See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/375743787

The Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan Historiography

Article · November 2023

CITATIONS READS
0 235

1 author:

Kaudagammana Rathanasara

26 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kaudagammana Rathanasara on 18 November 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of History, Archaeology and Architecture
ISSN: 2583-5106, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2023, pp. 147-158
© Permanent Blue. All Right Reserved
URL: http://www.pbjournals.com/jhaa
Publisher of Open Access Journals
Peer Reviewed Journal

The Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan Historiography

Kaudagammana Rathanasara
Studying MA in AIHC and Archaeology (BHU). E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract: This study investigates the origins and evolution of Sri Lankan Received : 19 July 2023
historiography, with a research problem that focuses on identifying the key Revised : 29 August 2023
factors that contributed to its development and understanding how those factors
Accepted : 11 September 2023
influenced the evolution of this tradition. The research methodology used a
qualitative approach and a systematic literature review of historical documents, Published : 30 November 2023
including the Tripitaka, its commentaries, the Mahāvaṃsa, and other relevant
sources. Content analysis was used to identify patterns, themes, and trends in
TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:
the evolution of Sri Lankan historiography. The findings suggest that Buddhist
monks played a vital role in compiling historical information from the Tripitaka Rathanasara, K. (2023). The
and Aṭṭhakathā, introducing Buddhism and related history to Sri Lanka. Over Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan
time, this information was gradually abstracted from the Tripitaka commentaries Historiography. Journal of History,
and developed into a different tradition. This study contributes to the scholarship Archaeology and Architecture, 2: 2, pp.
of Sri Lankan history by providing a comprehensive understanding of its origins 147-158.
and evolution, identifying critical historical accounts and their evolution.
Furthermore, this research serves as a basis for further exploration into the role of
Buddhism in shaping Sri Lanka’s historical tradition.
Keywords: Buddhism, Historiography, Mahāvaṃsa, Oral tradition, Sri Lanka

INTRODUCTION
Sri Lanka is a land of rich cultural heritage and history, and it is well known for its continuous
history, which is constructed by historians using literary and archaeological sources. The process
of compiling historical information raises questions about the origins of historical information, its
compilation process, and the factors that influenced it. Historiography is the study of the methods and
principles used in historical research and writing and the analysis of historical information. Sri Lanka’s
historiography is fascinating, as it offers insight into the c country’s cultural, social, and political
development. Mahinda Thero introduced Buddhism and related history to Sri Lanka through oral
generations and has incorporated their memories of the expansion and development of the Buddha’s
time. It is clear from the references in the Vaṃsatthappakāsinī about the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa
that this historical information grew gradually and was abstracted from the Tripitaka commentaries and
developed as a separate tradition. A different history of the discipline and a particular account of sacred
objects have been maintained by word of mouth from generation to generation. However, how and
why this oral tradition was transitioned into written records remains a significant issue in studying Sri
148 Kaudagammana Rathanasara

Lanka’s historiography. This article examines the origins of Sri Lanka’s historiography. The primary
research problem is to identify the factors that led to the development of Sri Lanka’s historiography and
how they shaped the transition from an oral tradition to a written one. The research will be conducted
using a qualitative methodology that involves a comprehensive review of historical documents, literary
sources, and archaeological evidence. The study aims to contribute to understanding Sri Lanka’s
cultural, social, and political development and shed light on the evolution of its historiography. In the
following sections, this article will review the literature on the historiography of Sri Lanka, discuss the
methodology employed in the research, and present the study’s findings.

HISTORIOGRAPHY
‘History’ encompasses different definitions, etymologies, and interpretations, varying across cultures.
However, the consensus is that history involves reflecting past events based on factual evidence left
behind by people of the past. The study of history primarily focuses on human phenomena, intending
to provide knowledge of past human experiences to present and future generations (Gunawardena
2005:1). Historiography, on the other hand, is the scientific study of historical information, which
is then recorded based on time and space (Bentley, 2012). Historiography refers to the method
and pattern of writing history. Different nations have different ways of writing history, with the
Greeks and Chinese being among the earliest pioneers of historiography (Gunawardena 2005:1).
In contrast, India and Sri Lanka were engaged in historiography with a cyclical conception of
historical events {Siṃhala Viśva Kośaya III, 1967: 514). With the spread of Christianity, the
Western world began historiography to write down the history of people aiming for the Kingdom
of Heaven. This tradition, which took a deterministic form, is called Christian synthetic thought
(Iggers, 2005). Following the 18th century, the historical tradition changed with the spread of the
ideas of Hegel and Marx, who identified secular determinism or classless communist society as the
pinnacle of human civilisation. With the eastward expansion of European hegemony from the 16th
century onwards, traditions of modern European historiography were also established in the East
(Fukuyama 1992: 2).

