History of Archaeology in Ceylon

History of Archaeology in Ceylon
By C. E. GopaxumBura, M.A., Ph.D., D.Lit. (Lond.)

Presidential address delivered on 29ih November 1968 at the
New Arts Theatre, University of Ceylon, Colombo.
The title of my lecture is ‘“The History of Archaeology in Ceylon”,

but I shall be covering a wider spectrum, for archaeological evidence
embraces the whole gamut of human existence. Thus my attempt
is not a history of the State Department of Archaeology in Ceylon.
What I intend to give is a broader account of the history of antiquarian
studies in our couniry. The study of the remains of man and his handi-
work is, in a way, a new subject, and is full of human interest. It has
a long history. In the modern sense, it began with our contacts with
European people. Our literature, however, is replete with passages
which describe ancient cities, their fortifications and moats, parks,
baths, religious edifices and secular buildings, paintings, sculpture,
woodcarvings and various other works of art. The word-portraits of
abandoned sites, city walls, dwelling-places and the like are indeed
what the poets themselves had seen. These accounts and descriptions
help us at least in the study of the meaning and purpose of our archaeo-
logical remains. ~
Sinhalese writers have also produced a vast amount of historical

material. In Ceylon, history and archaeology werc almost synonymous.
The Sinhalese term, borrowed from Sanskrit, to denote archaeology
is puravidyd. It 1s derived from puravid which means “knowing the
past’, “‘versed in anciant lore’, and this word goes as far back as the
Aitharva-veda. Early Sanskrit uses the words purduidya and puraveda
in the meanings, ‘things or events of the past.’
As with other literate civilizations, in Ceylon also ancient reccrds
form a very important part of the source material of our archaeology.
The old Sinhalese inscriptions have not been left to oblivion, but
have been read from time to time. In the twelfth century, the Abhi-
dhamma commentator, Sumangala Thera, is said to have read the early
Sinhalese inscriptions. He 1s also said to have made a Compendium
of Sinhalese Inscripttons.” This information is gathered from the most
recent epigraphical research by Professor Senarat Paranavitana, to
which I will have to return later. Paranavitana has also published
the information that duing the reign of Sri Parikramabahu VI of
1. Svaula-siira, see M. Momer Willams, A Sanskni-English Dictionary,

Oxford, 1899, s.v. pura.
2, See Ceylon Today, Nov.-Dec., 1968.
2 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol, XLII, (New Serres), 1969
Rayigama and Kotte (a.p. 1412-1467), Totagamuvé Sri Rahula

Thera and his pupil Sumangala Thera read some four hundred verses
of the Sigiri graffiti, and a copy of these was available at the Tota-
gamuva vihara.*
King Parakramabahu VI interested himself in literature and
epigraphy, and as Professor Paranavitana tells me this king did some
archaeological explorations as well. The emperor had heard of Sigiriya
from a relative of his queen, a provincial ruler who resided at Pidura-
gala.t Parakramabahu had come across a description of Sigiriya,
and he is said to have had tested the measurements of the various
buildings given m the records. For this purpose he would have had to
send his officers and men, and get them to make some excavations. We
are awaiting the publication of Paranavitana’s Sigivi-vistaraya,*
“the Account of Sigiri’, which will no doubt give more information
regarding the archaeological interests of Sinhalese kings. Parakrama-
bahu VI gct down to Kotte some sculpture from Anuradhapura and
Sigiriya, examined them, and sent them back to their original find
spots to have them reburied there, perhaps for the benefit of future
archaeologists! Sone of them have since been re-discovered.
Now we come to records made by European writers concerning
the ancient cities and buildings of Ceylon. They were quite often
made for the benefit of those who had not seen them, or would not
have had the opportunity of seeing them. This explains the lack of
such accounts in the productions of dur own historians. Father Fernao
De Queyroz in his The Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of Ceylon®
has a few notices of some of our cities. Of Kandy (Candi) he says,
‘The metropolis has well-built houses ard streets, cleaned and adorned.
The buildings are of masonry, thatched with leaves of bamboo -and
Tattan, good material for fire, though the Pagodas and the Palace of
the King, they say, were covered with copper, silver and gold.’’® Here
the last statement is only hearsay. Queyroz took the Brahmi script
of the Sinhalese inscriptions to be Greek.? He believed that a Tamil
inscription at Trincomalee contained a prophecy.® An account of this
inscription, which is at Fort Frederick, is in the Riks-archief at the
Hague, Netherlands.? The Dutch have left some interesting maps of
the island, and useful plans of the cities and forts.
ம 3. Lamhkddipa, June 27, 1968, p. 8.

Now locally pronounced *“Piduran-gala.”’
4- Read from interlinear inscriptions.
5. Translations by Father S. G. Perera, Colombo, 1930, 3 vols.
6 Op.cit. Book J, p. 60.
௪. Op.cit,
8. Op.cit. Book I, p. 66.
9. JCBRAS, Vol. XXX (No. 80), 1927, pp. 448-449.
HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY
IN CEYLON 3
Diogo do Couto,!° the Portuguese historian, records that one of

their captains stationed at Mannar* excavated at Mantota in 1574 or
1575 remains of Roman buildings in the form of masonry work of
foundations, an iron chain, medals, coms (copper and gold}. The coins
were identified as those of Claudius, the Roman Emperor.
The Dutch historian Francois Valentyn’™ refers to a report of the
same discovery (in a.D. 1574-75) of Roman finds of archaeological
value along the coast of Mannar. He writcs “Great ruins and pieces of a
Romish building of marble work to be seen from which the workmen
threw down a stone on a part of the foundation, and turnmg over the
same they found an iron chain of such a wonderful and stately fashion
that im all India there is no artificer who should dare to undertake
to make such another. They found also three pieces of copper coin the
underside of which was entirely worn, and also one of gold which was
on the underside which was entirely worn, and also one of gold which
was on the underside likewise entirely worn.’’* These are about the
earliest statements regarding such valuable antiquarian discoveries
from the earth in the island. Valentyn had also worked out the
lengths of reigns of the Sinbalese kings.
Phillipus Baldaeus, the Dutch predikant, who was in Ceylon from
A.D. 1656, in his Description of Ceylon,4 chapter forty-eight, says that
the pagoda at Bintenna (that is, the Mahiyangana-dagaba) whose
base was 130 paces, was very lo{ty and wide it was gilt at the top.....”
He mentions also the Kustaraja figure at Weligania, Adam’s Peak and
another important site in the South or South-East, possibly Dondra.
The English captive, Robert Knox,'5 has made a passing reference
to our lithic inscriptions. This is published in the preface to volume I
ol the Epigraphia Zeylanica’® and I do not propose to repeat the same
here. Pybus, the British Ambassador to Kandy m a.pD. 1762, gives an
account of the Town of Candia (Kandy).17 As the text is now easily
to. Diogo do Couto (born, Lisbon 1543).

*Donald Ferguson says that the date should be 1584 or 1585.
11. JCBRAS, Vol. XX, No 60 (1908), pp. 83-84.
12. Walentyr, Frangois, English translation, in MS in the Library of R.A.S.
(London). Mr. James T. Rutnam of Colombo has a typed copy.
13. See also Casie Chitty S., JCBRAS, Vol. I, No. 1, 1875. Cf. Johnston at p. 6.
L4. Phillipus Baldaeus, .4 true and exact description of the Great Island of Ceylon
translated by Pieter Brohier, The Ceylon Historical J eurnal, Voi. VIII,
(1958-59), pp. 381-382.
15. Knox R., dn Mistovical Relahon of the Island of Ceylon, London 1681;
An Historical Relation of Ceylon, Glasgow, MCMXT; Colombo 1958.
16. Epigraphia Zeylanica, Vol. 1, preface. ர
17. Raven-Hart R., The Pybus Embassy to Kandy, 1762, “National Museums
of Ceylon Historical Series,’ Vol. I (1958), pp. 29-30.
4 JOURNAL, R.A\S. (CEYLON) Vol. XTI1, (New Series), 1969
available, I shall cite only the sentences relating to the royal palace.
“The palace stands in a manner detached from the rest of the houses at
the south end of this valley (which should be north end as Raven-Hart
has also pointed out), and is a large, lofty, spacious building, containing
a number of apartments, and seemingly well constructed; but as I
(was) never admitted there till mght, I cannot be very circumstantial
in my description of it. There 1s a large garden enclosed with a High
Wall in the north front of it, and close on the other side of it, to the
south, are Hills and thick woods.”
Admiral Suffrein when he was at Trincomalee with the French
fleet in 178x, sent a copy of a Sinhalese inscription to Mons.-Anquetil
du Perron* then in France with an offer of a considerable reward to any
person who could decipher it.1* He added that so far as he knew that
had never been accomphshed. We will hear of this inscriptiont later
when we come to Alexander Johnston.19
Ceylon had the good fortune of having here at the end of the
eighteenth century, and the beginning of the nineteenth, a number of
men, chiefly military officers and otheis accompanying them, who
took a keen interest in describing our ancient monuments. This cer-
tainly was the result of the artistic inclinations of these people, and
I believe, not a requirement of their profession. The journal A siatse
Researches has published, among other subjects, accounts of the
temples of Dondra by Captain Colin Mackenzie®! and temples of the
god of Kataragama by Captain Mahony? (1803, Vol. VII). There are
also in this journal further accounts of antiquarian value relating to
Ceylon by other writers such as Joseph Joinville.25 Lieut. Col. Barbut,
one of the commanders of the ill-fated British expedition to Kandy in
1803, gives a vivid account of the city of Kandy, Senkadagalanuvara,™
as he saw it on Tuesday, March 22, 1803. His description is far more
accurate than that of Pybus. Barbut must have found the palace
unoccupied since the king had fled 1o Hanguranketa, and he would
have been able to completely satisfy his antiquarian curiosities. The
descriptions of the palace, its halls and rooms, their adornments, and
அ்ரவ்ண்டிவமளிவதன்‌
எவை வம்‌ அனை
*Perron made a map of Ceylon.
18. See below. note 30.
{This 1s the Vévadlkatiya inscription of Mahinda IV (a D. 956-972), which has
been deciphered, translated and published by Wickremasinghe in the Epigraphia
Zeylanica, Vol. las Art. No 21 therein (see below}, We shall speak of Wick-
remasinghe later on.
19. See below: note 30.
2c. A static Researches or Transacttons of the Socrety imstituted an Bengal,... -
Vol. I, London, 1801, later Calcutta.
21, Op.cit., Vol. VI, p. 442.
22. ° Op.cit. Vol. VII (1803).
23, Op.cit., Vol. VII.
24. See Pieris, Paul E, Tv: Sinhala, the Last Phase, 1796-1815, (1930), Appen-
dix D, pp. 169-171.
HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY IN CEYLON 5
the temples, are full of details. These accounts of Kandy, though not
ali of them antiquities when their authors saw them, I have cited
as they should be helpful to officers and workmen of the ArchaeoJogical
Department who are expected to see to the conservation of the palace-
In Rev. James Cordiner’s Description of Ceylon,2® London, 1807,
there are some interesting accounts of roads and fortifications.
In 1817, an officer in the British Army while travelling from
Bintenna to Minneriya came across the ruins of Polonnaruwa which
was called Topary (Topavava) at the time.*® He remarks on a “‘stone-
slab containing on both sides an inscription, apparently in Cingalese
characters, its height above the ground 7 feet, breadth 2 feet g inches,
thickness ro inches, and the lines of insenption 2 inches apart.”
Lieutenant M. H. Fagan, another British Officer examined, in
1820, the ruins of Topary including those in the Vatadagée site, Tivanka-
pilimagé and the Galvihara (Galle Vihari). His descriptions were pub-
lished the same year.?”? He gives a vivid account of the Circular
Temple, which he begins expressing his opinion, “The circular building
I think was once a temple open above.”’ Of the ‘Guardstones’ with
the anthropomorphic Naga figures he says, ‘‘on each side of the steps
which conduct to the 4 doors of the temple, stands the same female
figure that guards the entrance to most of the Kandyan temples,
covered neaily to the knees with rmbbish....” In spite of such mis-
understanding Fagan’s detailed description of the shrine is very in-
formative. H2 describes the terra-cotta ornamentations of the Tivanka
Pilimagé, where the Gana figures attracted bis attention.
He recognized the colossal standing statue at Galvihara to be
one of the Buddha. He says, “I found it to be a figure of the Budhoo
in an upright posture, of excellent proportions and in an attitude I
think uncommon, his hands laid gracefully across his breast and his
robe falling from his left வார” At the excavated cave (Vijjadhara-
guha) he saw ‘the old wooden Door in good preservation’ and ‘the
ceiling painted in red ornament.’ Fagan’s excelJent account of Polon-
naruwa should be found useful to all students of Ceylon archaeology.
T. Ralph Backhouse, colector at Mannar made measured des-
criptions of some monuments and tank bunds at Anuradhapura, and
also the bunds of Mimneriya tank and the Kavuduluvava.*8
25. Cordiner, Rev James, Description of Ceylon, Vols. I & Il, London,
1807, See Vo. II pp. 155ff.
26 Supplement of the Government Gazcite, August 1st, 1820.
27. Orientaltst,
Vol II, p. 87.
28. Ievers, R. W., Manual of the North Central Province, Ceylon, Colombo,
1899, p. 213. A documented account of the History of the archaeology
of the N. C. P. is given m chapter XV of this Manual, pp. 211-242,
௪ JOURNAL, R.AS, (CEYLON) Vol. XLII, (New Series), 1969
John Davy in An Account of the Interior of Ceylon, etc.,29 London,

