Search Results

CITY, PALACE AND ROYAL GARDENS SENAKA BANDARANAYAKE Page 112 One of Asia's major archaeological sites, Sigiriya presents a uniq concentration of fifth-century urban planning, architecture, gardenin engineering, hydraulic technology and art. Centred on a massive rock risin 200 metres above the surrounding plain, Sigiriya's location is one considerable natural beauty and historical interest. An area of ancie settlement lying between the historic capitals of Anuradhapura an Polonnaruva, the Sigiriya plain still retains much of its forest cover, an many of its present village settlements and man-made village reservoir date back to the first millennium B.C. In its present form, Sigiriya itself i essentially a walled-and-moated royal capital of the fifth century A.D. with a palace complex on top of the rock, elaborate pleasure gardens extensive moats and ramparts, and the well-known paintings on the western face of the rock. The history of Sigiriya, however, extends from prehistoric times to the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The earliest evidence of human habitation is in the Aligala rock-shelter which lies to the east of the Sigiriya rock. This is a major prehistoric site of the mesolithic period, with an Occupational sequence starting nearly five thousand years ago and extending up to early historic times. The historical period a Sigiriya begins about the third century B.C., with the establishment of a Buddhist monastic settlement on the rock-strewn western and northern slopes of the hill around the rockAs in other similar sites of this period, partially man- made rock-shelters or 'caves', with deeply-incised protective grooves or drip- ledges, were created in the bases of several large boulders. There are altogether 30 such shelters, many of them dated by the donatory inscriptions carved in the rock face near their drip-ledges to a period between the third century B.C., and the first century A.D. The inscriptions record the granting of these caves to the Buddhist monastic order to be used as residences. Kasyapa, the master builder Sigiriya comes dramatically, if tragically, into the political history of Sri Lanka in the last quarter of the fifth century during the reign of King Dhatusena I (459-477 A.D.), who ruled from the ancient capital at Anuradhapura. A palace coup by Prince Kasyapa, the King's son by a non-royal consort, and Migara, the king's nephew and army commander, led ultimately to the seizure of the throne and the subsequent execution Rock, lake, water gardens and moats, Sigiriya, 5th century. The western precinct of the Sigiriya Complex of Dhatusena. Kasyapa, much reviled for his patricide, established a new capital at Sigiriya, while the crown prince, his half-brother Moggallana, went into exile in India. Kasyapa I (477-495 A.D.) and his master-builders gave the site its present name, 'Simha-giri' or 'Lion-Mountain', and were responsible for most of the structures and the complex plan that we see today. This brief Kasyapan phase was the golden age of Sigiriya. The post-Kasyapan phases, when Sigiriya was turned back into a Buddhist monastery, seem to have lasted until the thirteenth or fourteenth century. Sigiriya then disappears for a time from the history of Sri Lanka until, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, it appears again as a distant outpost and military centre of the Kingdom of Kandy. In the mid- nineteenth century antiquarians begin to take an interest in the site, followed some decades later by archaeologists, who have now been working there for nearly 100 years, since the 1890s. The Cultural Triangle project began its work at Sigiriya in 1982 and has focussed attention not only on the best-known and most striking aspects of Sigiriyathe royal complex of rock, palace, gardens and fortifications of the 'western precinct, but also on the entire city and its rural hinterland. Urban form One of the most important aspects of the archaeology of Sigiriya is that it is one of the best-preserved and most elaborate surviving urban sites in South Asia from the first millennium A.D. What we know presently about its urban form is that it consists of a series of concentric precincts, the outermost of which, not yet completely surveyed, seems to form a precise geometrical rectangleThese successive precincts are centred on the great Sigiriya rock, a massive monadnock or inselberg rising about 200 metres above the surrounding plainIt has a part-naturalpart man-made, stepped plateau of about 1.5 hectares on its summit. On this plateau is located the royal palace and the immediate palace gardens The palace stands about 360 metres above mean sea level and 200 metres above the surrounding plain. On the plain below, extending east and west, are two fortified precincts, 90 and 40 hectares in extent. Around the rock itself is a walled citadel' or inner royal precinct, covering an area of about 15 hectares. This citadel presents an irregular, broadly elliptical plan, more or less defining the outer limits of the hill slopes around the base of the rock. This boulder-strewn hillside has been fashioned into a series of terraces, forming a terraced garden around the rock. It also incorporates rock-shelters and rock-associated pavilions which form the distinctive architecture of the boulder gardens both to the west and the east of the citadel. The area to the west of the citadel is laid out as a symmetrically- planned royal park or pleasure-garden with elaborate water retaining structures and surface and sub-surface hydraulic systems. It is surrounded by three ramparts and two moats forming a square, whose inner dimensions are about 900 by 800 metres. To the east of the citadel extends the 'eastern precinct' or 'inner city', a rectangular form whose inner precincts measure about 700 metres from east to west and 500 metres from north to south with a high earthen rampart, gateways and vestiges of a moat. Our present City of Sigiriya 1. Outer Moat and Rampart 2. Mapagala Complex 3. Outer City 4. Inner Moat and Rampart 5. Entrances 6. Water Gardens 7. Boulder Gardens 8.Terrace Gardens 9.Mirror Wall and Paintings 10. Lion Platform 11. Palace at the summit 12. Inner City, Ramparts and Gates 13. Lake interpretation of this area is that it represents a ceremonial precinct with no permanent structures other than a large central pavilion erected on a long, low rock outcrop The outermost rampart of the Sigiriya complex is today a low, much eroded vestigial earthen embankment defining the extent of the still largely uninvestigated eastern residential or 'outer city area. This is more or less laid out as a rectangle, 1,000 by 1,500 metres, with two eastern gateways, suburban settlements beyond its northern walls, and the great man-made Sigiriya Lake to its south. Among the most remarkable aspects of the urban form at Sigiriya are its planning mathematics and total design conceptThe plan of the city is based on a precise square moduleThe layout extends outward from the coordinates at the centre of the palace complex on top of the rockThe eastern and western entrances are directly aligned with the central east west axis. The royal water-gardens and the moats and ramparts of the western precinct are based on an echo' plan, which duplicates the layout on either side of the north-south and east-west axes. In its total conception Sigiriya represents a brilliant combination of concepts of symmetry and asymmetry in a deliberate interlocking of geometrical plan and natural form. The Apsara paintings The most famous features of the Sigiriya complex are the fifth-century paintings found in a depression on the rock face more than 100 metres above ground levelReached today by a modern spiral staircase, they are but fragmentary survivals of an immense backdrop of paintings that once extended in a wide band across the western face of the rock. The painted band seems to have extended to the north-eastern corner of the rock, covering thereby an area nearly 140 metres long and, at its widest, about 40 metres high. As John Still observed. The whole face of the hill appears to have been a gigantic picture gallery the largest picture in the world perhaps (Still 1907: 15). All that survives of this great painted backdrop are the female figures preserved in two adjacent depressions in the rock-face known as 'Fresco Pocket A' and 'Fresco Pocket B' (three other depressions: 'Fresco Pockets C, D and E' higher up the rock-face, also contain patches of plaster and pigment andin at least one instance, fragments of a painted figure)Traces . of plaster and pigment elsewhere on the rock-face provide further evidence of the extent of the painted bandThey represent apsaras or celestial nymphs, a common motif in the religious and royal art of Asia The Sigiriya paintings have been the focus of considerable interest and attention in both ancient and modern times. The poems in the graffiti on the Mirror Wall, discussed below, dating from about the sixth to the thirteenth or fourteenth century, are mostly addressed to the ladies in the paintings, who seem also to have been studied and reproduced in the eighteenth century by the Kandyan artists who painted the Dambulla murals. Antiquarian descriptions of the figures in the fresco pocket' date back to the 1830sThe first proper descriptions in the nineteenth century are based on the examination of the paintings by telescope from the plain below. The first person in modern times to find his way into the fresco pocket and come face to face with the paintings was an engineer named Murray of the Public Works Department. He made tracings, copied them in pastel and published a paper in 1891. The first real study of the paintings, however, begins with the commencement of archaeological operations at Sigiriya by H.C.P. Bell from 1894 onwards and the facsimile copies in oils made by Muhandiram DAL Perera in 1896-7. Meaning and style An important and largely unanswerable question is how the present figures related to the entire composition of the painted band extending across the rock-face. Their fragmentary nature and unusual dramatic location have led to the Sigiriya paintings being interpreted in a number of ways Apsara celestial nymph, Sigiriya, 5th century. An outstanding example of the classical school of Sri Lankan painting. 'Fresco Pocket B' Sigiriya, 5th centuryIt is now thought that the Sigiriya paintings were executed in the tempera rather than true fresco technique. Detail from 'Fresco Pocket B', Sigiriya, 5th century. An Apsara holds a flower in a classical dance gesture. sometimes quite fancifully. Of the proposals that deserve scholarly consideration the three most important ones are those of Bell, Ananda Coomaraswamy and Senerath Paranavitana. Bell's idea that they portray the ladies of Kasyapa's court in a devotional procession to the shrine at Pidurangala is a purely imaginative reconstruction and has no precedent in the artistic and social traditions of the region or the periodIt seems quite likely, however, that the court ladies and their costumes and ornaments provided models for the Sigiriya artists and that, as such, the paintings reflect the life and atmosphere, the ideals of beauty and the attitude to women, of the élite society of the time. Paranavitana's suggestion that they represent Lightning Princesses (vijju kumari) and Cloud Damsels (meghalata) is an interpretation at once more literary and sociological. It forms part of his elaborate hypothesis, which attempts to explain Sigiriya as an expression of the cult of divine royalty, the entire palace complex being a symbolic reconstruction of the abode of the god Kuvera. While these identifications may seem to us today an overinterpretation too specific to accept in its totality, deriving from Paranavitana's attempt to see the Sigiriya palace and royal complex primarily as an expression of divine kingship, they do draw our attention to important sociological dimensions in the understanding of ancient works of art. There is no doubt that the spatial organization and symbolism of the Sigiriya complex is profoundly determined by the cult of the king and the ideology of kingship. The great tapestry of paintings at Sigiriya, the palace on the summit and the lion staircase, are all part of a complex 'sign-language" expressing royal power and ritual status. Coomaraswamy's identification of the Sigiriya women as apsaras is in keeping with well-established South Asian traditions and is not only the simplest but also the most logical and acceptable interpretation. Recent studies have reinforced this idea, showing that apsaras are often represented in art and literature as celestial beings who carried flowers and scattered them over kings and heroes as a celebration of victory and heroismWe can say almost with certainty that the Sigiriya ladies are celestial nymphs, very similar in essence to their successors thirteen hundred years later in the Daughters of Mara panel from Dambulla, but it is also likely that they had more than one meaning and function: as expressions of royal grandeur and status and as artistic evocations of courtly life, with aesthetic and erotic dimensions. Such an interpretation, with its varying levels of ambiguity, allows us to accommodate both Bell's and Paranavitana's suggestions at either end of a semiological spectrum. It also makes it possible for us to view the painted band at Sigiriya as a rare and early survival of a royal citrasala, or picture gallery, well known in Indian literature and implicit in the Culavamsa account of Parakramabahu's palaces and audience halls at Polonnaruva The style and authorship of the paintings have been as controversial a question as that of their identity. Early writers such as Bell, and even Coomaraswamy, saw them as extensions of the Central Indian School of Ajanta or of several related traditions such as those of Bagh or of Sittanvasal in South India. Bell even suggested that 'artists trained in the same school possibly the same hands - executed both the Indian and Ceylon frescoes. These were views expressed at a time when very little was known of the extent and character of early Sri Lankan painting Benjamin Rowland was amongst the first to observe carefully the actual painterly technique at Sigiriya and to note in what specific way it differed from Ajanta and other subcontinental traditions: The Sigiriya paintings. outside of their exciting and intrinsic beauty, are perhaps most notable for the very freedom they show at a time when the arts were tending to become more and more frozen in the mould of rigid canons of beautyThe apsaras have a rich healthy flavour that in contrast almost makes the masterpieces of Indian art seem sallow and effete in over-refinementJust as the drawing is more vigorous than that of the more sophisticated artists of India, so colours are bolder and more intense than the tonalities employed in the temples of the Deccan' (Rowland 1938: 84). These insights have been pursued and reinforced by contemporary Sri Lankan scholars, who rightly argue that, while the Sri Lankan paintings belong to the same broad traditions of South Asian art as the various subcontinental schools of the time, the specific character and historical continuity of the Sri Lankan tradition give it its own distinctive place in the art of the region. Thus, the Sigiriya paintings represent the earliest surviving examples of a Sri Lankan school of classical realism, already fully evolved when we first encounter it in the fifth century. The Boulder-Garden paintings The art of Sigiriya is not confined to the paintings on the great rock itself. Of equal archaeological and even aesthetic interest, though less well- preserved, are a number of paintings found in the rock shelters at the foot of the rock in the area that formed the boulder gardens in the time of Kasyapa. This was also the centre of both the ancient and the post- Kasyapan monasteries. Nearly thirty rock shelters and boulder arches (i.e.. archways formed of natural boulders) have been found at Sigiriya. Significant fragments of paintings can be seen in at least five of these. Many of the others contain traces of plaster and pigment, indicating an extensive complex of painted caves and pavilions in the whole of the boulder garden area. The most ambitious composition can be found on a large area of plaster in Cave 7 where there are faint traces of several female figures carrying flowers and moving amidst clouds, again in a northerly direction, very much like the apsaras on the main rock above. Even in ornamentation and general figural treatment, these women are broadly similar to those in the famous paintings, except for the fact that at least three of them are not cut off at the waist by clouds but are full-figure representations, with legs bent in a conventional flying posture. Altogether there are less than half a dozen distinct forms here, barely discernible in traces of body colour and linework The most extraordinary and certainly the most dramatic manifestations of the painter's art at Sigiriya are the remains of ceiling paintings in the rock shelter popularly known as the 'Cobra-hood Cave' (Cave 9) on account of its equally dramatic rock formation. The shelter itself dates from the Terracotta architectural detail, Boulder Garden, Sigiriya, 5th-8th century. This detail is typical of the moulded ornamentations of the lost brick and timber buildings in the Boulder Garden. Geometrical shapes and motifs, Cobrahood cave, Sigiriya, 5th century. A complex rendering of characteristic volute or whorl motifs earliest phase of occupation at Sigiriya and bears a donatory inscription belonging to the last few centuries B.C. The painting combines geometrical shapes and motifs with a free and complex rendering of characteristic volute or whorl motifs. It is nothing less than a masterpiece of expressionist painting, displaying considerable imaginative range and artistic virtuosity in a way not seen elsewhere in the surviving paintings of the Sri Lankan tradition. The characteristic brushwork style and tonal qualities of the Sigiriya school are immediately noticeable here. There is little doubt that this awning is contemporary with the paintings on the main rock. Further excavation in the caves of the boulder garden and detailed investigation of plaster layers and pigments will give us a much clearer idea of the successive phases of artistic activity at Sigiriya. Considered in their totality, the paintings in the boulder-garden area at Sigiriya, though vestigial, provide important evidence of the continuation of the Sigiriya school over a fair period of time. Excavations have shown several post-fifth-century phases of occupation in the rock shelters in this area, continuing until perhaps as late as the twelfth or thirteenth century. This situation is paralleled by the layers of plaster and painting which provide evidence of several successive phases of painterly activity at Sigiriya. The Sigiri graffiti The Sigiriya paintings have preoccupied visitors to the site over many centuries. After the abandonment of the palace in the fifth or sixth century and the establishment of a monastery in the boulder and water garden area to the west of the rock, Sigiriya became a place of pilgrimage for visitors from all over the country, who came to see the paintings, the palace and the lion staircase. Greatly inspired by the paintings, they composed poems addressed mostly to the ladies depicted in them and inscribed their verses on the highly polished surface of the Mirror Wall just below the painting gallery. Known as the Sigiri graffiti and dating from about the sixth to the early fourteenth century, hundreds of these scribbled verses cover the surface of the gallery wall and also some of the plastered surfaces in the caves below. Nearly seven hundred of these were deciphered by Paranavitana, and another 150 recently by Benille Priyanka The poems, which express the thoughts and emotions of ancient visitors to Sigiriya, provide not only revealing comments on the paintings themselves but also an insight into the cultivated sensibilities of the time and its appreciation of art and beauty. 'Art about Art': early souvenir sculptures Closely connected with the paintings and the poetry are a series of miniature terracotta figurines found in the debris of collapsed structures in the Boulder Garden area on the western slopes at the base of the Sigiriya rock. These are among the most interesting archaeological finds from nearly a decade of Cultural Triangle excavations at Sigiriya. Most of the figurines appear today as female torsos, modelled in the familiar 'classic- realist' style of the Middle Historical period (circa sixth to thirteenth century). The modelling of the figurines shows a characteristic concern with three-dimensional form and a sensitivity to both anatomical and decorative detail. From their archaeological context and style we may tentatively date them to a period between the seventh and the tenth centuries. As for as we know, terracotta figures of this specific type have only been found at Sigiriya, but they are clearly related to a contemporary tradition of fine terracotta sculpture associated with other sites in the region. What is particularly interesting is that these figures are representations or models of the famous apsaras of the Sigiriya paintings The concept of the unity of sculpture and painting, ie., the equivalence of the three- dimensional and the two-dimensional image, is a basic principle of South and Southeast Asian art. What is rare, perhaps even unique, at this early period is to find ancient works of art which are deliberate representations or, in this case, actual models or miniature reproductions of other works of art, a process which can be described as 'art about art. The correspondences between the paintings and the sculptures and the diminutive size of the latter (usually between 10 and 20 cm) suggest that the figurines were portable objects and not part of any fixed architectural decoration further supporting the notion that they are models or 'souvenirs'. The production of models and souvenirs to be carried away by pilgrims visiting famous religious centres is, of course, an ancient practice, well-known in the art and archaeology of Asia. Sigiriya, however, is an example of a site, rare in the archaeological record, which seems to have been visited purely on account of its secular aesthetic and 'archaeological' attractions. The verses are mostly addressed to the ladies in the paintings, thus, the terracotta figurines seem to have been produced as souvenirs to be taken away by visitors who appreciated the paintings This interpretation 'Their bodies' radiance Like the moon Wanders in the cool wind.' 'The song of Lord Kital: Sweet girl Standing on the Mountain Your teeth are like jewels Lighting the lotus of your eyes Talk to me gently of your heart." 'I am Lord Sangapala I wrote this song We spoke But they did not answer Those ladies of the Mountain They did not give us The twitch of an eye-lid.' Ladies like you Make men pour out their hearts And you also have thrilled the body Making its hair Stiffen with desire.' Terracotta Souvenir Sculpture, Sigiriya, 5th century. Terracotta models of the painted figures on the rock. is preferable to one that would view the figures as decorative or iconic sculptures associated with the monastic structures amongst whose debris they occur. The Sigiriya torsos, like the poems on the Mirror Wallare undoubtedly an expression of art about art'. They interest us not only as beautiful terracotta sculptures but also as unique historical documents, supplementing the insights we gain from the poems into the society and sensibilities of the period The Royal Gardens One of the major foci of the Cultural Triangle excavations has been the Sigiriya gardens. Sigiriya provides us with a unique and relatively little- known example of what is one of the oldest landscaped gardens in the world, whose skeletal layout and significant features are still in a fair state of preservation. Three distinct but interlinked forms are found here: water gardens, cave and boulder gardens, and stepped or terraced gardens encircling the rock. A combination of these three garden types is also seen in the palace gardens on the summit of the rock. The Water Gardens The water gardens are, perhaps, the most extensive and intricate, and occupy the central section of the western precinct. Three principal gardens lie along the central east-west axis. The largest of these, Garden L. consists of a central island surrounded by water and linked to the main precinct by cardinally-oriented causeways. The quartered or char bagh plan thus created, constitutes a well-known ancient garden form, of which the Siginya version is one of the oldest surviving examples. The entire garden is a walled enclosure with gateways placed at the head of each causeway. The largest of these gateways, to the west, has a triple entrance. The cavity left by the massive timber doorposts indicates that it was an elaborate gatehouse of timber and brick masonry with multipletiled roofs. Garden 2, the Fountain Garden', is a narrow precinct on two levels. The lower, western half has two long, deep pools with stepped cross-sections. Draining into these pools are shallow serpentine 'streams' paved with marble slabs and defined kerbs. These serpentines are punctuated by fountains. consisting of circular limestone plates with symmetrical perforations. They are fed by underground water conduits and operate on a simple principle of gravity and pressure. With the cleaning and repair of the underground conduits, the fountains operate in rainy weather even today Two relatively shallow limestone cisterns are placed on opposite sides of the garden. Square in plan and carefully constructed, they may well have originally functioned as storage or pressure chambers for the serpentine and the fountains. The eastern half of the garden, which is raised above the western section, has few distinctive features, a serpentine stream and a pavilion with a limestone throne being almost all that is visible today. Garden 3, on a higher level consists of an extensive area of terrace and halls Its northeastern corner is a large octagonal pool and terrace at the Water Garden, Sigiriya, 5th century. The gardens in the morning mist of the rainy season. Water Garden at Sigiriya 1. Water Garden 2. Boulder Garden 3.Terrace Garden 4.Palace Rock base of a towering boulder forming a dramatic juxtaposition of rock and water at the very point at which the water garden and boulder garden meet. A raised podium and a drip-ledge for a lean-to roof form the remains of a 'bathing pavilion on the far side of the pool.. The eastern limit of Garden 3 is marked by the wide entrance and massive brick and stone wall of the citadel. The citadel wall forms a dramatic backdrop to the water gardens, echoing the even more dramatic vision of the great rock and the palace on its summit to the east. When viewed from the water gardens, the wall extends from the towering boulder of Garden 3 to a matching bastion on the south-east, formed by wide brick walls and a series of boulders which surround a cave pavilion housing a rock-cut throne. The three water gardens form a dominant series of rectangular enclosures varying size and character, joined together along a central east-west of axisMoving away from this to the wider conception of the western precinct as a whole, we see that its other dominant feature is a sequence of four large moated islands, arranged in a north-south oriented crescent, cutting across the central axis, of the water garden. These, once again, follow the principle of symmetrical repetition, the two inner islands, on the one hand, and the two outer islands, on the other, forming pairs. The two inner islands closely abutting the Fountain Garden on either side, are partially built up on surfacing bedrock. They are surrounded by high rubble walls and wide moats. The flattened surface of the island was occupied by summer palaces' (Sinhala sitala maliga or cool palaces) or water pavilions. Bridges built or cut into the surface rock, provide access to these palaces. Further to the north and south, almost abutting the ramparts, are the two other moated islands, still unexcavated but clearly displaying the quartered or char bagh plan. Intricately connected with the water gardens of the western precinct are the double moat that surrounds it and the great artificial lake that extends southward from the Sigiriya rock. Excavations have revealed that the pools were interlinked by a network of underground conduits, fed initially by the Sigiriya Lake and probably connected at various points with the surrounding moats. Ancient Fountains, Sigiriya, 5th century. Fountains at play in the rainy season. The Miniature Water Garden To the west of Water Garden 1recent excavations have revealed a miniature water garden very different in character from those described above. There are at least five distinct units in this gardeneach combining pavilions of brick and limestone with paved, water-retaining