SRI LANKA’S HISTORIOGRAPHY TRADITION AND ITS ORIGINS

Leslie Gunawardena argues that China and Sri Lanka were the leaders in recording the history of
their respective countries. Sri Lanka has continuously worked to maintain and record its history
(Gunawardena 2005:3). While the earliest works containing historical information on Sri Lanka
are not available today, it is possible to identify them by name or from later works. Although those
works do not survive, it is clear that much of their content has been preserved by later sources. The
earliest chronicles written in Sri Lanka contain the religious and historical events that happened in the
country in the past. For that, people, offerings, and sacred places were based. However, the factors that
influenced the writing of such historical information and its origins need to be explored.
According to some scholars, the ancient texts mentioned in Sanskrit literature were a source
of historical information in Sri Lanka (Abhayagunawardena & Dissanayake 1993: III). They argue
that the Purāṇas, stories of Indian gods, influenced the compilation of historical information in Sri
Lanka through the five main features of those ancient texts. These features include character stories,
clan characteristics, and chronicles of gods and sages. Additionally, the Purāṇas emphasise five
characteristics, namely, Sarga (creation of the world), Pratisarga (pre-emergence and creation),
Vaṃsa (chronicles of gods and sages), Manvaṃtarāni (the eras that began with him, known as the
Manu Period), and Vaṃsanaucharitha (anecdotes of Surya Lunar dynasties) (Pargiter 1913).
The Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan Historiography 149

Moreover, the Purāṇas mention Varnāshrama dharma, Sacrificess of brāhmaṇas, Yāga Karma,
Śiva, Vishnu Pudapujah, and effort, and they gradually developed into the Eighteen Purāṇas, which
are mainly divided into Vishṇu, Shiva, and Brāhmaṇ. Similarly, the Vedic literature has a chronicle
literature called Vaṃsa Brāhmaṇa, which details the lineages of ancient Brahmin teachers. Furthermore,
the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upanishad highlights that excellent spiritual knowledge was passed down to
generations of sages, including a detailed chronicle of the Yājñavalkya category in the sixth Brāhmaṇa
of the fourth Adhyāsa (Pargiter 1913: 164).
However, even if some commentators think that the historical tradition of Sri Lanka started
following the ancient texts, it is not an opinion that can be quickly confirmed. Some scholars accept
that Sri Lanka received the inspiration for history writing from India, citing Sanskrit influence, among
other reasons. Nonetheless, no national historiography has been born in India. Some scholars believe
that ancient historical works of India existed and may have been destroyed, but C.H. Phillips counters
that there is no reason to destroy historical works alone (Philips 1961: 47).
Moreover, although Purāṇas mention detailed chronicles of kings and epics like Mahābharata
and Raghuvaṃsa, ancient features are found in chronicles, including Mahāvaṃsa, Dīpavaṁsa,
and Hatthavanagallavihāravaṃsa, which describe royal characters in exaggerated detail. However,
highlighting royal characters is not the only thing found in chronicles, as they also describe news
beyond that. Thus, the idea that the compilation of historical information started similarly to the
characteristics of the Purāṇas found in Sanskrit literature does not seem to be very reasonable. Instead,
it appears that news can be gleaned from chronicles that are more meaningful than the Purāṇas, but
systematic, religious, and historical.
Many people believe that the reasons that influenced the compiling of historical information
were received during the Buddhā’s time (Philips 1961: 47). There is a stronger and more intense
sense of history in Buddhist texts, such as the enacting of disciplinary rules and preaching of sutras,
which are recorded in the Tripitaka with the treasure of time, place, and those involved.1 There is no
clear indication that they were particularly interested in gathering historical news or narratives during
the Lord Buddha’s lifetime. Nevertheless, certain Buddha’s discourses reference the emergence and
evolution of significant persons or objects.
The Mahāpadāna Sutta and the Mahā Sudassana Sutta of Dīgha Nikāya reveal the character
stories of six Buddhas and the history of the Kusāvatī kingdom, respectively. No self-esteem or praise
is given to the subject of the characters and objects; the Buddha needed to prove impermanence,
provide new knowledge, and correct a wrong opinion. The Mahā Khandhaka of the Mahāvagga Pāli
of the Vinaya Pitaka, the Pancasatika Khandhaka, and the Satta Satika Khandhaka of the Culla Vagga
Pāli are also historical documents containing news of Buddhist order.
The Buddhist Theras, or elders, played a crucial role in preserving and transmitting the Buddha’s
teachings to future generations. One of their key responsibilities was to present information about
the Buddha’s biography and his previous incarnations, or Jātakas, to instil respect and devotion to
the Buddha in people. This practice became more prevalent over time. Later monks also annotated
the ‘Buddhavaṃsa’, a generational story about the previous Buddhas, to maintain credibility and
bring Buddhism to the ordinary people. The ‘Buddhavaṃsa’ is the only book in the Sutta Pitaka
that bears the name of ‘vaṃsa,’ a genealogical chronicle. Later, the ‘Anāgatavaṃsa,’ describing the
character of Maitreya Buddha, was added as a chronicle (Law 1947: 52). The Apadana Pāli, which
describes the past lives of the Buddha and other prominent disciples, is also found as a chronicle in
the Sumangalavilāsinī (Cowell, 1895). These chronicles were essential to Buddhist tradition, as they
provided a framework for understanding the Buddha’s teachings and the lineage of those who carried
150 Kaudagammana Rathanasara

them forward. In academic discourse, there has been some contention over the integrity of historical
information contained in Sri Lanka’s pre-Buddhist period (Although Ananda Guruge and others this
was commented that they believe that the growth and systematicity of Sri Lankan historiography had
been gained after the introduction of Buddhism. (Abhayagunawardena & Dissanayake 1993: XXI).
Moreover, scholars have noted that the reliability of the historical information in the Mahāvaṃsa is not
uniform throughout the text. The seven chapters dedicated to the pre-Buddhist period are considered
the least reliable.
Lakshman S. Perera has mentioned that all the authors of chronicles were pious and devout
monks, and their religious concepts were linked to writing the history of Sri Lanka. (Perera: 40). The
historical tradition of Sri Lanka has been subject to various influences and has taken on diverse forms
concerning ritual and purpose. However, the arrival and spread of Buddhism on the island profoundly
impacted the development of Sri Lanka’s historical tradition, leading it down a distinct path.

