326). The Capital moved to South because the king was responding to demographic and commercial changes, not because he was running away from Anuradhapura. Anuradhapura remained under him.

Secondly, there were no multiple kingdoms. There never was a ‘Kingdom of Jaffna’. Jaffna was under South Indian rule. Jaffna was an island separate from the mainland.

The Sinhala king was never very interested in it and it is not necessary to include Jaffna when discussing centralized rule. Inscriptions are found all over Sri Lanka except Jaffna. Jaffna’s usefulness as an embarkation point would have decreased once sea travel improved. In the medieval period, only Parakramabahu VI wanted control over Jaffna, other kings did not. The Sinhala Army defeated Vijayanagara when it invaded the mainland in 1390 and 1432, but did nothing to save Jaffna when Vijayangara attacked in 1365. By the 15th Century, Jaffna had become ‘small and weak’ and the kings of Kotte announced that Jaffna came under them.

There was no ‘Udarata Kingdom’ either. Sensammata Vikramabahu (1469-1511) declared independence against Buvanekabahu VI and thereafter against Dharma Parakrama bahu IX. He set up rule in Gampola, and then moved to Peradeniya and thereafter Kandy. He was defeated by both kings. He had to pay annual tribute to Kotte and could not issue coins. Somaratne says Senasammata was a feudatory rather than semi-independent ruler. Senasammata’s son, Jayaweera and grandson Karaliyadde ruled Udarata after him. Jayaweera married the daughter of the brother-in-law of the elder brother of king Dharma Parakramabahu IX (Sakalavalla raja). Karaliyadde Bandara was their son. Their daughter married Dharmapala of Kotte. A Sannasa issued by Dharma Parakramabahu IX declared that he was the king of Kotte, Kandy and Jaffna (trisinhala adhiswara).

(The writings of C.R. de Silva, G.P.H.S. de Silva, K.M. de Silva, R.A.L.H. Gunawardana, S. Pathmanathan, P.E. Peiris, W.I . Siriweera and G.V.P. Somaratne were used for this essay)