structures and winding water-courses. The two units at the northern and southern extremities are badly eroded, but the general layout of the major portion of the garden and of the three central units is clear. A striking feature of this miniaturegarden (it is in fact about ninety metres long and thirty wide) is the use of these water-surrounds with pebbled or marbled floors, covered by shallow, slowly-moving waterThese, no doubt, served as a cooling device and at the same time had great aesthetic appeal, creating interesting visual and sound effects. Another distinctive aspect is the geometrical intricacy of the garden layoutWhile displaying the symmetry and echo-planning' characteristic of the water-gardens as a whole, this miniature garden has a far more complex interplay of tile-roofed buildingswater-retaining structures and water-courses than is seen elsewhere in Sigiriya; even more intricate, in fact, than the beautiful Fountain Garden' Miniature Water Garden, Sigiriya, 5th century. This refined garden layout retains various paved ponds using pebble and marble floors with slow moving water. Rock cut footings, Sigiriya, 5th century. These cuttings on the rock were meant as foundations for brick masonry. Moat of the Summer Palace, Sigiriya, 5th century. The southern Summer Palace is one of five moated islands in the water gardens at Sigiriya. This newly-discovered garden seems to belong to more than one phase of construction. As far as we are able to say at this stage of our investigation, the garden seems originally to have been laid out as an extension and 'miniaturized' refinement of the Kasyapan macro-plan and therefore belongs in essence to the last quarter of the fifth century: But it seems to have been added to later and remodelled and then finally abandoned and again partially built over in the last phases of the post- Kasyapan period, between the tenth and thirteenth centuries. It seems very likely that a similar garden lies buried beneath the lawns of the unexcavated parallel sector in the northern half of the water-gardens, an 'echo' or 'twinof the present garden in the south. The Boulder Garden The boulder garden presents a garden design which is in marked contract to the symmetry and geometry of the water gardens. It is an entirely organic or symmetrical conception, consisting of a number of winding pathways, which link several clusters of large natural boulders extending from the southern slopes of the Sigiriya hill to the northern slopes below the plateau of the lion staircase. One of the most striking features of this boulder garden is the way in which almost every rock and boulder had a building or pavilion set upon it. What seem to us today like steps and drains or a honeycomb of holes on the sides or tops of boulders, are in fact the foundations or footings of ancient brick walls and of timber columns and beams. Among the unusual features of the garden are the impluvium of the Cistern Rock', taking its name from a large cistern formed out of massive slabs of granite, and the 'Audience Hall Rock' which has a flattened summit and a large 5-metre long- throne carved out of the living rock. The honeycomb of post-holes and flattened ledges of the 'Preaching Rock' are others. While considerable excavation will have to be done before we can recover the original pathways of the boulder garden, at least two distinct Cobrahood cave, Boulder Garden, Sigiriya, 3rd century B.C., and later. A drip-ledge inscription indicates that this rock- shelter was an early Buddhist monastic residence, while its painted ceiling, dates from the 5th century A.D. Assembly Hall and Ritual Bath, Boulder Garden, Sigiriya, 5th century. markers are provided by two boulder arches' and limestone staircases, as well as various flights of steps and passageways constructed of polished marble blocks and slabs. The vertical drains' cut in the sides of rocks in a few places indicates that, water-courses and controlled water movement formed part of the garden architecture in this area too. The Terraced Gardens The third garden form at Sigiriya, the terraced gardens have been fashioned out of the natural hill at the base of the Sigiriya rock by the construction of a series of rubble-retaining walls, each terrace rising above the other and running in a roughly concentric plan around the rock. The great brick-built staircases with limestone steps traverse the terrace gardens on the west, connecting the pathways of the boulder garden to the precipitous sides of the main Sigiriya rock itself. From here, a covered ambulatory or gallery provides access to the belly of the rock to what is in effect the uppermost terrace, the 'Lion Staircase plateau', with its chambers, buildings and pavilions and the great lion itself. The Mirror Wall The Mirror Wall dates from the fifth century and has been substantially preserved in its original form. Built up from the base of the rock itself with brick masonry, the wall has a highly polished plaster finish, from which it gets its ancient name, the Mirror Wall. The wall encloses a walk or gallery paved with polished marble slabs. The famous Sigiriya paintings are found in a depression high above this gallery. The polished inner surface of the mirror wall contains the Sigiriya Graffiti as described above. The Lion Staircase One of Sigiriya's most dramatic features is its great Lion Staircase, now preserved only in two colossal paws and a mass of brick masonry surrounding the ancient limestone steps Boulder Archway, Sigiriya, 5th century. One of the natural archways in the Boulder Garden. The lion staircase and the palace on the summit, Sigiriya, 5th centuryThe lion staircase was the main gateway to the palace on the summit. Palace, Lion Staircase, Garden and Lake, Sigiriya, 5th centuryA panoramic view of the centre of the Sigiriya complex, with the Terrace and Boulder Garden in the foreground and the lake in the distance(overleaf) 'We saw at Sihigiri the king of lions whose fame and splendour remain spread in the whole world' Having ascended Sigiriya to see what is (there) I fulfilled my mind's desire and saw His Lordship the Lion', The lionso impressive even in its ruined state today, must have afforded a vision of grandeur and majesty when it was intact. Remarkablywe have poems recording the impact of the Lion on ancient visitors to the site. The monstrous Simha - suggestive of the legendary founder of the Sinhalese race towering majestically against the granite cliffbright- coloured, and gazing northwards over a vista that stretches almost hill-less to the horizonmust have presented an awe-inspiring sight for miles around. (H.CP. Bell 1904: 9) We know from the chronicle account of Kasyapa's construction of Sigiriya that the Lion Staircase House was one of the principle features of his plan of the Sigiriya complex. The Lion was in effect the ultimate and solitary gatehouse to the palace on the summit. At the same time it made a major symbolic statement, operating on several levels of meaning, enhancing the power and majesty of royal authority and invoking ritual notions of dynastic origins, the Lion being the mythical ancestor and the royal symbol of the Sri Lankan Kings. The actual structure of the Lion Staircase House itself can be at least partially reconstructed from the evidence still remaining at the site. The paws, the surving masses of brick masonry and the original limestone risers give us a clear idea of the form, scale and materials used in the construction of the Lion: basically a brick masonry structure with its surface moulded fairly realistically in a thick coating of lime plaster. The Lion seems to have been in a crouching position, represented by its paws, head and shoulders projecting from the rock. The exact width and height of the Lion is indicated by cuts and grooves in the rock-face. It is likely that timber posts, beams and lintels were used inside the brick masonry to create the passages for the stairs, the decay of this timber framework leading ultimately to the collapse of a substantial part of the entire structure. The Lion Staircase House stood to a height of fourteen metres. Above this the gently-sloping rockface was utilized once again to erect a gently ascending gallery and staircase, presumably of brick masonry with stone risers. The Palace The summit of the Sigiriya rock is in the form of a stepped plateau with a total extent of more than 1.5 hectares. The palace was the centre of the royal city. Lying abut 180m above the surrounding plain and 360 m above mean sea level at its highest point, it is not only the loftiest and inner-most precinct of the Sigiriya complex, but it is also the geometrical centre of the ancient modular grid on which the plan of Sigiriya is based. The central north-south and east-west axes of the entire complex intersect near the mid-point of the palace area. The earliest surviving palace in Sri Lanka, with its layout and basic ground plan still clearly visible, it provides important comparative data for the study of Asian palace forms. The palace complex divides into three distinct parts: the outer or lower palace occupying the lower eastern part of the summit; the inner or upper palace occupying the high western section, and the palace gardens to the south. The three sectors converge on a large and beautiful rock-cut pool bordered on two sides by a stone-flagged pavement. A marble-paved walk runs down the centre of the complex between the outer and the inner palace, forming an axial north-south corridor. The palace 5th century. on the summit, Sigiriya, A view from the south. Rock Pool on Summit, Sigiriya, 5th centuryThis rock-cut pool was the central feature of the palace gardens on the summit. Sigiriya territory with Buddhist monasteries, village tanks and major iron producing centres. 1. Sigiriya city. 2. Pidurangala monastery. 3. Ramakale monastery. 4Talkote settlement complex. 5. Alakolavava iron-production site. 6. Sigiri Mahavava The Sigiriya Hinterland The archaeology of the Sigiriya complex is not limited to the palace, the gardens and the city, but extends to a large hinterland known in ancient times as the 'Sihagiri Bim', the Sigiri TerritoryRecent archaeological explorations have shown that this area presents a complex archaeological landscape consisting of a large number of rural settlement sites, village tanks, protohistoric cemeteries, major iron-producing centres, and a variety of Buddhist monasteries. The immediate greater Sigiriya area includes suburban settlements outside the city walls and along the Sigiri Oya. A major irrigation network to the south of the Sigiriya rock is formed by the Sigiri Mahavava, a great man-made lake more than eight kilometres in length, and the twelve - kilometre long Vavala canal network. Immediately to the north and south of the city are the ancient fortress of Mapagala, with its 'Cyclopean' walls, dating from the first to the third centuries A.D., and the major monastery complexes of Pidurangala and Ramakale. Recent studies of this remarkable landscape have made it one of the most intensively surveyed archaeo-historical micro-regions in South Asia

INTRODUCTION 1. SIGIRI, ITS HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION 1. THE rugged mass of granite forming the rock of Sigiri(1 Sigiri is in the Inämaluve Köra!é of the Mätalé District, and the road to it branches off from the Kandy—Trincomalee trunk road between its 50th and 51st mile-posts. B 597 ) rises, with unscalable, precipitous sides, to a height of 1,193 feet above mean sea-level—nearly 600 feet above the surrounding plain. In the fifth century, in consequence of a series of violent and brutally cruel deeds which disgraced the domestic life of the princes then ruling Ceylon, this rock suddenly became the focal point of the Island's political life, only to revert to its former obscurity after a brief, though splendid, period of eighteen years. Monumental remains of unusual interest to be seen today on the summit, as well as at the foot of the rock, bear testimony to the royal splendour which was once manifested on or around it. The history relating to Sigiri, as narrated in the chronicles,(2 For the history of Sigiri, as narrated in the chroni- cles, see Cülavathsa (Geiger's translation), chap. 38,) is briefly thus: 2. Dhätusena, who ascended the throne of Anurädhapura in or about 456 A.D., had two sons, one named Moggalläna, born of the anointed queen, and the other, Kassapa, by a consort of lesser rank. He also had a 'charming daughter, who Was as dear to him as his life'. This princess was given in marriage to the sister's son of Dhätusena, who held the office of senäpati (commander-in-chief). Without any fault on her part, she was on one occasion severely whipped on her thighs by her husband. Dhätusena saw her with blood-stained garments and, in his rage at the brutal treatment meted out to his favourite daughter, had the senäpati's mother, his own sister, burnt to death, naked. The senäpati, who now was the aggrieved party, resolved to avenge his mother, and plotted with Kassapa to bring about Dhätusena's downfall. They undermined the loyalty of the people towards their sovereign, seized power, and kept the king a prisoner. The rightful prince, Moggalläna, escaped to India. The senäpati, having persuaded Kassapa that Dhätusena had concealed his treasures for the benefit of the exiled prince, received orders to have the king put to death. Dhätusena thus ended his days by being walled up in a room. 3. Kassapa, t ough he was firmly established on the throne, lived in fear of the day of reckoning— the return of Moggalläna with military aid from India. He, therefore, wished to build for himself a stronghold where he could hold out against adversaries in times of danger; and found Sigiri to be a suit- able place for this purpose. He cleared the land round about the rock which 'was difficult of ascent for human beings', 'surrounded it with a wall and constructed stair-case houses in the form of lions'. It was this last-named detail which gave the rock the name that it bears to this day. 'He collected treasures and kept them well protected and for the (riches) kept by him he set guards in different places. Then he built there a fine palace, worthy to behold, like another Älakamandä, and dwelt there like (the god) Kuvera. (3 Cü!avaphsa, Geiger's translation, Part I, p. 42.) 4. After Kassapa had reigned for eighteen years, Moggalläna returned with an army from India. Kassapa, confident of victory, went out with his own forces to meet Moggalläna on the battlefield; but a trivial incident decided the day against him. Mounted on his elephant, he was manoeuvring for position in the course of the battle; and, coming to a swampy ground, he turned the elephant so as to avoid this obstacle. His army, however, mistook this movement for a retreat, lost their morale, broke ranks and fled in disorder. Kassapa, who found himself almost alone facing his enemies, realized that all was lost and, rather than fall into the hands of his brother, from whom he had no right to expect any mercy, cut his own throat with his dagger, 'raised the knife on high and stuck it in the sheath'. Moggalläna, having regained the throne, took up his residence at the ancient royal seat, Anurädha- pura, for he had no inclination to continue the policy or preserve the works of his brother who had so grievously wronged him and his father. He, therefore, converted the palace on the summit of Sigiri rock into a monastery, but the Buddhist Church itself evidently had no great love for the place, for it is not mentioned afterwards as having had anything to do with religion. 5. About a century after the close of the reign of Moggalläna, Sigiri is again mentioned in the chronicles as the scene of the tragic end of a prince. Samghatissa, who came to the throne in or about 606 A.D., had an adversary in the person of Moggalläna, the general of his predecessor. Due to the treachery of his own general, Sarhghatissa was at last defeated on the battlefield, and fled for his life, accompanied by one of his sons and a faithful minister. In the garb of Buddhist monks, they wended their way to Rohapa; but at Minneri they were recognized and captured by Moggalläna's men. Mog- galläna, on being informed of this, ordered the royal fugitive and his son to be taken to Sigiri and decapitated. The faithful minister was to be sent to him alive. The young prince begged of the executioners to be beheaded first, so that he might be spared the agony of seeing his father's end. Thus, at Sigiri, Samghatissa and his son had to bow their heads before the axe of the executioner. The faithful minister refused to remain alive, and lay prostrate, holding his dead master's feet, so that Moggalläna's men had perforce to cut off his head, too. 1

Editors Senake Bandaranayake Mats Mogren Associate Editors Eva Myrdal-Runebjer Seneviratne Epitawatte Amy de Silva Nilu Abeyaratne Priyantha Karunaratne THE POSTGRADUATE INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF KELANIYA PART I INTRODUCTION 1. Traversing an Archaeological Landscape Senake Bandaranayake 2. Objectives, Methods, Constraints and Perspectives Mats Mogren Appendix I: The Methodology of the 1992 SARCP Pottery Analysis Workshop. Appendix II: 14C-datings PART II ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PREHISTORIC PERIOD 3. Approaches to the Prehistory of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region Gamini Adikari 4. Excavations at Aligala Prehistoric Site Priyantha Karunaratne and Gamini Adikari 5. Excavations at the Sigiri-Potana Cave Complex: A Preliminary Account Gamini Adikari PART III ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE HISTORIC PERIOD 6. The Archaeology of Talkote Mats Mogren Appendix: A Catalogue of Archaeological Sites in the Talkote Area 7. Excavations at Tammannagala Raj Somadeva and Manjula Kasthurisinghe 8. A Brief Report of the Excavation at Ibbankatuva, a Proto and Early Historic Settlement Site Priyantha Karunaratne 9. New Information on Mapagal a W.A. Kumaradasa 10. Dehigaha-ala-kanda (KO . 14) at Alakolavava: An Early Iron Production Site with a Highly Developed Technology Svante Forenius and Rose Solangaarachchi 11. The Eastern Precinct of the Sigiriya Complex Priyantha Karunaratne 12. The Archaeolo gy of Irrigated Agriculture. A Case Study of Vavalavava - Sigiri Maha vava Irrigation System Eva Myrdal-Runebjer PART IV EPIGRAPHY 13. Epigraphy of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region Raj Somadeva Appendix: A catalogue of inscriptions 14. Sigiri Graffiti: New Readings Benille Priyanka PART V ETHNO-ARCHAEOLOGY 15. Premodern Sigiriya Region an Ethno-archaeological Perspective Eva Myrdal-Runebjer 16. Food Procurement: Labour Processes and Environmental Setting Eva Myrdal-Runebjer 17. Hunting, Trapping, Catching and Fishing Eva Myrdal-Runebjer and Anura Yasapala 18. Dwelling and Household: Activity Areas, Tools and Auxiliary Devices Eva Myrdal-Runebjer, Damayanthi Gunawardena, Sudarshani Fernando* 19. The System of Lan and Domestic Measurement Used in Nagalavava Prishantha Gunawardena 20. Plants Used in the Household T.R. Premathilake, S. Epitawatte, Anura Yasapala, Eva Myrdal-Runebjer References for Ethno-archaeology Section Index of Pali, Sanskrit, Sinhala and Tamil Words Project Staff and Management

Relic-Chamber Paintings The use of painted decoration and ritual or didactic representations in association with free-standing architectural monuments is as old as the art of the rock monasteries, and probably predates the use of sculptural detail in architecture. In fact, the separation of rock-shelter or rock-face paintings, on the one hand, from architectural decoration and murals, on the otherie. between rock painting and wall painting is merely a convenient division imposed by us on a unified tradition which made no essential distinction between a cave-temple and one built of brick and plaster. The early rock-shelter residence of the monk, the guha or lena, was the equivalent of the free-standing monastic leaf hut' or pannasala, both of which became in time 'residences' of the Buddha. i.e. the cave-temple and the image house, respectively. The one was in no way different ritually from the other. In the same manner, the garbha grha or womb-chamber of the stupa or dagaba, in which relies of the Buddha were deposited. was the 'cave' par excellence, located at the centre of the *stupa-mountain". These ritual correspondences are clear to us in architectural interpretation but not so obvious in the study of paintings, with the result that the rock paintings often seem very different from the wall paintings. There are at least two reasons for this. The first relates to actual differences in the layout of the paintings in monuments of different types. Thus, in rock shelters or rock-associated structures, the choice and arrangement of the paintings were profoundly affected by the configuration of the rock surface and the available space, while structural monuments had a relatively regularized distribution of wall surface and painted area. The second concerns factors of destruction, where- as historical experience shows-the chances of survival in rock shelters were very much higher than in structural monuments. It is significant that there is virtually no coherent fragment of early wall painting that has survived to any appreciable degree other than the paintings recovered from the excavated relic-chambers of ancient dagabas and the unique example of the Tivanka murals at Polonnaruva. The fact that wall paintings and painted decoration were fairly widely applied in architecture is clear from literary and archaeological evidence. A number of ruined buildings, both at Anuradhapura and Polonnaruva but mostly dating from the Polonnaruva period, show vestiges of painted decoration both internally and externally. This takes the form of flat areas of monochrome colouring and simple linear decoration, often emphasizing or sometimes Pl. 34 Floral detail. From north entrance archway, Lankatilaka temple, Polonnaruva. 12th century (7), (From a copy by D.A.L.. Perera, c.1922, in the National Museum, Colombo) The original painting was on a plaster ground with a brick support. It resembles the vahalkada paintings from Anuradhapura described by Smither replacing moulded architectural detail-as in the case of the ruined palaces at Anuradhapura and Polonnaruva, or royal buildings such as the 'Audience Hall' and the "Mausoleum' at Polonnaruva- as well as much more intricate floral and geometrical motifs of the type seen in the ceiling paintings at Sigiriya, and in the Lankatilaka. "Potgul Vehera and Tivanka shrines at Polonnaruva. We can be fairly certain that many buildings were colourfully painted and much more profusely decorated than is indicated by the bare masonry and stonework which survive today." Bell's description of the Mausoleum' by the side of the lake at Polonnaruva, when it was first discovered, gives us an impression of the use of colour in architecture in a way that we can hardly visualize today: The surface ornamentation is tastefully conceived and has been completed with great care, the lines are true and sharp, the plaster hard and smooth vivid and varied (the) colouring of the entire facades. the main colouring of the walls is in monochrome: A bright blue covers all the broadest spaces, only the pilasters and narrow string courses are picked out in red The dagaha as the principal ritual monument of the Sri Lankan Buddhist tradition must certainly have been a subject of considerable painterly interest. This is clearly borne out by the floral and animal motifs and figures painted on the vahalkadas or highly ornamented frontispieces of almost all the principal dagabas at Anuradhapura. Protected over the centuries by being buried in earth, debris and vegetation, their exposure by early excavators has often led to the destruction of the paintings. Scanty remains of painted decoration, however, can still be seen at the Ruvanvalisaya and the Mirisavati dagabas at Anuradhapura and the Kantaka Cetiya at Mihintale (Fig.19). The frontispieces themselves are of great antiquity and date from the early centuries of the present era. Their sculptural decoration represents the earliest surviving examples of Sri Lankan sculpture in stone, preserving, as we observed earlier, a treatment of the female form that anticipates the art of Sigiriya. The paintings, however, as an carly documentalist, J.G. Smither, rightly observed, belong to the last phase of monumental restoration in the 12th or possibly 13th century. Smither's watercolour copies of the Ruvanvalisaya paintings are still preserved in the archives of the Archaeological Department in Colombo, while his description of the paintings is a detailed account of a method of architectural ornamentation that can rarely be seen today. Other examples of painted ornament from similar contexts are found in the copies in the National Museum (P134) and in recently discovered fragments from the Cultural Triangle excavations at the Jetavana Vihara at Anuradhapura (Fig 36). The Jetavana fragment shows and unusual combination of blue and green tones, as well as several layers of pigment." Fig. 36 Fragment with frieze of hamsas (sacred geese) and lotuses. Vahalkada, Jetavana dagaba, Anuradhapura. 12th century (?). (Drawing by Dayananda Binaragama,1985.) Fig. 37 Male figure and attendants. Relic-chamber drawing, Mihintale. c. 8th century. The principal figure is placed within a circle and centred upon a vertical line bisecting the circle. It has been identified as one of the Lokapalas, the four rulers protecting the world. Many of the motifs seen in these vahalkada paintings, such as dwarf, lion and hamsa figures, show close similarities to forms used in sculptural ornamentation and clearly demonstrate the unity of sculpture and painting. Moreover, the comparison of these vahalkada paintings with the ceiling paintings at Sigiriya shows the continuity as well as the development of decorative concepts and motifs over a period of nearly seven or eight hundred years. This is particularly noticeable in the very similar and, at the same time, very different use of the intricate whorl or volute and the combination of alternating circle or diamond forms. Of course, the best-preserved examples of paintings from dagabas are relic-chamber paintings from Mihintale and Mahiyangana, now removed from their original contexts and housed in the museums at Mihintale and Anuradhapura. The representation in relic-chambers of Jatakas and of the events associated with the life of the historical Buddha is, as we have seen, one of the most ancient practices in Sri Lankan art. It goes back, if the Mahavamsa account can be relied on at this early date, to the 2nd century BC, in the paintings executed in the relic-chamber of the Ruvanvalisaya.S9 In this connection, an interesting expression of the Sri Lankan concern with historical tradition is to be found in the 18th-century € Mahavamsa' panels at Dambulla, where we have an actual painting of the Ruvanvalisaya with its relic-chambers showing the Vessantara Jataka and other murals. The Mihintale and Mahiyangana paintings are archaeological discoveries which confirm the existence of these traditions in the Late Anuradhapura and Polonnaruva periods. The Mihintale relic-chamber was discovered by Paranavitana in his excavations of a dagaba to the east of the Kantaka Cetiya at Mihintale.60 As with all relic chambers, this was one of several — usually three — compartments, located one above the other in the centre of a solid mass of brick masonry which forms the dome and basal terraces of the dagaba. The chambers were embedded in the masonry and totally inaccessible. They served as repositories for the relics, which signified the presence of the Buddha within the monument. They also formed part of the cosmological symbolism associated with the dagaba. The chambers seem to have represented the three worlds the heavens, the earth and the underworld — of Buddhist cosmology, centred around the cosmic mountain, Mount Meru. The paintings, therefore, though never actually viewed once the monument was completed, were part of the ritual apparatus that activated the symbolic meaning of the chambers and their contents — as Paranavitana expresses it, they served 'purposes that may be called magical' .61 The paintings at Mihintale, dated by associated palaeographic evidence to the 8th century, are only red-and-black line-drawings or painters' sketches, even retaining the geometrical outlines that guided the composition. They are intentionally unfinished, perhaps for reasons of economy or time, but were obviously considered adequate for the ritual functions which they performed. The paintings depict Lokapalas, the four rulers protecting the world. Each occupies the Fig. 38 Crowned male figures, probably with male and female attendants, seated amidst clouds. Relic-chamber drawing, Mihintale. c. 8th century. If the identification of the principal figures as Lokapalas is correct, the figure to the left would represent the central figure in this composition.