BUDDHIST TEMPLES AND HISTORIOGRAPHY OF SRI LANKA

E.H. Carr has noted the importance of examining the historian behind the historical work (Carr,
1961: 9). Buddhist monks who played a pivotal role initiated the writing of Sri ‘Lanka’s history. The
development of Sri Lanka’s historical tradition was closely linked to the monasteries where the monks
resided. Sirima Kiribamune has articulated this perspective.
“Buddhist monks wrote historical literature based on chronicles such as the Mahāvaṃsa in
Buddhist monasteries. The growth of the historical writing tradition of Sri Lanka should be analysed
in light of the strong association with Indian Buddhist literature and the reasons that led to the arrival
of Buddhist doctrine to Sri Lanka”(Kiribamune 2005: 112-113).
Although the eldest chronicle is the Dipavaṃsa, the origin of the historical compilation can be
traced back to the attempt to provide Aṭṭhakathā in Sinhala to the Pāli Tripitaka. Following the arrival
of Mahinda thero to Sri Lanka, the Tripitaka, initially in the Māgadhi or Pāli language, was introduced
to Sri Lanka.2 Mahinda Thero played a crucial role in establishing Theravada Buddhism in Sri Lanka at
a time when Buddhism comprised various sects in contemporary India. Each sect wanted to maintain
a history associated with their tradition to demonstrate their identity. Hence, the lineage from Buddha
was introduced to Sri Lanka along with Buddhism through the history of Theravada. Upāli Thero,
Dāsaka, Sōnaka, Siggava, Moggaliputtatissa Thero, and Mahinda Thero are among the prominent
figures mentioned in the lineage.3 They confirmed their identity by pointing out that the Dhamma they
preached was pure Buddhism and that they were descendants of prominent Theras in the Buddhist
order.
Mahinda Thero introduced Māgadhi or Pāli to Sri Lanka, which was the language of Theravada
Buddhism. It can be inferred that there were commentaries to explain this doctrine. Those commentaries
may have collected significant information about the history of the Buddhist order (Sāsana) and the
Magadha dynasty. As a result, local monks attempted to compile commentaries in Sinhala to bring this
doctrine closer to the local people. These commentaries were not written scriptures but an explanation
of Dhamma in the Sinhala language. Over time, it can be assumed that the Sinhala commentaries
constantly added religious news and information about patrons.
As these traditions were passed down from generation to generation in Sri Lanka, they were
combined with the events related to the restoration of order in Sri Lanka, such as the introduction of
Buddhism under the patronage of King Dēvanampiyatissa. The monks maintained Buddhism through
the oral tradition and transmitted their memories of events related to Buddhism to their generations. The
writing of Dhamma and Aṭṭhakathās during the reign of King Valagambā,4 which were brought orally
The Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan Historiography 151

in Sri Lanka, also had a significant impact on the compilation of historical information (Rathanasara
2021: 85). It is plausible to suggest that the collection of historical information, along with the Dhamma
brought from the oral tradition, may have been recorded in books.
The Mahāvihāra monks may have attempted to separate the history of introducing Buddhism
and the series of events related to it from the Tripitaka commentaries and maintain it separately. The
Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa, Sīhalaṭṭhakathā, and Porāṇaṭṭhakathā, mentioned in Vaṃsattappakāsini as
sources for Mahāvaṃsa, are the result of that effort (Vaṃsatthapakasinī 1935: 120, 129, 290, 293, 438,
35, 49). At the beginning of the Mahāvaṃsa, the author cites the sources on which he is based, including
the “Kato “pēsō” in Porāṇa reference made by the ancients, which implies that there was already a
collection of historical information before the Mahāvaṃsa.5 “Porāṇa” means ancient, former, or past
(Weerasekara 1968: 285) and is put in the Tatiyā inflectional plural. The author of the Mahāvaṃsa
states that he is going for a revision of this work.6 The author of Vaṃsattappakāsini: who comments
on the Porāṇa mentioned here, has emphasised that it means the Mahāvaṃsa of Sīhalaṭṭhakathā itself.7
The Mahāvaṃsa intended to abandon the Sinhala language of the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā and move to the
Māgadhi language.
Over time, a tradition emerged that was separate from the Mahāvihāra tradition, called Abhayagiriya.
Like the Mahāvihāra, they endeavoured to maintain a collection of historical information associated
with the patrons of their monastery and sect. Inspired by Buddhism, the monks of the Buddhist
monastery were keen on recording the history of their sect and monastery and showing the relationship
between Buddhism and the country’s history.