1821, notices various architectural styles prevalent in the districts he
saw, but has failed to discern any style which he could call Sinhalese.
This indeed is surprising seeing that he spent most of his time in the
Kandyan provinces. These are the opening sentences of Davy’s com-
ments: “In architecture, I am not aware that the Sinhalese can be said
to have any national or any very peculiar style. In no country is much
greater variety to be seen, or much stronger marks afforded to trace
the progress of the art. Rock-temples, which are very numerous in the
interior, may, with the exception of their embellishments, be consi-
dered rather the work of nature than art.” Davy also makes a brief
note on Anuradhapura. ‘‘A large tank, numerous stone pillars, two or
three immense tumuli (probably old dagobas), are its principal remains.”’
Sir Alexander Johnston in a contribution to the Tvansactions
of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, made in 1824
(Vol. I, art. xxx} refers to the archaeological remains at Mantai
which Valentyn had earlier noted: He writes in a note:* “The ruins
of the ancient town of Mantotta, all of which consist of brick, still
cover a considerable extent of country. Great numbers of Roman
coins of different emperors, particularly of the Antonines; specimens
of the finest pottery, and some Roman gold and silver chains, have
been found in those ruins.’’ Johnston has also published in the same
journal the Sinhalese inscription from Trincomalee a copy of
which the French Admiral Suffrein had sent to du Perron
in 1781 with a fac-simile made in 1806 under his direction.™
This appears to be a duplicate of the Vévalkatiya inscription
of Mahinda (a.p. 956-972).¢ Words such as dasagam can be read
clearly. A slab bearing a tenth century inscription had been utilized.
for the pavement of the cella of the budugé {image-house) at Velgam-
vihara (Periyakulam) near Trincomalee as was noticed when the
Archaeological Department was engaged in conserving the remains of
that building in 1953 (see ASC Report for 1953, p. G. 11). These pro-
bably may be fragments from the inscribed slab which Admiral Suffrein
and Alexander Johnston refer to. Johnston also communicated to the
same Transactions the text of a Cufic inscription from Ceylon (dated
Hejira 317—a.p. 948) with a translation by Samuel Lee, Professor
of Arabic in the University of Cambridge (art. xxxi, “A Cufic
Inscription found in Ceylon, communicated by Sir A. Johnston, with
29. Davy, John, An account of the Interior of Ceylon, etc., London, 1821:
P. 255; Pp. 302 f.n.
*See also account at p. 3.
fSee fn. 18 above.
30. Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Socvety of Great Britain and Ireland
Vol. I (1824), art. xxx, “An account of an inscription found near Trin-
comalee.”’
31. Ibid. art. xxxii.
a translation by the Rev. Samuel Lee, A. M. Professor of Arabic in-the

University of Cambridge”). This inscription was at Jawatta in Colombo.
In a country like Ceylon, with a long literary tradition gomg
back to twenty-five centuries and farther m the original home lands
of the people who inhabit it, a knowledge of history is the prerequisite
for all archaeological work. In countries like Ceylon and India research
in prehistory has also to follow history. It should be so for prehistoric
archaeology as well. Very often prehistorical levels lie under several
historical layers. If an archaeologist digs for prehistory, without a
knowledge of history, or without the co-operation of scholars with a
sound knowledge of chronology of the historical times, he will be des-
troying a number of historical levels before he alights on the pre-
historic strata in which he 1s interested. The pre-historic strata have
to be reached after a careful examination of the historic ones. I shall
come to pre-history in Ceylon later on. Now we turn to the study of
Ceylon chronology by modern scholars, who were also interested in
antiquities.
Edward Upham’s** translation of the Mahkdvanst, the Raja-rat-
nacari and the Rajd-valt from the Sinhalese, published in London in
1833, did not add in any manner to the knowledge of Sinhalese chrono-
logy. The news of the publication in London of a translation of the
Mahdvamsa only delayed George Turnour’s work on the chronicle.
Meanwhile, Turnout completed m 1832 his “Epitome of the History of
Ceylon.”*3 The author states this in his letter from Kandy, dated
September 14, 1832, to the Editor of the Ceylon Almanac. Turnour
comments on the scepticism of some individuals who wrote on Ceylon
History, namely Cordiner, Perceval, Bertolacci, Philalethes and Davy,
stating that they ‘“‘unacquainted themselves with the native languages,
and misguided by the persons from whom they derived their imfor-
mation, have concurred in representing that there were no authentic
historical records to be found m Ceylon.”’ Turnour made use for his
Epitome, in addition to the Pali Maha@vamsa and the Conmunentary
to its first part, the Sinhalese works: Pijavaliya, Nikayasangrahaya,
Rajaratnakaraya, Rajavaliya and Vilbagedara Mudiyanse’s “Account
of his embassy to Siam.” Turnour’s Epitome of the History of Ceylon
contains its chronology, the prominent events recorded therein, and
the lineage of the reigning ‘families’, and gives, in somewhat greater
detail, an account of the foundation of the towns and of the construc-
tion of the many stupendous works, the remains of which still exist,
to attest the authenticity of those annals. Turnour prepared his notes
hastily and he was aware that this was done imperfectly, but we have
to admit that the publication of this Epztome was the turning point of
32. Upham, E., The Mahdvansi, the Rdja-ratnacari, and the Rajavali, London,
1833. ‘ 5
33. Ceylon Almanac, 1832? Also as Appendix to Forbes’s Eleven years in
Ceylon (Vol. II, ஐ. 271-323).
8 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol. XIII, (New Series), 1969
antiquarian studies in Ceylon. From the summary we note his bias

towards archaéological remains, and he would make use of the existing
monuments to test the authenticity of the historical and literary
records. This was the purpose of archaeology at the time and to a very
great extent even today. Did not Schliemann dig in the site of Troy
to find the truth of Homter’s epic?*4
Wnriters after the publication of Tumoutr’s Epitome have made
use of his essay, and have certainly benefited from the same. They
have identified some of the cities and monuments mentioned in the
annals. Forbes reproduced Turnour’s Efitome as the Appendix to
his work which we shall presently refer to. Turnour published a Revised
Chronological Table of Sovereigns of Ceylon in the Ceylon Almanac
of 1834, and this is appended also to the introduction to his Maha-
vamsa%> (London, 1837}. This made a further advance to/the Epitome
in respect of the earlier period. In 1832-33 Major Skinner, who wrote
the Fifty Years in Ceylon*6 (London, 1891), supplied Turnour notes
regarding the ancient sites at Anuradhapura with a plan showing
the principal ruins under the names ascribed to them by tradition.
Some of the identifications may be wrong, but we notice the names
sticking to the monuments to this day. Tradition has a greater sway on
people than archaeology or history. ௫
Major 1௦0%,57 ஏங்‌ explored the island in the fourth decade of the
nineteenth century, has given us first hand accounts of several sites
such as Matara, Dondra, Mulgirigala, Kurunegala, Yapahuva, Kandy,
Dambulla, Polonnaruwa, Mihintale and Anuradhapura. Forbes was
at Anuradhapura between 1828-1829. (See Vol. I. Ch. X. of Eleven
Years ww Ceylon, Vol. I-II, London, 1840.) Ievers,38 in his Manual
of the North-Central Province (p. 214), says, ‘In 183 Major Forbes
visited Polonnaruwa, and gives a far more reliable account of the ruins
than Sir Emerson Tennent.”*® Forbes’s description of Anuradha-
pura is illustrated with drawings of Lévamahapaya, Abhayagiri
(Jetavana) and Thiparama, before restoration in about a.p. 1829,
and details of a pillar with capital from the last site. In his account
of Matara and Devinuvaira, Forbes records a tradition that the seven
tombs built in memory of Kumaradisa, Kalidasa and the five
queens of the king, and the seven bo-trees planted there existed ‘‘as
34- Durant, Will, The Life of Greece, ‘The Story of Civilization,’ Part 11, New
York, 1939. pp. 33ff. Jacquetta Hawkes, The World of the Past, New
York, 1963, pp. 23-25.
35. Turnour, Makavamsa, London, 1837.
36. Skinner, Major Thomas, Fifty Years in Ceylon, London, 1891.
37, Forbes, Major, Eleven Years in Ceylon, Vol. HI, London, 1840.
38. Op. eit. p. 2rq.
39. Tennent, J. E., Ceylon, an account of the island, physical, historical and
topographical, Vol. I-II, London, 4th edition 1860.
late as the ‘year a-D. 1783, when a Dutch gentleman made use of the
materials of which the tombs were built, and cut the venerable
bo-trees.’"40 Forbes also has published translations of four long
inscriptions, which were supplied to him by George Tumour, namely,
Tablets of King Mahinda from Mihintale, NigSankamalla’s Galpota
inscription from Polonnarawa, Dambulla Rock Inscription of
Nigsankamalla, Sahassamaila’s slab-inscription from Polonnaruwa,
while he himself translated an inscription from Matale District. This
is Hapugastiinna Inscription dated Saka 128 (a.D. 1359) of Parak-
ramabahn V (a.D. 1344-1359) cited by Bell at JCBRAS. Vol. XXII
(No. 65), p. 295, of this Society’s Jovrnal, and the full text and
translalion of which is published by Simon de Silva at ibid. pp.
362-363. Of the Sinhalese inscriptions Forbes says, “‘the dates which
they afford confum the accuracy of the Cingalese histories, and the
correctness with which Mr. Turnour had arranged its chronology in an
Epitome not then published, although compiled several years before."
-Sir Samuel Baker,#2 in his Exght Years in Ceylon gives a vivid
description of the abandoned ruins of Polonnaruwa. While speaking
of ‘the Architectural relics,’ as he calls them, he says, ‘The Bricks,
or rather the tiles, of which all the buildings are composed, are of
such an imperishable nature, that they still adhere to each other in
large masses in spots where portions of the buildings have fallen.’’4%
The visitor can yet see these masses of brick. It is interesting to ncte
that Baker calls bricks also ‘tiles’. The Pali term for both ‘brick’ and
‘tile’ is tithaka.
Now let us turn our attention again to the south. J. W. Bennet,“
accounts
in his Ceylon and tis Capabilities, London, 1843, gives some tota.
of the temples of Dondra Head, and sites with ruins near Ambalan
While dwelling on the remains of the pawsala and the vihare, of Wan-
derope*® (Vafiduruppé), that is, the monastic residence and the dagoba,
he says, ‘‘the priest considered it a desecration of the sacred relics of
were
the ancient vihdyé to part, with them for a lay purpose.” They
being, however, used, Bennet says, to fill in some nook in the monastic
grounds. It is interesting to note that to this day the conservative
the
Buddhist monk regards the bricks of dagobas which have received
adoration of the devotee to be sacred.
40. Forbes, op. cit, Vol. II, p. 176.