BENILLE PRIYANKA This article is a continuation of an earlier paper on the same subject which appeared in The Settlement Archaeology of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region (Bandaranayake 1990). In the former article 53 Sigiri Graffiti, of which 49 were deci phered for the first time, were published with texts and trans­ lations. The present article brings to light texts and translations of yet another 97 Sigiri Graffiti, hitherto unread. Among these, 83 belong to the Anuradhapura period and 14 to the Polonnaruva and Dambadeniya periods. The purpose of this article is only to present the author’s findings. It is in no way a comprehensive study. An analysis based on the grammar, epigraphy and etymology of the graf­ fiti has to be studied at a later stage. The present endeavour is to decipher as many of the unread graffiti as possible be­ fore undertaking a linguistic study. A few brief remarks on the new collection of Sigiri Graf­ fiti presented in this article are given below. No. 55. is a song attributable to the 10th century AD. (Late Anuradhapura Period). The writer has commenced the record by mentioning ‘Seneviradun Vahansege', which re­ veals that he was a general of King Sena’s army. The song concludes with mention of ‘Senrajäli kit, which is interprete- d interpreted that the writer’s name was Kit (Kirti) who served King Sena. No. 73. suggests that some writers considered very sim­ple records as gi and briefly mentions that they saw the ‘golden lady in the cave’. ‘Mapattalaviya janavi Aboya ga gi/Gal beyadhi ranavana dutuvamo me gi-badmo' No. 71. "Sarasavi Bälu Pansilu Agano bälu" In this poem we come across another interpretation for the ladies in the paintings. The writer of this record has viewed the paintings as depicting ‘Sarasavi’ (Sri Kantha) and ‘Pansilu’. It may be noted that among the 685 graffiti deciphered by Paranavitana, there were a number of poems in which their writers give different interpretations to the ladies in the paintings. The above poem adds to this collection of inter­ pret- ations. Unlike the poetic graffiti which are versified, another simpie category of records can be identified too. They are short sentences written by various visitors recording their visit. No. 67 mentions simply that the writer is paying a visit to the great lion in the Sigiri rock. ‘Sri! Mihi Sihimiyan Galamen Yanne' No. 72 mentions that the writer came to Sigiriya to record news on the Mirror Wall. He also mentions that he saw the ‘golden lady in the cave’. "Puvat ley a yannat amo, Sigiri bedahi ranvan katava bälumo' No. 69 is another short record. It says that the writer did not compose and record a poem (gz) because many people before him had written songs on the Mirror Wall. "Kamaravulu Budmit pa ma Bomi! GT boho jana liyen nolTmT A considerable number of such short records which are not poems still await deciphering. On the other hand, very brief records which demonstrate more poetic expression have been deciphered and presented in this article. They cannot be considered mere prose sen­ tences. Some examples are : No. 75. ‘Topa kima bahakaya pavasata me sihi srT padaye * No. 79. ‘Svasti! Pahandak kadabitve he kat nevandute balu’ No. 76. ‘Sihiraka dev ad parijima siri kadvure asuvi kopaya’ No. 74. "Svasti! Sohaduk nivada avuda pirivarni gT tivara giya ’ No. 71. "Sarasavi balu pansilu agano balu’ The majority of the graffiti appearing in Paranavitana’s publication {Sigiri Graffiti), are relatively longer than the examples given above. We do not know whether Paranavitana had been selective in deciphering the longer graffiti, or whether he read the ones which conform to the specific prosody he had been discussing in his book. In addition to the examples quoted above, the collection of graffiti presented here contains a number of songs, eg. Nos. 55,64, 66, 80, 100, 101, 102, 103 which conform both by length and poetic expression to the pattern of poems gen­ erally found on the Mirror Wall. Other than the above, there are 11 records which are incomplete poems. Five other records mention only the name of the writer. All the exam­ ples quoted above belong to the Late Anuradhapura Period (circa 8th century AD. - 10th century AD.). A number of records belonging to the Polonnaruva and Dambadeniya Periods (circa 11th century AD. - 13th century AD.) have also been deciphered here. Among them No. 99. is a record which had been written in the 25th regnal year of King Parakramabahu. No. 56. had been written in the 10th year of ‘Kalinga Chakravarti'. There is another record which had been written in the 15th year of ‘ Vathimi Nakka Siva\ interpreted ‘Nakka Siva’ (name), whose title was ‘ Vathimi' (treasurer). As shown below, the Mirror Wall is marked with yard numbers. The following examples will illustrate the identi­ fication of the graffiti using the respective measurements (see fig. 14:2 and 14:3). Example: Identification of Graffiti A. Between yard Nos. 10 and 11. x:5"/y:50”. Horizontal distance from the vertical lines demarcating yard No. 10. x is always read from the lesser yard No. y:50" the vertical distance from ground level. Identification of Graffiti B. Below yard No. 11 .x:0"/y:40". x:0" the vertical line yard No.l1. y:40" the vertical distance from ground level Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:28”/y:70”. Between yard Nos. 29 and 30. Four lines. The first is 11 l/2in., the second 10 l/2in., the third 10 in. and the fourth l in. in length. The script is of the 12th century. Average height of the letters is about 1 in. Text : › 1.ශ්‍රී මායාගෙහි සාහිතිය රාජො ඈ 2.දුරු කාවා කොනුර ගලහි 3.විහි රතපුලැ කොටැ ලී 4.වී Text 1. Sri māyāgehi sāhitiya rajo ä 2. duru kākā konura galahi 3. vihi ratapulä Kota li 4. vi Translation : Sri! I am Konura, the Chief poet of the Coun­cil of the heir to the throne ((māyā – the maha ādipada)I wrote this for the red lotus who lives on the Rock. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:15 l/2”/y:84". Between yard Nos. 63 and 64. Three lines. The first is 22in., the sec­ond 71 in. and the third 23 l/2in. in length. The script is of the 10th century. Average height of the letters is about 2in. Text 1.සෙනෙවිරදුන් වහසෙගෙ 2.එදැක අගනටප සිහිවන හිතිනි වෙය සෙනෙ එහි රජණන් වන් රන්වනිහන් ඒහි ඒබස් රස ජනනෙ ගී කෙ වලින් නොලියෙනය් 3.සෙන්රජැලි කිත් රැව රසගා ලි Text 1.Seneviradun Vahasege 2.Edäka aganatapa sihivana hitini veya sene ehi rajanan van ranvanihan ehi rasa janane gī kevalin no liyeneyi 3. Senrajäli Kit ruva rasaga lī Translation : This is by the Honourable General (of the king’s army). These golden ladies are like queens who in­ spire love in our hearts. When they speak such beautiful words, who can resist writing a poem ? I am Kit (Kirti) who serves King Sena. I composed this poem in appreciation of the painting on the Rock. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:57/y:56". Between yard Nos. 6 and 7. Six lines. The first is 12in., the second 12in., the third 12 l/2in., the fourth 12 l/2in., the fifth 11 l/2in. and the sixth 3in. in length. The script can be assigned to the 12th century. Average height of the letters is about 1 in. Text : 1.කාලිංඟ වක්‍රවන්ති සුවාමින් 2.වහන්සෙ දස වනුයේ ශ්‍රී පාදා 3.සව වසනා මාපහ නකරෙ පාලක 4.මි ... පැමැණ.. බලා ගියෙ 5.රදගෙයි සෙද පියොවියන් බලා ගියෙ 6.නියායි. Text 1. Kālinga cakravatti suvāmin 2. vahanse dasa vanuye srī pādā 3. sava vasana māpaha nakare pālaka 4. mi ... pämina .... balā giye 5. radageyi seda piyoviyan balā giye 6. niyāyi Translation : (I) visited this place in the 1 Oth regnal year of my Lord, King Kalinga Chakravarti. I am a Governor of a city. I serve the King. 1 saw the lovable ladies of this court. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:18"/y:66". Between yard Nos. 17 and 18. Two lines. The first is 10 l/2in. and the second 11 l/2in. in length. The script is of the 11th century. Average height of letters is about 3/4in. Text 1.විසිවනු බැගැ නැඟී කැටපත් මහරු පවු 2.හැමැ දෙනු ව හසෙ පුළ කත්ති ලීමි. Text 1. Visivanu Bagä nägī kätapat maharu pav 2. häm ä denu vaha se pula Kitti līmi Translation : I am Pula Kitti. I visited the Mirror Wall in the month of Bak in the twentieth regnal year of the King. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:87y:9 3/4". Between yard Nos. 8 and 9. Two lines. The first is 13in. and the second 9 3/4in. in length. The script is attributable to the 11th cen­tury. Average height of the letters is about 1 in. Text 1.මෙ බලා ගියෙමො සයැ අද් බල 2.යාමි මා නියම් කෙතාමි Text 1. Mebalā giyemo sayä ad bala 2. yāmi māniyam ketāmi Translation : We visited this place. (We say) Saya athbalaya and Maha niyam ketā. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:20.5'7y:68". Between yard Nos. 26 and 27. Two lines. The first is 4in. and the second 3 3/4in. in length. The script is of the 12th century. Average height of the letters is about l/4in. Text 1. බෙනර් වැහි ......වඩ්ගුර 2. සුවයාමි (නැ)ග ලිමි Text 1. Benar vähi.... vadgura 2. Suvayāmi (nä)ga līmi Translation: I am Suvayā the Master carpenter (vadgura) who lives at Benara. I climbed (up here) and wrote this. Text 1. ජෙටෙ බස් වජ් හිණිගෙර් පාලයහයාමි 2. බැලීමි Text 1. Jete bas vaj hiniger pālayaha yāmi 2. bälīmi Translation : 1 am Hiniger Pāia, the jeta bas vaj (a title). I saw this place. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:7'/y:6". Between yard Nos. 6 and 7. One line which is l0in. in length. The script is of the 12th century. Average height of letters is about 1 in. Text 1. සාපෙලවක වත්කැමි බලා ගැයැ Text 1. Sāpelavaka Vatkämi balā giyä Translation : I am sā pelavaka Vatkämi, who visited this. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:8”/y:67". Between yard Nos. 24 and 25. Two lines. The first is 8in. and the second 6in. in length. The script is attributable to the 12th century. Average height of the letters is about l in. Text 1 සණා පසල් දෙවැ 2. වමහ... Text 1. Sanā pasal deva 2. Vamaha….. Translation : I am Sanā Pasal Devä Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:9'/y:73". Between yard Nos. 2 and 28. Three lines. The first is 5 l/2in., the second 6in. and the third 1 l/2in. in length. The script is attributable to the 11th century. Average height of the letters is about 1 in. Record is an incomplete song. Text 1 මහමැහි පියණා මි 2.තා මිය නෙ දැකැ 3. පත Text 1. Mahamähi piyanāmi 2. tā miya ne däkä 3. pata Translation : I am Maha Mahi Piyana. Seeing you dying (incomplete poem). Text 1 දුරුවැ යැනා කතුන්ගෙ වග රුහිසිලියාසෙ 2.බැලි ති සය නිවෙ දාකුත් දො සොහි ලියා බසිමි. Text 1. Duruvä yänā katunge vaga ruhisiliyāse 2. bäli tā say a nive dākut do sogi liyā basimi Translation : I saw the beauty of these damsels who are fading away. I have found consolation for my grief. Yet I write this sad poem and climb down. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:0'7y:21". Below yard No. 11. One line which is 4in. long. The script is attributable to the 9th century. Average height of the letters is about 1/4 in. Text 1.ඇජ්ගිරි වෙහෙරින් ආ දළ් බතිමි ලිතිමි. Text 1. Äjgiri veherin ā dal batimi litimi Translation : I who wrote this am Dal Bati who came from Athgiri Vihara. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:30"/y:32.5". Between yard Nos. 27 and 28. Three lines. The first is 4in., the second 7in. and the third 4.5in in length. The script can be dated to the 10th century. Average height of the letters is about 1/4 in. Text 1. මන ගන්න වරණෙනන තොප 2. හන්දුනෙනු කළා සිර්මැලියෙ ගතා යෙහෙලියි 3. කි ඒනු වනිද් නිල සිවනු ගී Text 1. Managanna varanenana topa 2. hadunenu kala sirmäliye gatā yeheliyi 3. Kienu vanid nila sivanu gī Translation : I recognized you from your attractive complexion (colour). Your body is tender. O my friend ! This is a song by the merchant (vanid) Neela Siva. Position : On the Mirror Wall, x: 1l"/y:7.5". Between yard Nos. 37 and 38. One line which is 6in. in length. The script is attributable to the 9th century. Average height of the let­ ters is about l/4in. Text 1. ශ්‍රී මිහි සිහිමියන් බලමෙන් යන්නෙ Text 1. Sri mihi sihimiyan balamen yanne Translation : Sri! We look at the great lion as we go along. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:30"/y:66.5". Between yard Nos. 47 and 48. One line which is 4in. in length. The script is attributable to the 8th century. Average height of the let­ ters is about l/8in. Text 1. ස්වස්ති බොදුර් වමයැ අයුත මමයි බැලි. Text 1. Svasti! Bodur vamayä ayuta mamayi baäli Translation : Hail ! I am Bodur. I have come to visit this place. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:13.57y:65". Between yard Nos. 47 and 48. One line which is 64.5in. long. The script is attributable to the 9th century. Average height of the letters is about l/4in. Text 1. කාමරවුලු බුද්මිත් පා ම බොමි ගී බොහො ජනා ලීයෙන් නොලීමි. . Text 1. Kamaravulu Budmit pā mabomi gī boho janā līyen nolīmi Translation : I am Maha Bo from the bud mit pā (temple or mansion) at Kamaravulu. Since many have written poems, I do not write one. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:3”/y:19.5”. Between yard Nos. 30 and 31. One line which is 8in. in length. The script is attributable to the 9th century. Average height of the let­ ters is about l/2in. The song is incomplete. Text 1.කොටියාල බතියුනා ගී ස්වස්ති බැලුමො නැගැ Text 1. Kotiyāla batiyuna gī Svasti balumo nagä Translation : This is the song of Batiyunā from Kotiyāla. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:20"/y:32”. Between yard Nos. 12 and 13. Two lines. The first is 5.5in. and the second 3.5in. in length. The script is attributable to the 10th cen­ tury. Average height of the letters is about l/2in. Text 1. සරසවි බැලු පන්සිලු 2.අගනො බැලූ Text 1. Sarasavi bälu pansilu 2. agano bälu Translation : We saw the ladies who resemble Sarasvati. They seem the work of Pansilu (Vishvakarma). Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:327y:23”. On yard No. 14. One line which is 12in. in length. The script is attribut­ able to the 9th century. Average height of the letters is about 1/4 in. Text 1. පුවත් ලෙයා යන්නට් ආමො සිහිගිරි බෙදහි රන්වන් කතව බැලුමො Text 1. Puvat leyā yannat āmo Sihigiri bedahi ranvan katava bälumo Translation : We came to record the information (that) we saw the golden damsels in the Sigiri cave. Position : On the Mirror Wall.x:3l”/y:28.5". Between yard Nos. 13 and 14. One line which is Ilin, in length. The script is attributable to the 9th century. Average height of the let­ ters is about l/8in. Text 1. ම පත්තලාවිය ජනවි අබොය ගැ ගී ගල් බෙයද්හි රනවන දුටුවමො මෙ ගී බද්මො Text 1. Ma pattalāviya janavi Aboya gä gī gal beyadhi ranavana dutuvamo me gī badmo Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:27.5’7y:22.5". Between yard Nos 12 and 13. One line which is 5in. long. The script is attributable to the 9th century. Average height of the let­ters is about l/8in. Text 1. ස්වස්ති සොහදුක් නිවද අවුද පිරිවිර්නි ගි තිවර ගිය Text 1. Svasti! Sohaduk nivada avuda pirivimi gitivara giya Translation : Hail ! Our company has arrived. We leave this song to comfort you in your grief. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:32"/y:22.5". Between yard Nos. 28 and 29. Two lines. The first is 3in. and the second 1/ 2in. in length. The script is attributable to the 8th century. Average height of the letters is about l/8in. Text 1. තොපැ කිම බහකය පවසන මෙ සිහි 2. ශ්‍රී පාදයෙ Text 1. Topä kima bahakaya pavasata me sihi 2. Srī padaye. Translation : What do you keep murmuring at the feet of this majestic Lion. Position : On the Mirror Wall. x:0"/y:24". On yard No. 31. One line which is 7.5in. in length. The script is attributable to the 9th century. Average height of the letters is about 1/ 16in. Text 1. සිහිරක දෙවි අද් පරිජිම සිරි 2. කද්වරෙ අසුවි කොපයැ Text 1. Sihiraka dev ad parijima 2. Siri kadvure asuvi kopaya Translation : You who are caught in this jail are very angry. You must keep your proper senses (stay calm) now and in the future.

THE ROCK AND WALL IPAINTINGS OF SRI LANKA The evolution of a pictorial tradition Prehistoric Art 07 Early Buddhist Rock Monasteries 11 Classic and Late Classic Styles 13 The Gampola and Kotte periods 15 The Kandyan and Southern Schools 17 Transitional Styles of the Modem period 19 Context and Method 22 Sri Lanka has a long and rich tradition of rock and wall painting, extending possibly from prehistoric times, and at least from the 2nd or 3rd century BC, to the 20th century. The great majority of these paintings are found in Buddhist contexts — in monasteries and temples, many of them established hundreds of years ago. Historical chronicles record the use of pictorial representations in the relic­ chambers of Buddhist stupas, in monastic residences, and in architectural drawings, as early as the 2nd century BC. Fragmentary remains of early paintings are known from a number of ancient archaeological sites, while a great cycle of 18th-and 19th-century murals can be seen in many urban and rural temples, still forming part of a living religious tradition. Secular paintings, on the other hand, are relatively rare though not entirely unknown. It is significant that the earliest securely dated paintings that have been preserved are the well-known female figures from the 5th-century palace complex at Sigiriya. We know little of the more ephemeral forms of secular art and painted decoration, although the application of polychrome decorative detail to personal and domestic articles and the use of painted textiles are familiar practices, well-documented from Late Historical times. Paintings and painted sculpture from ritual and ceremonial contexts associated with Buddhism or related cults — manuscript illustrations, painted cloth or paper hangings and scrolls, flags and banners, illustrative and decorative panels on ceremonial arches erected during the annual festival of Vesak? an array of wooden mask forms, paintings of astral deities associated with the Bali rituals2 — all reflect a many-faceted, traditional world of colour, which we perceive today only in an isolated and fragmented way. The most ancient examples of an art form which transcends — because, at least in essence, it predates — the separation of religious and secular are the paintings and ‘engravings’ in a primitive style, found in ancient rock shelters. Some of these may well be of prehistoric origin, while others are clearly of more recent date and seem to have been produced by the forest-dwelling Vadda peoples, who like their hunter-gatherer ancestors of prehistoric times and other similar rock-art-producing sewhere, used these shelters as seasonal dwellings. However rich these varied contexts, and however important they may be for historians, archaeologists and ethnographers, it is in the rock and wall paintings of the historical period that we find a substantive and interconnected body of artistic material, which allows us to examine and delineate a distinctively Sri Lankan tradition, with its own internal history of continuity and development. If we set apart the ‘primitive’ rock-shelter paintings and graffiti associated with the prehistoric and the Vadda peoples, it is possible to subsume the main body of Sri Lankan rock and wall paintings in three distinct but related groups: the fragmentary paintings of the Early and Middle Historical periods, the murals of the Kandyan school and those of the Southern or maritime tradition. The first dates from around the 5th to the 13th century, while the others belong to the last phase of the Late Historical period in the 18th and 19th centuries. Figure 1 presents in diagrammatic form the chronology of these developments and their relationship to other aspects of the Sri Lankan pictorial tradition. The schools of Sri Lankan mural painting that we encounter in historical times form the principal concern of this book. The pictures reproduced here have been selected to illustrate the thematic range, compositional methods and stylistic variety displayed in these wall paintings, as well as their historical evolution and functional context. Prehistoric Art For the archaeologist, concerned with the reconstruction of the patterns and processes of the past from its fragmentary material remains, one of the most elusive dimensions of human behaviour is ancient man’s use of colour for decoration, ritual or imaginative expression. Pigment, which is usually the material basis of colour, is not only the most fragile of artefacts, but is also doubly vulnerable, depending as it often does on equally fragile and perishable materials for its support. The existence, therefore, of ancient paintings anywhere and from any period is always a rare phenomenon, astonishing not only by virtue of their artistic character and the insight they provide into the imaginative and conceptual world of the past, but also for the sheer feat of survival. When that art relates to prehistoric times, the chances of survival are even more remote. Unlike with the art of historical communities, which are often linked with their modern successors, in prehistory we are faced with much broader time-scales and much greater discontinuities in social and cultural evolution It is surprising, therefore, that we know as much as we do about the art of prehistoric man in many different parts of the world (as a result of archaeological investigations and discoveries, and through ethnological analogies with the art of communities which still preserve, or preserved until recent times, a prehistoric mode of existence). Sri Lanka shares in this general experience, if only in a limited way. The early rock art and the associated lifestyle of the Vaddas make a tangible contribution to our understanding of artistic activity in prehistoric times, even though we know hardly more about the paintings themselves than that they are extremely rare and of uncertain date and origin. The study of this prehistoric art, while lagging behind prehistoric research in general, goes back to the turn of the century. The pioneer interest in the subject was shown by the archaeologist H.C.P. Bell3 and the ethnologists, Charles and Brenda Seligmann, who produced the classic study of the Vaddas.4 The Seligmanns were also amongst the first to investigate the connections between the basically stone-age way of life of the Vaddas, on the one hand, and prehistoric man in Sri Lanka, on the other, and to draw attention to the rock shelters occupied both by prehistoric man and the Vaddas and to the rock art found in those shelters. Subsequent work on the subject has been more or less limited to brief reports, notably the observations made by John Still on paintings in the Anuradhapura district5 and to P.E.P. Deraniyagala’s notes on a number of rock-shelter paintings and engravings at sites in the southeast and north-central regions.6 There are altogether about thirty-three cave and rock­ shelter sites at which paintings and graffiti have been recorded.7 They contain three basic types of rock art, as described by Deraniyagala: monochrome silhouettes, polychrome paintings and incised representations. The ‘artists’ have employed white or coloured clays, kaolin and ash, or have just bruised the surface of the rock in a primitive form of engraving. Line or ‘stick’ figures, thicker finger drawings and smears, portray stylized animal forms, hunting figures holding bows and arrows, men riding on animals, and geometrical or symbolic motifs. Some forms are highly imaginative or symbolized renderings in which the identification of subject matter is dependent on interpretation. Others are clearly influenced by more representational concepts, such as a man riding a horse or two human figures framed within a rectangle. The colours used are, as we might expect, earth colours — ash grey, light-brown or white, dull-red or, occasionally, a pale orange colour from ferruginous clay. Fig. 2 Prehistoric’ or Vadda rock-art sites. (After Nandadeva 1985.) Although similar in character and in the contexts in which they are found to the much more extensive and well-documented rock art of Central India,8 there is a considerable degree of uncertainty regarding the date and authorship of the Sri Lankan paintings. None of the examples has been recovered from excavated or stratigraphically related contexts nor dated by any objective method. Their ascription to the prehistoric period — or, more accurately, their classification as paintings and engravings of a ‘prehistoric type’— has been on a stylistic and locational basis. In many instances, it is not even clear whether these examples are nearly contemporary graffiti, produced by the Vaddas or other people frequenting these areas, or the productions of fore st-dwellers in historical rather than prehistoric times. This is not to say, of course, that their authenticity as an organic rock-shelter art is in doubt. On the contrary, their stylistic character and technique, and the clear correspondence they bear to rock art in India and elsewhere, confirm beyond question the fact that they represent the spirit if not the actual form of the earliest manifestation of pictorial art in Sri Lanka. We are nowhere closer to the art of the prehistoric period than in the handful of rock-shelter paintings and engravings that has so far been discovered and documented. Other sources that recall the colours and images of this prehistoric world, such as brand marks on cattle9 or the brightly coloured animal and demonic masks associated with shamanistic rituals and ritualised theatre,10 or even the painted and incised designs on clay grain-storage bins (bihi citra)^ often bear unmistakable echoes of the style and imagery of the primitive rock-shelter paintings. In the much broader if still rather grey picture of Sri Lanka’s pre- and protohistoric past that is emerging today, as a result of the archaeological research of the last two decades, the early art of the rock shelters provides a bright if elusive image of the imaginative world of prehistoric Sri Lankan man. Fig. 3 •Prehistoric’ or Vadda rock art. Kadurupokuna, near Mahalenama. (After Deraniyagala. ASCAR 1957.) Fig. 4 ‘Prehistoric’ or Vadda rock art. Ganegama. (From a photograph, ASCAR 1957.) Fig. 5 ‘Prehistoric’ or Vadda rock art. Komarika-galge. (From a photograph, SZ (2)1, 1951.) Early Buddhist Rock Monasteries If the rock-shelter paintings constitute, at least typologically, the art of the hunter-gatherers of the prehistoric epoch, and the mask and bihi paintings represent that of the early agriculturalists, the paintings of the historical period are a product of the great transformation that Sri Lankan society and culture underwent in the last few centuries BC: a leap from preliterate protohistory to the beginnings of literate civilization, with the institutional, technological and cultural developments that were part and parcel of that transformation. Thus the paintings of the historical period have little connection with the rock art of the previous epoch, except for the fact that the rock shelters used by the prehistoric hunting peoples were adapted by the early Buddhist monastic communities as monastic dwellings. These early rock-shelter residences, and their successors, became the most enduring monuments of Sri Lankan ‘architecture’ and thereby one of the main repositories of extant historical paintings. As we may still observe at a number of sites, the Buddhist monks and builders developed a technique of deepening a rock shelter or cave by ‘peeling off’ the weathered surface and striated layers of the rock to form a deep cavity or declivity below a large natural boulder or projecting cliff­ face. The cavity thus formed was further protected by a deeply incised groove or drip-ledge, which marked the upper limits of the peeled surface. This drip-ledge quite effectively prevented rainwater flowing down the sides of the boulder or cliff, into the depression. The depression or cave, in turn, was enclosed and enlarged by the addition of frontal screen walls — originally made of mud and wattle or rubble, later of brick or stone masonry — and was surmounted by a lean-to roof to form a ‘cave-dwelling’ or later a ‘cave-shrine’. The rock-face was then plastered and the plastered surface, including the internal walls, was finally covered with paintings. The dates of the earliest of these rock-shelter monasteries are firmly established by the existence of donatory inscriptions, usually located just below the drip­ ledge. Familiarly known as the ‘Brahmi’ inscriptions, on account of the Indian alphabet they use, they are written in the local proto-Sinhala language. Nearly three thousand such inscriptions, dating between the 3rd century BC and the 1st century AD, have been recorded. The rock-shelter and walled-in-extension concept maintained an extraordinary history of continuity in the Sri Lankan tradition. Many of the sites established at the beginning of the Early Historical period were occupied through Middle Historical Times, Although they were generally Converted into in to shrines rather than dwellings; i.e. with a ritual rather than a residential function. Many of these were also restored or refurbished in the Later Historical period and especially during Kandyan times in the 17th and 18th centuries. Some of the most famous sites associated with the late-period murals, such as Dambulla or Mulkirigala, have a history covering two thousand years of occupation or repeated restorations. The rock shrines at Mulkirigala were established as monastic dwellings in the period of the Brahmi inscriptions. They are known to have contained murals in the early 18th century, and were repainted in the late 18th and then again in the mid-19th century.12 Similarly, the rock temples at Dambulla13 belong to a group of more than seventy such shelters used by one of the largest monastic communities of the early period. They still bear the donatory inscriptions of the period BC, and contain fragments of painting belonging to the Middle Historical period and sculpture and epigraphical records of the 12th century. The four main shrines were completely restored in the 18th century and a fifth in the early years of the 20th. Recent excavations at Sigiriya reveal a series of developments extending from the 2nd or 3rd century BC to the 12th or 13th century.14 Brahmi inscriptions, periodic extensions of drip-ledges and deepening of rock shelters, successive layers of plaster and painting and at least five or six reconstructions of the walled extensions and the internal partitions, are all represented in the archaeological record. Elsewhere, archaeological investigations have revealed repeated occupation of rock shelters in both prehistoric and historic times.15 Fig. 8 Early Buddhist rock-shelter residence. Cave 9 (‘Cobrahood Cave’), Sigiriya. c. 3rd-2nd century BC. A Brahmi donatory inscription beneath the drip-ledge establishes the date of the original shelter. Ceiling paintings from the 5th century AD indicate the continuing occupation of the cave in later times. Classic and Late Classic Styles The patterns of development seen in the evolution of the rock monasteries and shrines — such as the formation of an indigenous Sri Lankan tradition linked with, but distinct from, that of the Indian subcontinent, and the continuity and reinterpretation of that tradition through a long historical trajectory — are equally applicable to other fields of cultural activity such as painting and sculpture. The earliest paintings that accompanied the formation of a Sri Lankan Buddhist architecture are no longer extant. Literary and epigraphic records, however, show an active propagation of the painter s art during the remarkable cultural efflorescence of the Early Historical period. Stone relief sculptures from stelae of the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, associated with the early stupas, anticipate the art of Sigiriya and the paintings of the Middle Historical period, and give us some idea of the stylistic continuity that must have prevailed between the two epochs. It is in the transitional period of the 5th century at Sigiriya that the Sri Lankan pictorial tradition actually comes into view. By this time — keeping well in step with the most advanced developments on the subcontinent — there has already evolved in Sri Lanka a fully articulated and mature school of painting displaying what we may call a classic style. Judging by the affinities this has with the sculptural representations of an earlier phase and with the related history of architecture, the genesis of this style must date to at least the early centuries of the present era. Characteristic of this classic style are compositions in which the human figure is dominant and in which both the male and female form is rendered in a highly refined, sensitive but idealized naturalism. Each figure is invested with an individual character, while idealized notions of the perfection of the human form dominate the individual ‘portrait’. Personal ornament and decorative motifs are important but always relegated to a subordinate and supportive role, whilst repetition, when it occurs, is usually mitigated by the individualized treatment of each subject or motif. Due as much to a freak of nature as of history, the well-known paintings of celestial nymphs in a depression in the great central rock of the 5th-century palace-city of Sigiriya are not only the most outstanding but also the best-preserved and earliest datable examples of the classic style. What we see here are several ideal female figures, which are at the same time portraits depicting individuals of different ages, physical types and personalities. After Sigiriya we can trace this style, and variations and developments of it, through a period of nearly eight hundred years by studying fragments and traces of paintings at nearly thirty archaeologial sites distributed throughout the country. The paucity of remains at most of these sites does not allow us to make anything more than broad generalizations about the ‘schools’ or ‘ateliers’ that seem to constitute the spectrum of the Sri Lankan tradition. Significant patterns of similarity and differentiation are noticeable, however, between the fairly well-defined characteristics of the school of Sigiriya — which seems to have continued here beyond the 5th century — and the ateliers represented, if only marginally, at other sites not so far removed in date from the 5th century, such as Kandalama16 (Pl.19) and Gonagolla17 (Pls.20, 21). Both these sites, like most others of this period, are rock-shelter residences or shrines. The limited nature of the examples that have survived does not allow us to speculate whether the stylistic variations we observe are a result of differences in painterly treatment, subject matter and mood or regional and chronological factors. Again, from a somewhat later period, the paintings at Pulligoda18 (Pls.23-25) and the elaborate composition at Hindagala19 (Pl.26) show stylistic developments which are not only different from each other but are also intermediate between Sigiriya and the later paintings of Polonnaruva. Fig. 9 Torso of female deity. Provenance unknown. 