A PERSPECTIVE ON THE HISTORY OF BUDDHIST TEMPLES

The usage of the term “Itihāsa” by monastic monks for history prompts an inquiry into its connotations.
The Eastern interpretation of “history” differs from its modern, literal interpretation. According to the
Abhidhanappadipika Pāli Nighandu, the term was limited to fiction (Abhidhānappadīpikā: 1865). In
place of “Itihāsa,” Buddhist scholars have utilised the term ‘vaṃsa’ Mangala Ilangasinghe argues that
the compilation of historical information in Sri Lanka encompasses contemporary aspects of history
writing despite the literal meaning of “Itihāsa” (Ilangasinghe 2003: 11). Additionally, he asserts that
Buddhist history writers possessed scientific training and literary skills that enabled them to gather,
interpret, and record facts. However, according to Kalhana, who wrote Rājatarangani, these elements
alone were inadequate to compose history in the Theravada tradition.8
Since monastic monks at the centre of the monasteries compiled this historical information, the
religious perspective heavily influenced it. Although the Buddhist tradition did not begin its history
with the first five monks (Paṃcavaggiya Bhikkhu) with the Parinirvāna of the Buddha, it is evident
that the Theras of dhamma councils regarded the Parinirvāna of the Buddha as the starting point
for the history of the Sasana, which they observed. Thus, the Buddhist monastic historical tradition
is pragmatic based on reality. Nonetheless, this view is not entirely accurate, as information about
the Mahāsammata Dynasty, the Buddha’s visit to Sri Lanka, and the arrival of Prince Vijaya to Sri
Lanka is found in the chronicles. Furthermore, not all historical compilations possess these qualities
and are subject to variation depending on the author. A religious backdrop supports the collection of
historical information centred on Buddhist monasteries. Vaṃsattappakāsini demonstrates that it was
a presentation of Buddhist history. The Dīpavaṁsa’s reference to ‘Listen attentively to’ highlights
the religious context of historiography.9 The compilation of Buddhist historical information aims to
showcase the relationship between Buddhism and Sri Lankan history. Examples include the arrival
of Prince Vijaya’s association with the Buddha’s parinirvana day. While presenting facts with a firm
152 Kaudagammana Rathanasara

grasp of time, the authors carefully express their intent. Their purpose, as stated in “Sujana Pasāda
Saṃvēgatthāya,” (Mahāvaṃsa Pāli. end of every chapter), is not solely to provide a history essay but
to evoke sensibilities in the people. These works are not the product of a single person but rather the
contribution of numerous generations. Therefore, the authors acknowledge that they are only editors
and, without revealing their names, show the same respect to their sources that they were taught.

EARLY STAGES OF HISTORICAL INFORMATION COMPILATION IN SRI

LANKA

Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa
The early stages of historical information compilation in Sri Lanka involved the revision of old work
by the author of Mahāvaṃsa, who indicated that he was revising an old work (Mahāvaṃsa Pāḷi. Ch.
1. v. 3). Vaṃsattappakāsini: a commentary on Mahāvaṃsa, mentions that the old work is the Sinhala
Mahāvaṃsa written by the monks of Mahāvihāra (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 35-36), and suggests that the
form of the Sīhalaṭṭha Mahāvaṃsa should be investigated. While the Sīhalaṭṭha Mahāvaṃsa does not
exist, it is possible to reveal some information about this work by association with Vaṃsattappakāsini
(Vaṃsatthapakasini:120, 129, 290, 293, 438). The compilation of Mahāvihāra historical information
is considered to have been done in prose, as the use of the name Aṭṭhakathā and the fact that the Pāli
Mahāvaṃsa is written in verse suggest that the original work was written in prose. The Mahāvaṃsa
author mentions that he referred to this Sinhala prose Mahāvaṃsa edition because of three errors in it.
Therefore, it is better to consider the Mahāvaṃsa as an edition of the old Sinhala prose Mahāvaṃsa
rather than as a collection of new information.
It is believed that the Sīhalaṭṭha Mahāvaṃsa may have existed as a preface to the Sinhala
Mahāṭṭhakathā, which provided commentary in Sinhala for the Tripitaka. However, as the amount
of historical information increased, it may have become an independent work separated from the
Mahāṭṭhakathā. Geiger suggests that the preface, which was initially attached to the Mahāṭṭhakathā,
may have contained only information up to the time of Mahinda Thero (Geiger 1908: 64). After being
separated from the Mahāṭṭhakathā, it may have been maintained in Sinhala in prose, adding later
material. The Sīhalaṭṭha Mahāvaṃsa may have been detailed up to the time of Dutugemunu. However,
problems arise regarding the authenticity of the information mentioned in the Mahāvaṃsa after King
Valagambā, and there is little detail. The lack of details may be because the Sinhalese commentaries
(Aṭṭhakathā), which is the source of the Mahāvaṃsa, recorded little information about this era.
The recent history of the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā is not descriptive, missing facts, and includes false
information. Geiger suggests that the first part of the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā may have been recorded with
the Tripitaka, and the later parts may have been written later (Geiger 1908: 27). King Mahāsēna’s
activities may have been a strong factor in the poor compilation of the recent historical information of
the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā. In addition, the destruction of the Mahāvihāra during the King Mahāsēna period
may have resulted in the loss of records of the old Sīhalaṭṭhakathā, and later monks who could not
provide those records may have done so with such weaknesses in loading the information. It seems that
the compilation of historical information of the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa was temporarily halted in
the face of the challenges faced by the Mahāvihāra during the King Mahāsēna period.