4t. Op.cit. Vol. I, p. 421.
in Ceylon, 2nd Edition, London, 1847,
42. Baker, Sir Samuel, Eight Years
ch. iv.
43. Op.cit p 77-
44. Bennet, J. W., Ceylon and tle Capabilities, London, 1843.
45. Op. cit. p. 314.
Charles Pridham’s Historical, Political and Statistical Account of

Ceylon** contains in addition to descriptions of Anuradhapura, Mihin-
tale and the large tanks of the north, accounts of the ancient city of
Magama, including the Tissa-vihara and Saiidagiri-dagiba, and the
Mulgirigala-vihara.
Anuradhapura was the centre of archaeological interest for govern-
ment in the middle of the last century, but officers continued to visit
other sites and produce accounts of them. In 1840 a sum of £40 was
spent for jungle clearing at Anuradhapura. Ievers in his Manual of
the North-Central Province” says that an estimate of {100 was not
accepted by the government. Ancient edifices were, however, not
left alone. Renovation began. In 1841, a Buddhist bhikkhu collected a
Jarge sum of money and restored the Thiiparama-dagiba, obscuring
ali its ancient features. Ievers says that the “chief architect” could
have known nothing of the proper lines of erection of a dagoba. The
“restoration” has been vehemently criticized by a writer on the history
of world architecture.4* The Samaniapasadika® and the Thapavamsa®
say that this dagoba was originally built in the shape of a paddy-
heap. The picture given by Forbes®? shows what it looked like in
the eighteen-twenties, a padmakara dagoba. The same fate has later
befallen the Lankarama-dagaba, another dagoba with a vataddgé
of about the same size, also at Anuradhapura. Years later, the Ruvan-
valisaya was rebuilt, and many other ancient stapas, in Anuradhapura
and in other places. We shall come to this later on.
In 1845 the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society was founded,
and archaeology was included within the orbit of its activities. An
examination of the contents of the journals of the Society shows that
antiquarian studies and research have been given a very important
place by the Society. Numerous papers on ancient sites and monuments
have been read before the Society and articles on such topics are
published in the Journal. A large number of ancient records are also
published in them. In fact, the sole organization which could have
advised the government until the appointment of an Archaeological
Commissioner with the establishment of the State Archaeological
Survey was this Society.
46. Pridham Charles, An Historical, Pohtical and Statistical Account of Ceylon
and tts Dependencies, Vol. 1-II, 1849.
47. Op. cit. p. 214.
48. Fergusson, Ancient Architecture, p. 187.
49. P.T.S. ed. para 88; Sacred Books of the Buddhists, Vol. XXI, para 93.
(Translation 78, text; p. 201).
50. P.T.S. சம்‌. ற. 50.
51. See also Paranavitana, Stipa om Ceylon, Memoirs of the Archaeological
Survey of Ceylon,”’ Vol. V, p. 13 at. 3.
52. Forbes, op. cit, Vol. I p. 226.
HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY IN CEYLON EL
In the same year as the establishment of the Society (1845),

The History of Ceylon by William Knighton,54 a member of the Civil
Service, and a Secretary of the Society, was published in London.
Reading through Knighton’s pages one would easily come to the con-
clusion that unlike many other European writers who have undertaken
the writing of histories of Asian peoples, our author was full of sym-
pathy and love towards the ancient nation he was dealing with. The
‘work is not devoid of accounts of archaeological interest. He describes
the palace of Kandy and the “beautiful little trellised wall” by the
side of the lake (p. 378). He says that it was gradually crumbling away,
and adds “probably ere long, it will be replaced by some structure of
brick and stone, permanent as ponderous and ponderous as ugly’.
Of the tombs of the kings of Kandy, he says, they “‘now afford scarcely
any thing worth the trouble of looking at. The hand of rapime has been
busy, the carvings and sculptures have been removed, and but a
few shapeless stones attest the burial places of the ‘lion kings’.”’ (Since
demolished, with the extension of the railway lme from Kandy to Matale
through Mahayiyawa.) A description of these tombs is gtven in the
same author’s Forest Life in Ceylon,>+ In the same chapter there are
accounts of the rock of Dambulla and the cave-temples of the same site.
Chapter V of the volume is devoted to Anuradhapura, the buried city.55
. Ceylon, A General Description of the Island and tis Inhabitants

with an Historical Sketch of the Conquest of the Colony by the English®®
by Henry Marshall published in 1846, a year after Knighton’s History,
is a distinct contrast to the latter work. To him the history of Ceylon
begins with the discovery of the island by the Portuguese in உற. 1505.
His sketch of the Town of Kandy and the surrounding country for
about three miles taken in the year 1815 is nevertheless*’ interesting.
I have already referred to Pridham’s History which appeared in

1849. Sir James Emerson Tennent who came as Colonial Secretary to
Ceylon in 1845 and remained here until 1850 devoted himself to the
study of the history and antiquities of the island. He made full use of
the opportunities he had to see the country and what remained of
ancient works. His two volumes on Ceylon* show his vast amount of
reading. He makes reference to numerous volumes and essays relating
to Ceylon and the neighbouring countries. His descriptions of early
Buddhist monuments, irrigation works, fine arts, ancient coins, etc.
with the illustrations that accompany them are an invaluable source
53. Knighton W., The History of Ceylon, London, 1845.

54. Knighton W., Forest Life in Ceyion, 2nd. ed., London, 1854.
55. Op.cit. pp. 1364.
56. Marshall, H., Ceylon,........., London, 1846.
57. Op. cit. facing page 146.
*4th ed., 1860.
12 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol. XIII, (New Series), 1969!
of information to those engaged in antiquarian studies relating to

Ceylon. For example, I may, refer to his account of Padaviya tank
(the Great Tank of Padivil, as he calls it,)5® is not without interest
even today, both with regard to its history and construction. Tennent
had described this tank earlier in his book Christiamtty in Ceylon.®®
In the very first year of its inception (1845) Simon Casie Chitty,
the Secretary of this Society, had presented to the Society twenty-five
copper coins from a hoard that was found buried na cemetery attached
to a mosque at Kalpitiya, with descriptions of two of them. In 1847
Casie Chitty read a paper ‘‘On the History of Jaffna from the earliest
period to the Dutch conquest.’’6! This paper is of considerable anti-
quarian value. We may not accept today some of the information
which Casie Chitty has presented as history, but the essay contains
valuable notices of archaeological interest. He refers here, in a note,
to the discovery of Roman antiquities cited by Valentyn and Ale-
xander Johnston to which I have made reference earher.®*
In the first part of the last century the Ceylen Almanac published
papers on Sinhalese inscriptions,*4 but from the middle of the century
the journal of this Society was the chief medium for the pubhcation
of.our ancient records. A.O. Brodie contributed a paper on the ‘Rock
inscription at Gurugoda Vihare in the Magul-Korale of the Seven
Korales’’% and ‘‘A Notice of various Rock Inscriptions in the North-
Western Province.’ Casie Chitty contributed a note on “A Royal
Grant, Engraved on a Copper Plate’’6? and a paper with eye copies on
a “Rock Inscription at Piramankandel.’’68 Rhys Davids’s contributions
up to 1872 are. “On Inscriptions from Dondra”’,® Inscmption at Weli-
gama Vihdra,”?° and ‘‘On Methods of taking Impressions of Inscrip-
tions.’’?1 A text and translation of a Rock Inscription at the Buddhist
58. Tennent, op. cit. Vol. II, pt xu, ch. v.

59. Tennent, Christianity i Ceylon, London, 1850.
6c. Casie Chitty, S, ‘‘Account of Some Ancient Coins,’ JCBRAS, Vol. I,
No 1, 1845, pp 79 82.
61. Ibid. No. 3, 1847-48, pp 73-84.
62. Ibid, p.73f.n.
63. See notes 30-31.
64. See Forbes, op. cit. Vol. II, pp. 324-356.
65. j/CBRAS, Vol. II, (No. 5), 1853, pp. 59-64.
66. Ibid. No 8, 1855, pp. 193-196.
67. Ibid, Vol. I, (No. 3), 1847-48, pp 115-116.
68. Ibid. Vol. II, (No. 7), 1853, p. 102.
69. Ibid. Voi. V, (No. 16), 1870-71, pp. 25-28, No. 17, 1871-72, pp. 57-56.
qo. Ibid. Vol. V, (No. 16}, 1870-71, pp. 21-24.
qi. Ibid. pp. 1-3.
\Temple at Kelaniya?* and the transcript and translation of an ancient

copper-plate Sannas‘$ were published by L. V. de Zoysa.
\
_ During the governorship of Sir Hercules Robinson (1865-1872)

an Archaeological Commission was appoimted {1868) to consider
practical measures to be taken to conserve ancient architectural] struc-
tures and other works of art. The Surveyor-General, Col. A. B. Fyres
was the Chairman, and J. G. Smither, the Chief Architect of the Public
Works Department, was the Secretary.74 The Government Agents of
the Provinces were circularized to report on all architectural structures.
In 1871, a series of photographs of the principal monuments of Anura-
dhapura was taken by Mr. Svaminathan Kanakaretnam Lawton.*
This pioneer photographer, [ am told, came from Jaffna.
Antiquarians of Ceylon were fortunate when Sir William Gregory,’5

a good classical scholar who had missed prizes and scholarships and
failed to sit his final examination, took up duties as Gevernor of Ceylon
in 1872. Gregory was a cultured Irish gentleman from Galway. He
had been a member of the British Parliament, and Chairman of the
Committee on the British Museum which was appointed in 1860 to
inquire into extensions and arrangements of the various collections.
He had also taken an interest in the affais of the Royal Irish Academy.
In Ceylon he was keen on improving facilities not only for the large
and annually increasing number of foreign students of oriental history
and of oriental philology, but to the people of the Island, many of
whom had already widely distinguished themselves by antiquarian
research.?§ Evidently inspired by the work of this society, chiefly in
the collection of inscriptions, he founded the Colombo Museum. That
epigraphy was foremost in Governor Gregory’s ming%§ evidently by a
passage of his speech to the Legislative Council ogre subject of the
museum. ‘‘I propose, in connection with this MuStim, to obtain re-
production of the inscriptions throughout the island, by means of
photography, casts, and hand-copying. These inscriptions, varying in
character and dialect, will be of deep interest to the philologist, and
throw light on the ancient usages, religious customs, and the early
history of Ceylon.’’’6
72. Ibid. No. 17, pp. 36-44.

73. Ibid. No. 78, 873, நற. 75-70.
74. The Administration Report of the Surveyor-General for 1868, pubhshed in
1869.
tJames T. Rutnam gave the lecturer the full name of LawTON who is mistaken by
the present generation to have been an Englishman or an Amertcan,
75. Hulugalle, H. A. J., British Governors of Ceylon, Colombo, 1963, pp. 116ff.
76. Lady Gregory, Sir William Gregory, K.C. M.G., London 1894, pp. 314-315.
14 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol. XIII, (New Series), 1969 |
்‌
Gregory in his autobiography, published by his widow, ‘gives some

of his impressions of the ancient sites. Very vivid is his narrative’?
of the transport of the Kalinga Lion from Polonnaruwa to the Colombo
Museum, although at the time he wrote he could not lay his hands on
the letter of Mr. Mac Bride, the Director of Public Works, who.carried
out the operation. Great strides,in archaeology were made during
Gregory’s period of stay in Ceylon. Between 1873-75 under his direc-
tions, a complete survey of all, that was known of ancient Anuradha-
pura was made by George Capper. This surveyor met his death at the
hands of a villager whilst on this work, but an account of “The dagobas
at Anuradhapura” was published in 1888 by John Capper, father of
George, in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, London.78 He
deals with the “Thuparama, Miris-wattiya, Ruvan-waeli, Abhayagiri,
Jetawanarama and Selachaitiya dagobas,”” The heights and other measu-
rements of these seven dagobas are given, in accordance with the recom-
mendations of Sir James Fergusson.
J. G. Smither, the Government ‘Architect, who acted as Secretary
to the Archaeological Commission of 1868, completed by. 1877, detailed
plans and drawings to scale of the-more important ruins at: Anura-
dhapura.7? ர
Meanwhile there had also beer published in the இ ourital of the
Royal Asiatic Society, London, two articles on Sigiriya, namely, ‘‘Sigirt
,
the Lion Rock, near Pulastipura, Ceylon & c., by T. W. Rhys Davids®
and “On the Ruins of Sigiri, in Ceylon” by B. H. Blakesley.*!
P. Goldschmidt was appointed Archaeological Commissioner in

1875, to carry out systematic research m Sinhalese Epigraphy. For
‘two years he worked in the North-Central, North-Westerm Provinces
and the Hambantota District. Before he died of malaria in May
1877,
Goldschmidt had published two reports in the Sessional Papers®™
for 1875 and 1876 and a paper entitled ‘Notes on Ancient Sinhalese
Inscriptions” in this Society's Journal.88 ்‌
In 1878, Edward Miller was appointed Archaeological Commis-
‘sioner also for the same purpose as Goldschmidt. He took over the
papers left by Goldschmidt, and began his explorations for more ins-
criptions. Muller brought out the first main publication on the epigra-
77- ‘Ibid. pp. 342-344.