5th-7th century AD. Now in the Archaeological Museum. Anuradhapura. This dolomite sculpture has been assigned to the Middle Historical period but represents a treatment of the female form that goes back to at least the 2nd-4th century AD. Fig. 10 Brahmas and devas in a celestial palace. Fragmentary painting. Vijjadhara Guha, Uttararama (Gal Vihara), Polonnaruva. Last quarter of the 12th century. (After Dhanapala 1957.) The culmination of this development is the late classic style of Polonnaruva. The 12th-century Polonnaruva murals are in a high style of great elegance and richness of treatment. Descended from Pulligoda and Hindagala in their treatment of form and volume and their complexity of composition, they are executed in a much more controlled and deliberate manner than the paintings at Sigiriya. Badly faded or extremely fragmentary though most of them are, we can see that the direct and sturdier style of Sigiriya has now been replaced by a much softer and more dissolved sense of form. Also, unlike the pre-12th-century epoch, which is almost entirely restricted to rock paintings, vestigial remains and traces of murals are found in a number of brick-built shrines at Polonnaruva, most of them dating from the latter half of the 12th century. The most extensive of these remains are those at the Tivanka temple (Pls.33, 35-42,45); while some of the most eloquent expressions of the Polonnaruva school are from an excavated rock-shrine, the Gal Vihara (Pls.43,44). The Tivanka murals are important in many respects. Although in a bad state of preservation, they are the only surviving examples of an at least partially complete cycle of paintings from the early period. Moreover, the Tivanka itself is the only painted temple or image-house of that epoch in which we may observe the organization and disposition of the murals and the utilization of wall space. What is most significant is that the arrangement of the wall paintings in large panel compositions or long successive bands or ‘registers’ and the choice of subject matter — such as stories from the life of the historical Buddha or the Jataka or ‘Birth' stories — are similar to what we find in the late-period murals of the 18th and 19th centuries. Moreover, the Tivanka paintings display several stylistic variations, including the grand manner of the late classic style of the 12th century and. at the opposite end of the spectrum, a sub-classic and a post-classic style, probably dating from the 13th century. In considering the entire body of Sri Lankan painting, from the classic style of the 5th century to the post-classic styles of the 13th, we encounter an astonishing range of stylistic variation,as well as clear genealogical relationships. Thus we move from the hieratic geometry of Kandalama and the fresh exuberance of Sigiriya to the elegance and complexity of the Gal Vihara and the illustrational directness of the narrative registers of the Tivanka temple. At the same time, tenuous but clearly discernible links exist between these fragmentary images of a tradition which — within the parameters of the surviving examples alone — has a chronological range of nearly eight hundred years, and a previous history which is probably just as long. The Gampola and Kotte Periods The 13th century marks a watershed in Sri Lankan history. The most visible manifestation of the changes that took place at this time was the shift in the main centres of political, economic and cultural activity from the dry zone plains of the north-central and eastern regions to the wet lowlands of the southwest and the central highlands. A significant development was the decentralization of political authority and, therefore, of patronage, resulting in the disappearance of the monumental complexes and the dissolution of the monumental style that characterized the civilization of the Early and Middle Historical periods. Conventionally viewed by historians as a period of decline, a loss of momentum affecting the entire civilization itself, recent interpretations suggest instead a transition to more complex and varied forms of polity, connected with underlying changes in social and economic organization. These early phases of the Late Historical period were times of commercial expansion, proliferation of urban and port centres, and considerable ethnic, religious and cultural diversity. They are marked in fact by major developments in literature and considerable intellectual vitality. The inevitable consequences of such deep-rooted transitions are changes in religious and cultural activity as well as in the nature of artistic production. The important, if relatively limited architectural and sculptural remains of this epoch testify to the continuity and development of the styles and motifs associated with the arts of the earlier period. The naturalism and individuality of treatment that marked the classic style in all its variations now give way to the formalization and decorative abstraction of the post-classic mode. At the same time, changes in technology and materials appear as important factors affecting, often adversely, the survival of cultural artefacts, especially in the field of architecture. As far as the survival of wall paintings is concerned there is a hiatus in the archaeological record between the late 13th and the mid-18th centuries. Apart from the few rare examples of painted manuscript boards and some traces of old murals, all described below, we have no actual remains of paintings associated with the kingdoms of the post-Polonnaruva epoch, until the 18th century. Whatever developments may have taken place during this period in both the character and context of mural painting and other manifestations of the painter’s art, the basic reason for this gap lies in the fate of the architectural monuments themselves. The survival of the paintings is intrinsically linked with the survival of the monuments. Thus, ironically, the paintings of the Early and Middle Historical periods survived as a result of the abandonment of the early monumental complexes and rock temples in the 13th century. This made possible, even to a limited extent, their subsequent recovery in the modern period. The monuments of the post-13th-century epoch, in contrast, were not only different in character and often in materials, but were also subjected to very different processes of destruction and preservation. Those that were located in what was now the wealthiest and most advanced region, the southwest maritime zone, were almost entirely destroyed during the period of European colonial occupation. Thus there are scarcely any extant monuments or ruined complexes of the 13th-18th-century period in the maritime region, other than structures of colonial origin. Meanwhile, the monuments that were in the territory of the Kandyan kingdom — including temples such as those at Gadaladeniya and the Lankatilaka temple in Udunuvara (Pls.63-66 ),20 which were architectural conceptions as grand as any at Polonnaruva — were all periodically restored and refurbished especially during the Buddhist revival of the mid-18th century when a number of early temples and rock shrines were renewed and repainted. This well- established ancient practice of overpainting or repainting is documented at a number of early and later sites, including Sigiriya, Polonnaruva and Dambulla. The overpainting at Sigiriya and Polonnaruva is often within a narrow time range of less than a hundred years. At Dambulla we have an example of small fragments of early painting surviving on the rock-face outside the Kandy-period roof-line, while the internal surfaces of the entire complex have apparently been swept clean and repainted in the 18th century. A similar situation exists at Gadaladeniya. This 14th-century temple retains its original stone fabric and carvings and traces of early painting and decoration on its ceiling, but has a complement of paintings on its walls that is entirely of the 18th century. The subject of the early ceiling painting has been identified as the episode of the gifting of the white elephant from the Vessantara Jataka.2' Literary descriptions and epigraphical records indicate considerable painterly activity during this period, not only, as Paranavitana observes, ‘on walls of buildings but also on wooden boards and cloth.’22 While Sri Lanka has no illustrated palm-leaf manuscripts in any way comparable with those of Nepal or eastern or western India — the only examples being manuscripts with 19th-century line­ drawings in a provincial style — at least three important, illustrated wooden manuscript covers exist, dating from the late 13th and 14th centuries. The earliest of these is the Cullavagga, a manuscript in the National Museum, Colombo, from the reign of Parakramabahu 11 (1230- 70) at Dambadeniya, with polychrome illustrations in a late Polonnaruva-period style (Fig. 12).23 The other two are the covers of the Saratthadipani manuscripts, in the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris24 (which has floral designs), and the British Library in London, discussed below (Fig.l I).25 The only way in which we may recover at least some aspects of the pictorial style of this period is by referring to the manuscript-cover illustrations, the relief sculptures of the 14th century and the ivory carvings of Kotte and its successors in the 15th-18th- century period.-* The decorative ano narrative p.iicN of the sculptural friezes preserve the format of the narrative registers in the wall paintings at Polonnaruva. Similarly, the formalized treatment of the human figure derives from the later styles of t e Tivanka murals and anticipates the developments of the 18th and 19th centuries. There is no doubt, though we cannot easily document it, that the transition from the classic to the post-classic style took place during this epoch.27 The Kandyan and Southern Schools Whatever the lost art of Gampola and Kotte might have been, correspondences in style and composition between the later, narrative paintings in the Tivanka temple and the murals of the 18th and 19th centuries, allow us not only to bridge a gap of five hundred years but also to conclude that there was a continuity of tradition, between the earlier and the later period. The stylistic connections between the two traditions are immediately apparent in their treatment of similar subjects. The organization and disposition of the Tivanka paintings and the choice of subject matter — Jataka stories in the antechambers, the life of the Buddha and representations of divine beings at the entrance to the sanctum or in the sanctum itself — are again similar to the general pattern followed in the later work. At the same time, echoes of the late classic style appear from time to time in Kandyan painting. In short, there can be little doubt that the paintings of the 18th and 19th centuries are the continuation of a tradition which has its genesis in at least the 12th or 13th century. The late-period murals belong to two distinct but related schools: the Kandyan paintings of the central highlands and contiguous north-central plains, i.e. the area constituting the territory of the kingdom of Kandy in the 18th and early 19th centuries; and the Southern school of the lowland, southwest littoral. Both schools date back to at least the 18th century, with the Kandyan tradition being the earlier and, at least partially, ancestral to that of the maritime region. The best and earliest examples of Kandyan art date from the period of the revival of Buddhism and the renaissance of Buddhist art and literature that took place in the reign of Kirti Sri Rajasinha (1747-81). Though no paintings clearly identifiable as belonging to a period before the mid-18th century can be found in the Kandyan tradition, it is entirely reasonable to assume that the renewal of the tradition during this time was not a new beginning but a continuation — at most after a brief interruption — of the prevailing style of the 17th and early 18th centuries. As we shall see, there is both material and literary evidence for the existence of mural paintings during the reigns of Kirti Sri Rajasinha’s predecessors. Moreover, in more senses than one, the kings of Kandy were the heirs to the traditions of Gampola and Kotte. Gampola is only a few miles away from Kandy and one of its kings built a palace in Kandy in the 14th century. Some of the earliest rulers of Kandy were feudatories of the kings of Kotte in the 16th century. There is no fundamental historical break between the earlier and later kingdoms of the Late Historical period. Temples constructed in the 14th century continued to be in use during Kandyan times. The Southern temples, on the other hand, are mostly from the 19th century, the most mature expression of Figs, lla-f (L to R) Dancers and musicians. Details from painted wooden covers of the Saratthadipani manuscript. 13th-14th century. British Library, Or. 6676. Fig. 12 Dancing dwarfs. Details from painted wooden covers of the Cullavagga manuscript. 12th-13th century. National Museum, Colombo, 17/69. this tradition being essentially a mid-19th-century phenomenon. The genesis of the Southern school, however, dates back to the early 19th or even late 18th century. This period saw the extension of the Buddhist revival to the southern territories, with the weakening of Dutch colonial authority in the maritime provinces and the arrival of the British. Temples such as Mulkirigala, which preserve some of the finest expressions of the Southern school, seem to have played a major role in the formation of this tradition. Located in a border area, at the southernmost extremity of both the maritime region and the Kandyan kingdom, Mulkirigala is associated with some of the earliest evidence for the existence of late-period murals from a time pre-dating the mid-18th-century revival. A European engraving of the 1730s shows the murals in one of the rock temples at this site (Fig.13).28 Subsequently, the temple is also mentioned in connection with the transmission or re-introduction of the mural tradition from Kandy to the southern region in the latter half of the 18th century.29 Fig. 13 Mulkirigala cave-temple. Detail from an engraving published in 1744 (Heydt 1952) and probably based on a sketch made by Arent Jansen between 1734 and 1737. The two schools were closely related, but whether one was a branch or derivative of the other, or whether they were relatively independent developments, responding to similar needs, galvanized by the Buddhist revival, is a matter that cannot be easily decided. It is possible that the maritime tradition drew on vestigial survivals of the Kotte tradition as well as the prevailing art of Kandy. What the two schools have in common and the extent to which they differ from each other can be seen at a glance, even from examples chosen at random, such as Pls.54, 55 and 72; and 143, 146 and 147. The chief characteristics of the Kandyan style are its heavy dependence on linework, not merely to define a figure but also to create visual interest and to generate pictorial activity in its own right; its use of a restricted range of colours, usually limited to yellow and red in the principal narrative registers; and the deployment of a relatively uncrowded picture space, using the red or yellow background and isolated figures to heighten narrative interest and visual drama. In some of its best examples, such as at Suriyagoda, the figures are almost expressions of pure line and form, each figure or group separated and suspended, so to speak, in monochromatic background space (Pl.55). The Southern school, in general, while using similar techniques is far more elaborate, depending on a multiplicity of figures sometimes heavily crowded-in on each other, and a wealth of decorative detail. There is a much greater range and variety of colours and ornamentation, and the tonal modelling of faces and limbs creates a very different sense of liveliness and volume. The extremes of the spectrum, encompassing the stylistic range of the two schools, are represented by portraits from the Suriyagoda temple near Kandy and from two Southern temples (Pls.54, 145, 147). The paintings are separated by a hundred years or more — Suriyagoda dating from the latter half of the 18th century and the Southern murals from the late 19th century. The contrasts between the pictures also point to the fact that while the Kandyan school remained very broadly within the parameters of its traditional 18th-century mode — this applies, for instance, to Kandyan murals painted as late as 1915, in the Alut Vihara at Dambulla — the Southern tradition was subjected to significant processes of development and change throughout the 19th century. Transitional Styles of the Modern Period The closing decades of the 19th century saw an acceleration in these processes of change and a critical turning point in the evolution of the Southern school, which ultimately brought about its demise. The collapse and disintegration of traditional mural paintings, from about the 1910s or 1920s onwards, and their replacement by contemporary renderings of traditional subject matter, belong as much — or more — to the history of modern painting in Sri Lanka, as to that of traditional art. A discussion of this lies beyond the scope of the present book. But our survey of historical painting would be incomplete without some reference to the transitional styles that emerged just before the turn of the century and which continued to influence post-traditional mural painting till the 1940s, and even to the present day. Contemporary mural painting is generally considered to be a debasement of the artistic heritage of the late- period murals. To a great extent this is true. Much of the present work is a poor imitation or lifeless rendering of the compositional formulas and subject matter of the late- period murals, or is unskilfully derivative of the transitional styles of the early 20th century. It often exhibits poor artistic sensibility and bad craftsmanship, and is marred by the generalized use of industrial paints and varnishes. However, as a manifestation of contemporary ‘popular’ art, it operates within its own artistic and social context and has to be judged on its own terms. At its best, it displays the creative inconsistencies and awkward appeal of spontaneous, popular expression; at its worst, it reflects the impoverishment of both ‘popular’ and ‘formal’ culture in a transitional era. These paintings betray the meagreness of resources available today to a tradition which, in the not so distant past, was able to command a much greater wealth of imaginative and artistic experience. As far as stylistic development itself is concerned, the origins of the present situation lie in the period between the 1890s and the 1930s. During these four or five decades, the art of the Kandyan school, or whatever strands of that tradition remained alive at the end of the 19th century, went into complete eclipse although a few families of painter-craftsmen still retained — as they do today — their skills and tools of trade. At the same time, the derivatives of the Southern style became fashionable and widespread throughout the country, often resulting in the overpainting of 18th- or 19th-century work, even in temples belonging to the Kandyan tradition. There are several stages, still poorly documented and imperfectly understood, in the evolution of the Fig. 14 Scenes from the Vessantara (above) and Dahamsonda (below) Jatakas. Gothabhaya Rajamahavihara, Botale. Early 1930s. transitional style and of related styles and sub-styles. One of its earliest manifestations can be seen at the Karagampitiya temple at Dehiwela, to the south of Colombo. Here we have three sets of paintings, executed in the 1890s. The earliest of these, dated 1894, on the central wooden enclosure of the preaching hall, and a sequence of about the same date on the walls of the same building, show slight deviations from the normative style of the mid- to late 19th century, but remain within the broad conventions of that style. The Ummagga Jataka frieze in the ambulatory of the image-house, on the other hand, shows a definite break with tradition, a clear stylistic deviation from it (Fig. 94). Dating from 1897, these murals can be considered one of the earliest examples we have of paintings in a transitional style. At the end of the transitional period, several decades later, the Vessantara Jataka sequence at Botale represents a much more modern rendering of the same basic mode. The essence of this stylistic mode lies in the use of geometrical perspective, an exaggerated and rather theatrical naturalism, and the mixture of stylistic and compositional elements derived, on the one hand, from traditional painting, and on the other, from European 19th-century illustration. Costumes, decorative motifs and ‘architectural scenery’ evoke a theatrical milieu, which we may identify specifically with the popular Nurti theatre of the late 19th century and its successor, the ‘Tower Hall’ traditions of the early 20th. The mixture of European and Indian conventions which marked both Nurti and the Tower Hall tradition is apparent in the paintings too. It is significant that there were some actual connections between the mural painters and the painters of theatrical scenery. Two of the most famous scene painters, the brothers George and Richard Henricus, were commissioned to paint murals in a temple at Dematagoda, a Colombo suburb, and their apprentice, M. Sarlis, went on to become one of the best-known illustrators of religious compositions. Sarlis’ scenes from the life of the Buddha and from the Jataka stories were brought out in coloured lithographs, printed in Germany in the 1930s (Fig.15). The popularity of these prints and their wide distribution and the consequent adoption of this style in many temple paintings of that time, are often held to have brought about the demise of traditional painting. But we can now see that, while the Sarlis prints may have had a profound effect on the formation of popular taste and painterly practice, the transition from the stylistic conventions of the 19th century had begun much earlier. Moreover, a comparison of these Sri Lankan developments with similar trends in the mural and miniature painting traditions of South and Southeast Asia, shows that the appearance of eclectic, transitional styles, influenced by the academic realism of 19th- Fig. 15 Prince Siddhartha displays his skill at archery. Lithographic print of a painting by M. Sarlis. 1930s. Fig. 16 The Bringing of the Tooth-Relic to Sri Lanka (detail). From a mural by Solias Mendis. Kelaniya Rajamahavihara. Between 1932 and 1946. century European art, was a general tendency in late 19th- and early 20th-century Asian art and not a phenomenon restricted to Sri Lanka. One of the most interesting products of this transition, and one that goes beyond the boundaries of the transitional style itself, is the work of Solias Mendis (Fig. 16; Pls. 168,169)?° Starting as a traditional artist in the transitional style, Mendis executed new murals at Kelaniya, between 1932 and 1946. These are a remarkable achievement of contemporary painting, in the spirit and context of the traditional temple murals, but in a style which is entirely a product of the 20th century. This style owes a great deal to the school of Ravi Varma and the painters of the ‘Bengali renaissance’, but displays a vigorous naturalism and strength of realization lacking in the Victorian sentimentality that often characterizes the Bengali work. The furthest development of this process is reached when contemporary artists, working in an entirely different social and artistic context and trained in the modern European traditions of easel painting, turn their attention to temple murals. George Keyt’s work at the Gotami Vihara and Albert Dharmasiri’s paintings at Veheragodalla fall into this category (Figs.17,18). It is indeed the mark of a transitional society that while in the village of Nilagama descendants of the Dambulla painters of the 18th century still retain, if only vestigially, their traditional craft skills, artists nurtured in the conventions of the Ecole de Paris are inspired by the ancient mural traditions to decorate the walls of modern temples with contemporary interpretations of traditional subjects. Fig. 17 The Buddha on his first alms-round, in the presence of King Bimbisara (detail). From a mural by George Keyt. Gotami Vihara, Borella, Colombo. 1939-40. Fig. 18 The Birth of Prince Siddhartha (detail). From a mural by AlbertDharmasiri. Veheragodalla Vihara, Sedavatta.Kollonava. 1968/9. Context and Method The wall paintings in ancient shrines or modern temples remind us that there is a considerable degree of continuity, not only in the mural tradition itself but also in the contexts in which we find the murals, and in their organization, disposition and subject matter. We know from historical records and from archaeological finds that some of the earliest paintings were associated with stupas and monastic residences. Minute traces of plaster and pigment on architectural or sculptural remains at many ancient sites clearly indicate that buildings and sculpture were vividly and brightly painted and far more colourful, both internally and externally than is apparent from the bare brick and stone masonry that we encounter today. Nothing illustrates this better than the sections of painted architectural decoration still visible in the Tivanka temple at Polonnaruva (Pl.33). Surviving traditional practice and the monuments of the 18th and 19th centuries amply bear out this contention, except for the fact that in the later period, paintings and painted sculpture and decoration are usually restricted to image-houses and, more rarely, to preaching halls and are generally absent in stupas or monastic residences. With the exception of the relic-chamber paintings from Mahiyangana and Mihintale and traces of decoration on the dagabas at Anuradhapura, the surviving examples of ancient painting are restricted to rockshelter residences or image-houses and the Tivanka temple at Polonnaruva. The image-house, therefore, occupies a special position in the study of murals in both the earlier and later periods. A typical Sri Lankan Buddhist temple — or strictly speaking, temple-monastery — of the 19th or 20th century contains at least three major ritual monuments as well as a preaching hall (dharmasalava), one or more monastic residences (avasa) and sometimes, a chapterhouse (poyage) and a library. The ritual monuments are a stupa or dagaba containing relics, a bodhi tree surrounded by a terrace and one or more small image-chapels, and a central image-house. Though all three major monuments have more or less the same ritual status and equally complex architectural forms, the most intricate of these structures is the image-house, where the paintings are to be found. The basic plan of the image-house, whether it is an ancient rock shelter, a temple of the 12th century, or a structure of more recent times, consists of an inner chamber, preceded by a vestibule, or surrounded by an ambulatory corridor, with a pillared veranda in front. Of course there are an infinite number of variations on this basic plan. The rock temples follow the natural configuration of the rock and of the original cave or rock shelter, but usually consist of a large internal chamber and a fronting vestibule and veranda (Figs.64,66). The Tivanka temple has a succession of antechambers leading to the inner shrine (Fig.42). Many of the free-standing Kandyan temples of the 18th century, such as Suriyagoda and Madavala (Fig. 62), are elevated on stone columns and have an open veranda forming an ambulatory around the inner chamber. In the Southern temples, at least three of the four major elements — inner chamber, vestibule, ambulatory and porch or veranda — are invariably present, as the accompanying plans show (Figs.84, 93). Again, the disposition of the paintings and sculpture varies considerably from one temple to the other, but certain basic principles are adhered to everywhere. The inner chamber which forms the ritual centre of the building contains the principal icon, a seated, standing or recumbent Buddha, accompanied by other two- or three-dimensional representations of the Buddha, Bodhisattvas (‘Buddhas- to-be’), arhats (‘enlightened beings’), disciples and gods of the Buddhist pantheon. This chamber is rarely entered directly, but from an antechamber or ambulatory, while the doorway or doorways giving access to it are usually elaborately decorated and guarded by divine beings and attendants. The doorway is often surmounted by a makara torana or dragon arch. Thus, with its statues, paintings and elaborate entrances, the inner chamber is at least implicitly the recreation of a cosmic or ‘other-worldly* realm or palatial residence, presided over by the Buddha, who is accompanied by an appropriate retinue, Even if, in practice, this iconographic complexity and symbolism is not operative in any precise or schematic manner, it provides a dramatic and devotional setting and a broad semiology of cosmic authority and power. The walls of the outer chambers, on the other hand — i.e. the vestibule and the ambulatory — have a more didactic or instructive purpose, and usually constitute the largest area of wall space available for paintings. These walls are divided into long strips or registers, which contain narrative paintings whose subjects are drawn from Buddhist texts. The most popular items are those which are connected, in one way or another, with the life and antecedents of the Buddha. They include, therefore, the representations of the ‘Twenty-four Previous Buddhas’ (the suvisi vivarana, or ‘Twenty-four Annunciations’) with their distinguishing iconography; the principal events associated in the Theravada tradition with the life of the historical Buddha (the Buddha Carita)\ the Jataka stories, illustrating the life of the Buddha in his previous births as a Bodhisattva; and other stories taken from Buddhist literature and based on events or personalities associated with the Buddha during his lifetime. The narrative registers, which extend horizontally along each wall, vary in Kandyan and Southern temples from about 40 to 75 centimetres in width. Narrower decorative strips with lotus medallions or flower garlands are often found at the top and the bottom, while in many instances the lowermost register is also divided vertically into panels depicting the various hells and underworlds of Buddhist cosmology. The wooden ceilings and, wherever they exist, the masonry vaults or arches, are decorated with floral and vegetal motifs, often resembling painted textile and cloth awnings. Some ceilings contain central panels or large, circular medallions depicting the planets, the zodiac, the guardian gods of the four or the eight directions and other cosmic or astral realms. There is an attempt, therefore, to cover the entire internal wall surfaces and ceilings with colours and images which evoke, in both a two- and three-dimensional form, the world of the Buddha and of his disciples and followers; a world which is both historical and eternal; terrestrial and yet cosmic, of earthly inhabitants and of supernatural beings. It was clearly the intention of the designers of these temples to use sculpture and painting to create an exclusive, internal environment that was totally different from the world outside, to immerse the worshipper in a world of religious ideas, information and sentiment. The contrast between the external environment of white painted buildings and neatly swept sand courtyards, on the one hand, and the brightly painted interiors illuminated by windows in the ambulatories and with oil lamps in the inner shrines, on the other, helped to heighten, in a very dramatic manner, the sense of entering a special realm of existence. Using relatively modest architectural and sculptural resources and making extensive use of murals, the temples of the 18th and 19th centuries display a complex organisation of internal space. The spatial divisions of the temple, symbolically recreate a kind of cosmic geography, representing, in a highly complex way, the whole universe and both past and present time. The wall paintings constitute one of the most important aspects of this complexity. In fact, we might say that the critical role in the transformation of the architectural interior into an ‘other-worldly’ environment is performed by the paintings and the painted sculpture which change a relatively familiar and dominantly anthropomorphic world into a supernatural or historical landscape, peopled by superior and ancient beings. There is a noticeable sequence and hierarchy in the disposition of the various subjects represented in the paintings, based on alternating horizontal and vertical concepts of space and ritual importance. As each temple differs in significant details from the other and as no single temple displays the entire range of subjects, we can only present this hierarchy as a general scheme or normative pattern, in this way : HORIZONTAL SEQUENCE Inner Chamber Central and subsidiary Buddha images Bodhisattvas, arhats, disciples; gods (sequence interchangeable) Context and Method Inner or Middle Chamber The 24 previous Buddhas (suvisi vivarana) Major events in the life of the Buddha (Buddha Carita) The 8 or 16 great places of pilgrimage (atamasthana or solosmasthana) Middle or Outer Chamber Jataka stories Major events in the life of the Buddha Other events or personalities associated with the life of the Buddha The locations associated with the Buddha's 45 annual rainy season retreats Hells and underworlds VERTICAL SEQUENCE Upper Registers (or entire wall space of Inner Chamber) Bodhisattvas, arhats, disciples, gods (sequence interchangeable) Ceilings Cosmic or astral realms, planets, zodiac, guardian gods of the 4 or 8 directions, divine residences Upper Registers (of Middle or Outer Chamber) The 24 previous Buddhas The locations associated with the Buddha’s 45 annual rainy season retreats The 8 or 16 great places of pilgrimage Middle Registers (or entire wall space of Middle or Outer Chamber Jataka stories Major events in the life of the Buddha Other events or personalities associated with the life of the Buddha Lower Register (Rarely, in inner chamber) the 8 or 16 great places of pilgrimage Hells and underworlds The murals (and painted sculpture) usually cover the entire wall space and use two basic forms of arrangement: either, large rectangular panels sometimes covering an entire wall, or — especially in rock temples — a large, well- defined area of ceiling space; or the familiar division into narrow horizontal strips or registers containing narrative paintings. A third form is a combination of these two, where the registers are vertically sub-divided into small regular panels, each representing a particular event, personality or place — as in the suvisi vivarana representations or in the depiction of the rainy season retreats, of the Eight or Sixteen Great Places of Pilgrimage and of hells and underworlds. The compositional methods also vary in keeping with the different arrangements. The panels often use a centralized composition technique, where the principal subject occupies and dominates the centre of the panel — or, where the panel is one of a pair placed on either side of a central sculpture, the composition within the panel is directed towards the central image. The narrative registers, in contrast, most commonly use the method of continuous narration, where the entire length of one or more registers is used to illustrate a story. Each part or incident in the story is depicted in sequence, one scene following the other without interruption. The ‘pictorial drama' in each register takes place against a continuous backdrop, usually a monochromatic red or black background, which unifies the narrative action and maintains its continuity both in space and time. At the same time, the different parts of the narrative do not flow into or overlap each other, as they do in some pictorial traditions, but exist contiguously and on the same picture plane. Although there are vertical demarcations within each story, a change of action or of architectural or natural setting provides an indentifiable separation between ‘scenes’ and ‘episodes’. A smooth transition from episode to episode is ensured not only by the continuous background but also by the fact that the central character or characters in the story appear repeatedly in the same strip and sometimes twice or thrice in the same scene. We see this, for instance, in a sequence from the Kataluva temple depicting the story of Patacara, a tale of human tragedy and pious devotion based on an incident associated with the life of the Buddha (Figs.87,89). Patacara is a tragic figure, who is driven out of her mind by the loss, in quick succession, of her husband, her children and her parents. Oblivious to the world, she wanders around naked. The Buddha alone, in his supreme compassion, understands her plight; and she finds solace and relief — in his preaching. Figure 89 shows her appearing four times within a single scene; she arrives from the right; passes a palm tree —which, in a kind of cross-action, is being climbed by a man picking nuts — ; she approaches a crowd which has gathered to hear the Buddha preach, and then she sits down to listen to him. All this action takes place, so to speak, in a flash. The technique is essentially theatrical or cinematic — or, in fact, closest to the method of the modern comic strip. Although the figures do not speak, except by action and gesture, a written commentary on the story — briefly identifying the principal incident in a given section of a register — is often provided on the narrow white bands which separate one horizontal register from another. There is considerable variation in the way in which the episodic sequence of each story is chosen and presented. Much depends on the amount of space and the wall divisions available to the artist, as well as on his compositional preferences and the varying degrees of importance attached to the stories in the planning of the pictorial layout of each temple. The complexity of this layout and its infinite variations from temple to temple can only be appreciated in a schematic and comparative analysis, as we shall see later. In some examples each of the major episodes of the story is presented, while in others only a few, arbitrarily chosen episodes are shown. Sometimes a story is compressed into a small area by using a few familiar episodes, or even by the representation of a single event or scene; at other times the painter may use a great deal of space for one episode, while allocating much less to others. In general, however, the extended strip narrative, involving a regular pattern or rhythm of episodic sequence, is the norm. The direction in which the story moves also depends entirely on location and spatial constraints, but the convention of a zigzag pattern, moving usually from upper to lower registers, is generally adhered to. Thus, the narrative action moves horizontally along a register from left to right or right to left and then, at the end of that register, continues in the register below, moving in the opposite direction. The artist, therefore, makes effective use of the fourth dimension, time. The observer moves up and down the room following the zigzag of the story as it unfolds from episode to episode and register to register. Despite the familiarity of the stories and their remarkable Fig. 19 Frieze of painted lions. Eastern vahalkada, Kantaka Cetiya, Mihintale. 12th century (?). (Drawing by Dayananda Binaragama,1985.)