Porāṇa
Porāṇa represents a valuable example of the compilation of early historical information that is no longer
extant. This historical text is mentioned seven times in Vaṃsattappakāsini and is referenced in the
The Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan Historiography 153

Pāli Aṭṭhakathās of the Tripitaka. According to Oldenburg and other experts, the “Porāṇa” Aṭṭhakathā
describes Vaṃsatthappakasini (Oldernberg 1879: 3; Adikaram: 1946: 65). Vaṃsattappakāsini also cites
nine verses and two prose passages from the Purāṇas, with these same verses appearing in Dīpavaṁsa
but with some variations. Although scholars have paid particular attention to the Purāṇas, it is unclear
whether sufficient evidence has been discovered to warrant further extensive study. Nonetheless, it is
significant that Porāṇa compiles early historical information, which can be considered an important
opportunity for compiling the first historical information.

Vinayaṭṭhakathā
The Mahāvihāra is known for preserving a continuous record of information related to Shasanika
history. One example is the commentary on Vinaya written in Sinhala, which likely contains
information on the compilation of Vinaya sermons and the role of the different schools of Vinaya in
conducting them. This information is also found in the preface of the Pāli text Samantapāsadikā, which
Adhikaram believes drew from the Vinayaṭṭhakathā rather than the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā (Adikaram 1946:
14). The Vaṃsattappakasini also extracts information from the Vinayaṭṭhakathā, such as the reference
to Gokanna as “Rōhita Miga” in the ceremonial offerings of King Ashoka (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 73-
207). Similar facts are present in Samantapāsadikā (Samantapāsadikā 1924: 52, 73.), suggesting that
a Sinhala Vinayaṭṭhakathā may have existed before Samantapāsadikā. However, Samantapāsadikā is
not simply a Pāli translation of Vinayaṭṭhakathā but was prepared critically in association with other
sources. Geiger argues that the earliest historical traditions of the Mahāvihāra likely stem from a
common root (Geiger 1908: 70).

Uttaravihāraṭṭhakathā
Like the Mahāvihāra, the Abhayagiri sect also maintained its own history, though little is known about
it today. The Vaṃsattappakasini mentions the Uttaravihāraṭṭhakathā (Vaṃsattappakāsini: Ibid, Pages
177, 189, 247, 249, 289.), Uttaravihāra Mahāvaṃsa (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 134), and Aṭṭhakathā of the
Uttara Vihāra (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 125, 155) as sources of historical information for the Abhayagiri
sect. The Vaṃsattappakāsini suggests that the Uttaravihāraṭṭhakathā may have been more detailed in
some places than the Sīhalaṭṭha Mahāvaṃsa and provides information on the Mahāsammatha dynasty,
the Magadha dynasty, and King Vijaya and Pandukābhaya periods (Vaṃsatthapakāsini: 125, 134, 155,
177, 187, 247, 249, 290). Kiribamune proposes that the historical story may have been described from
the Uttaravihārattatha to the establishment of Buddhism (Kiribamune: 2005: 119).
The Vaṃsattappakasini often refers to the Uttaravihāraṭṭhakathā when there are differences
between the two works but provides little explanation for why (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 187). When there
are no differences, the facts are described in the same manner as in the Mahāvaṃsa. Many accept that
the chronicle is an edition of the monks of the Abhayagiri sect, compiled over time like the Sīhalaṭṭha
Mahāvaṃsa. As the Vaṃsattappakasini was still in circulation in the 10th century, it is clear that the
earliest compilation of historical information in Sri Lanka was done in association with monasteries.

Unfamoused Early Works

Sirima Kiribamunye suggests that, like the Mahāvihāra Abhayagiri, it is plausible that other temples
may have also preserved their collections of monastic history Buddhism (Kiribamune: 2005: 119).
Still, there is no visible evidence of this. Each temple has preserved its history and the history of the
sacrificial objects associated with Buddhism, such as Sri MahāBōdhiya Ruwanvelisaya, which has
maintained the record of the sacred things.
154 Kaudagammana Rathanasara

The Vaṃsattappakāsiniya, which recounts the story of the arrival of Mahā Bōdhi (Bōdhi āgamana),
has referred to additional information on this topic in Bōdhivaṃsaṭṭhakathā (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 676).
Although Geiger asserts that the existing Pāli Bōdhivaṃsa is the same as the Bōdhivaṃsaṭṭhakathā
(Geiger 1908: 32, 34.), it can be concluded that the Pāli Bōdhivaṃsa was written more recently based
on linguistic characteristics and related facts. Consequently, it is possible that the Bōdhivaṃsaṭṭhakathā
mentioned in this context does not exist.
Cētiyavaṃsaṭṭhakathā can be identified as a work written to document the history of Mahāthupa or
Ruwanweli Sai. Vaṃsattappakāsiniya has introduced this work as Cētiyavaṃsaṭṭhakathā , Mahācētiya
Vaṃsaṭṭhakathā (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 508, 548). Likewise, the Pāli Thupavaṃsa, written after the 10th
century, also mentioned the Thupavaṃsa that existed in Sinhala and Pāli before it.10
Moreover, many currently unavailable works can be inquired about through Vaṃsattappakāsini.
These include Sahassavatthuaṭṭhakathā (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 451), Dīpavaṁsaṭṭhakathā
(Vaṃsattappakāsini: 411, 683), cūlasīhanāda sūtra varṇanā siṃhala aṭuvāva (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 173,
305, Gaṇṭhipadatthavarṇanā (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 148), and Sīmākāthā (Vaṃsattappakāsini: 362). As
Vaṃsattappakāsini cites various information from these works, it can be assumed that they represent
some of the earliest historical information compilation in Sri Lanka. These works were created and
inspired by Buddhist culture centred around monasteries.