78. Volt. XX, 1888, art. v.
79. Smuther, J. G., Archife.tural Remains of Anuradha pura, London, 1894
80. Vol. VIII, 1876, art. x.
Sr. ரம்‌. Vol. Vii, 1876, art, ii.
82. Reprinted in the Indian Antiquary, Vol. V, 1875 pp. 189-192, Vol. VL
1876, pp. 318-329._ த்‌ யூ
83. Vol. VI, (No. 20), 1879, pp. 1-45.
HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY IN CEYLON, 15
\phy of the island in two volumes under the title Ancient Inscriptions
1% Ceylon.’ Besides, he contributed two papers on Simhalese inscrip-
tions to our Journal® and three contributions in the Sessional Papers®
1878, 1880, 1881. Among the latter, a study entitled “Contributions to
Sinhalese Grammar’’®? is the first attempt in the approach to the
Sinhalese language on an historical basis. Muller’s Granunar of the
Pali Language®® on simular lines was published in London in 1884.
Miller relinquished his post in 1879.
The Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society continued its
activities in antiquarian research under the patronage of another
enlightened governor, Sir Arthur Hannlton Gordon, afterwards Baron
Stanmore {1883-18g90)*. Sir Hamilton presented to the Society Henry
Parker’s ‘‘Report on the Archaeological Discoveries at Tissamaharama
in the Southern Province og Ceylon” and this was published as No. 27
of the Society’s Journal.° This exhaustive report running to nearly 100
pages is supported with a map, plans and illustrations. It is also accom-
panied by a comparative palaeographical table to help in the decip-
hering of inscriptions, It appears that the Irrigation Officer, Henry
Parker, had carried out archaeological excavations, and, in the absence
of an Archaeological Commissioner at the time, he may have been
commissioned to do the work by the government. Parker’s material is
embodied in his Ancient Ceylon®' which was published 11) 1000.
S. M. Burrows carried out some operations at Anuradhapura
and Polonnaruwa during the years 1884-1885. His name is yet remem-
bered in connection with an archaeological monument at Anuradhapura,
namely, ‘““Burrow’s Pavilion’. The results of Burrows’s work is found
in Tever’s Manual,® pp. 227ff. In 1885-86, at Polonnaruwa Burrows
removed the debris from the portico and the vestibule of the Tivanka-
pilimagé and laid bare the wall-paintings therein He might well have
left fhem alone.®? Burrows’s report to the Government on ‘A year’s
work at Polonnaruwa, where he gives the translation of twelve inscrip-
—
84. Wol. I- Text; Vol. II- Plates, London 1883.

85. ‘Text and Translation of the inscription of Mahinda [iI at Mihintale,
with glosarry, JCBRAS, Vol. VI (No. 21) 1880, pp. 3, 36; ‘Notes on
Ancient Sinhalese Inscrrptrons,”* Vol. VIII (No. 26), 1883, pp. 18-43.
86. Ceyion Sessional Papers, 1878, 188௦, 1881. _
87. Ibid
88. Muller, E., A Semplhfied Grammar of the Pali Language, London, 1884.
89 See Hulugalle, op. cit. pp. 124 ff.
90. Parker, H., ‘Report on the Archaeological Discoveries at Tissamahaérama
in the Southern Province of Ceylon,” Vol. VIII (No. 27), 1884, pp. 95-192.
91. Parker, H., Ancient Ceyion, London, 1909.
92. See Note 28.
93. Bell, H. C. P., Notes and Querries “Demalamahaseya Paintings’,
JCBRAS, Vol. XXVI (No. 71), 1918, p. 200.
~16 JOURNAL, R.AS. (CEYLON) Vol. “XIII, (New Series), 1969
tions at the ancient capital is published m our Journal. Burrows
became Director of Education. He was a man of literary talents, as 1s
seen from the little guide, The Burted Crites of Ceylon, he wrote (1905).
In 1886, the Society had given a grant to W. J. S. Boake of the
Ceylon Civil Service to conduct excavations at Tirukketisvaram of
Mantai. The results of a few days’ digging were incorporated by the
excavator in a paper which was read before the Society on the 7th
of November, 1887. The paper is accompanied by two plans. The pottery
is compared with Parker’s finds from Tissamaharama. Finds from two
spots examined are listed. Of other archaeological explorations before
the establishment of the Archaeological Survey, the results of which
are recorded in the Society’s Journal, the papers relating to Ritigala
in the North Central Province should be mentioned.°7
A regular vote for archaeological purposes was for the first time
inserted in the Supply Bull for 890, and introduced to the Legislative
Council by Governor Gordon’s Message dated November 20, 1889.
Herein he says, “It is proposed to make some systematic examination
of the interesting remains at Sigiri, and to commence on a modest
scale, before the rapidly disappearing monuments of the past have
altogether perished, a species of Archaeological Survey resembling
that carried on in India.” In February 18go, the commencement of the
Archaeological Survey of Ceylon was entrusted to H. C. P. Bell of the
Ceylon Civil Service, who was the Honorary Secretary of this Society
at the time. Bell was at the time stationed at Kegalla, and he found
it convenient to make that district the first scene of his work. It was
an tunworked field with several sites of considerable interest, stret-
ching from the most ancient times to the latest. Bell produced his
monumental Report, Historical and Antiquarian, on the Kegalla District
in 1892.98
The purpose of the establishment of the Archaeological Survey
appears to have been to make a descriptive list of ancient monuments
and inscriptions, A commission of four persons appointed to look into
the matter reported that in twenty years’ time this task would be
0011610099
94 JCBRAS, Vol. X; (No. 34), 1887

95. Burrows, S. M, Buried Cites of Ceylon, a guide to Anuradhapura and
Polonnaruwa, with chapters on Dambulla, Kalawewa, Mihinuale and
Sieur, (€ ௦00௦. 1905),
96. Boake, W. J. S., “Tirukketisvaram, Mabatirtha, Matodd ane
taddai,"" JCBRAS, Vol. X. (No. 35), 1887 pp. 107-114. =e

97. Wickremasinghe, D. M. de Z., “Etymological and Historical notes டon
Ritigala.” JCBRAS, Vol. XI, (No. 9}, 1899: Rid t B
. Vol. XII No. 43, 1892. 3 99 eout, J.B.M., ibid,
98. Sessional Paper XX of 1894, Colompo, 1892.
99. Sessional Paper I of 1899.
ன்‌
Even after the Archaeological Survey began to function this
Society continued its archaeological activities at least in the publica-
tion of various papers in the Jourwal, affording a platform for lectures
and providing opportunities of discussion. Preliminary reports of the
Survey’s work of exploration and excavation were presented to the
Society. After Bell completed his exploration of the Kegalla District,
he shifted the scene of his activities to Sigiriya, (while making Anura-
dhapura his headquarters) the site named by Governor Gordon in his
communication to the Legislative Council containing the proposal for
the initiation of the Archaeological Survey. Bell’s “Interim Report on
the Operations of the Archaeological Survey at Sigirtya in 1895” was
presented to the Society at its meeting on September ro, 1895. This
paper was prefaced with extracts from a short paper by A Murray,
giving a general description of Sigiriya and its history. In illustration
of the report, plans, architectural drawings and views of the Rock and
the surroundings, done by the Archaeological Survey, were exhibited
in the room; also an album of photographs taken by the Archaeological
Commissioner. The paper gives information as to how archaeclogical
activities were carried on at the time. Personal supervision by the
Commissioner had not always been possible. Bell acted as District
Judge, Kalutara, whilst also directing Archaeological Survey opera-
tions, between May Ist and December 7, 1894. In August that year
Bell’s assistant, M. F. Maxfield, acting on written directions from
Kalutara employed a number of Sinhalese villagers to fell and burn
the trees on the top of the Rock, as well as close round the base of the
western and southern scarps. The employment of this chena clearing
method is what archaeological explorers now try to guard against.
One knows the fate of inscriptions, sculpture or other works of art if
they should lie unnoticed under the trees subject to burning. Even after
seventy-five years of the existence of the Archaeological Survey we
find this still being done. Bell’s Intertm Report on. the second season,
1896, was submitted to the Society on January 9, 1897, whule the third
report (which was for 1897) was presented in December 8, 1897. The
last evoked some public discussion on Bell’s views of the Siginya
artists. Since the Archaeological Commussioner supervised operations
only at one site during one given period, and he had no “Antiquities
Ordinance” to operate (nor to attend to constant needs of members
of the public including politicians as now) he could speedily finish
his report. This 1s the ideal we must expect in all archaeological work,
especially in exploration and excavation. The Society's interest in
receiving the Reports also would no doubt have been an encouragement
for the Archaeological Commissioner to expedite them. No one wishes
to write reports and books that are not promptly read! The Archaeo-
logical Commissioner annually presented to the Council of this Society
a synopsis of the work done by the Archaeological Survey during the
ear. Some of these summaries are published in the Journal (1900;
ol. XVII, No. 52; rg01; 1901: ibid. No. 53; 1go2: Vol. XVIIF, No. 54;
18 JOURNAL, R.AS. (CEYLON) Vol. XIII, (New Series), 1969
1903: ibid. No. 55, 1904). Archaeological summaries continued to be
published in our Journal unti] very recent times. The last published
were for 1951 and 1952 in the New Series Vol. IV (pt. x), 1955. I shall
not enumeiate here the Reports of the Archaeological Survey, later
named the Department of Archaeology; but a passing reference must
be made to the Seventh Progress Report! of Bell, a much sought after
volume, like the same author’s Kégalla Report.°! Meanwhile F. E.
Oertel of the Public Works Department of India reported on the
restoration of monuments at Anuradhapura,102
Let us turn our attention again to epigraphy. Don Martino de
Zilva Wickremasinghe, who had been Assistant Librarian of the Colombo
Museum Library, joined the Archaeological survey soon after its incep-
tion as Bell’s “Native Assistant”. Wickremasinghe’s thoroughness and
ability as a scholar, though not a graduate of any University at the
time, is seen from his contribution to the Seventh Progress Report just
referred to. Wickremasinghe had proceeded to Europe on studies in
1898 and there shown full evidence of his ability. It would be sufficient
to refer to his Catalogue of the Sinhalese M. anuscripts in the British
Museum, London, 1900. Wickremasinghe was appointed Epigraphist
to the Ceylon Government simultaneously with his duties as Lecturer
in Tamil and Telugu in the University of Oxford, and he began editing
and translating lithic and other inscriptions of Geylon for the E pigra-
phia Zeylantca. The progress of the first volume was reported in the
archaeological summary! for the year rgor. In the similar statement
for the vear 1903, under Epigraphy we read. The first number (Vol. x,
part 1) of the Epigraphia Z eylanica has been issued in a neat and
scholarly form, by Mr. D. M. de Z. Wickremasinghe. A copy was
on table at the
laid
Annual General Meeting held on March 2, 1904.
Of Wickremasinghe’s work on Ceylon epigraphy, his successor as
Epigraphist, Paranavitana, later Archaeological Commissioner,
says
as follows in the preface to the fourth volume of the Epigraphia Zey-
tanica: ‘In the midst of his (Wickremasinghe’s) multifarious duties,
first at Oxford University and later at London University,
and published, between 1903 and 1927, thirteen parts of thishe journal
edited
,
consisting solely of his own contributions, The scholarly and able
manner in which Dr. Wickremasinghe carried out this onerous task
eared for him a first-class international Teputation
among Indianists;
but it is sad to reflect on the indifference of his own coun
' wards the great service he has rendered his country by his trymen to-
researches
into the history, language, and culture of the Sinhalese people, incid
en-
100. Sessional Paper XIII of 1896.

101. Sessional Paper XIX of 1892, Colombo,
1892.
102, Sessional Paper XX of 1903.
103. JCBRAS,No. 52, p.7.
HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY IN CEYLON 1g
tally bringing credit to Ceylon scholarship.”” Wickremasinghe made

his contribution to archaeology also by his research and teaching.
I may here refer to his paper on ‘‘the Antiquity of Stone Architecture
in India and Ceylon” published in our Journal.1°* Wickremasinghe
deserves to be remembered by philologists and antiquarians of Ceylon
for his scholarship, if his patriotic deeds are not widely known. Not
even has a street been named after him. Wickramesinghe, though blind
at the time, favoured this Society with a valuable paper! in 1934.
I searched through the pages of our journals for an Obituary Notice
of this distinguished scholar and found none.
The first decade of this century also had among us another
Ceylonese. He has not been forgotten. This is Ananda Coomaraswamy,
the exponent of oriental art, chiefly Sinhalese, the author of Mediaeval
Sinhalese Art published in 1908, in London, Earlier he had contri-
buted three papers to this Society of which “Some Survivals in Sin-
halese Art” is of particular interest to antiquarian studies.1%
John Still is better known for his Jungle 782108 than for his
contributions towards archaeological and historical research in Ceylon.
His Index to the Mahavamsa‘® has not yet been superseded. He was
Assistant to the Archaeological Commissioner under Bell from January
I, 1g02 to December 31, 1907, and his contribution during this brief
period is indeed noteworthy. His papers and notes on the ancient Sinha-
lese coins read before this Society and subsequently published in the
journal are a notable advance in the study of Ceylon Numismatics,
while his paper on Tantrimalai!® shows the accuracy of his archaeo-
logical observations and the trustworthiness of his deductions. He also
wrote a book on the Ancient Capitals of Ceylon4) Very few are aware
of its existence. In the first world war he was taken captive by the
Turks when he wrote the Poems in Captivity. When Still had to give up
archaeology, he took to planting. He was later on appointed the Sec-
retary of the Ceylon Planters’ Association. Before Still died, he burnt
all his notes.
௩௦4. Vol. XXT, No 62, 1909.