SENAKE BANDARANAYAKE WITH PHOTOGRAPHS BY GAMINI JAYASINGHE THE EVOLUTION OF A PICTORIAL TRADITION Prehistoric Art 07 Early Buddhist Rock Monasteries 11 Classic and Late Classic Styles 13 The Gampola and Kotte periods 15 The Kandyan and Southern Schools 17 Transitional Styles of the Modem period 19 Context and Method 22 EARLY AND MIDDLE PERIOD PAINTING The Art of Sigiriya 26 The Boulder-Garden Paintings 31 Cave-Shrines of the Anuradhapura Period 34 Relic-Chamber Paintings 73 Polonnaruva Murals 79 LATE PERIOD MURALS 'Impressionism' and 'Idealism' 106 Origins of the Post-Classic Style 109 The Central Kandyan Tradition 112 The Dambulla Cycle 153 Provincial Kandyan Schools 161 Evolution of the Southern Tradition 201 Southern Styles of the 19th Century 204 NOTES 281 ABBREVIATIONS 285 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY 285 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 289 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 290 INDEX 295 AFTERWORD 2006 ADDITIONS TO THE SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY Sri Lanka has a long history of rock and wall painting extending from at least the last few centuries BC to the early 20th century. Fragmentary remains of early painting are known from a number of ancient archaeological sites, while a great cycle of 18th and 19th century murals is found in many urban and rural temples and monasteries. The early paintings, fragmentary and incomplete though they are, give us vivid and complex images of a distant historical epoch. The later paintings - some of them painted almost within living memory - constitute one of the richest and most substantial expressions of Sri Lankan pictorial art in its final period of efflorescence. They give us access to an imaginative world of the recent past in a way that is not easily paralleled by any other form of documentation. Modem interest in Sri Lankan rock and wall paintings began in the late 19th century. Although there have been several books and articles published on the subject since, this study is the first to present an overview of the entire tradition from its early historical origins to its contemporary traditional manifestations. It brings together almost all the available material belonging to the Early and Middle Historical periods and selected studies of the Kandyan and Southern schools of the later epoch. The analytical and descriptive text is accompanied by photographs and line-drawings selected to illustrate the thematic range, compositional methods and stylistic variety displayed in these paintings as well ad their historical evolution and functional context. Looked at in a regional perspective, the Sri Lankan murals take their place in a broad spectrum of South and Southeast Asian traditions, best known from the Indian subcontinent for the early period and from Burma and Thailand for the later. At the same time, the specific character and continuity of Sri Lankan art over a period of two millennia give it a distinctive place in the art and art-history of the region. 305 PAGES WITH 272 ILLUSTRATIONS INCLUDING 174 COLOUR PLATES AND 98 BLACK-AND-WHITE PHOTOGRAPHS, LINE­ DRAWINGS AND MAPS Jacket illustrations. Front:Lady attendant accompanying Madri Devi, wife of Vess ant ar a (detail). Vessantara Jataka, Kumaramahavihara, Kumarakanda, Dodanduva. Late 1880's. Back: Colossal painted door with fretwork panels (detail). Lankatilaka Temple, Handassa. 18th century. Senake Bandaranayake is Emeritus Professor of Archaeology at the University of Kelaniya. He is the author or editor of a number of books on the archaeology and culture of Sri Lanka, among them Sinhalese Monastic Architecture (1974); Sri Lanka- lsland Civilisation (1977); Sigiriya: Excavations and Research (1984); The Settlement Archaeology of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region (1989); Sri Lanka and the Silk Road of the Sea (1990; repr.2003); The Heritage of Asia and Oceania (1993); Ivan Peries: Paintings 1938-88 (1996); and Sigiriya: City, Palace and Royal Gardens (1998; repr.2003). Prof. Bandaranayake is best known for his excavations and research at Sigiriya, over a period of nearly two decades, and has worked and lectured widely at various universities in Asia, Europe and America. His interest in traditional and contemporary art goes back to the 1960s when he was Associate Editor of the UNESCO-WCOTP series, Man Through His Art. He was the founding Director of the Postgraduate Institute of Archaeology in Colombo, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, and served as Sri Lanka's Ambassador to France and UNESCO and High Commissioner in India. Gamini Jayasinghe is a freelance photographer and film-maker who has been involved in the photographic documentation of Sri Lankan rock and wall paintings since 1965, and has become one of the leading specialists in this field. He began his professional career as a film editor in the Government Film Unit. Later, he became Manager, Foreign Productions, in the State Film Corporation, from which post he resigned in 1980 to take on a four-year commission to document temple murals for the Lever Cultural Conservation Trust, a collection now deposited in the National Archives in Colombo. He has worked on a number of documentary and feature films as photo-director, cameraman and editor. His photographs have appeared regularly in Sri Lankan and international journals and magazines and he has illustrated a number of books. Gamini Jayasinghe lives at Waradala, Kotadeniyawa. ISBN -955-1131-10-X Published by Stamford Lake (Pvt) Ltd Pannipitiya, Sri Lanka E-mail: stamford@eureka.lk Distributed by Lake House Bookshop Colombo, Sri Lanka

THE ROCK AND WALL IPAINTINGS OF SRI LANKA EARLY AND MIDDLE PERIOD PAINTING 25 The Art of Sigiriya 26 The Boulder-Garden Paintings 31 Cave-Shrines of the Anuradhapura Period 34 Relic-Chamber Paintings 73 Polonnaruva Murals 79 The paintings of the Early and Middle Historical periods — unlike sculpture or architecture — come into view not only fully formed but at the peak of their development, in the classic art of Sigiriya at the end of the 5th century. However, these paintings and other remains of comparable date and style are clearly the product of a mature tradition of pictorial art with several centuries of development behind it. The existence of such a tradition from about the beginnings of the Early Historical period is borne out by literary evidence. The great chronicle, the Mahavamsa — itself written in the 6th century AD but based on earlier records — refers to representations of the Jataka stories, including the Vessantara Jataka, and of events from the life of the Buddha, the Buddha Carita, on the central throne of the Lohapasada, the chapter-house of the Mahavihara at Anuradhapura,1 and in the relic-chamber of the Ruvanvali dagaba, as early as the 2nd century BC.2 These two subjects, the Jataka and the Buddha Carita, remain the principal themes of Sri Lankan painting until the 18th and 19th centuries and even today. The Mahavamsa description refers specifically to the sat sati, the ‘Seven Weeks following the Buddha’s Enlightenment’, and the ‘Descent from the Tavatimsa Heaven’, subjects which recur frequently in later painting. The use of architectural representation, and especially of royal or celestial palaces and mansions, is a traditional feature that is anticipated in an equally early reference to an architectural drawing of a celestial palace, which provides a model for the Lohapasada: When the theras, going to the heaven of the thirty-three (gods), saw that (palace) they made a drawing of it with red arsenic upon a linen cloth, and they returned, and being arrived they showed the linen to the brotherhood. The brotherhood ... sent it to the king. When the king full of joy saw it he went to the splendid arama and caused the noble Lohapasada to be built after the drawing.3 The contexts referred to in these early literary records are significant as they are the very same contexts in which we find the paintings of the early and later periods. Thus, excavations have revealed the relic-chambers of stupas decorated with both narrative and iconic paintings, while a few painted preaching halls or dharmasalavas of the later period, each with its painted, central pavilion or dais, give us a fair impression of what a chapter-house with an elaborately decorated central throne and enclosure might have looked like (Pls.157, 160; Fig. 81).4 The use of cloth as a base for paintings is best known today in the petikcidas, the painted cloth hangings and scrolls of Kandyan times.5 The existence of painting in monastic residences is virtually unknown in the later period.6 As far as many of the early painted rock shelters are concerned, we are unable to say without further archaeological investigation whether these were monastic residences or cave-temples at the time the existing paintings were executed. Literary references, however, make it clear that residential caves and other monastic dwellings were decorated with paintings from ancient times. One of the earliest records of paintings in a cave residence comes from the Visuddhimagga story of Thera Cittagutta whose ‘restraint of the sense faculties’ was so exemplary that he lived for more than sixty years without seeing the paintings decorating his cave dwelling: In the Great Cave of Kurandaka ... there was a lovely painting of the Renunciation of the Seven Buddhas. A number of Bhikkhus wandering about among the dwellings saw the painting and said ‘What a lovely painting, venerable sir!’. The Elder said ‘For more than sixty years, friends, I have lived in the cave, and I did not know whether there was any painting there or not. Now, today, I know it through those who have eyes’. The Elder, it seems, though he had lived there for so long, had never raised his eyes and looked up at the cave.7 Cittagutta is thought to have lived near Mahagama in southern Sri Lanka during the reign of Saddhatissa (137- 119 BC). The Kurandaka cave has been identified with Karambagala, a rock shelter of the early period, containing fragments of paintings from a later time.8 These literary references, which became quite extensive in later times, clearly substantiate the view that the Sigiriya paintings are the product of an ancient tradition of Sri Lankan rock and wall painting. This is further supported by a study of the earliest examples of Sri Lankan art, the sculptured reliefs associated with the vahalkadas, the masonry frontispieces of the early dagabas? and other early figure sculptures. These sculptures date from about the 2nd to the 4th century AD. In their treatment of the human figure — and especially of the female torso — they show a clear line of development from stylization to classic realism, and in their finally evolved form they closely approximate to the classic style of the Sigiriya paintings. The two well-known limestone torsos of full-breasted female figures in the Archaeological Museum at Anuradhapura (Fig.9), dating from the 5th-7th century,10 are clearly the sculptural equivalents of the ladies of Sigiriya and the female deities of Gonagolla and Vessagiriya. On the basis of this evidence, and the patterns of development seen in the art of the middle period, we may well speculate that the paintings of the Early Historical epoch had an evolutionary history very similar to that of sculpture. The 5th-century rock paintings at Sigiriya — which, as we have seen, are the earliest extant Sri Lankan paintings that can be dated with any degree of certainty — are the culmination of these early developments. They stand at a point of transition between the Early and the Middle Historical period. Fig. 20 Sites with paintings of the Early and Middle Historical periods. (Anuradhapura includes Vessagiriya; Dimbulagala includes Pulligoda and Maravidiya; Polonnaruva includes the Tivanka temple and the Gal Vihara.) The Art of Sigiriya Sigiriya is an ancient rock-shelter monastery site, converted in the last quarter of the 5th century into a fortified palace and city by Kasyapa I (AD 477-95). The entire complex, with its outlying fortifications, walled and moated precincts and elaborate landscaped gardens, covers an area of more than a hundred hectares. It has as its central feature a massive, precipitous rock, 200 metres high, with a relatively flat plateau on its summit, nearly 1.5 hectares in extent, on which was erected the royal palace. Access to the palace is by a series of staircases and an elevated gallery or walk built against the nearly vertical west face of the rock. Just above this walk and extending across the entire west facade was a broad area of prepared rock-face, protected by drip­ ledges and originally plastered, on which were located the paintings. Judging by the drip-ledges and prepared rock surface, this broad ‘tapestry’ was continued along the north face too, on either side of the great lion staircase. The lion formed the sculptured gateway to another gallery, now destroyed, leading to the palace on the summit. The painted band seems to have extended to the northeastern corner of the rock, covering thereby an area nearly 140 metres long and, at its widest, about 40 metres high. As John Still observed, ‘The whole face of the hill appears to have been a gigantic picture gallery ... the largest picture in the world, perhaps.’11 What survive of this great painted backdrop are the female figures preserved in two adjacent depressions in the rock-face, known as ‘Fresco Pocket A’ and ‘Fresco Pocket B’ (Pls.2, 5; Fig.21), reached today by a spiral staircase fixed above the gallery. Three other depressions — ‘Fresco Pockets C, D, and E’ — higher up the rock-face, also contain patches of plaster and pigment and, in at least one instance, fragments of a painted figure. Traces of plaster and pigment elsewhere on the rock-face provide further evidence of the extent of the painted band. The Sigiriya paintings have preoccupied visitors to the site over many centuries. After the abandonment of the palace in the 5th or 6th century and the establishment of a monastery in the boulder- and water-garden area to the west of the rock, Sigiriya became a place of pilgrimage for visitors from all over the country, who came to see the paintings, the palace and the lion staircase. Greatly inspired by the paintings, they composed poems addressed mostly to the ladies depicted in them and inscribed their verses on the polished surface of the gallery wall. Known as the ‘Sigiri graffiti’ and dating from about the 6th to the 13th century, hundreds of these scribbled verses cover the surface of the gallery wall and also some of the plastered surfaces in the caves below. Nearly seven hundred of them have been deciphered by Paranavitana. A selection shows that the poems are not only revealing comments on the paintings themselves but also an insight into the cultivated sensibilities of the time and its appreciation of art and beauty: Their bodies’ radiance Like the moon Wanders in the cool wind. I am Lord Sangapala I wrote this song We spoke But they did not answer Those ladies of the Mountain They did not give us The twitch of an eye-lid. The song of Lord Kit al Sweet girl Standing on the Mountain Your teeth are like jewels Lighting the lotus of your eyes Talk to me gently of your heart. Ladies like you Make men pour out their hearts And you also have thrilled the body Making its hair Stiffen with desire. 12 Fig. 21 ‘Fresco Pockets A and B.’ Sigiriya. AD 477-95. (Drawing by D.L.G. Perera in PPAR 1896.) Twenty-two numbered figures are indicated, 5 in ‘Pocket A’ and 17 in ‘Pocket B’. These include the fragmentary figures mentioned on p.28 and in Chapter 2, Note 23. The recently observed figure B2a lies between B2 and B3. For the location of the ‘fresco’ pocket see Pl.2. The term ‘fresco’ is still retained in this context although it is no longer believed that the Sigiriya paintings really utilised the true ‘fresco’ technique. With the growth of modern antiquarian interest in the 19th century, Sigiriya came to the attention of contemporary visitors. A British military officer, Jonathan Forbes, leaves us the first modern description of the rock and the fortifications, which he visited twice in the 1830s. He climbed as far as the ‘Mirror Wall’ gallery, and refers to the paintings in the following manner: On my second visit I remarked that the projecting rock above the gallery, at least so much of it as is within reach, had been painted in bright colours, fragments of which may still be perceived in those places most sheltered from the heavy rains.13 Forbes leaves us in little doubt that the site was well known to the people living in the villages around Sigiriya and records local reports of ‘a tank ... on the inaccessible summit of this fortress’.14 Sirr, in 1850, reproduces Forbes’ earlier description, while an anonymous and obviously inaccurate account of 1851 refers to the gallery and the rock-face above it as being ‘covered all over with fresco painting chiefly of lions’.15 These early notices remain purely allusive. It is only in the 1870s that we have actual, if rather brief, descriptions of paintings in papers published by Blakesley and Rhys Davids, both based on the examination of the paintings by telescope.16 Rhys Early and Middle Period Painting Davids remarks on ‘the clearness of their outline and freshness of colour’ and notes the absence of green17 in the painters’ choice of colours, while Blakesley observes their ‘Mongolian cast of features’ and proposes a Chinese connection. Murray, of the Public Works Department, seems to have been the first person to find his way into the fresco pocket and come face to face with the paintings. He made tracings of them, copied some in pastels and published a paper on them in 1891.18 The first real study of the paintings, however, begins with the commencement of Bell’s archaeological operations at Sigiriya from 1893 onwards and the facsimile copies in oils made by Muhandiram D.A.L. Perera in 1896-7.19 Bell’s descriptions of the paintings are comprehensive and worth reproducing: The paintings consist of twenty-one half-figure portraits, all female, and a hand of one more figure. Of these, five are in pocket A, seventeen in the larger chamber B.2" It is almost certain that there once existed three rows of such half-figures in “pocket” ‘A’ and four in ‘B’ painted on the rock walls and projecting roof. Highest up in the first line remain the single hand (No. 17) and a very worn pair of figures (Nos.15,16); of the second row only faint traces here and there; to the third line belong frescoes Nos.3 and 4 of ‘A’, and Nos.5, 6, 9, 10, 11,12, and 14 of B; whilst the fourth, or lowest, row is made up of Nos. 1, 2, and 5 of ‘A’, and Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 and 13 of B’. The figures in “pocket” ‘B’ are above life-size; those of ‘A’ smaller than the ordinary human from a divergence due to the proprtionate wall space available The predilection for the three-quarter face is conspicuous • • • Of the score of faces left in pockets A and B...only three are in profile. The figures are not in full length, but cut off at the waist by cloud effects—no doubt to economize space. (The conformation of the rock left the artists no option but to “dock” the ladies of their lower limbs to avoid the comical effect extremities distorted by concavity must necessarily induce. Equally undesirable would have been the compression of full length figures into the limited space available in as much as details could not be distinguished from the terraces below the Rock. No small ingenuity was exercised in putting to full use the peculiar, badly adapted surface (wall and roof) of the chambers, so as to exhibit to the best advantage a series of half figure portraits ranged in possibly three to four rows originally.) The scene intended to be pourtrayed would seem to be a procession of the queens and princesses of King Kasyapa’s Court, with their attendants, on the way to worship at the Buddhist Vihare of Piduragala, the hill about a mile north of Sigiri-gala. The figures are manifestly all walking in that direction, and the flowers held in their hands by the ladies, and carried for them by servant-maids, can hardly bear any other signification. The frescoes in pocket A may have no connection with those of the larger cave; though both seem to represent the same scene, painted by different artists. Grouping in pairs is chiefly favoured throughout: usually queen, or princess, attended by a lady-in-waiting ... every court­ lady depicted is in reality fully clothed; in coloured kamhaya from the waist downwards, and above in short-sleeved jacket of finest material — so thin, indeed, that the painter has occasionally contented himself by indicating it by a mere line of deeper colour. A redundancy of ornament is affected equally by queen or serving­ woman. Coronets, tiaras, aigrettes crown the head; flowers and ribbons adorn the hair; and ears, neck, breast, arms, and wrists are loaded with a plethora of the heaviest ornaments and jewelled gauds. The portraits are all painted in brilliant colours and with the broad “dabbiness” characteristic of scene painting, which renders them so clear, yet soft, from a distance. The paintings appear to have been first outlined in red or black — perhaps by artists different from the finishers of the pictures, who did not slavishly follow the original outlines .... • • • • Only three pigments were used, yellow, red and green, though black seems to have been given a trial as background to one figure, No.14 in pocket B. The entire omission of blue is very remarkable... two layers of painting exist. These paintings were doubtless for the most part “portraits”. Conventionalism rules the stiff disposition of arms and hands; yet each figure is imbued with divergent traits in face, form, pose, and dress, which seem to stamp it as an individual likeness.22 Bell records a total of twenty-two figures, including two that are badly worn and a third represented by a hand fragment. In fact, careful scrutiny reveals the existence of one more fragmentary figure (No. 2a in ‘Pocket B’).23 Bell’s suggestion that the figures are clothed in diaphanous material has also been questioned recently.24 The existence of two layers of painting, referred to by Bell, may be either the result of an original painting technique, in which a primary layer of pigment was put down and subsequently added to and worked on, or the product of overpainting or repainting during the eighteen-year period in which the rock and the palace were occupied. Two of Bell’s most important observations relate to the composition of the paintings and their interpretation. Despite the obvious validity of his argument that the figures are cut off by clouds at the waist due to the awkward configuration of the rock surface, this is only applicable to some figures, not all. There is no doubt that if the Sigiri painters had wished to add lower limbs to any of their figures, they would have done so — as is in fact the case in some of the paintings in the rock shelters at the foot of the Sigiriya rock. The use of clouds is not only a compositional device but a well-established symbolic motif in the representation of celestial regions and celestial beings. An even more important and largely unanswerable question is how the present figures related to the entire composition of the painted band extending across the rock-face. While it will never be possible to answer this question, the matter does not rest entirely in the realm of speculation. Bell’s suggestion that the figures were in rows is significant. The arrangement of celestial beings or any other massed gathering of figures, either in the air or on the ground, is often presented in spaced-out or densely-packed rows — as we see in the representation of divine beings in the Tivanka temple (Pls.35, 36), or in the ceiling panels or wall paintings of the later period (e.g. Pls.89, 90). As in the case of the Ajanta murals, or, for that matter, the late-period Sri Lankan wall paintings, the painted band at Sigiriya may have consisted of a series of connected, successive scenes, or taken the form of a colossal decorative band or frieze without any narrative function. Whatever the original arrangement may have been, we have to understand the Sigiriya figures as part of a larger composition with symbolic, narrative or decorative functions, rather than as individual portraits or particular representations. This compositional factor has to be borne in mind in the interpretation of the paintings. Their fragmentary nature and unusual dramatic location have led to the Sigiriya paintings being interpreted in a number of ways, sometimes quite fancifully. Of the proposals that deserve scholarly consideration the three most important ones are those of Bell, Coomaraswamy and Paranavitana. Bell’s idea that they portray the ladies of Kasyapa’s court in a devotional procession to the shrine at Pidurangala is a purely imaginative reconstruction and has no precedent in the artistic and social traditions of the region or the period. It seems quite likely, however, that the court ladies and their costumes and ornaments provided models for the Sigiriya artists and that, as such, the paintings reflect the life and atmosphere, the ideals of beauty and the attitude to women, of the elite society of the time. Very much like the scholars and visitors of our time, the ancient writers of the Sigiri graffiti exercise their poetic licence to interpret the paintings in subjective and imaginative ways. Most of the poems have the paintings as their principal subject and treat the ladies as actual people or as expressions of feminine beauty, mixing poetic feeling and emotion with the projection of similar sentiments into the ‘portraits’ themselves. Of over 650 deciphered poems that deal with the paintings, a dozen refer to them as the king’s wives or ladies, while a similar number see them as apsaras (celestial nymphs) or divine beings. Paranavitana’s suggestion that they represent Lightning Princesses (vijju kumari) and Cloud Damsels (meghalata) is an interpretation at once more literary and sociological. It forms part of his elaborate hypothesis, which attempts to explain Sigiriya as an expression of the cult of divine royalty, the entire palace complex being a symbolic reconstruction of the abode of the god Kuvera: Alakamanda being thus conceived as a place with clouds hovering around it, Sigiri, if it is a replica of that paradise, must have had the same characteristics .... The drawing of naturalistic clouds on the rock face would not have impressed the beholder; and, if the clouds had been fully personified, their nature would not have been evident to him at first sight. The master mind that was responsible for the designing of Sigiri therefore made a compromise between these two methods, and showed the clouds half personified and half naturalistically. The dark damsels rising from clouds thus would represent the Cloud Maidens, and their fair companions are the representations of Lightning which issues forth from the Cloud, and is golden in colour. Alakamanda (Alaka) being thus the place from which the Clouds originate, one who is symbolically its lord can claim to be able to control rain on which the life of an agricultural community ultimately depends. And this is the real political significance of the king’s assumption of the title of Alakapati. The paintings of Sigiri, thus, are not the result of individual caprice nor an expression of aesthetic feeling as understood today, but a means of applying age-old and deeply rooted beliefs to political theory designed to bend the people to an individual’s will.25 While these identifications may seem to us today an overinterpretation too specific to accept in its totality — deriving from Paranavitana’s attempt to see the Sigiriya palace and royal complex primarily as an expression of divine kingship — they do draw our attention to important sociological dimensions in the understanding of ancient works of art. They represent a level of analysis lying beyond our present considerations, which are restricted to historical and aesthetic description. There is no doubt, however, that the spatial organization and spatial symbolism of the Sigiri complex is profoundly determined by the cult of the king and the ideology of kingship. The great tapestry of paintings at Sigiriya, like the palace on the summit and the lion staircase, are all part of a complex ‘sign-language’ expressing royal power and ritual status. While such observations may be obvious at a certain level of generalization, to interpret individual details as specifically as Paranavitana tries to do is more difficult and requires more rigorous analysis than he provides. Moreover, to insist on the validity of a single interpretation is always inadequate. Coomaraswamy’s identification of the Sigiriya women as apsaras is in keeping with well-established South Asian traditions, and is not only the simplest but also the most logical and acceptable interpretation.26 Recent studies have reinforced this idea, showing that apsaras are often represented in art and literature as celestial beings who carried flowers and scattered them over kings and heroes as a celebration of victory and heroism.27 We can say almost with certainty that