DEVELOPMENTAL POINTS IN MONASTIC-CENTERED HISTORIOGRAPHY

Dīpavaṁsa
Dīpavaṁsa is considered to be the oldest extant chronicle in Sri Lanka. However, it is evident from
the available information that it is not the first compilation of historical information in Sri Lanka.
Although the time and authorship of its composition are still uncertain, it is believed to have been
written between the King Mahāsena era and the King Dhātusēna era. Dīpavaṁsa is an important
source for the study of early historical data collection, and it represents the initial attempt to translate
the oral tradition of Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa into Pāli.
Despite being considered a poetic work, Dīpavaṁsa also contains prose. It is possible that the
facts of the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa were translated into Pāli to facilitate the transmission of the
oral tradition. Many stanzas in Dīpavaṁsa consist solely of a collection of nouns without verbs to aid
memorisation.11 It follows a specific sequence of historical events and is believed to be a compilation
of historical information from various sources. (Perera: 38).
Mahāvaṃsa, at the beginning of his work, pointed out the problem of repetitiveness in older
works (Mahāvaṃsa Pāḷi. Ch. 1. v. 2). Since the Vaṃsattappakāsini confirms that the primary source
of the Mahāvaṃsa is the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa, it is reasonable to assume that retellings
based on the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā itself may have been widely created. However, it should also be
noted that the reconstructions are diverse. For example, in one place, Dīpavaṁsa attributes the
construction of the Great Stupa to Dutugemunu (Dīpavaṁsa The Chronicle of the Island, Ch. 19. v.
10-11), while in another place, it is said to be the work of Saddhatissa (Dīpavaṁsa The Chronicle
of the Island, Ch. 20. v. 1-5), There are also two different descriptions of the third Dhamma Council
(Dharma Sangāyanā) in Dīpavaṁsa (Dīpavaṁsa The Chronicle of the Island, Ch. 7. v. 37-59).
Dīpavaṁsa represents the earliest moments of historical information compilation in Sri Lanka
centred on monasteries. While it is vital in terms of content, it is weak in terms of composition.
Further research and development opportunities exist to explore the potential of monastic-centred
historical informatics in Sri Lanka.
The Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan Historiography 155

Mahāvaṃsa
The writing of the Mahāvaṃsa is a significant milestone in the compilation of historical information
in Sri Lanka. Despite being considered a successful edition rather than an independent work, it is
acknowledged for addressing issues of length, conciseness, and repetition present in earlier works
(Mahāvaṃsa Pāḷi. Ch. 1. V. 3). Based on various historical sources available in the Sinhala language;
the Mahāvaṃsa is believed to be an edition of the Sīhalaṭṭhatha, as noted in the Vaṃsattappakāsini
(Vaṃsattappakāsini: 687). The Mahāvaṃsa is divided into 37 chapters, with the first thirty-seven
chapters written by Mahānama Thero, containing information from the Mahāsammata dynasty to the
reign of King Mahāsen, covering fifty-eight kings. The first thirty chapters describe the reigns of
fifteen kings and document significant historical events in Sri Lanka, such as the Mahindagamana,
the introduction of the Sri Mahā Bōdhi, and the construction of the Abhayagiri, among others. The
total number of stanzas in the Mahāvaṃsa written by Mahānama Thero is 2906. The composition
of the Mahāvaṃsa is an important landmark in compiling historical information due to its focus on
time and space. The author connected events to the Magadha dynasty and documented significant
events in India and Sri Lanka, providing a comprehensive overview of history. It is not merely an
informational report but shows evidence of the author’s skill in the modern historiographical concepts
of information gathering, analysis, and composition. The Mahāvaṃsa author did not limit themselves
to a single source but associated with many works in compiling historical information, as confirmed
in the Vaṃsattappakāsini. This work inspired other Buddhacharyas to engage in historical information
compilation, leading to the creation of the four remaining Mahāvaṃsa groups, known as the Geiger
Chulavaṃsa (Culavaṃsa 1926: 1).

Vaṃsattappakāsini
The Vaṃsattappakāsini is a work that explains obscure and difficult-to-understand passages in the
Mahāvaṃsa. The authorship and date of writing are subject to debate among scholars. However, it
is widely recognised as an important milestone in developing historical information compilation in
Sri Lanka. The author of the Vaṃsattappakāsini is careful to cite his sources, indicating a growing
awareness of the importance of historical accuracy and reliability. The Vaṃsattappakāsini is a valuable
source for understanding the earliest attempts at historical compilation in ancient Sri Lanka. While
it has been referred to as the Mahāvaṃsa Tika, this name is a recent innovation, with George Turner
being the first to use it The Mahāvaṃsa (The Mahāvaṃsa 1838: xxxi).