“Evolution of the Language of the Pah Canon,” JCBRAS, Vol.
105. .
XXXVIII, No. 37, 1934, pp. 18-33-
106. Second Edition, incorporating the author’s corrections, Pantheon Books,
Wew York, 1956.
107. JCBRAS, Vol XIX, No. §7, 1906.
January 1930. Reprint of popular edition, Wilham Black-
108. First printed
Sons Lte., Edinburgh and London. October 1955 Other works
wood &
include: Poems in Captivity, A Prisoner in Turkey.
109. Index to the Mahavamsa, Government Printer, Colombo, 1907.
110. “Tantrimalai: Some Archaeological observations and deductions”’,
JCBRAS, Vol. XXII, No, 63, 1910. pp. 199-714. .
111. John Still, Guide to Ancient Capitals of Ceyion, Anuradhapura, 1907.
ப்‌
20 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol, XIII, (New Series), 1969
Prehistory did not come within the purview of the State Survey
or Department of Archaeology until the rst of October, 1965. Never-
theless, foreign anthropologists have done some field-work for sometime.
T have given a very brief account of their work in Ceylon Today {October
1965) and I do not propose to dwell on the subject today. I may only
mention some of the early papers published in our Journal.1* A paper
by Drs. Sarasin had been published as early as 1886. John Pole read a
paper entitled “‘A Few Remarks on Prehistoric Studies in Ceylon’,
before this Society.1/8 John Still has appended to his apper on Tantri-
malai reproductions of a large number of cave paintings of the pre-
historic type. Still had made further pre-historic findings at this site.
Bell retired from the post of Archaeological Commiusstoner in 1912.
Before we proceed further in this history of antiquarian research in
Ceylon, we must consider the effect of this new subject on the masses, ~
chiefly the Sinhalese speaking people who form the great majority of
the population. For a number of centuries learning had been at a low
ebb, and even this was confined to a few. The higher classes had begun
.to imitate European ways. There was little interest in the indigenous
culture of the people. The studies in oriental lore or antiquarian research
then undertaken were not meant to be for the benefit of the people of the
country. These subjects were persued for the sake of a few sclected people
in the “colony” and their results published in European languages for the
information and edification of their countrymen in their home countries.
This Society too was founded for this class of people. The few natives
admitted were those who lived apart front the majority of their country-
men. The so-called elite that were able to devote themselves for anti-
quarian studies had no roots in the soil; they had no contact with the
common man. Thus the ordinary citizen had no idea of the meaning and
purpose of archaeology. It served no purpose to lament or criticize
the renovation or the destruction of ancient monuments and works of
art. No one had tried to educate the masses on their usefulness and
value. A Society like this did not cater even for the less privileged of the
English educated. It was only for the very high strata of the Euro-
peanized society. Until the third decade of this century the meetings
of the Society were after dinner gatherings, to attend which members
had to be in dinner-suits. One may have entered with the national
dress. Thus the only body which encouraged antiquarian studies was
highly exclusive. The Archaeological Survey too presented its findings
only toa limited audience. The Sinhalese press hardly reported archaeo-
logical discoveries. No one knew about them. The excavation sites
were not opened to the public. I have been told that archaeological
operations were carried out within barbed wired fences, and no villager
_412 Sarasin, Drs. B. P. and C. F., ‘Outline of two years Scientific Researches
in Ceylon,” JCBRAS, Vol. IX, No. 32, 1886, pp. 289-305.
on
133. JCBRAS, Vol. XIV, No. 53, 1907, pp. 272-278.
HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY IN CEYLON aI
was allowed to see them. Thus fanciful stories were circulated among
the ignorant folk.
The state of affairs regarding antiquarian studies was in this
condition when the national awakening took place during the second
half of the last century. The Sinhalese press could do nothing to spread
the knowledge of our ancient culture. They were only interested in the
language and a little history. Some devoted their columns te arguments
on religious or caste affairs. As time went on, however, there was some
interest at least on the history of the country. The Mahavamsa and
its commentary were published in the Sinhalese character, and trans-
lations of the chronicle also appeared. More began to read about the
ancient monuments.
Some of the ancient sites in the Southern Province had been

subjected to clearing during the Dutch and early British times. This
area was for the most of this time free from enemy activities, and there
were Sinhalese Buddhists who had acquired wealth from trade. Their
object was to renovate Buddhist edifices, particularly the dagobas.
When business took these people to other places in the island, and they
saw ancient monuments, their whole aim turned to restore or rebuild
them. We have already seen how the smaller dagobas the Thiparamal™*
and the Lankarama had been renovated. Now the attention of the
restorer was drawn to the Ruvanvalisaya. In 1871 a young bhikkhu
came to Anuradhapura from some far off place and began the removal
of debris to repair 1t. There was no Archaeological Department to
advise the monk, nor was there an ‘Antiquities Ordinance’’ to protect
the edifice. Countless works of antiquarian value would have been
lost or destroyed during the operations. The extent and value of the
antiquities that would have come to light could be judged from their
remains that still lie strewn about the pavement and grounds of the
dagoba, and those that have been recently collected into an open
shed.
A branch of the Mahabodhi Society was opened in Anuradhapura

towards the end of the last century and Walisinha Hamschandra
appeared in Anuradhaputa during the first years of this century.
He was interested in the preservation of the national monuments.
He wrote a book in English entitled The Sacrsd City of Anuradhapura,4s
giving the history and some of the archaeological features of the edifices.
He wrote separate booklets in Sinhalese on some of the more important
114. For Thiparaima as it was in 1828-1829, see Major Forbes, leven Years
an Ceylon, Vol. I, London 1840, pp 226-227, with woodcut on p, 226,
ராத, Walhsinha Harischandra, The Sacred City af Anuvadhapura, Colombo,
1908. See also Kalukofidayavé Pafifidsckhara Thera, Simhala Puvatpat
lithasaya.
22 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol, XIII, (New Series), 1969
. a
buildings, and also a work called the Purdvidydva,s “ Archaeology’.

I believe this was the first time the word was used as the Sinhalese
equivalent for ‘archaeology.’ [am not certain whether Harischandra’s
idea of the preservation of an ancient edifice was conservation or whether
it was restoration.
A Sinhalese journal by the name of Szvt-anurapura-puvatatl’,

started on the 2nd of August 1909, was first published monthly and
then fortnightly. One of the objects of the journal, as stated in one of
the editorials, was mainly to announce to the public the discoveries of
antiquities made by the government officers engaged in examining-
ancient monuments. [do not know how far this purpose was achieved.
Sinhalese journals had begun the publication of ancient docu-
ments. Some of them started on publishing inscriptions also in Sinhalese
borrowing their material from the English publications (e.g. /#é-
niadar &aya,8 Vol. X).
Following the year of Bell’s retirement, in 1913 Edward R. Ayrton,!9

a young Egyptclogist who had worked under Flinders Petrie was
appoimted Archaeological Commissioner. In addition to his work at
Anuradhapura, Ayrton carried out explorations in the south, an
area which had hitherto not been explored archaeologically, except
for the tours by Goldschmidt and Miller in search of inscriptions,
and investigations made by the irrigation engineer, Henry Parker.
Ayrton’s archaeological activities in the south came to an unfortunate
end with his sudden death when he was accidentally drowned in 1914,
before a year had passed after his appointment.* Ayrton’s field-notes
made in the south were published in the Ceylon Antiquary and Literary
Register.1°° A. M. Hocart, who came to Ceylon as Archaeological Com-
missioner in I92I, incorporated, in the first ‘Memoir of the Archaeo-
logical Survey of Ceylon,” Ayrton’s field notes from Anuradhapura.
நரக, See note 115.

ராத, See note 115.
118. Ed. Gunasekera, A. Mendis, 1896 ff. (ten volumes are published).
11g. Ayrton was joint author of Abydos III with C. T. Curell and E. P. Weigall,
London, 1904.
*Ceylon’s officialdom did not want even to honour Ayrton’s memory. The present
Sri-mahabodhi-mavata was named ‘‘Ayrton Road’. It was later changed to
“Dickson Road", after the name of a Revenue Officer (Government Agent) of
Anuradhapura. Such was the treatment archaeologists have received in our
country even after their death. See also Hanschandra, The Sacred City of
Anuradhapura, p. 117 foot note.
xz0. “Antiquities in the Southern Province’, Diary of the late Mr. E. R.
Aryton (Archaeological Commissioner of Ceylon) with notes by John
M, Senaveratne, CA and LR, Val. VI, pt. I (July 1920), art. vi, pp. 39-46;
ibid pt.z, pt. 3 (January 1921) art. xvi pp. 151-153; pt. 4 (April 1gat),
art. xviii, pp. 191-197; Vol. VII, pt. I (July 1921), art. v, pp. 38-41.
Ayrton has published six contributions in the Ceylon Notes and Quertes
of this Society. They chiefiy deal with the identification of places and
monuments with the help of literary evidence. After the death of
Ayrton until the appointment of an Archaeological Commissioner in
1920, the Government Agent, North Central Province, was in charge
of the Department and the reserves at Anuradhapura, Polonnaruwa
and Sigiriya were maintained.
Although the office of Archaeological Commissioner was vacant

between the years 1914-1920 antiquarian activities continued, this
Society providing the forum for discussion, and publishing the results
of research. H. W. Codrington contributed papers on numismatics,™4
and his other contributions such as those to the Ceylon Antzquary
and the Literary Register? formed no doubt the preliminary studies
for his large work Ceylon Comms and Currency13 Inscriptions were
published, and papers on subjects of antiquarian interest continued to
be read before the Society. Important archaeological operations during
this period were the explorations and excavations undertaken by Paul
E. Pieris in the Jaffna Peninsula, the results of which were presented
to this Society.
Hocart (born 1883) was a graduate in classics of the university of

Oxford and had studied Philosophy and Psychology at the Berlin
University. He was a member of an expedition to the Solomon Islands
in the Pacific, led by the well-known ethnologist W. H. R. Rivers in
1908-9, and Jater {1912-1914) Graduate Scholar Research of Exeter
College and Jesus College, Oxford, when he investigated races, crafts
and customs in the Pacific islands. He had acted as a Reader in Mental
Philosophy at Oxford (1915) and served as a Captain in France during
the First World Way (1914-1918).
With this background Hocart took up his duties as Archaeological
Commiissioner in 1921. In Ceylon he must have found a close connection
between cultural anthropology and archaeology. He recommended
that an ethnologist be attached to the Department of Archaeology.
Hocart was a prolific writer. He founded and edited The Ceylon Journal
of Science, and contributed a Section on Archaeology and Anthropology
namely, Section G. in the ‘Archaeological Summaries” of which have
2. ‘A recent find of Coins’; Vol. XXIII, No. 66, 1913. pp 72-88, “Ceylon
Numismatics”, Vol. XXIV, No. 68, pt. II. r918.' pp 169-186; “The
Kahdpana of the Vinaya Parajika Pali,” XXIX, No. 76, pt. I-IV, 1923.
Pp. 215-220, :
12z, Ca and LR.
123. Government Press, Colombo, 1924.
124. ‘‘Nagadipa and Buddhist Remains in Jaffna’, JCBRAS, Voi. XXVI,
No. 7u, pt. I, 1917, pp. 11-30; Vol. XXVIII, No. 72, pt. I-IV, 1919, pp.
40-66,
24 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol. XII], (ew Series), 1969
given the results of his work in this field. He started the publication
of the “Memoirs” of the Archaeological Survey of Ceylon, and he
himself produced two of the volumes. Hocart retired in 1931 due to
ill-health. An account and appreciation of Hocart’s work is found in the
“Obituary Notice” by Paranavitana published in this Society’s Journal%
A bibliography of Hocart’s writings by Rodney Needham (of Oxford)
was published by Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1967.
Much of Hocart’s work in archaeology was devoted to the conser-
vation of ancient monuments which were in urgent need of attention.
D. T. Devendra, writing about Hocart’s' contribution to archaeology
says,12 “In it (the Journal of Science} he tried meticulously to build
up a sequence in the evolution of building styles of old, He failed to
hold a permanent architect.”’ I thinkin the last Hocart was not a failure.
Professional architects are very often not a help, but an obstruction
in the scientific conservation of ancient monuments. The good archaeo-
logist will only attempt to preserve and protect for posterity what
remains of an historical monument. He will not attempt to add any
portion to it by conjecture. Any conjectural restoration should be
only on paper, or in a model for comparision. It was to deal with resto-
ration work at monuments privately owned that the Department
later on desired an Architectural Assistant. (See Report for 1933, p. 16,
para 21.) This was for providing new structures, and not for conser-
vation. Hocart did not take upon himself such problems. Where Hocart
failed was in understanding the full value of Sinhalese inscriptions in
Ceylon Archaeology.
After Hocart’s retirement C. F. Winzer, Chief Inspector of Art
of the Education Department, was appointed Acting Archaeological
Commissioner on March 24, 1931. He had already been in charge of the
Department from January 15, to October 31, 1929 when Hocart was
away from the Island on sick leave. Winzer retired from the Public
Service of Ceylon on March 31, 1932. According to records Winzer had
been in the Island only for six days during the second period he acted
as Archacological Commissioner and Dr. Joseph Pearson, the Director
of the Colombo Museum, had been in charge of the Department for a
year (March 23, 1931-March 24, 1931). An officer
on furlough abroad
had been actin g as Archacological Commussioner!
Winzer's undoubted artistic talents were not with
archaeology. He made a collection of photographs out benefit to
of the sculptural
remains at Anuradhapura. He arranged for public
stones, images and other stone antiquities whic view the inscribed
dhapura in a part of the Department’s premises. h were lying at Anura-
Similarly he arranged
in a room the pottery and the terra-cottas. He
paintings made from Anuradhapura and had copies of some
Kelaniya,
125. “Arthur Maurice Hocart,’’ Vol. XXXIV,
No. 98, 1938, pp. 264-268.
126. Artibus Asiae, Vol. XXII.
During Hocart’s time an Epigraphical Assistant was added to the