the Sigiriya ladies are celestial nymphs, very similar in essence to their successors thirteen hundred years later in the ‘Daughters of Mara' panel from Dambulla (Pl.86), but it is also likely that they had more than one meaning and function — as expressions of royal grandeur and status and as artistic evocations of courtly life, with aesthetic and erotic dimensions. Such an interpretation, with its varying levels of ambiguity, allows us to accommodate both Bell’s and Paranavitana’s suggestions at either end of a semiological spectrum. It also makes it possible for us to view the painted band at Sigiriya as a rare and early survival of a royal citrasala, well known in Indian literature28 and implicit in the Culavamsa account of Parakramabahu's palaces and audience halls at Polonnaruva.29 The style and authorship of the paintings have been as controversial a question as that of their identity. Early writers such as Bell, and even Coomaraswamy, saw them as extensions of the Central Indian School of Ajanta or of several related traditions such as those of Bagh or of Sittanavasal in South India. Bell even suggested that ‘artists trained in the same school—possibly the very same hands— executed both the Indian and Ceylon frescoes’,30 a view that seems to have been accepted by other authorities such as Archer.31 Percy Brown viewed them as manifestations of a Buddhist school of South Asian art.32 These were views expressed at a time when very little was known of the extent and character of early Sri Lankan painting. Benjamin Rowland was amongst the first, followed many years later by Philip Rawson, to observe carefully the actual painterly technique at Sigiriya and to note in what specific way it differed from Ajanta and other subcontinental traditions: The Sigiriya paintings, outside of their exciting and intrinsic beauty, are perhaps most notable for the very freedom they show at a time when the arts were tending to become more and more frozen in the mould of rigid canons of beauty. The apsaras have a rich healthy flavour that, contrast almost makes the masterpieces of Indian Art seem sallow and effete in over-refinement. Just as the drawing is more vigorous than that of the more sophisticated artists of India, so colours are bolder and more intense than the tonalities employed in the temples of the Deccan.33 Philip Rawson’s description of the artistic technique and the similarities and differences between the Sri Lankan and the Indian paintings deserves to be quoted at length: The preliminary drawing was cut into the surface of the plaster; then in light strokes of red the main plastic masses were indicated. Next, the colours of the main areas were laid on with broad strokes that are scarcely visible, but nevertheless emphasise the rotundity of the forms. Some slight modelling from the contour, like that at Ajanta, was used. The flowers the women carry, those they wear in their hair, the hair itself and their elaborate jewelled ornaments were drawn freely and directly in colour. Finally the contours were emphasised with black, and the expression of eyes, lips and hand given point and clarity. Especially interesting is the way in which it is possible to see in successive corrections of the drawing visible through the layers of paint how the artists altered the inclination of a profile, the sweep of a shoulder or the gesture of hand, as the work developed. The drawing is, like that of all Indian mural painting, based on lines. But at Sihagiri the lines are sweeping and deeply curved, so that their embraced content of rounded form can almost be felt in the hand. And yet the firm extension of these lines across the surface of the plaster forbids the eye to take the figures as merely solid. There is a deliberate conflict or tension between the two aspects of the drawing, the plastic and the linear, each of which is developed to a very high degree to produce an overwhelming aesthetic effect. The mouths are drawn with the large and beautiful petal-like lower lips so much admired in India, and the glance of the eyes is given direction by a downward undulation in the arch of the eyelid. The hands especially are deeply and elegantly expressive, somewhat affected in their gestures but with fingers alive like serpents. Beneath their heavy breasts the stomachs of the women show the two or three creases that are canonical attributes of feminine beauty. Their hair is piled up in elaborate and fantastic chignons woven in with flowers, with jewelled tiaras, strings of pearls and threads of gold. On their necks and arms they wear a great variety of jewellery. All these characteristics emphasise the decorative and sensuous idealism.34 Fig. 22 Artist’s impression of a painting of an apsara discovered in 1983 on a boulder archway (Cave 5) at Sigiriya. 6th-7th century. (Drawing by Dayananda Binaragama, 1985.) These insights have been pursued and reinforced by contemporary Sri Lankan scholars such as Wijesekera, Gunasinghe and Dharmasiri.35 They rightly argue that, while the Sri Lankan paintings belong to the same broad traditions of South Asian art as the various subcontinental schools of the time, the specific character and historical continuity of the Sri Lankan tradition give it its own distinctive place in the art of the region. There is, in fact, a considerable distance between the art of Ajanta and that of Sigiriya. The Sigiriya paintings represent the earliest surviving examples of a Sri Lankan school of classical realism, already fully evolved when we first encounter it in the 5th century. The Boulder-Garden Paintings The art of Sigiriya is not, of course, confined to the paintings on the great rock itself. Of equal archaeological, and even aesthetic interest — though less well-preserved — are a number of paintings found in the rock shelters at the foot of the rock, in the area which formed the boulder gardens in the time of Kasyapa.36 This was also the centre of both the ancient and the post-Kasyapan monasteries. Nearly thirty rock shelters and boulder arches (i.e.archways formed of natural boulders) have been found at Sigiriya. Fig. 23 Sketch of plastered area with fragments of apsaras from Cave 7, boulder garden, Sigiriya. The foliage seen in the lower left­ hand corner of the plaster represents the earliest, 5th-century, layer of paintings. The figures date from subsequent phases, 6th-7th century onwards. (Drawing by R.U. Wickremaratne, after Deraniyagala 1948.) Significant fragments of paintings can be seen in at least five of these. Many of the others contain traces of plaster and pigment, indicating an extensive complex of painted caves and pavilions in the whole of the boulder garden area. The existence of several layers of plaster and of paintings which belong to different historical phases is clearly apparent in these shelters. The most important remains are those in Cave 7, popularly known as the ‘Deraniyagala Cave’ after P.E.P. Deraniyagala who discovered the traces of several female figures here; in the so-called ‘Cobrahood Cave' (Cave 9), which has a rare survival of a vivid and dramatic ceiling painting; and in the ‘Asana Guha' or ‘Throne Cave' (Cave 1) with its many layers of plaster and painting. The most ambitious composition can be found on a large area of plaster in Cave 7 where there are faint traces of several female figures carrying flowers and moving amidst clouds, again in a northerly direction, very much like the apsaras on the main rock above (Fig.23). Even in ornamentation and general figural treatment, these women are broadly similar to those in the famous paintings, except for the fact that at least three of them are not cut off at the waist by clouds but are full­ figure representations, with legs bent in a conventional flying posture. Altogether there are less than half a dozen distinct forms here, barely discernible in traces of body colour and linework. Many others are reduced to faint lines or patches of colour. One figure alone (Pl.18) retains enough of its pigment for us to have a fair idea of its original form. The face is destroyed, but the golden-yellow body colour and much of the torso are well preserved together with parts of an ornate head-dress with blue pigment. A recent discovery in a boulder archway nearby (Cave 5) preserves the complete outline and some details of a face (Fig.22). This portrait is similar in scale and style to the pigmented figure in Cave 7; and the two paintings are complementary, the missing parts of the one, so to speak, being supplied by the surviving sections of the other. Most of the remaining paintings in Cave 7, as elsewhere in this boulder-garden area, have to be studied in line-drawings. The line-drawings have the advantage of separating the surviving traces of linework from the visual distractions of the weathered plaster, enabling us to see the figures themselves more clearly, without any addition or reconstruction beyond a slight strengthening of the line itself where it actually exists. Several layers of painting can be distinguished in the remains in Cave 7. Deraniyagala himself speaks of ‘four or five superimposed layers’.37 Today, at least three distinct phases of painting are visible. The earliest layer is a thin strip showing representations of leaves and flowers (Pl. 16), observable at the lower end of the plaster area and also at certain places well below the paint layer bearing the female figures. The next is an underlay or a lower layer of pigment beneath the present figures, probably representing an earlier version of the same subject, while the final phase is what is visible on the surface today. It has also been suggested that some portions of these figures which Fig. 24 Details of tree and other floral elements. Cave 1 (‘Asana Guha’), boulder garden, Sigiriya. 5th or early 6th century. (Drawing by Dayananda Binaragama, 1985.) Figs. 25,26 Male figures, probably deities. Cave 1 (‘Asana Guha'), boulder garden, Sigiriya. These figures are depicted on the uppermost layer of plaster in this cave and represent the final phase of painting in the boulder garden. They cannot as yet be assigned to any specific date but may well be as late as the 12th-13th century. figures themselves more clearly, without any addition or reconstruction beyond a slight strengthening of the line itself where it actually exists. Several layers of painting can be distinguished in the remains in Cave 7. Deraniyagala himself speaks of ‘four or five superimposed layers’.37 Today, at least three distinct phases of painting are visible. The earliest layer is a thin strip showing representations of leaves and flowers (Pl. 16), observable at the lower end of the plaster area and also at certain places well below the paint layer bearing the female figures. The next is an underlay or a lower layer of pigment beneath the present figures, probably representing an earlier version of the same subject, while the final phase is what is visible on the surface today. It has also been suggested that some portions of these figures which Fig. 24 Details of tree and other floral elements. Cave 1 (‘Asana Guha’), boulder garden, Sigiriya. 5th or early 6th century. (Drawing by Dayananda Binaragama, 1985.) Figs. 25,26 Male figures, probably deities. Cave 1 (‘Asana Guha'), boulder garden, Sigiriya. These figures are depicted on the uppermost layer of plaster in this cave and represent the final phase of painting in the boulder garden. They cannot as yet be assigned to any specific date but may well be as late as the 12th-13th century. virtuosity in a way not seen elsewhere in the surviving paintings of the Sri Lankan tradition. The characteristic brushwork, style and tonal qualities of the Sigiriya school are immediately noticeable here. There is little doubt that this awning is coeval with the paintings on the main rock. There are indications of animal or bird forms in the centre of the large diamond or circular panels, but these are merged with stylized or abstract volutes similar in essence to the 'katurumala or ‘tiringitala' design of the Kandy period. 9 This motif is also seen in sculptural and architectural details of Anuradhapura and Polonnaruva times, especially in connection with lion and makara sculpture and in floral volutes. Considered in their totality, the paintings in the boulder­ garden area at Sigiriya, though vestigial, provide important evidence of the continuation of the Sigiriya school over a fair period of time. Excavations have shown several post- 5th-century phases of occupation in the rock shelters in this area, continuing until perhaps as late as the 12th or 13th century.40 This situation is paralleled by the layers of plaster and painting which provide evidence of several successive phases of painterly activity. We may summarize these phases in the following way: Phase I: To this phase belong the leaf and flower paintings in Cave 7, the representation of a tree in the ‘Asana Guha' and the ceiling paintings in the ‘Cobrahood Cave'. These have stylistic affiliations with the paintings on the main rock and in at least one instance can be dated to the late 5th or early 6th century by the superimposed 6th-century graffiti found on the tree in the ‘Asana Guha’. The female figures and cloud motifs visible on the upper reaches of the plaster in the same cave may belong to this phase too or to a slightly later period of activity. Phase IIA: This is represented by the lower layer of pigmentation of the figures in Cave 7. There is no way in which we may date this phase precisely, but it is possible to speculate that it represents a continuation of the school of Sigiriya in the immediate post-Kasyapan period i.e. the closing years of the 5th century or the early 6th century. Phase IIB: The presently visible figure representations in Cave 7 denote the overpainting or repainting of figures from the previous phase. Phase II A/B: Coeval with the figure paintings in Cave 7 is the recently discovered painting in the boulder archway nearby, Cave 5. Phase II A/B or Phase III: The thin limewash with faint traces of black line-drawing, observable in the ‘Asana Guha’, belong to a later period than the figure representations and cloud motifs visible on the upper reaches of the plaster here. Traces of a similar limewash are also noticeable in Cave 7. Phase Ill/rV: The uppermost layer of paintings and black line-drawings in the ‘Asana Guha’ certainly belong to a period much later than any of the previous phases. They constitute a rather impoverished expression of the Sigiriya tradition, perhaps belonging to the last phase of occupation at Sigiriya during the Middle Historical period, possibly dating from a time between the 10th and the 13th century. Further excavation in the caves of the boulder garden and detailed investigation of plaster layers and pigments will give us a much clearer idea of the successive phases of artistic activity at Sigiriya. Fig. 27 Female figure, probably an apsara or nagini. Cave-shrine, Vessagiriya. 5th/6th century (?). (Drawing by Dayananda Binaragama,1985.) Cave-Shrines of the Anuradhapura Period In spite of the paucity and relatively limited scope of the paintings and the absence of a single unified composition, the fragmentary masterpieces of Sigiriya constitute a source book for the study of early Sri Lankan painting. They provide information in a number of different spheres — artistic, iconographical and chronological. Our knowledge of this tradition is supplemented by even more fragmentary remains from several Buddhist cave-temple sites of the Anuradhapura period. Gonagolla, Kandalama, Karambagala, Kotiyagala, Kudagala, Vessagiriya and Situlpahuva are all sites where nearly complete figures Fig. 28 Flying male figure. (Cave­ shrine. Vessagiriya. 5th-6th century (?). (Drawing by Senarat Bandara Disanayaka, 1985.) or discernible portions of figures have survived, while in a number of other places (e.g.Budugalge, Dambulla, Kudimbigala and Nuvaragalkanda) we have traces of paintings which show no discernible forms or, at most, only fragments of decorative or floral motifs. More important remains have been found at the Pulligodagalge and the Maravidiya cave-shrine at Dimbulagala and at the Hindagala temple near Kandy (Pls.23-26). Of these only the Pulligoda paintings remain, the others having been destroyed since their discovery and documentation. To this list we may add the cave paintings of the Polonnaruva period at Pidurangala near Sigiriya and at the Gal Vihara (Uttararama) in Polonnaruva itself (Figs.35, 10; Pls.43,44). The painting at Kandalama is faded and much damaged but still quite discernible (Pl .19).41 Fragmentary outlines and patches of pigment show a seated female figure, identified as a representation of the Goddess Tara, in a highly formal and hieratic pose, holding a lotus stalk in her right hand. Appearing today almost a line-drawing, in a faded Indian red, with touches of yellow ochre, orange and turquoise­ blue, it is unlike any other painting of the early period. The or discernible portions of figures have survived, while in a number of other places (e.g.Budugalge, Dambulla, Kudimbigala and Nuvaragalkanda) we have traces of paintings which show no discernible forms or, at most, only fragments of decorative or floral motifs. More important remains have been found at the Pulligodagalge and the Maravidiya cave-shrine at Dimbulagala and at the Hindagala temple near Kandy (Pls.23-26). Of these only the Pulligoda paintings remain, the others having been destroyed since their discovery and documentation. To this list we may add the cave paintings of the Polonnaruva period at Pidurangala near Sigiriya and at the Gal Vihara (Uttararama) in Polonnaruva itself (Figs.35, 10; Pls.43,44). The painting at Kandalama is faded and much damaged but still quite discernible (Pl .19).41 Fragmentary outlines and patches of pigment show a seated female figure, identified as a representation of the Goddess Tara, in a highly formal and hieratic pose, holding a lotus stalk in her right hand. Appearing today almost a line-drawing, in a faded Indian red, with touches of yellow ochre, orange and turquoise­ blue, it is unlike any other painting of the early period. both in India and Sri Lanka.'43 The paintings with the closest relationship in style and coloration to Sigiriya are those at Vessagiriya.44 The female figure here, though very badly weathered and scarcely discernible, still retains — as careful examination reveals — an almost complete outline and photographable areas of pigment (Fig.27). The other identifiable figure, of the several fragmentary forms that can be distinguished here, exists as traces of line and colour. It is a divinity, or supernatural being (Fig,28), complete sections of whose body, face and head-dress have now been obliterated. Bell has recorded what he could see of these figures in 1907: On the rock wall of Cave No.9 may yet be seen, though very greatly weathered, the outline of a female figure, measuring 3 ft.by 2 ft., painted in yellow with dashes of red here and there and a leg crossed horizontally, the lady has her left leg raised and knee bent, and is emphasising an animated discourse by left arm half­ outstretched and hand with open palm — a favourite attitude in Indian sculpture and painting. , A smaller figure — a prince with jewelled headdress, armlets, etc. — is just distinguishable on the worn plaster of Cave No. 10. This figure measures 2ft. by 1 ft. 6 in., and is coloured in red and yellow.45 The head-dress or coiffure of the female figure seems to have had a cobrahood surmounting it as in the Gonagolla example. Historical links exist between Sigiriya and Vessagiriya as the latter site is thought to have been the location of a monastery established by Kasyapa 1. Recent studies of architectural details, such as the moonstones, at these two sites, confirm the close relationship between them. As in other paintings of this nature, the figures here must have formed part of a larger composition of gods and other celestial beings ‘worshipping the Buddha or a Bodhisattva’.46 The Karambagala painting (Fig.30), though much more fragmentary, clearly indicates a similar theme — an apsara with her head bent in supplication apparently scattering flowers on a Bodhisattva.47 It has been suggested that the Karambagala fragment is the earliest extant Sri Lankan painting from the historical period, on the basis that Karambagala can be identified with the Kurandakalena referred to in the Visuddhimagga. Style, technique and the nature of the plaster ground on which it is painted indicate, however, that the Karambagala picture is probably coeval with or somewhat later than Sigiriya and of a similar character to the paintings at Gonagolla and Vessagiriya, all of which form a distinct group or school. Somewhat more elaborate and developing in the direction of the late classic style are the paintings of Kudagala and Dimbulagala, the one as little known as the other is well documented. The Kudagala paintings (Figs.31, 32) were first reported in 1968 and dated by Paranavitana to around the 8th century, although an alternative Polonnaruva-period date has been suggested.48 Two layers of painting exist, the better-preserved and more visible upper layer being executed mostly in black on an off- white background, with areas of white body pigment. They include a masterly Bodhisattva figure with an exquisitely painted jewelled head-dress, attended by an beautifully drawn female figure; and a much-weathered, enthroned Buddha, not dissimilar to that at the Maravidiya caves, with Fig. 29 Bodhisattva and attendant female figure. Cave-shrine, Gonagolla, 5th-7th century (?). (From a drawing in ASCAR 1956.) Fig. 30 Male and attendant female figures. Cave-shrine, Karambagala. 5th-7th century. (Drawing by L.T.P. Manjusri in Dhanapala 1957.)Probably a Bodhisattva and an apsara scattering flowers. Fig. 31 Bodhisattva and attendant female figures (detail). Cave- shrine, Kudagala. 8th-l 2th century. attendant haloed deities An interesting composition of a man astride an elaborately saddled and bridled horse, can also be seen here. The Dimbulagala paintings (Pls.23-25; Fig.33) include the now vandalized and badly damaged pictures at Maravidiya, of late Anuradhapura or Polonnaruva vintage, and the well-preserved and protected group of deities at Pulligoda, dated to the 7th or Sth century.49 The latter, at least, constitute a stage of stylistic evolution somewhat less than midway between the classic style of Sigiriya and the paintings of the Polonnaruva epoch. The paintings in a large cave-shrine at Kotiyagala (Fig.34) were first recorded in 1967, and appear to have as their subject events from the life of the Buddha. At least two exceptional styles are in evidence here: one, rather stiff and schematic; the other, somewhat sketchy and fluid. Essentially illustrative or decorative in character, they may sometimes lack the elegant formality associated with the classic mode, but are no less interesting as examples of the range and virtuosity of early painting. The Archaeological Survey Report on these paintings runs as follows: The ceiling of the cave appears to have been once covered with paintings the remains of which are still quite extensive. Above the head of the (recumbent Buddha) statue there are paintings in white on a red background of a floral motif and an elephant depicted within a circle. To the north of this there is painted a rectangular framework of creepers, sacred geese and a design of alternating rectangles and ovals, identical with that found in the painting on the ceiling of the Cobra Hood cave in Sigiriya. Within the framework there are depicted numerous scenes including animal and human figures. Among the animals shown are elephants disporting in the water among lotus and water lily, sacred geese, snakes, cattle, horses, the hare, parrot and bull. There are figures of females similar to the Sigiriya figures, and personalities shown as making obeisance to a dagoba of a very early type. These paintings are attributable to a very early period of painting in Ceylon. Fig. 32 Horse and rider. Cave-shrine, Kudagala. Date uncertain. These paintings can be compared with those at Maravidiya, ‘the frail and unsteady character" of whose linework has been counterposed to ‘the masterly quality’ of the paintings at Gonagolla and Vessagiriya?1 The varied treatment of elephant figures in the respective examples clearly demonstrates the two stylistic approaches. This is also apparent in the decorative awning designs, of which there are at least five different examples at Kotiyagala. The remains of paintings just below the drip-ledge of the main cave-temple at Situlpahuva, in the deep south, are extremely fragmentary but still partly ‘readable’ (Pl.22).52 They show parts of a narrative composition, including a robed figure in an architectural setting, one or, perhaps, two antlered stags and an elegantly gesturing hand. If the Kotiyagala paintings represent an illustrative mode that is moving away from the expressive and vigorous realism and evocative formality of the Sigiriya style, the great panel at Hindagala (Pl.26), dated tentatively to the 7th century, represents a development in an opposite direction.53 It displays an illustrative naturalism and an explicitness which — though anticipated in some of the Sigiriya ladies (e.g. Pls.3, 6) — are rarely observable in any other extant paintings of the period. The sophistry of the composition, with its multiple planes and fragmented interposition of successive subjects, and the remoteness — as far as the Anuradhapura period is concerned — of its location in a mountain village above Kandy, render it historically one of the most significant pictorial remains of the Middle Historical era. Having been one of the best-preserved panels of this period — ironically now almost completely destroyed by an accidental fire and known to us only from photographs and an excellent facsimile copy in the National Museum in Colombo — it adds an entirely new dimension to our knowledge of the Sri Lankan tradition. It has features that are not seen in the Sigiriya paintings, and only very partially in the fragmentary panel compositions of the Anuradhapura period or the Polonnaruva murals. The Hindagala painting displays a particular version of the technique of ‘episodic repetition’ where various events or incidents involving the same central personage or personages — in this case two incidents from the life of the Buddha — are placed next to each other in an uninterrupted pictorial succession. This is best represented in the Asian tradition in the great cycles of painting at Ajanta or Dun-huang, and also in a somewhat different way in the 'continuous narration’ technique of the later-period murals of Sri Lanka or Thailand, where the sequence of events is projected on a single picture plane. In the Hindagala painting, as in the classic Indian or Chinese murals, there is a complex juxtaposition of planes, levels and figures. The foreground, represented by the lowest section of the painting, is occupied by the dramatic figure of Indra, whose turning head and torso mark and at the same time conceal the separation between one incident and the other. Beyond him, on a different plane and on a reduced scale indicating lesser status, but still in the lower reaches of the composition, Fig. 33 Elephant (detail). Cave-shrine, Maravidiya, Dimbulagala. 8th-l2th century. (From a copy by D.J. Lokuge, 1933, in the National Museum, Colombo.) Possibly from an incident in the life of the Buddha where an elephant, offered to the Bodhisattva, is subsequently killed by his cousin Devadatta. Fig. 34 Detail showing elephant surrounded by stylized lotuses. Cave-shrine, Kotiyagala. 5th-7th century (?). Possibly depicting an incident from "Queen Mahamaya’s Dream' predicting the birth of the Bodhisattva. Early and Middle Period Painting Pl. 2 Sigiriya rock and water-gardens from west. The Mirror Wall appears as a horizontal, light-coloured band along the west face of the rock, just above the trees. Above it is the area originally occupied by the paintings and still protected by a drip-ledge. The large dark patch in the centre of this prepared rock surface is the ’fresco pocket. Pl. 3 Apsaras. Figures Bll and B12. Sigiriya. AD 477-95. Details of Pl. 5. is a group of attendant figures. In the middle ground, on a plane slightly behind that occupied by Indra, are the two repeated representations of the Buddha, dominating in each case the most prominent central area of the two respective episodes. Behind the Buddha, on an appropriately reduced scale and occupying a third and receding plane, are the background figures. One of these, on the extreme left, enters the same picture plane as the Buddha himself, traversing the second and the third planes. The separation of the two scenes and the complex spatial qualities of the picture are heightened by the slightly different angles expressed in the seats or thrones on which the Buddha sits, on either side of the half-kneeling figure of the god. The use of both vertical and three-dimensional perspective as well as tonal modelling is seen elsewhere in Sri Lankan paintings, but it is best observed and most dramatically manifested in the Hindagala composition. The compositional sophistication of the picture is matched by its other artistic qualities. Siri Gunasinghe has written at length on its unusual psychological dimensions: Fig. 35 Fragmentary wall painting. Cave-shrine, I’idurangala. 