CONCLUSION
The historical tradition of Sri Lanka is said to have been influenced by the Buddhist culture, with Sri
Lankan monks being directed to it through the compilation of historical information in Tripitaka and
Aṭṭhakathā. The Buddhist monks, particularly Mahinda Thero, introduced Buddhism and related history
to Sri Lanka through oral tradition, incorporating their memories of the expansion and development of
Buddha’s time. The references in the Vaṃsattappakāsini about the Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvansya suggest
that this historical information grew gradually and was abstracted from the Tripitaka commentaries,
developing as a separate tradition. The Sri Lankan historical traditions have been maintained through
word of mouth from generation to generation, with separate histories of discipline and sacred objects
being preserved. The Tripitaka Sutras and Vinaya Nidanas have spent time and space compiling
historical information. Monks have tried to keep these traditions in Pāli poems by editing them for
ease of remembrance and international use, which Dipavaṃsa and Mahāvaṃsadi confirm.
156 Kaudagammana Rathanasara

Additionally, mentions of the Uttaravihāraṭṭhakathā suggest that various monasteries have also
worked on composing the history of their sect. All the historical information compilations, starting
from Sīhalaṭṭhakathā Mahāvaṃsa, Vinayaṭṭhakathā, Uttaravihāraṭṭhakathā, Dīpavaṁsa, Mahāvaṃsa,
and Vaṃsattappakāsini: have been done in association with Buddhist temples. Although some argue
that Sri Lankan historiography started under Indian Purāna influences, no evidence supports this
claim. The primary stage of the compilation of historical information in Sri Lanka was concentrated
on Buddhist monasteries, confirmed by the facts studied.

NOTES
1. “Evaṃ me sutaṃ ekaṃ samayaṃ bhagavā antarā ca rājagahaṃ antarā ca nāḷandaṃ addhānamaggappaṭipanno
hoti Mahātā bhikkhusaṅghena saddhiṃ pañcamattehi bhikkhusatehi. Suppiyopi kho paribbājako antarā
ca rājagahaṃ antarā ca nāḷandaṃ addhānamaggappaṭipanno hoti saddhiṃ antevāsinā brahmadattena
māṇavena. Tatra sudaṃ suppiyo paribbājako anekapariyāyena buddhassa avaṇṇaṃ bhāsati, dhammassa
avaṇṇaṃ bhāsati, saṅghassa avaṇṇaṃ bhāsati; suppiyassa pana paribbājakassa antevāsī brahmadatto
māṇavo anekapariyāyena buddhassa vaṇṇaṃ bhāsati, dhammassa vaṇṇaṃ bhāsati, saṅghassa vaṇṇaṃ
bhāsati. Itiha te ubho ācariyantevāsī aññamaññassa ujuvipaccanīkavādā bhagavantaṃ piṭṭhito piṭṭhito
anubandhā honti bhikkhusaṅghañca.” Digha Nikaya: Brahmajala Sutta. CS CD Rom.
2. “Sīhaḷadīpaṃ pana ābhatātha, vasinā mahāmahindena; Ṭhapitā sīhaḷabhāsāya, dīpavāsīnamatthāya.”
Sumaṃgalavilāsinī, Nidānakathā, CS CD Rom.
3. “Upāli dāsako ceva, soṇako siggavo tathā;
Moggaliputtena pañcamā, ete jambusirivhaye.
Tato mahindo iṭṭiyo, uttiyo sambalo tathā;
Bhaddanāmo ca paṇḍito.” Parivārapāḷi, Bhikkhuvibhaṅgo, Soḷasamahāvāro CS CD Rom.
4. “Piṭakattayapāḷiñca, tassa aṭṭhakathampi ca;
Mukhapāṭhena ānesuṃ, pubbe bhikkhū mahāmati.
Hāniṃ disvāna sattānaṃ, tadā bhikkhū samāgatā;
Ciraṭṭhitatthaṃ dhammassa, potthakesu likhāpayuṃ.” Mahāvaṃsa Pāḷi. Ch. 33. V. 102-103. CS CD Rom.
5. “Porāṇehi kato’peso, ativitthārito kvaci;
Atīva kvaci saṃkhitto, anekapunaruttako.” Mahāvaṃsa Pāḷi. Ch. 1. v. 2. CS CD Rom.
6. “Vajjitaṃ tehi dosehi, sukhaggahaṇadhāraṇaṃ;
Pasādasaṃvegakaraṃ, sutito ca upāgataṃ. Mahāvaṃsa Pāḷi. Ch. 1. v. 3. CS CD Rom.
7. “Ĕvaṃ mahāvaṃsaṃti laddhanāmaṃ mahāvihāravāsīnaṃ vācanāmaggaṃ pŏrāṇaṭṭhakathaṃ ĕttha
sīhaḷabhāsaṃ hitvā māgadhikabhāsāya pavakkhāmīti adhippāyŏ.” Vamsatthapakasini, 35-36.
8. “ślāghya sa ĕva guṇavān - rāgadveṣa bahiṣkṛtā bhūtāthīkathanĕ yasya- sahirĕva prajāpatī” Rajatarangini.
9.
10. “Kiñcāpi so yatijanena purātanena
Atvāya sīhaḷajanassa kato purāpi,
Vākkena sihaḷabhavena’bhisaṅkhamattā
Atthaṃ na sādhahati sabbajanassa sammā;
Yasmā ca māgadha niruttikatopi thūpa-
Vaṃso viruddhanaya sadda samākulo so,
Vattabbameva ca bahumpi yato na vuttaṃ
Tamhā ahaṃ punapi vaṃsami’maṃ vadāmi;” The Chronical of Thūpa and the Thūpavamsa. v. 3,4.
11. “dīpaṁ purañ ca rājā ca upaddutañ ca dhātuyo thūpaṁ dīpañ ca pabbataṁ uyyānaṁ bodhi bhikkhunī”
Dīpavaṁsa The Chronicle of the Island, Ch. 17. v. 3.
The Origins and Evolution of Sri Lankan Historiography 157