staff of the Department. (Mr. Senarat Paranavitana, appointed on
April 24, 1926.) Thus the collection of inscriptions and epigraphical-
research were carried on steadily, in spite of the vicissitudes the
Department had to suffer from. The Epigraphical Assistant, S. Parana-
vitana, acted in the office of Archaeological Commissioner from 1932
(April, 1) 10 1935 (October 8). By this time, he had edited two volumes
and two parts (Vol II. pts. 2-3) of the third volume of the Epigrapina
Zeylanica. In 1932 two more parts appeared (4-5). In the first period
of two and a half years Paranavitana was Acting Archaeological
Commussioner, he had taken action to reserve a jarge number of sites
for purposes of archaeology. At Anuradhapura, Paranavitana took up
excavations where Ayrton had left them (publishing, in 1936, Memoir
IiI of the AS.C. Excavations 11 the Citadel) and the conservation of
ancient buildmgs exposed by earlier excavators. He explored various
districts for archaeological remains. This explains the large number
of sites reserved for future work.
Paranavitana’s greatest contribution 1s the action he took for the
control of the restoration of ancient monuments in private ownership.
At the time the Archaeological Commissioner had no legal authority
to prevent works of restoration undertaken at sites privately owned.
The “Buddhist Temporalities Ordinance,’ No. 19 of 1931, empowered
the Governor-in-Council to make regulations for the preservation and
protection of such Buddhist shrines, temples, inscriptions and monu-
ments as may be considered to be of historical, archaeological-_or artistic
interest, and for preventing the same from being defaced by inappro-
priate or incongruous repairs or additions. This Ordimance was adminis-
tered by the Public Trustee. Such regulations as were necessary were
framed and the acting Archaeological Commissioner was included
in a Committee appomted to advise the Public Trustee on such
restorations. When the regulations were framed restorations at the
ancient shrines at Mulgingala, a site which had been noticed by early
writers and mentioned by me earlicr, had advanced to such a stage
that nothing could have been done with regard to the place, but the
committee was able to prevent the total demolition of valuable remains
at another site, namely, Avukana in the North-Western Province.
It would be of immense interest to-day to read what Paranavitana

had to say on the subject of restoration of ancient monuments in private
ownership. I shall cite but one paragraph from his Report? for 1933:
“The deplorable manner in which ancient religious monuments in
private ownership have been restored in recent times has repeatedly
been commented upon, both in reports of this Department and else-
where. There are signs that the Buddhist themselves are beginning to
127. See paragraphs 16-21, also “Antiquities Outside Archaeclogical Reserves

in Report for 1934, Paras 38-44.
26 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol. XIIT, (New Series), 1969
tealize the harm done to their religious shrines by the pious and well-
meant but ill-planned efforts of the restorers; and letters on this
subject appear in the daily press very frequently. But, unfortunately,
those who actually exert themselves in these works of restoration do
not seem to have realized that they are doing anything but mer-
torious, in completely renovating the ancient edifices according to
their own standards of beauty; and on the other hand, those whe
make public protests against what they call acts of vandalism do not
generally belong to the temple-building section of the Buddhists.”
(Read the whole of section, paras 16-21; also “Antiquities Outside
Archaeological Reserves” in the Report for 1954 (paras 38-44.)
By the provisions of the “‘Antiquities Ordinance’, No. 9 of 1940

the Archaeological Commissioner was vested with powers to prevent
such ugly and incongruous restoration; but, as it will be pointed out at
the end, in recent years the craze for restoration and re-building has.
spread to monuments owned and reserved by the State. The Jatest
news is that an historical ancient stipa*, in an Archaeological Reserve
already conserved the Department, is in danger of being built upon.
The offenders are not the temple-building section of the Buddhists,
but quite another section of the public. For various reasons which I
do not propose to go into, the Antiquities Ordinance for the most
part is a dead letter.
An item of work Paranavitana began during the first period he
acted as Archaeological Commissioner, which has earned much deserved.
praise not only from Archaeologists but also from all persons with an
aesthetic taste, is the conservation of the Kantaka-cetiya at Mihintale.
He had no architect to assist or mislead him! There is no conjectural.
restoration, no attempt to fill in missing portions. In 1965 at least
one private owner of a dagoba,f a leading Buddhist monk, requested.
the Archaeological Department to have the same conserved like the
Kantaka-cetiya.
Archaeological work in Ceylon took a rather different turn with
A. H, Longhurst, who was recommended {or the post of Archaeological
Commissioner by the Director-General of Archaeology in India. Long-
hurst, who had been Superintendent of the Southern Circle of the
Indian Archaeological Survey, took over the charge of the Archaeolo-
gical Department on October 8, 1935. During the period he held the
office of Archaeological Commissioner, just two months and a few
days short of five years, he confined his attention to Polonnaruwa,
where probably tle massive structures attracted him! The cnly important
excavation recorded in his Reports is that of the Pabalu-dagiiba at
* Kotavehera at Dedigama in the Kegalla District.

{Sandagiri-digaba at Tissamaharama. This was when the conservation and
restoration of the Kirivehera at Kataragama was in progress (see below).
Polonnaruwal’s (1938, ற. 17). He carried out conservation, or rather

restorations, extensively at Polonnaruwa, and a few at Anuradhapura
and Sigiriya. Longhurst restored portions of buildings. He even got
new Buddha statues made, and placed them in or near shrines, and
these are taken today by some to be genuine antiquities.!29 The results
of his restoration of the architectural stucco work of the Lankatilaka,
Thiparama and the Tivankapilimagé at Polonnaruwa, can hardly be
considered correct from either an archaeologica] or an aesthetic point
of view. At Anuradhapura his attempts to restore the damaged nose
of the Samadhi Statue in the Abhayagiri complex disfigured this
unique work of Buddhist art, and earned the lament of Pandit Nehru
en his last visit to Ceylon. To determine whether Longhurst’s conserva-
tion methods, which are mainly seen through his works tn the mediaeval
capital of Polonnaruwa, are scientifically acceptable or aesthetically
satisfying, you are as good judges as I am.
Longhurst plastered and colourwashed the gallery wall of the

Sigiriya Rock. Restoration of the Sigiriya paintings in recent time,*
eamed the censure of the Archaeological Chemist of the Indian Survey,
Mohd. Sana Ullah, who wrote: ‘‘A careful examination of these frescoes
revealed that the old plasters had undergone extensive repaus in
recent time, showing the dilapidated condition in which they were
found. It is noteworthy that the missing parts of the paintings have
also been restored sometimes co skilfully as it is now difficult to dis-
tinguish the omgimal from the recent work. It is obvious that such
restorations depreciate their value as specumens of ancient art and
should therefore not be permitted in future.’ The vandals of the night
of 14th October, 1967 who thoughtessly damaged the paintings of Sigiriya
would have done well had they only apphed the cheap paint on
the figures and not used their knives on two of the ladies. Perhaps
they only wanted to remove the handiwork of a m odern artist.
Evidently Longhurst realized what the people of Ceylon, whose

voices were heard by those in power at the time wanted, and did what
would have been approved and appreciated by them. Like some other
arcbacologists did, he did not want to court their disfavour. He did
not hesitate to build roads at Polonnaruwa cutting through the foun-
dations of old stricture to make it possible for the V.I-P’s to motor
up to the very foundations of some of the important edifices. And
did they not exclaim: “At last we have got the man we wanted. We
128, ASCAR, 1938, ற. 17.

these
129. Ihad one of my officers requesting my permission to have some of of the
to the Archaeol ogical Museum. A close examina tion
removed often mislead
statues convinced him agaist the proposal. Foreign experts
us!
* As to who was responsible for 1t one seeks in vain.
130. Ceylon Sessional Paper, XXI, 1943.
28 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol. XILL, (New Series}, 1969
can see everything from our cars!”’ It is no wonder that efforts to save
the ancient features of our historic monuments, and keep the sites in
their ancient splendour are not a success. To catch the popular fancy
we must clear the old and indigenous trees as much as possible
from the historic sites, and plant new flowering trees as Longhurst
did. ்‌ -
Longhurst does not appear to have favoured this Society with
any of lus research or any account of his work. He, however, mentions
in the final paragraph of his last Report (1939), that his Epigraphical
Assistant (Dr. 5. Paranavitana) read a paper on Sigiri Graffitti before
the Royal Asiatic Society, Ceylon Branch, in October 1939. A contri-
bution of Longhurst here 1o archaeology was The Story of the Stapa.®
Longhurst retired in July r940 and Paranavitana-succeeded him.
The Antiquities Ordinance had been proclaimed on June 3rd and
gazetted on June 7 of Ig40 just before Longhurst’s retirement. -The
enactment of this law was for a very large extent the result of Parana-
vitana’s pleading, when he was earlier acting Head of the Archacolo-
gical Department, for such legislation for the protection and preser-
vation of our historic monuments By section 40 of this Ordinance the
Archacological Commissioner was empowered to.
(2) to prepare a list of monuments;

(6) to conserve, maintain, repair and restore all ancient monu-
ments on Crown land and such protected monuments as may
from time to time be specified by the Executive Committee
(later, the Minister};
(c) to carry out excavations with the approval of the Executive
Commnuttce (later, the Minister).
By an ‘amendment act’ of 1955 the Archaeological Commissioner
was also empowered to purchase antiquities with funds provided for the |
purpose.
The Regulations made by the Executive Committee of Education
under section 47 of the Antiquities Ordinance, which were approved.
by the State Council and ratified by the Officer Administering the
Government, had already empowered the Archaeological Commissioner
to exhibit any antiquity delivered to him tnder the Ordinance in an
Archacological Muscum maintained by him or to transfer such antiquity
to any national muscum established by government to be kept and
cusplayed therein ்‌
131. ASCAR, 1938 p. 17, para. 23.

132. Colombo, 1936.
133. See. eg., ASCAR, 1933, pp. J5-J6 (paras, 6-21).
The proclamation of the Antiquities Ordinance and the appoint-

ment of a Sinhalese scholar with experience and foresight In ர040 to
head the Department of Archaeology ushered in a new era for the
subject, and much was achieved, but the 1esults would have been of
greater magnitude if the support from the State and the co-operation
of the public were what they should have been. Paranavitana held office
until the end of 1956, and thereafter was Professor of Archaeology in
the University of Ceylon up to the beginning of 1965, and still
continues his research in the subject. The present lecturer joined
the Department of Archaeology in September 1947 as Assistant
Archaeological Commissioner but was away on public policy
abroad from September 1953 to end of January 1959; he has been in
charge of the Department, first in an acting capacity and later
confirmed as Archaeological Commissioner. He was, however, not
responsible for action under the ‘‘Antiquities Ordinance” up to Septem-
ber 1960, which, by gazette notifications, came unde: the purview of
various Permanent Secretaries under whom the Archaeological Depart-
ment was placed. Yeu will have occasion to note why special
reference to this fantastic position is made (See page 34.)
It would not be possible here to attempt even a very brief summary

of the achievements in our country and by our scholars during the
last twenty-eight years after 1940. D. T. Devendra, in his paper entitled
“Seventy Years of Ceylon Archacology’’, published in the Arttbus
Astae4, gives an appreciation of Paranavitana’s work, including his
major publications up to 1960. A full list up to January 1963 is included
in the Paranavitana Felicttation Volumes Among other articles
dealing with the progress of archaeology in our country in the recent
times, I may refer you 1o Paranavitana’s “Two Decades of Archaeo-
logicai Work in Ceylon,’’ published in the Ceylon Today for February
—March—April 1968. This briefly covers the 1mportant work up to the
end of 1967.
Since the present lecturer was also involved for the greater part of
this period, he would briefly state what has been achieved, without
omitting to comment on what has not been, so that others, particularly
members of this Society which fosters antiquarian pursuits in Ceylon,
will seek for the remedy and apply it.
134. Vol. XXII, 1/2.