12th century (?). ( Drawing by Senarat Bandara Disanayaka,1985.j The ladders and the figure with halo and unusual head- dress suggest the ‘Descent from the Tavatimsa Heaven ’he Hindagala mural has shown itself capable of expressing emotions by suggesting psychological relationships between the protagonists of the story. For instance, in one of the episodes, the Buddha receiving an offering has been represented not as an impassive super-human but as a being capable of displaying human emotions and acting as a person familiar with simple human behaviour. He is depicted not in the hieratic majesty of the padmasana pose but in a relaxed posture with his head slightly inclined in the direction of the personage making the offering. The relationship between the two characters is clearly stated by this simple pictorial device. However, the most obvious expression of tthehe B Buddha uddha’’ss a attttiittude ude i in t n thi hiss e epi pissode ode i iss i in t n thehe de depi piccttiion ot on ot hi hiss ha hands nds with the cupped palms cordially held up to receive the offering. his hands in the dhyana or some other mudra would have been the normal mode here, with his visage showing intense concentration unaffected by the event itself. The Hindagala painter, however, had other ideas and happily also the freedom to express them. Equally expressive of emotion is the personage seated beside the Buddha in the other scene, and identified as Indra of the famous Indasala guha episode. It would appear, however, that the eyes and the mouth of the personage tend to exhibit a frightened submission rather than a friendly veneration that would have been proper as the attitude of Indra in this particular situation. The body shown turning away from the Buddha is certainly not the vehicle for intimacy and veneration; it betrays, on the contrary, an uneasy avoidance of contact. This is not the psychological relationship one would expect to have observed between the Buddha and Indra. It is more likely that what we have here is some other popular theme involving a divine being — maybe Indra himself — submitting to the majesty of the Buddha or soliciting his favour. Despite the absence of the usual iconography this scene can be viewed as a version of the submission of Mara, shown as a god (which he was) by means of heroic proportions. In any event, in the untraditional iconography and the sense of freedom shown in the depiction of the Buddha himself, one must recognize the individualistic approach of an artist who lived beyond the reach of orthodoxy.54 If, in the extant art of the painted rock surfaces and rock shelters, Sigiriya represents the finest and purest expression of early Sri Lankan painting, the Hindagala panel is certainly its most complex statement. PL 2 Pl. 4 Apsara. Detail of Pl. 6. Pl. 5 View of‘Fresco Pocket B’looking south. Sigiriya. AD 477-95. Figures B9-B13 (L to R Pl. 6 Apsara. Figure B9. Detail of Pl. 5. Pl. 7 Apsara. Figure BIO. Detail of Pl. 5. P1 8 Apsaras. Figures B3 and B4. Sigiriya. AD 477-95. Pl. 9 Apsara. Figure B13. Detail of Pl. 5. P1 10 Apsara. Figure BI4. Sigiriya. AD 477-95. Pl. 11 Apsara. Figure Al. Sigiriya. AD 477-95. Pl. 13 Apsara. Figure Bl. Sigiriya. AD 477-95. Pl. 14 Apsara. Figure A5 (detail). Sigiriya. AD 47795 Pl. 15 Ceiling painting from Cave 9 ("Cobrahood Cave’ i. Boulder garden, Sigiriya. Late 5th century (?) Pl. 16 Detail of foliage painting from Cave 7. Boulder garden, Sigiriya. 6th-7th century (?) Pl. 18 Detail of apsara from Cave 7. Boulder garden, Sigiriya. 6th-7th century (?). Though not seen in the detail, this is one of the rare figures at Sigiriya where the entire body, including the lower limbs, was depicted P1.19 Female goddess, probably Tara. Cave painting, Kotgalkanda, Kandalama. 5th-7th century (?). (From a copy by R.U. Wickremaratne, 1985. Pl. 20 Female figure in attitude of worship. Cave painting, Gonagolla. 5th-7th century (?). (See also Fig. 29, p. 35.) Pl.21 Bodhisattva. Cave painting, Gonagolla. 5th-7th century (?). (See also Fig. 29, p. 35.) Pl. 22 Robed figures and deer in an architectural setting.Fragmentary painting, Situlpahuva. Late Anuradhapura period. Pl. 23 A group of divine beings. Pulligoda cave-temple,Dimbulagala. 7th-8th century oror Late Anuradhapura period. Pls. 24,25 Details of Pl. 23. Pls. 24,25 Details of Pl. 23. Pl. 26 Episodes from the life of the Buddha (?). Cave painting. Hindagala temple. c.7th century AD (?). (From a copy by W.M. Fernando, 1918, in the National Museum, Colombo.) The scene on the right is often identified as Indra’s Visit to the Buddha in the Indasala Cave. Pl. 27 The Buddha seated under the Bodhi tree attended by brahmas. Relic-chamber painting, Mahiyangana. 9thl 1th century. Now in the Archaeological Museum, Anuradhapura. The scene is thought to represent the Enlightenment or the first week of the sat sati. Pl. 28 Robed figures and flying male figure bearing a sword, identified as Mara. Relic­ chamber painting, Mahiyangana. 9th-l 1th century. Now in the Archaeological Museum, Anuradhapura. Pl. 29 Visnu bearing a tray of flowers. Relic-chamber painting, Mahiyangana. 9th-l 1th century. Now in the Archaeological Museum, Anuradhapura. Pl. 30 A divine being. Relic-chamber painting, Mahiyangana. 9th-11 th century. Now in the Archaeological Museum Anuradhapura. Pl. 31 Siva. Relic-chamber painting, Mahiyangana. 9th-l 1th century. Now in the Archaeological Museum, Anuradhapura. Pl. 32 Robed figures in postures of adoration. Relic-chamber painting, Mahiyangana. 9th-l 1th century. Now in the Archaeological Museum. Anuradhapura. Pl. 33 Painted pilasters and Jataka registers (detail). North wall of vestibule, Tivanka temple, Polonnaruva. 12th-13th century. The panel between the pilasters is the second panel from the west with the Mahasudassana Jataka (see Fig. 45, pp. 82-3).

Seven years ago, we began what we described as the study of the settlement archaeology and palaeoenvironment of a diagnostic micro-region of the Sri Lankan Dry Zone’. The project is now usually referred to as the SARCP (the Settlement Archaeology Project). Our initial objectives were, at one and the same time, modest and extremely ambitious. On the one hand, we were embarking on an exploratory probe into the little-known archaeological terrain surrounding the major urban center at Sigiriya and the ancient royal monastery complex at Dambulla; on the other, we were undertaking the investigation of the total archaeological landscape’ of an area. of about one thousand square kilometers, the scope of our study extending from the prehistory and palaeo-ecology of the area to its contemporary ethnography. The present report - together with its precursor, The Settle­ ment Archaeology of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region - brings together the preliminary results of that undertaking. As one might have predicted, these results lie somewhere in between the two extremes of our objectives. As the illustration on the opposite page and other plans show, we now have from the Sigiriya-Dambulla region one of the best-documented archaeological landscapes in Sri Lanka. At the same time, we realize that we have only scratched the surface of this landscape and retrieved some fragments of the data it has to offer. Many of the major - and minor - research problems underlying our investigations remain unresolved. However, we have now co­ me to know at first hand the nature of the terrain, its research Figure 1:1 SARCP archaeological sites and irrigation sites in the Sigiriya-Dambulla region. The Sigiriya-Dambulla region: between the Anuradhapura and Polonnaruva systems and a gateway to the central mountains Figure 1:3 The river basins of the Sigiriya-Dambulla region potential, and the capabilities and limits of our investigative techniques and resources. In place of a relatively blank sheet in our understanding of the settlement network of the Sigiriya- Dambulla area through the various phases of its long history (Bandaranayake 1990), we now have a fairly complex picture of what there is, what there could be and also an acute sense of how little we know. As Mogren observes (see "Objectives, Methods, Constraints and Perspectives" this volume) in his overview of the project, emphasizing one of the laws of archaeological research: "...an interpretation of a site or a pattern, that is published or presented...in some form should always be seen as a mere take-off for further research, never as an ab­ solute fact, or termination of study. It must be under­ stood, therefore, that no matter how many times one returns to a given site, its does not represent a truly complete understanding of a past reality." Our surveys have documented so far a total of 195 archaeological sites and 203 irrigation tanks within the demarcated zone. This forms a complex, diachronic palimpsest, a superimposition, often one upon the other, of the remains of the human occupation of the area through several millennia. The project is contained within an area of about 40km from north to south and 30km from east to west, in the uppermost reaches of the Kiri Oya, Sigiri Oya, Mirisgoni Oya and Dambulu Oya basins. For a variety of reasons, such as the prevailing conditions in 1988 and 1989, the relative inaccessibility of certain sectors such as the northern half of the Kiri Oya basin, the constant presence of wild elephants in the more heavily-forested tracts, human and transport resource constraints and the concentration on other research interests, various sectors of the target area have been surveyed in different degrees of intensity. The Kiri Oya basin Thus, research in the Kiri Oya basin was more or less re­ stricted to a brief preliminary survey of its southern half in 1988 (Manatunga 1990); the excavations of the major iron production site at Alakolavava - Dehigaha-ala-kanda (KO. 14) in 1990 and 1991 (see Forenius and Solangaarachchi this volume); and the survey and trial excavations of the Vavala- Sigiriya canal and dam network in 1992 (see Myrdal-Runeb- « jer: "The Archaeology of Irrigated Agriculture" this volume) Figure 1:4 Prehistoric sites. and 1993. Rich in spring water resources, limestone quarries and, presumably, in high-quality ironore, the area seems to have formed an important industrial zone and a well-settled communications corridor between the Sigiriya and Dambulla area to the south and west and the Minneriya-Giritale and Parakrama Samudra ’sub-systems’ to the east. Further re­ search in the Kiri Oya basin lies outside the present program of the SARCP, but must remain an important unfinished task to be accomplished at some future date. The Upper Sigiri Oya basin The Sigiri Oya originates in the bed of the Sigiri Mahavava, as a small stream flowing northwards out of the breached bund of this once massive, man-made lake. Well beyond the greater Sigiriya area it ultimately joins the northeastward­ flowing Yan Oya, the country’s fifth longest river, and a major settlement zone of the protohistoric and Early and Mid­ dle Historic Periods in Sri Lanka. Limited surveys of the Sigiri Oya basin between 1988 and 1990 have revealed not only a typical tank village and tank cascade landscape (see Wickremesekara 1990a:95-101; 1990b:163-166), but also a series of riverside settlements of EHP-1 which have had to remain uninvestigated. It is only the Talkote complex (Mo- gren this volume), Tammannagala (Somadeva and Kasth- urisinghe this volume) and the prehistoric sites of Aligala and Potana (Adikari: "Approaches to the Prehistory of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region" this volume; Karunaratne and Ad­ ikari: "Excavations at Aligala" this volume; Adikari: "Excavations at the Sigiri-Potana Cave Complex" this vo­ lume) that have been the subjects of trial excavations. The Sigiriya-Mapagala-Ramakale-Pidurangala complex and the Sigiriya hinterland briefly discussed below, dominate this ba- sin and remain the best-researched section of the entire study area. Figure 1:5 Protohistoric - Early Historic (EHP 1) sites. The Mirisgoni Oya and Dambulu Oya basins The documentation and survey work in the Mirisgoni Oya and Dambulu Oya basins has not been as extensive as in the Sigiriya hinterland, not so much for reasons of inaccessibility or the difficulty of the terrain as in the Kiri Oya area, but rather for those of time and resource allocation. The early work on the study of the irrigation network (Wickremesekera) could not be pursued, greater emphasis being laid on and resources allocated to the excavations of the important prehistoric site at Potana (which was in danger of being des­ troyed by modern construction work), the substantial settle­ ment site at Ibbankatuva, and the survey of iron production sites in the southern sector of the Mirisgoni Oya basin (Ka- runaratne and Mogren, to be published in Forenius and Sol- angaarachchi (eds.) in preparation). The Potana excavations, briefly described below (Adikari this volume) have produced a wealth of data, especially of faunal remains - nearly 300 kilograms - and human skeletal material from a prehistoric horizon. This rock shelter has also become a test site for our first steps in palaeobotanical studies (by T.R. Prematilake), and the experimental application of chemical analysis to soil as a prelude or complement to excavation (by A. Tantillage). The Sigiriya Hinterland The most intensively surveyed area is the immediate hinter­ land of the urban and palace complex at Sigiriya (fig. 1:8), including the great monasteries at Ramakale and Pidurangala (figs. 1:12 and 1:13), each covering an area of about one square kilometre, the irrigation network of the Sigiri Mahavava and the Sigiri-Vavala canal (Myrdal-Runebjer: "The Archaeology of Irrigated Agriculture" this volume; see also fig. 1:8), and the complex of archaeological sites around the ancient settlements at Talkote (Mogren this volume: "The Archaeology of Talkote"). From Prehistory to the Early Historic Period A much more varied and intricate picture than was hitherto imagined has now emerged. We are now aware of the prehis­ toric occupation of the Sigiriya area, with nearly five prehis­ toric sites available within a 6km radius of Sigiriya itself. A substantial body of data relating to prehistoric habitat, tech­ nology, subsistence and lifeways, and even ritual practices has been gathered and will be the subject of on-going ana­ lysis and research (Adikari this volume: "Approaches to the Prehistory of the Sigiriya-Dambulla region"; Karunaratne and Adikari this volume: "Excavations at Aligala"; Adikari this volume: "Excavations at the Sigiri-Potana Cave Complex"). Aligala, within the eastern sector of the citadel area at Si­ giriya, is a site of primary importance, where we have a rare instance of an immediate succession from the prehistoric thr­ ough the protohistoric to the Early Historic Period. Figure 1:7 ‘Potana Man’ - skeleton No. 2 from cave 1, context 10, Sigiri-Potana (MO. 14). Three ,4C dates for this context have a 5000 - 4500 BC range. There is no indication whether the skeleton is intrusive. Photo: CCF - Sigiriya Project. Figure 1:8 Sigiriya Hinterland Figure 1:9 The Aligala-Potana sequence. This site became doubly important when the protohistoric settlement horizon here provided one of the earliest radio- metric dates for an Iron Age site in the country. The Aligala sequence is complemented by that from the rescue excavations at Potana. Irrigation Another important focus of research (see Myrdal-Runebjer: "The Archaeology of Irrigated Agriculture" this volume) has been the hitherto little-understood canal system lying to the south and east of the Sigiri Mahavava, the great relict man­ made lake, whose earth dam has now been found to have extended for a distance of 7km from the southern foot of the Sigiriya rock and the Mapagala fortress to Nikavatavana and beyond (Adikari 1993). This canal system seems to have its origins as far away as Vavala, 9.6km to the south of Sigiriya. It forms, therefore, an early example of a trans-basin canal, whose complex technology, function, chronology and man­ power inputs are continuing subjects of investigation. The Sigiri Mahavava seems to have been supplemented at its southernmost point by another canal which seems to have connected the Kuda Gona Oya to the great lake from a point 11km away. The urban form Equally significant has been the discovery of the full extent of the urban area of Sigiriya, now appearing as a walled city nearly 3km in length, with a series of suburban settlements (figs. 1:10 and 1:11; see also Karunaratne: "The Eastern Pr­ ecinct of the Sigiriya Complex" this volume). Judging by the pottery from these sites and the 14C dates from the large suburban ’village’ of Tammannagala (see Somadeva and Ka- sthurisinghe this volume), these settlements seem to date fr­ om the major urban period in the late 5th century AD, but at least some of them continued - as the city itself seems to have done - for some centuries after its abandonment as a royal capital. Sigiriya is one of the best-preserved urban forms of the first millennium in Asia, exemplifying the grand scale and vision of Sri Lankan city planning. We can now add to the discussion of this in the previous volume (Bandaranayake 19- 90.24-26). The city can now be seen as having an elongated rectangular form, nearly 3km from east to west and 1km from north to south, based on a square module of circa 170m and a concentric-cum-axial design. This gemometrical conception also accomodates organic and assymmetrical elements such as the Sigiriya rock itself, the terraced hill around the base of the rock, the Mapagala fortress, the partly man-made, partly natural topography of the lake, and the ’borrowed scenery’ of the Figure 1:10 Suburban settlements of the 5th-7th century. The black dots indicate the existence of BRW utility EHP 1 settlements. Figure 1:11 Schematic Plan of the Urban Center Kandalama mountains and the Matale ranges. The urban plan presents itself in at least five, hierarchically organized zonal divisions: Level 5: the palace on the summit; Level 4: the inner citadel or raj angaria', Level 3: the ’inner city’ or ceremonial precinct to the east, and the royal pleasure gardens to the west; Level 2: the outer city and the Mapagala fortress; Level 1: the suburbs and villages beyond the outer city ramparts and the lake, the Sigiri Mahavava. Buddhist monasteries Immediately contiguous to this urban landscape and extending beyond it are the remains of a large number of Buddhist monasteries belonging to various categories and from different periods of history. These monastery sites form the most visible and expressive aspects of premodem settlement in the Sigiriya-Dambulla region, as almost everywhere else in the Dry Zone. They occupy a dramatic and central position in an elaborate mosaic of multi-period village settlements, irriga­tion features, iron production centres, cemeteries, and fortifications. The monasteries were clearly principal foci of social organization in the countryside. Their role as centres of religion, as well as their socio-political and socioeconomic functions are well known and have been extensively researched but as yet mostly from literary and epigraphical sources. Figure 1:12 Ramakale Figure 1:13 pidurangala. The ’pre-Kasyapa’ and ’post-Kasyapa’ history of Sigiriya, first as a rock-shelter monastery of the earliest phase of the Early Historical Period (EHP 1 - 3rd to 1st century BC) and then the establishment and development of the post-Kasyapan monastery of the Middle Historical Period (6th to 13th century AD) is complemented by the continuation and expansion of the grand monastery complexes at Pidurangala and Ramakale. Our surveys have also indicated a number of equally important and other less substantial monastic centres, many of which were previously unknown. These monastic sites are set amidst a large number of multi-period village settlements, the best-surveyed and most complex example being that of the Talkote complex described at some length below (Mogren thisvolume). Detailed investigations of selected monastic complexes, including field surveys and test excavations have been completed and will form the subject of a separate volume (in preparation - by Prishantha Gunawardena and the present au­ thor) and more than one dissertation. Particular attention has been focussed on the network of rock-shelter monasteries of the earliest phase of the Historical Period, which form an important component of the monastery sites in the area, and which were discussed in a preliminary way in the earlier report (Bandaranayake 1990:22-23). A general survey of the area indicates a clear hierarchy of sites and site catchment systems. In particular, excavations and detailed surveys have been carried out in rock-shelters at Sigiriya, Pidurangala and Dambulla. The underlying research objectives were: Figure 1:15 Early Buddhist rock shelter complexes. (a) the depositional and habitational sequence; (b) the study of rock-shelter architecture; (c) the extent and use of space within a rock shelter and its maximum number of occupants in a cave; (d) the relationship between the cave itself and the sur­ rounding area; (e) the population parameters of monastic settlement. The analysis of the results of these studies is still on-going and will be completed and published in the forthcoming monograph. Figure 1:14 Buddhist monasteries of the EHP 1 and Early Middle Historic Period. Figure 1:16 Development of monumental structures. Thematic studies Period-based and thematic interests - such as prehistory, the early settlement period, iron production, irrigation systems, central place studies (particularly of the monastic centres in the area), the ethnoarchaeology of food production - have replaced the general field surveys of the first two seasons of the project. The major research problems that are being addressed include: 1. The descriptive reconstruction of the human settle­ ment in the area from prehistoric times onwards and an understanding of the major changes and transformations that took place; 2. The indications if any in the study area, of the beginnings of agriculture and settlement and of the development of major rural and urban settlements in the Protohistoric Period and in Phase I of the Early Historic Period. 3. The character and function of the monastery as a central place, its population, development history and material and other evidence of the exact nature of its relationship with the society around it. 4.The urban form at Sigiriya in the wider context of urbanization in Sri Lanka. * 5. The major changes that took place and the charac­ ter, chronology and causative factors of the gra­ dually decline of central places and of population in the period after about the 13th century. 6. The role played by iron production in the economy of the region and the chronology of this develop­ ment. 7. The character, chronology and technology of va­ rious types of irrigation systems and the manpower inputs involved in the construction of irrigation w- orks. 8. The usefulness of specific contemporary ethnog­ raphic studies in the interpretation of archaeologi cal remains, especially the ethno-archaeology of food production. The archaeological scope of such questions, and the inves­ tigative resources required in addressing them, in the context of the study area itself and in terms of the level of development of Sri Lankan archaeology, defines the intellectual and institu­ tional horizons of the project. The present volume reflects the multi-disciplinary approach and the broad thematic and chronological range that has been achieved in SARCP. It dis­ plays the new perspectives and insights the project has brought to the study of this country’s rich and multi-faceted history, undertaken principally by a new generation of Sri Lankan archaeologists, with the collaboration and assistance of our Swedish colleagues. Future Perspectives The program continues to maintain, in a number of different ways, the momentum generated during the last seven years. Several research dissertations based on or deriving from SARCP fieldwork are in progress. They are scheduled to be completed in 1994-95 and to be published as project monographs. These descriptive and analytical studies will form the project’s most substantial research product. Theoretical syntheses relating the composite and diachronic data generated to broader patterns and long range processes of historical development, on a national, regional and global scale, are also being attempted - without losing the close focus on micro and macro-level fieldwork. In this con­ text, comparative studies in irrigation, palaeo-ecology, ur­ banization, iron production, and the social history of fortifications are underway, at least in an incipient or program­ matic form, and constitute some of the important areas of ongoing and future SARCP research, considerably expanding the project’s intellectual terrain. The potential for such re­ search in two areas of study was assessed recently in a field visit (led by the palaeo-ecologist, Prof. Urwe Miller, of the University of Stockholm) and in a paper read before the Sri Lanka Historical Association (Bandaranayake 1993). The lat­ ter discussed the possibilities of using data concerning irriga­ tion works and monumental remains, on a local or national scale, as useful indicators of cycles of economic development, which could at the same time be related to long-range global processes. The type of projection that might be obtained from the study of monumental remains in the study area were presented in the form of a diagram (Fig.1.16), generated from the combined and partly "guesstimated’ evaluation of three factors - (a) site area; (b) estimated quantities of material and/or labour input; (c) level of technology. In all the technical complexities of SARCP research the human dimensions of archaeology have not been forgotten. While settlement and landscape studies, like all other branches of the discipline, are primarily concerned with the tech­ nicalities involved in the retrieval and analysis of material residues, as well as wider interpretative and theoretical con­ cerns, they are ultimately concerned with people - in the past and in the present. The primary objectives of the program, such as the ’archaeology of the village’, of the neglected base of the social pyramid, the development of national research capabilities and the collegial relationship between Sri Lankan and Swedish archaeologists, have remained in the forefront of day-to-day work. We may use as an elegant and symbolic expression of this concern Maya Upananda’s evocative photograph of a terracotta souvenir sculpture from Sigiriya (Fig. 1.17) in which he has captured for us an intensely per­ sonal glance from the past. Fashioned out of clay, the simplest and most basic of materials taken from the homeground of both the farmer and the archaeologist, this figure expresses the imaginative and individualized sensibilities of an ancient society so profoundly concerned with its art that it wrote poetry about it - the Sigiri graffiti (Priyanka, this volume) - and produced sculptured souvenirs of the well-known Sigiriya paintings. This image reminds us that archaeology is as much about ourselves as it is about trying to understand the ’objective’ societal realities of the past.­ Figure 1:17 Terracotta souvenir sculpture from the Boulder Garden at Sigiriya. 7th-9th centuries AD. These figurines depict the apsaras, the celestrial nymphs in the Sigiriya paintings. They were probably made as souvenirs to be taken away by visitors to the city who came to see the abandoned rock, its palace and the paintings. Photo: Maya Upananda. REFERENCES Adikari, G. Preliminary report on ancient irrigation. Study of the Sigiri Mahavava. PGIAR Ar chive. Cat.No. 93/14. Bandaranayake, S., M. Mogren and S. Epitawatte (eds.). 19- 90. The Settlement Archaeology of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region. Colombo: PGIAR. Bandaranayake, S. 1990. Approaches to the Settlement Ar­ chaeology of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region. In Ban­ daranayake, etaZ. 1990:14-38. Bandaranayake, S. 1993. Sri Lanka in the context of long range patterns of development in world history a note. Paper presented to Sri Lanka Historical Association Re­ search SeminarColombo. Forenius, S. and R. Solangaarachchi (eds.). (in preparation). Approaches to the Ancient Iron Production of the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region. Colombo: PGIAR. Karunaratne, P. and M. Mogren. The Spatial Aspect of Iron Production in the Sigiriya-Dambulla Region. In Forenius, S. and R. Solangaarachchi (eds.) (in preparation). Prematilake, T.R. Palaeobotanical studies in the Sigiriya Region. Paper presented at the seminar on the Archaeology °f Sigiriya. CCF - Sigiriya Project. February 1994. Thanthilage, A. Report on phosphate analysis for tracing set­ tlement patterns in the Sigiri-Potana cave complex. PGIAR Archives. Cat. No. 1992. Wickremesekera, C. 1990a. The Sigiri Oya and Misrfsgoni Oya basins. In Bandaranayake, S., et al. 1990.94-104. Wickremesekera, C. 1990b. A catalogue of villages. In Ban­ daranayake, et a/.1990:159-163.