REFERENCES
Abhayagunawardhane, M.V., Disanayake, Mahanama (eds.) (1993). Mahāvaṃsa Gītaya. Colombo: Sanskuthika
Katauthu Departhamenthuwa.
Adikaram, E.W. (1946). Early History of Buddhism in Ceylon: Or, State of Buddhism in Ceylon as Revealed by
the Pāli Commentaries of the 5th Century A.D. D. S. Puswella.
Bentley, J. H. (2012). Traditions & Encounters: A Global Perspective on the Past. McGraw-Hill Higher
Education.
Carr, E.H. (1961). What Is History? Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
Cowell, E. B. (1895). The Jataka, Or Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births: Vol. 1-6. Cambridge University
Press.
Digha Nikaya. Chatta Sangayana CD Rom (1997). Dharmagiri: Vipassana Research Institue.
Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press.
Turner, G. (1838). The Mahawanso in Roman Characters with The Translation Subjoined, And An Introductory
Essay On Pali Buddhistical Literature. Vol. I containing the first thirty-eight Chapters.
Geiger W. (eds.) (1926). Culavamsa, vol. I, London: Pali Text Sociaty.
Geiger, W (1908). Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa and Other Historical Developments in Ceylon, (trl.) E.M.
Coomarasamy, Colombo: H.C. Cottle Government Printer.
Geiger, W. (1912). The Mahāvaṃsa or the Great Chronicle of Ceylon. Oxford University.
Gunawardena, R.L.H. (eds.) (2005). Itihasaye Atitaya: Shikshanayaka vardhanaya pilibanda vimarshanayak.
Colombo: S. Godage and Brothers.
Hettiarachchi, D.E (eds.) (1967). Siṃhala Viśva Kośaya III, Colombo: Department of Government Printing.
Iggers, G. G. (2005). Historiography in the Twentieth Century: From scientific objectivity to the postmodern
challenge. Wesleyan University Press.
Ilangasinghe, Mangala (2003). Mahāvaṃśaya Saha Śrī Laṃkāve Itihāsa Sampradāya, maharagama: taraṃji
printers.
Jayawickrama, N.A. (eds. and trl.) (1971). The Chronicle of Thūpa and the Thūpavamsa. London: Luzac and
Company Ltd.
Kiribamune, Sirima (2005). “Mahāvaṃśaya hā lakdiva paraṇi aitihāsika sampradāya” Gunawardena, R.L.H.
(eds.) (2005). Itihasaye Atitaya: Shikshanayaka vardhanaya pilibanda vimarshanayak. Colombo: S.
Godage and Brothers.
Law, Bimala Churn (1947). On The Chronicles of Ceylon. Kolkata‎: Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal.
Mahāvaṃsa Pāḷi. Chatta Sangayana CD Rom (1997). Dharmagiri: Vipassana Research Institue.
Malalasekara, G.P. (eds.) (1935). Vaṃsatthapakasinī, London: Pāli Text societ.
Oldernberg, H. (eds. and trsl.) (1879). Dīpavaṁsa: The Chronicle of the Island. London: Pali Text Society.
Pargiter, F.E. (1913), the Purana Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age. Humphrey Milford, Oxford University
Press, London.
Parivārapāḷi. Chatta Sangayana CD Rom (1997). Dharmagiri: Vipassana Research Institue.
Perera, Laxman s. (not mentioned) Lagdiva Pāli Vaṃśa Kathā, Vimaladāsa, Jasṭin (eds.) Itihāsaya 4. No
mentioned.
Philips C.H. (1961). Historians of India, Pakistan and Ceylon, London: Oxford University Press.
 158 Kaudagammana Rathanasara

Rathanasara, Kaudagammana (2021). Bamiṇitiyā Mahāsāgataya. Colombo: S. Godage & Brothers.

Stein, M.A. (eds. and trl.) (1979). Rajatarangini. Delhi: Banarsidass.
Subhuti Thero, Vaskudve (1865). Abhidhānappadīpikā; or, Dictionary of the Pali language. Colombo: W.H.
Herbert. Acting Government Printer.
Sumaṃgalavilāsinī. Chatta Sangayana CD Rom (1997). Dharmagiri: Vipassana Research Institue.
Takakusu and Nagal (eds.) (1924). Samanthapasadika, London, Pali text Sociaty.
Weerasekara, Gunapala (1968). Pāli Śabdakoṣaya (Pāli-Siṃhala-English). Colombo: M.D. Gunasena.

View publication stats