135. Printers, M. D. Gunasena & Co. Ltd., Colombo, 1965.
136. Published by the Department of Information.
30 JOURNAL, R.A.S, (CEYLON) Vol, XIII, (New Series), 1969
T shall take archaeological activities as they are enumerated
under the powers of the Archaeological Commissioner:
(2) The preparation of a list of monuments:
Preliminary work on this has been done. A great deal of exploration
has to be undertaken for the purpose, but the lack of facilities for
transport, coupled with the inadequacy of provision for travelling
expenses and the shortage of qualified staff, has constantly delayed
the publication of even a part of the Register. The present lecturer was
attending to this duty as Assistant Archaeological Commissioner, but
the authorities decided that teaching and examinations in Sinhalese
and allied subjects in a foreign University were more important than
archaeological activities in Ceylon. At no time had the Department
the full services of even the few officers available being provided, and
indeed during some years the present lecturer headed the Depart-
ment he had to work without the assistance of even a single staff officer.
The shortage of accommodation both at the Head Office in Colombo
and at the outstations has delayed all work of the Department,
particularly that of the Monuments Register. Time and again this
has been brought to the notice of the authorities, but without any
result except a threat to remove the Department to Anuradhapura, and
even to get the Head Office to function under tents, or in a small
dilapidated building.
The Department had a sojourn of four years from 1942-1946 in
various places, including Anuradhapura, and was brought back to
Colombo to the place where it is now, in front of the Colombo Museum.
The records, including files from which material has to be gathered for
the Monuments Register, the library and the photographic studio, were
once more housed in premises which were totally inadequate and
unsuitable to be the Headquarters of a department which was the sole
custodian of the ancient culture of the land. Paranavitana’s com.-
ments on the situation in the introduction to his Administration Report
for 1946 includes the following: ‘The ordinary amenities which are
conducive to efficient work are lacking and the place is crowded to
capacity, there being hardly any room for future additions to the
departmental staff. If the department is to function satisfactorily,
the first requisite is a reasonably comfortable place for its officers to
work in when they return after a strenuous time in the field.”137 He
goes on to say that conditions under which the officers were obliged to
work were no better than what they had to submit by necessity in the
field. In his Report for 1950, while commenting on the expansion of the
Department’s activities, he wrote again: “There is, however, oneserious
shortcoming which stands in the way of maximum results being achie-
ved by the exertions of the Department. This is the inadequate pro-
137, ASCAR, 1946, para..-t.

HISTORY OF ARCHAEOLOGY IN CEYLON 3௩
vision of working accommodation for its officers both at the headquarters

and at the outstations. There is, for example, no room at the head-
quarters for the proper storage of the thousands of estampages of
ancient inscriptions which the Department has collected, no proper
laboratory arrangements for the cleaning and restoration of antiques,
and no space for methodical arrangement and study of objects unear-
thed in excavations or collected during explorations. The 1esult is that
the preparations of scientific accounts of the Department’s work is
much delayed.’’138 He goes on to say that the “‘undesirable state of
affairs’”’ will soon become worse with the further addition of staff.
We could not expect a descriptive Register of Monuments under
these conditions, and without satisfactory staff. The Department was,
and it stil) is, graded in Ciass 3, and except for rare cases under special
circumstances, it could not recruit good staff or hold whom it had.
What has been said concerning accommodation and staff is true not -
only: with regard to the preparation of the Register of Monuments,
but of other subjects as well.
(2) Coming to conservation, examples of all classes of buildings,
inclusive of various types of each belonging to different periods, have
been conserved. Of religious edifices there are new examples of sidpa,
vatadagé, bodhighara, dsanaghava and patimaghara cleared of debris
and conserved. Special attention has been paid to wooden architecture,
some with architectural numbers containing invaluable carvings.
These include Buddha-image houses, temples of the gods and way-
side resting-places (ambalama). Royal palaces and dwellings of
the royalty are also included, but sufficient attention could not be
paid to what yet remain of the dweliings of the common people,
or what information could be gathered on these. One world think
that this is an aspect that should not have been neglected in this era.
Here again the means at the disposal of the archaeologist were limited.
The conservation notes regarding various works have to be edited and
published with the plans.
(c) Systematic excavations, in addition to the scientific removal
of debris preliminary to the conservation of a monument, have been
carried out, and their results are given in the Admntstvation Reports.
A Memoir on one of the excavations and conservation, namely, on the
Kotavehera in Dedigama was with the printer last year.* In £957,
P. E. P. Deraniyagala, while officiating as Archaeological Commis-
sioner, carried out some excavations at the pre-historic site. of Pom-
parippu.8° The UNESCO nominee, P. C. Sestieri, who was in charge
of the Department of Archaeology in 1958, excavated at the Gedigé
438. Ibid, 1950, para 1.
only in November 1969, as A.S.C. Mem. ,VI, over two mon ths
*Published i
Asian Atchaeology
after the Second International Conference-Seminar on
held in Colombo from 23rd-26th August, 1969.
139. Ibid. 1957.
9418—2
site at Anuiadhapura.1#0 In April 1966 systematic excavations were
begun at Kantarodai, where Paul E. Pieris had made his investigations
during 1917-1919. A preliminary account of the work by the present
lecturer was placed before this Society on the 7th of November 1967.44
(Also Ceylon Today November 1967. ‘“‘Archaeology of the Northern
Peninsula 117.)
(8) For the exhibition of antiquities a number of archaeological
museums were established, in various parts of the Island. When objects
of exceptional historical and antiquarian interest were discovered in the
telic chambers of the Kotavehera at Dedigama the local residents
desired that these antiquities should not be removed from their village.
Numbers among them even expressed the fear that some misfortune
would befall the district if these treasures were not left with them. The
government and the Archaeological Commissioner agreed that it would
be advantageous both for students of archaeology and the general
public as well to exhibit the finds at a convenient place near the monu-
ment, and a site museum was built (1954). This museum has earned
the praise of several visiting scholars. As stated earlier the collections
of sculpture, pottery, etc., were inadequately housed in some part of
the premises of the Archaeological Department’s quarters at Anura-
dhapura. In 1960 when the old Kachcheri building fell vacant by the
removal of Government offices to the New City, advantage was taken
by the Department of Archaeology to obtain the building for the
purposes of an Archaeological Museum. Nissanka Parakrama Wije-
ratne, the Government Agent of Anuradhapura at the time, helped
the Department to obtain the buildings, and co-operated in the setting
of the Museum, Much renovation was needed to make the main buil-
ding and the outhouses and sheds suitable to receive the antiquities,
and to have them exhibited therein. In spite of these difficulties, and
the obstructions from persons in authority, the Archaeological Depart-
ment has cause now to be pleased that it has a museum at least to
serve part of the needs of the ever-increasing students of archaeology
and culture of their country and the curious general public, At Polon-
naruwa, the old Public Services Club was obtained for an Archaeolo-
gical Museum, and the old Resthouse at Ambalantota for the same use.
At the latter place after the Archaeological Commissioner had obtained
the building, the local Police forcibly entered the premises and occupied
apart of it but the Archaeological Commissioner got them out although
he was unarmed! At Amparai a house that was allotted to the Depart-
. ment for use as a Circuit Bungalow serves the purposes of an office,
Circuit Bungalow as wel] a: museum. A temporary building was put
up at Sigiriya for a small museum. At Panduvasnuwara a room in the
140. Ibid. 1959,

141. Seo JCBRAS, NS., Vol. XI , 1967, and Ceylon Today, January, Sep-
tembor and November, 1967. » ok
Circuit Bungalow is separated for display of antiquities. The Branch

Museum of the National Museums at Jaffna was handed over to the
Archaeological Department in 1965 to be organized as an Archaeologi-
cal Museum, and it served weil to house and display the finds from the
excavations at Kantarodai and other explorations in the Peninsula.
At the same time the Palace of the Kings of Kandy, at which the
Archaeological Department had earlier carried out some conservation
work, was handed back to the Department for further conservation and
for a regional Archaeological Museum.
Simultaneously with the handing over of the Royal Palace at

Kandy to the Archaeological Department, the Ministry authorised
the Archaeological Commussioner to take back the Kalinga lon-
throne from the Colombo National Museum to Polonnaruwa and place
it in NisSankamalla’s Audience Hall which was being conserved. The
animal’s journey to his original native home was easier and more
comfortable than his coming out to our capital. He had a mde in a
trailer, lent by the then Director of Drigation, Mr. A. E. de S. Guna-
sekera, a Head of Department who always was ready to help the poor
brother Department of Archaeology, due no doubt to his own interest
in the subject. Thus the Archaeological Commissioner has no beautiful
incidents to relate about the return journey of the lion, as Governor
Gregory had of its first coming to the present Colombo 7, the home of
the elite of the country.
Research has progressed within facilities available. Besides the

“Memoirs of the Department, papers on topics of Ceylon Archaeology
have appeared in various journals both local and foreign. Ceylon has
been given a prominent position in world Archaeology, mainly due to
the contribution of Paranavitana. Large numbers of inscriptions have
been collected and many edited. The publication of Paranavitana’s
Sigivi Graffiti? contributed not only to the advance of epigraphical
and palaeographical research, but to linguistic studies as well. The
fifth volume of the Epigraphia Zeylanica, edited by Paranavitana
and the present lecturer, was completed. While working on some inscrip-
tions for this volume Paranavitana made his astounding discoveries
of the interlinear records in Sinhalese inscriptions.4§ Two volumes of
the Corpus of Ceylon Inscriptions were completed by Paranavitana
towards the end of the financial year 1966-1967. Of these the first,
containing over 1,200 Brahmi inscriptions, had gone through the page
proof stage with the Government Printer by October 1967, and the
second, covering inscriptions up to the fourth century a.p., that 1s,
up to the end of reign of Mahasena (a.D. 276-303), was ready for print.
The volumes are delayed, and I understand that the second has not
142. Two volumes, Oxford, 1956.

143. See Ceylon Today, November-December, 1968.
34 JOURNAL, R.A.S, (CEYLON) Vol, XIII, (New Sertes), 1969
yet been handed over for printing.* Now is this not a matter to be
taken up by the Council of this Society which led a deputation to the
Minister of Education and Cultural Affairs, a few years ago (in 1962)
regarding the delay in the editing and publications of inscriptions
by the Archaeological Department?
A large number of inscriptions were collected by C. W. Nicholas,
Deputy Excise Commissioner, who later became Warden of the Wild
Life Department. His contributions in the field of epigraphy are pub-
lished in the Journals of this Society,“ and elsewhere. A complete
volume!6 of the New Series of our Journal has been devoted to the
research of Mr. Nicholas.
Apart from academic pubhcations, booklets of a popular nature,
but with correct and precise information, such as Guide Books or
accounts of ancient sites, have been published both in the official
language ‘and in English. Among these the twelve booklets of the
“Art Series” may be mentioned. Here also the publication of two
parts which were ready in November, 1967 are unduly delayed.f
The preparation and issue of these simpler works is in pursuance of the
policy of bringing archaeology within the reach of the full electorate.
It is not possible here to give a full list of publications relating to
or bearing on Ceylon Archaeology brought out in Ceylon or abroad. I
will mention two of them as they come to my mind. One is D. T. Deven-
dra’s Classical Sinhalese Sculpture, (Alec Tiranti, London, 1958,) and
the other Heinz Mode’s Die buddhistische Plastik Ceylons, (Leipzig,
1963). A large number of new sites have been added to the reservations
for archaeological work. Among them are some sites believed to contain
prehistoric remains and, while new sites are being added, it is regret-
ted that the archaeologist has not been able to hold to a large portion
of one of the most important sites, namely, the ancient site of MAntota
which was mentioned several times éa:lier. There were encroachments,
and these were legalized in 1959, when a Permanent Secretary was the
gazetted Archaeological Commissioner. (See comment on p. 29.)
*They were not out even at the end of December, 1969. The position remains the
same, ்‌
144. "Text of the Brahmi Inscriptionsinthe Ruhuna National Park”, JCBRAS,
N.S., Vol. Vi, Special Volume.
145. ‘"Historical Topography of the Ancient and Medieval Ceylon”, N.S.,
Vol. Vi, Special Volume. (Also reprinted.)
146, These guide books, after 1949, were prepared by S. Paranavitana, J. M.
Senaveratne, D. T. Devendra, D. S. Gunatilaka, Marcus Fernando and
the present lecturer.
fNow, after a long delay, handed over by the Department tn the Government
Printer only in August, 1969. ¥ -
The teaching of archaeology has spread to the universities. On

his retirement, Paranavitana was appointed Research Professor of
Archaeology at the University of Ceylon, Peradeniya. After the con-
version of the two main pirivenas into universities, one of them too
started courses in Archaeology. The universities have not yet to an
appreciable extent taken part in organized fieldwork with the co-ope-
ration of the State Department of Archacology as it is done in other
countries, although the Department had been most willing to work
together, and in fact more than once made arrangements for the
purpose. Provisions of the Antiquities Ordinance had to be applied
against an university, when some people, using the name of an institu-
tion were alleged to be engaged in UWlegal diggings.
Dealing with the recent period mention must be made of the

Special Committee on Antiquities appointed in 1957 soon after the
retirement of Paranavitana. The Committee issued an Intertm Report
in 1958, in which the chief recommendation was to amalgamate the
Department of Archaeology, the National Museums and the Government
Archives. In their Final Report, however, they went back on this
recommendation and supported their individual continuance.'47
Nothing came of these Reports, perhaps due to the reason that the
Committee themselves were changing their opinions so soon. The
Heads of the three departments (or acting Heads) were requested
to submit their opinions. The present lecturer, who had no opportunity
to place his views before the Committee due to his absence from the
island on State policy, had then the opportunity of having his say.
‘He began his lengthy comments with, “The Committee of Inquiry
have listed a large number of failures and shortcomings of the Depart-
ment of Archaeology, and those of its staff; but have not set out the
reasons for the state of affairs.” The cause must be known to apply a
remedy. The Ministry of Industries, Home and Cultural Affairs under
which the Archaeological Department was then placed considered the
amalgamation of the newly established Department of Cultural Affairs
and the three departments dealing with antiquities, and this idea was
also given up; and the threats to the individual! existence of the Archaeo-
logical Department ended there. Here I must point out that during
the year after 1959, the Archaeological Department has been driven
from pillar to post since it had been placed under seven ministries and
ten ministers, every time with some change oi policy.
R. L. Brohier, who was the Chairman of the Special Committee

on Antiquities, has made his own contribution in the field of antiquarian -
research in Ceylon. In his three monumental volumes the Ancient
Irrigation Works in Ceylon, (part I, Colombo. 1934; parts II-III, Col.
ombo, 1935,) he has collected and put together a vast amount of Archaeo-
147. Ssssional Paper VII, 1959.

logical and historical material. The same he has done in his Land,
Maps and Surveys (1800-1950) with the collaboration of J.H.O.
Paulusz, the Government Archivist for some time,148 Colombo, 1950;
Vol. II, Colombo, 1951. Brohier has read a number of papers on
antiquarian topics before this Society and they are published in the
journal, His contribution brings out often the value of archaeology
to the modern development of a land with a long past history. Herein
I may refer to his ‘“Antiquarian Notes on Padaviya,’’!*9 wherein he deals
with not only the history and the repair of the tank, but also with
the land irrigated by the reservoir and its supplementary sources. While
commenting on the wrong selection of land for paddy fields he adduces
archaeological evidence in support of his statements at pp. 245-261
{also published in his Seeing Ceytom) 150
The wilful destruction of antiquities and the misguided enthu-

siasm for restoration have been commented on in the Admintstration
Reports of the Department!®! under “Archaeological Reserves’’ and
“Antiquities outside Archaeological Reserves.”’ In 1954 a religious
fanatic applied a liberal coating of cow-dung on the inscriptions and
_ paintings at Maravidiya caves in the Archaeological Reserve of Dim-
bulagala. The inscriptions were unharmed, but it was too late when the
officers of the Archaeological Department attempted to remove the
cow-dung from the paintings. We all agree with Deraniyagala when
he considers that the defacing of the hon depicted upon Dutugaémunu’s
flag in the famous Dambulla frescoes as a national loss'®? (Report for
1957, para. 1). This, so far as we know, is the only ancient representa-
tion of the lion-flag of the Sinhalese. Deraniyagala says that the police
were unable to bring the culprits to book although they managed to
save them from the infuriated mob. What about the vandalism on the
Sigirlya “frescoes in 1967? The Police and other authorities have
failed again. The vandals are at large. Archaeological treasures cannot
be protected without public co-operation.
In spite of the provisions of the Antiquities Ordinance, and spread

of archaeological knowledge among the public, the other kind of van-
dalism, namely, the desecration of ancient monuments by unsightly
renovation and new additions that vulgarize and destroy their sanctity
and dignity goes on unchecked, and is even encouraged by the very
persons who should protect their ancient splendour. This enthusiasm
148. Vol. I, Colombo, 1950; Vol. II, Colombo, 1957.

149. JCBRAS,N.S. Vol. VIII, pp. 245-261.
150. Colombo, 1965, pp. 75-85.
151. See eg. ASCAR, 1954, pp. G7-Gro under “‘Archacvlogical Reserves”
and “Antiquities outside Archaeological Reserves’’.
152. ASCAR, 1957, paral.
for renovation has increased manifold in the recent years. One courts
unpopularity by any attempt to tell these enthusiasts of this kind
of Buddhist ‘regeneration’ that it amounts to the deliberate destruction
of the evidence which so eloquently proclaims that in the past the
Buddhist religion had inspired its devotees in this country to create
great works of art of such great magnitude and so universal in appeal.
Those in authority fear to take the correct steps when proposals are
made for restoration of monuments in private possession. This has
gradually spread to those owned by the State, and those in the very
Archaeological Reserves. One hears of attempts to modernize the
Kotavehera of Dedigama which has already been conserved.
At the same time several societies interested in the restoration of

monuments have sought the advice of the Archaeological Department.
Sometimes the reason for not being able to preserve as much of the
ancient features of an old structure has been due to the reluctance of
the officers of the Archaeological Department themselves to hurt or
displease people in mportant positions. The conservation and restora-
tion of the Kirivehera at Kataragama and the Somavati dagoba in the
.Polonnaruwa District must be mentioned as examples where an attempt
has been made to meet both the needs of religion and those of archa-
ecology. Better results could have been achieved if the architectural
section of the Department were also more co-operative in furthéring
the archaeological interests. The re-building of the Mahasaya at Mihin-
tale is not done according to plans approved by archaeologists. 1 shall
not dwell on that work here. The custodians of devale-temples too have
sought the assistance of the Archaeological Commissioner and have
fully abided by his advice. The Badulla-Kataragama-devale was
conserved in this manner, and the Sabaragamuwa Mahasaman-devale
was being conserved and restored (1967). During operations at this
historic edifices it has been clearly demonstrated that archaeological
conservation should not be entrusted to architects, as their desire
is to create, and not to conserve. We agree that the architect can
be of use to us provided he can conserve for us monuments in the
anastylos method which the great French archaeologists have taught
us all in their handling of the Buddhist monuments of quondam
Dutch East Indies (Indonesia).
This clearly indicates that at least certain intelligent sections
of the public have been influenced and educated by the efforts of the
antiquarians, including members of this Society, who have taken an
interest in fostering archaeological research and spreading relevant
knowledge
in the Island. A few years ago an Archaeological Society was
also established for the further encouragements and popularization
of the subject. It would be useful if the Society continued their activities.
38 JOURNAL, R.A.S, (CEYLON) Vol, XIII, (New Series), 1969
Very often the antiquarian in this country is reminded of the

words of James Fergusson who wrote in 1876: “The stars in their courses
have warred against archaeology in Ceylon.’’15° Paranavitana repeated
them in 1938 when he wrote an Obituary Notice of Arthur Maurice
Hocart for our Jouwrnal.'54 One still feels that these words are true
when we see how our monuments, works of art and everything that
reminds us of our culture, are treated by the very people who should
take care of them, and the indifference shown by the public towards
the pursuit of archaeologica] studies, and research in the subject an
those allied to it.1®° .
A growing public enthusiam for a clear knowledge of the past—
and thus essentially and unavoidably with archaeology—so that the
knowledge of their rich heritage could be an inspiration for a nobler
and fuller future would be sterile if it were not matched with intel-
ligent support by the authorities. One can fervently hope that the
dawn of wider horizons will fall upon so vita) a part of our cultural
a and disperse that darkness which quite often threatens to over-
Ww, it.
153. History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, pp. 185-186.

154. JCBRAS, Vol. XXXIV, No. gr.
ரதத. During recent years the underwater Archaeologist also has directed
his interest to the coasts of Ceylon and has worked in close collabo-
ration with the Department of Archaeology.—See ASC Report for
Fin. year 1662-1963, pp- G77-78 and plate XXIV.

History of Archaeology in Ceylon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

History of Archaeology in Ceylon

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

History of Archaeology in Ceylon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

History of Archaeology in Ceylon

By C. E. GopaxumBura, M.A., Ph.D., D.Lit. (Lond.)

The title of my lecture is ‘“The History of Archaeology in Ceylon”,

Sinhalese writers have also produced a vast amount of historical

1. Svaula-siira, see M. Momer Willams, A Sanskni-English Dictionary,

Rayigama and Kotte (a.p. 1412-1467), Totagamuvé Sri Rahula

ம 3. Lamhkddipa, June 27, 1968, p. 8.

Diogo do Couto,!° the Portuguese historian, records that one of

to. Diogo do Couto (born, Lisbon 1543).

John Davy in An Account of the Interior of Ceylon, etc.,29 London,

a translation by the Rev. Samuel Lee, A. M. Professor of Arabic in-the

antiquarian studies in Ceylon. From the summary we note his bias

40. Forbes, op. cit, Vol. II, p. 176.

Charles Pridham’s Historical, Political and Statistical Account of

In the same year as the establishment of the Society (1845),

. Ceylon, A General Description of the Island and tis Inhabitants

I have already referred to Pridham’s History which appeared in

53. Knighton W., The History of Ceylon, London, 1845.

of information to those engaged in antiquarian studies relating to

58. Tennent, op. cit. Vol. II, pt xu, ch. v.

\Temple at Kelaniya?* and the transcript and translation of an ancient

_ During the governorship of Sir Hercules Robinson (1865-1872)

Antiquarians of Ceylon were fortunate when Sir William Gregory,’5

72. Ibid. No. 17, pp. 36-44.

Gregory in his autobiography, published by his widow, ‘gives some

P. Goldschmidt was appointed Archaeological Commissioner in

77- ‘Ibid. pp. 342-344.

84. Wol. I- Text; Vol. II- Plates, London 1883.

94 JCBRAS, Vol. X; (No. 34), 1887

taddai,"" JCBRAS, Vol. X. (No. 35), 1887 pp. 107-114. =e

100. Sessional Paper XIII of 1896.

tally bringing credit to Ceylon scholarship.”” Wickremasinghe made

௩௦4. Vol. XXT, No 62, 1909.

20 JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON) Vol, XIII, (New Series), 1969

Some of the ancient sites in the Southern Province had been

A branch of the Mahabodhi Society was opened in Anuradhapura

buildings, and also a work called the Purdvidydva,s “ Archaeology’.

A Sinhalese journal by the name of Szvt-anurapura-puvatatl’,

Following the year of Bell’s retirement, in 1913 Edward R. Ayrton,!9

நரக, See note 115.

Although the office of Archaeological Commissioner was vacant

Hocart (born 1883) was a graduate in classics of the university of

During Hocart’s time an Epigraphical Assistant was added to the

It would be of immense interest to-day to read what Paranavitana

127. See paragraphs 16-21, also “Antiquities Outside Archaeclogical Reserves

By the provisions of the “‘Antiquities Ordinance’, No. 9 of 1940

* Kotavehera at Dedigama in the Kegalla District.

Polonnaruwal’s (1938, ற. 17). He carried out conservation, or rather

Longhurst plastered and colourwashed the gallery wall of the

Evidently Longhurst realized what the people of Ceylon, whose

128, ASCAR, 1938, ற. 17.

(2) to prepare a list of monuments;

131. ASCAR, 1938 p. 17, para. 23.

The proclamation of the Antiquities Ordinance and the appoint-

It would not be possible here to attempt even a very brief summary

134. Vol. XXII, 1/2.

137, ASCAR, 1946, para..-t.

vision of working accommodation for its officers both at the headquarters

140. Ibid. 1959,

Circuit Bungalow is separated for display of antiquities. The Branch

Simultaneously with the handing over of the Royal Palace at

Research has progressed within facilities available. Besides the

142. Two volumes, Oxford, 1956.