Dr. Nilan Cooray PDF Link https://www.sigiriya.site/publicaitons The Sigiriya Royal Gardens Analysis of the Landscape Architectonic Composition Nilan Cooray Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Urbanism The Sigiriya Royal Gardens Analysis of the landscape architectonic composition Dit proefschrift is goedgekeurd door de promotoren: Prof. dr. ir. C. M. Steenbergen Prof. dr. E. A. de Jong Samenstelling promotiecommissie: Rector Magnificus, Voorzitter Prof. dr. ir. C. M. Steenbergen, Technische Universiteit Delft, promotor Prof. dr. E. A. de Jong, Universiteit van Amsterdam, promotor Prof. N. de Silva, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka Prof. ir. E.A.J. Luiten, Technische Universiteit Delft Prof. dr. ir. P.H. Meurs, Technische Universiteit Delft Prof. dr. ir. A. van den Brink, Wageningen Universiteit Dr. ir. W. Reh, Technische Universiteit Delft abe.tudelft Ontwerp: Sirene Ontwerpers, Rotterdam ISBN 978-1480030978 ISSN 2212-3202 © 2012 Nilan Cooray Contents (concise) Abstract 9 Acknowledgements 11 1 Introduction 23 2 Context for the Study 41 3 Previous Research and Interventions 85 4 The Methodology 119 5 The Analysis 131 6 Conclusions 223 7 Perspectives 251 Abstract Besides the efforts that are of a descriptive and celebrative nature, studies related to Sri Lanka’s historical built heritage largely view material remains in historical, sociological, socio-historical and semiological perspectives. There is hardly any serious attempt to view such material remains from a technical-analytical approach to understand the compositional aspects of their design. The 5th century AC royal complex at Sigiriya is no exception in this regard. The enormous wealth of information and the material remains unearthed during more than 100 years of field-based research by several generations of archaeologists provide an ideal opportunity for such analysis. The present study aims, therefore, to fill the gap in research related to Sri Lanka’s historical built heritage in general, and to Sigiriya in particular. Therefore, the present research attempts to read Sigiriya as a landscape architectonic design to expose its architectonic composition and design instruments. The study, which is approached from a technicalanalytical point of view, follows a methodological framework that was developed at the Landscape Design Department of the Faculty of Architecture at the Delft University of Technology. The study reveals that the architectonic design of Sigiriya constitutes multiple design layers and multiple layers of significance with materialspatial-metaphorical-functional coherence, and that it has both general and unique landscape architectonic elements, aspects, characteristics and qualities. The richness of its composition also enables the identification of the landscape architectural value of Sigiriya, which will help reshape policies related to conservation and presentation of Sigiriya as a heritage site, as well as to its protection and management as a green monument. The positive results of the study also underline that the methodology adopted in this research provides a framework for the study of other examples of historical gardens and landscapes in Sri Lanka, which will eventually provide insight into the typological aspects of a possible Sri Lankan tradition of landscape design. Acknowledgements The present research is the outcome of work carried out in the field, archives and the drawing studio; the analysis of such material was carried out in 1995, 1996, 1999 and 2003 in Delft. It was the late Prof. dr. ir. Frits van Voorden, Chair, Architectural and Urban Conservation of the Faculty of Architecture of the Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands (TUD), who supervised and guided my research before his untimely demise. In him I found a great mentor who made me look at historical built heritage differently from the conventional art-historical perspective. Prof. dr. ir. Clemens Steenbergen, Chair, Landscape Architecture of the same faculty, who was the co-supervisor during the initial stages of my research, agreed to be my supervisor after the demise of Prof. van Voorden. I am most privileged to be associated with and guided by Prof. Steenbergen, who is one of Europe’s innovative researchers on landscape design, and whose research work on West European gardens and landscapes was a great source of inspiration for me. Prof. Steenbergen devoted much of his valuable time to discussing my study, reading the text and drawings meticulously and giving critical remarks to improve the quality of this research work. When Prof. Steenbergen in 2011 retired as Chair, he requested Prof. dr. Erik de Jong, with his great expertise in the history of landscape architecture, also to be a supervisor of this project. He devoted much time to going through the text of my study and gave his specific input to improve its quality. It has been an enviable pleasure to carry out this research under their expert guidance, and I respectfully record my deepest gratitude to these three teachers. I also take this opportunity to pay tribute to Dr. Roland Silva, the former Director General of the Central Cultural Fund (CCF) and under whom I had the privilege of developing a carrier in heritage conservation, for persuading me and providing institutional assistance to carry out this doctoral research in the Netherlands and giving his expert comments at various stages of this study; to Prof. dr. Senake Bandaranayake, under whom I had the opportunity to work at Sigiriya, and to be inspired by his exceptional knowledge of, and scholarly research on, the site, and for giving me all the facilities to carry out the study during his tenure as the Director General of the CCF; to Dr. Nandana Chutiwongs, the former Curator of the Leiden Museum of Ethnology, and Prof. dr. K. R. van Kooij, the former Chair, South Asian Art and Archaeology, Kern Institute, Leiden University, for not only introducing me to Prof. van Voorden of TUD, but making valuable comments during my research work; to Dr. ir. Wouter Reh of the subdepartment of Landscape Architecture of TUD for giving his expert advice, especially on the methodological aspects of the study; to Prof. dr. P. L. Prematilleke, former head of the Department of Archaeology of the University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, for giving his scholarly advice during the research work; and to Prof. Nimal de Silva, former Dean of the Faculty of Architecture, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka, who was one of my teachers during my architectural training at the same university, for devoting his valuable time to read the text and giving his constructive criticism to improve it. I feel fortunate to have obtained such assistance from an array of distinguished experts. I am also grateful to Dr. Gamini Wijesuriya for his valuable comments and the encouragement given at different stages of the study; to Dr. Ron van Oers for accompanying me to European gardens during field work, commenting on the text and also helping me in diverse ways to make my stay in the Netherlands a pleasant one; to architect Ismeth Raheem for his valuable advice during the archival research; and to architect Jayatissa Herath, my colleague since our undergraduate days, for going through the text and drawings and making valuable suggestions to improve them. I wish to acknowledge all the assistance given by the non-academic staff of the subdepartments of Architectural and Urban Conservation and Landscape Architecture of TUD, especially Ms. Will Hoogendijk-Hagen and Ms. Margo van der Helm, for providing logistical support during my study periods at TUD. My study in Delft on several occasions was made possible through the scholarships offered to me by the Netherlands National Commission for UNESCO, and the balance financial support given by my employer, the CCF. I am grateful to both these institutions for the kind contributions made to engage and complete this study. Messrs. S. Sivanantharaja and S. M. J. S. Samarasinghe of the GIS Division, Department of Survey, were cooperative in obtaining the Department’s GIS data covering the Sigiriya region for the morphologic analysis related to the study. Mr. Kusumsiri Kodituwakku of the CCF’s Sigiriya Project was helpful in discussing some of the questions which I was confronted with during this research. Messrs. Mohammed Sabet of TUD, Sarith Karunaratne of Jayatissa Herath Associates and Chanaka Bogahawatte of the Department of Survey helped me in producing most of the drawings, while Ms. Dilanthi Atapattu and Ms. Rovina de Soyza of the CCF assisted me in the word processing. My brother-in-law, Mr. Linus Fernando, volunteered in editing the language of the text and Ms. Judith Waters Pasqualge undertook the copyediting of the final text. To all these institutions and individuals and many others not mentioned, I wish to express my heartfelt thanks. Finally, I wish to extend my deep sense of gratitude to my wife, Dilinie, my daughters, Nayanamalie, Divyanie and Navyangie, who, no doubt, appreciate my work despite much inconvenience caused to them throughout this study. Nilan Cooray Colombo, September 2012 To the late Prof. dr. ir. Frits van Voorden Former Chair, Architectural and Urban Conservation, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands Contents (extensive) 1 Introduction 23 1.1 Sri Lanka’s Historical Built Landscapes: General Overview 23 1.2 The Central Issue and Main Objective 34 1.3 The Secondary Objectives 36 1.3.1 Positioning Sigiriya in the Global Landscape Design Context 36 1.3.2 Conservation, Presentation and Management of the Heritage Site of Sigiriya 38 1.4 The Approach, Method, Scope and Limitations 38 1.5 The Structure of the Thesis 40 2 Context for the Study 41 2.1 General Context 41 2.1.1 Environment, Topography and Society 41 2.1.2 Attitude towards Nature 44 \ \ 2.1.3 The Cosmology 45 2.1.4 Discourse of Kingship 49 2.1.5 City Planning and Architecture 51 2.1.6 Irrigation Engineering 56 2.1.7 Pleasure Activities of Royalty 58 2.1.8 External Contacts 59 \ 2.2 Sigiriya: A Basic Introduction 61 2.2.1 Historical Context 61 2.2.2 Physical Characteristics 63 3 Previous Research and Interventions 85 3.1 Previous Studies and Interpretations of Sigiriya 85 3.1.1 Function and Meaning 86 3.1.2 Design and Technical Aspects 94 3.1.3 Observations 102 3.2 Previous Conservation, Presentation and Development Activities 104 3.2.1 Sigiriya Proper 104 3.2.2 Visitor Infrastructure and Facilities 112 3.2.3 The Surrounding Hinterland 114 3.2.4 Observations 118 4 The Methodology 119 4.1 Survey of Existing Methodologies 119 4.2 Methodology of the Delft Tradition of Research 121 4.3 Adaptation of the Methodology for the Present Study 123 5 The Analysis 131 5.1 Characteristics of the Natural and Agricultural Landscape 131 5.1.1 Geomorphology and Topography 131 5.1.2 Natural, Topographic Configurations 142 5.2 Interaction of the Formal Layout with the Natural and Agricultural Landscape 149 5.2.1 Lines of the Formal Layout 149 5.2.2 Location and Orientation 151 5.2.3 Axial Arrangement 156 5.3 Geometry of the Scheme 160 17 Contents (extensive) 5.4 Symmetry and Asymmetry 165 5.4.1 Symmetry 165 5.4.2 Asymmetry 173 5.5 Incorporation and Organization of Spatial Entities 181 5.6 Treatment of Panorama/Horizon 184 5.7 Spatial Depth 190 5.8 Scenography of Movement 191 5.9 Visual Structure 203 5.9.1 Visual Layers 203 5.9.2 Hydraulic Elements 206 5.9.3 Natural and Built Elements 212 5.10 Activities and Functional Elements 215 5.10.1 Programmatic Domains 215 5.10.2 Pleasure Program 216 5.10.3 Functional Relationship of Spaces 218 6 Conclusions 223 6.1 Landscape Design Characteristics of Sigiriya 223 6.1.1 The Basic Form 223 6.1.2 The Spatial Form 229 6.1.3 The Metaphorical Form 232 6.1.4 The Programmatic Form 233 6.2 Sigiriya and Other Landscape Traditions: A Comparison of Landscape Designs 235 6.3 Sigiriya as a Landscape Architectonic Composition 246 18 The Sigiriya Royal Gardens 7 Perspectives 251 7.1 Conservation, Presentation and Management 251 7.2 Scientific and Methodological Aspects of the Research 259 7.3 Sigiriya in the Local and Global Design Context 262 7.3.1 A Sri Lankan Tradition of Landscape Design? 262 7.3.2 Landscape Design in the Global Context 262 List of Figures 265 Summary (Samenvatting) 271 Curriculum Vitae 277 Reference List 279 1. Introduction 1.1 Sri Lanka’s Historical Built Landscapes: General Overview Historical references in literary sources indicate that Sri Lanka’s earliest built landscapes were the royal parks and woods that existed in the ancient royal center of Anuradhapura during the pre-Buddhist period (before the 3rd century BC), which were later offered to Buddhist monks by transforming them to monastic use. Therefore, the pre-Buddhist Mahameghavana and Nandana (later Jotivana) gardens at Anuradhapura could be regarded as such woods and parks of royalty.1 As per the commentaries of the chronicle Mahavamsa (chapters XI:2-3, XV:1-3, 7-9) these woods and parks would have consisted of thick foliaged fruit and flowering trees, aromatic plants and streams providing shade and coolness. The chronicle Culavamsa (chapter LXXIX:2-3, 4-5) mentions that the park called Nandana at Polonnaruva (12th century AC) was adorned with hundreds of fruits and blossoms, and indicates that the park called Lakkhuyyana, also at Polonnaruva, was planted with thousands of trees of every variety. The offering of a royal lodge within Mahameghavana at Anuradhapura to Arahant Mahinda, who led Buddhist missionary activities to Sri Lanka from India, for his night stay indicates that built structures were also elements of the landscape design of such parks and woods (Mahavamsa, chapter XV:11-13). An inscription of Nissankamalla (1187-1196) found at the pavilion named Priti-dana-mandapa at Polonnaruva, where the king distributed alms for the poor and forbade the picking of fruits from the surrounding orchards, indicates that this pavilion was also a built structure of a park (Prematilleke and Karunaratne, 1993:111). The references in the Mahavamsa (chapter XIV:1-10) to the meeting of King Devanampiya Tissa and Arahant Mahinda at Mihintale, 13 kilometers east of Anuradhapura, during a hunting expedition of the king also indirectly indicate that hunting parks were not unusual, at least during Sri Lanka’s pre-Buddhist era.2 1 The chronicle Mahavamsa (chapter I:21-23) also mentions a garden called Mahanaga that existed during the 5th century BC at Mahiyangana in central Sri Lanka as a customary meeting place of Yakkhas, one of the early inhabitants of the island. For more information on gardens referred to in ancient literary sources, see Dissanayake (2003:5-62). 2 Geiger (1960:62) mentions that hunting was a sport to which the king and noblemen were devoted. Adithya (1981:9), referring to the Mahavamsa, points out that hunting was an acceptedsport, despite Buddhismbeing the state religion, and killing was resorted to by royalty. Figure1.1 1 Ranmasu Uyana 2. Isurumuniya 3. Vessagiriya 4. Tisavava Reservoir Location of royal and monastic landscapes in relation to Tisavava reservoirat Anuradhapura (courtesy: Bandaranayaka 1993a) The most interesting built landscapes, however, were the pleasure gardens (magul uyan) for the sensual enjoyment of royalty that continued over the centuries with a possible pre-Buddhist origin.3 As seen at Ranmasu Uyana4 (7th or 8th century AC5), located below the earthen bund of Tisavava, a gigantic man-made reservoir at Anuradhapura (figures 1.1, 1.2), and at Dip Uyana (literally: Promontory Park, 12th century AC), located between the citadel and Parakramasamudra (figure 1.3), the great man-made reservoir at Polonnaruva, the pleasure gardens were elaborated with moatedisland pavilions and summer palaces, ornamental baths and swimming pools, artificial waterfalls and cascades.6 Ranmasu Uyana also showcases that natural boulders were used as caves and to build garden structures upon them.7 However, the most famous garden is at Sigiriya (5th century AC), which is the subject of this study. The provincial royal complex at Galabadda (11th century AC) in southern Sri Lanka, which is still largely uninvestigated, also falls into this category. The royal precinct of Kandy (19th century AC), the last royal capital of Sri Lanka, with the vast sheet of water of the man- made lake in the foreground and the green-forested mountain in the background, wasdesigned to give an impression of an abode,floating in the sky8 (figure 5.60). 3. Studies on Sinhala literature also indicate that water sports and water gardens were important aspects of Sri Lankan courtlylife (Gooneratne, 1983). 4. See ASCAR (1940-1945:18-22) and Paranavitana (1944:193-209) for detailed accountsof Ranmasu Uyana. 3 Van Lohuizen (1979:340) assignsthe date of the rock-cutreliefs of elephants on either side of a royal bath house at Ranmasu Uyana to the late 7th or early 8th century AC. However, Dissanayake (2003:55) argues that the garden was established during the periodfrom 3rd to 1st centuryBC. 4 The Culavamsa (chapter LXXIII:98-100) gives avivid description of the different varieties of trees and structures within the pleasure gardens at Polonnaruva. For a detail description of the variety of trees grown within the historical built landscapes and their use, see Dissanayake (2003:224-230). Also see Ashton, et al. (1997:391- 399) for the use of trees in Sri Lanka’s history, and De Silva, N. (1998) for indigenous trees associated in the traditional landscapes of Sri Lanka. 5 Upavana Vinodaya (1964:21) prescribes creating artificial caves and archeswithin the gardensby means of vegetation, and this indicatesthat caves are important featuresof the built landscape. 6 According to tradition, King Sri Vickramarajasingha (1798-1815) commissioned the royal architectDevendra Mulacariya to transform the city of Kandy into a celestial city. After seven days, the royal architect explained the designconcept to the king thus: “Your Majesty,I imagine that the thick green Udawattakele (the forested mountain) behind the palace buildingis Neela Megha, the blue clouds of the sky; and that in front of the palace building,it is possible to createcloud-walls in white.Then by transforming the paddy fieldsinto a lake, one will see the reflection of cloud-walls and the palace buildings in water, and no doubt, it will appear like a city floating in the sky” (cited by De Silva,N. 1993:159). Figure 1.2 Ranmasu Uyana at Anuradhapura Figure 1.3 Dip Uyana at Polonnaruva (photo:Roelof Munneke) Such architectural elements as walakulu bemma (the cloud drift parapet wall, as depicted in temple paintings) running at the level of the base of the palace buildings, and diyareli bemma (the wave swell parapet wall) over the lake, also heighten the above impression and reinforce the dynamic composition of the scheme.9 Although not yetinvestigated from a landscape design point of view, the rock-associated royal capitals of Yapahuwa (13th century AC), Dambadeniya (13th century AC) and possibly Kurunegala (14th centuryAC) could also be significant built landscapes (figure1.4). 1. Rock 2. Inner City 3. Outer City 4. Monastic Precinct 5. Moat 6. Rampart Figure 1.4 Layout, rock associated royalcapital at Yapahuwa 9 For further detail on walakulu bemmaand diyareli bemma,see Seneviratne (1983:86) and Duncan (1990:101- 107). The cave/rock-associated Buddhistmonastic sites, which were meant to concentrate on the religious ideals of the monks, were the earliest monastic landscapes10 of the island, datingfrom the 3rd century BC. As seen at Mihintale, Dambulla and numeroussuch sites (almost all dating from the 3rd or 2nd century BC), natural and/or partly excavated cave shelters on rocky mountain peaks or slopes were utilized with minimum disturbance to the naturalsetting. Sigiriya (3rd/2ndcentury BC) and modern Vessagiriya (ancient Issaramana, 3rd century BC, figures 1.1, 1.5) at Anuradhapura were also cave-associated monastic landscapes, before they were altered in the latter half of the 5th centuryAC.11 Figure 1.5 Vessagiriya at Anuradhapura 10 For more description of Sri Lankan monastic landscapes, see De Silva, N. (2009). 11 Kasyapa (477-495) absorbed the monastic landscapeof Sigiriya into his royal garden, while that of Vessagiriya was relaid as a ‘pancavasa’ type of monastery and renamed after his two daughters and himself as ‘Bo-Upulvan- Kasub-giri vehera’. For furtherdetail, see Silva (1988:222, 228-229). The modern Isurumuniya at Anuradhapura, betweenRanmasu Uyana and Vessagiriya, provides a different example, with moats and island structures arranged in an axial layout with the backdrop of a towering rock mass12 (figures 1.1, 1.6, 1.7). As seen at Puliyankulama at Anuradhapura (10th century AC) and numerous other sites in the island, the Pancavasa Monasteries presents a highly formal layout with a series of concentric squares of monks’ cells, so ordered as to circumscribe an elevated, central ritual quadrangle. These monasteries are usually enclosedby a moat with axial avenues orientedto the cardinal directions leadingup to the central quadrangle13 (figure 1.8). Figure 1.6 Layout, Isurumuniya at Anuradhapura (courtesy: Bandaranayake 1993a) 1. Tisavava Reservoir 2. Earthen Bund 3. Moat/Pond 4. Island Structure (?) 5. Rock 6. Earthen Embankment 12 Due to the secular sculpture found at the site and to its location in relation to Ranmasu Uyana, the very existence of Isurumuniya as a monastic establishment is questionable. Bandaranayake (1993a:32) suggests that together with Ranmasu Uyana, they were likely to have come under royal and monastic use collectively or separately at various stages of history. However, van Lohuizen (1979:340)attributes the secular rock-reliefs at Isurumuniya to the same period as those at Ranmasu Uyana (late 7th or early 8th century AC). Judging by the decorations at the entrance to the rock-cutshrine, Paranavitana (1953:173), on the other hand, suggeststhat the site was a Buddhistcenter from about the 10th century AC, or later. 13 See Silva (1995:215-273) for the planningsystem of the Pancavasa Monasteries. The forest monasteries of Ritigala (9th century AC) and Arankele (9th-10th century AC), with well-defined pathways that traverse the thick wooded natural topography, and subtle positioning of the monastic structures with restricted views, present different characteristics to those described above14 (figures 1.9, 1.10). However, the monasticlandscape associated with Kaludiya Pokuna (literally: Dark Water Pond, 8th- 10th century AC) at Mihintale is unique and a rare example which demonstrates the integration of man-madegeometrical forms with natural elementssuch as rocks and water. The visual integration of the natural landscape beyond the monastery proper is achieved throughits large man-madepool (figures 1.11, 1.12). Figure 1.7 General view, Isurumuniya at Anuradhapura 14 For a detailed description of theforest monasteries, see Wijesuriya (1998). Figure 1.8 Layout, Pancavasa Monastery, Puliyankulama, Anuradhapura 1. Central Ritual Quadrangle 2. Concentric Squares of Monks’ Cells 3. Moat 4. Service Buildings Figure 1.9 Pathway, Ritigala forest monastery (photo Lakshman Nadaraja; courtesy: Fernando, S. 2009) Figure 1.10 Winding pathway, Arankeleforest monastery (photo:Lakshman Nadaraja; courtesy: Fernando, S. 2009) Figure 1.11 Layout, flaludiya Pokuna Monastery at Mihintale 1.Pool 2.Stupa 3.Monastic Buildings 4.Island Structure 5.Entrance Porch 6.Axial Avenue Figure 1.12 General view, flaludiyaPokuna Monastery at Mihintale 1.2 The CentralIssue and Main Objective The site of Sigiriya celebrated 100 years of archaeological activity, research and interpretation in 1994. Many scholarly studieshave been carried out on various aspectsduring this period. With exposure of the remains of garden structures at the western precincts of the complex in the late 1940s, archaeologists began to interpretSigiriya also as an example of built landscape that can be dated to the 5th century AC (ASCAR 1952:18). Up to the commencement of the UNESCO-Sri Lanka Project of the Cultural Triangle at Sigiriya in the early 1980s, scholarly consideration of the historical built landscapes of Sri Lanka had mainly focused on several isolated examples, such as the royal gardens at Sigiriya, Ranmasu Uyana at Anuradhapura and the monastic gardens of AlahanaParivena at Polonnaruva (Paranavitana, 1944, 1955; Bandaranayake 1976).With the commencement of the above project at Sigiriya, much interest was generated not only to study various aspects of the built landscape itself, but also to understandthe process behind its creation. In this regard, Silva (1984) speculates that earlier monastic concepts of the arama or the park must have set the pace to design norms at Sigiriya, while Bandaranayake (1993a:8)declares, ‘The Sigiriyagardens are the survivals of a fairly recently identified Sri Lankan traditionof garden-art, of which there are few other surviving examples, some historical and literary documentation, and traces and fragments at nearly every site of the historical period. The gardens at Sigiriya are a concreteand mature expression on a grand scale of these various strands and traditions, which we see at other sites and in literary descriptions, in a fragmentary form.’ Based on the physical elements and characteristics, Bandaranayake (1993a:8-25) goes on to identifythree distinct types of ‘landscape traditions’ at Sigiriya: symmetrical water gardens, organic boulder gardens and stepped tiers or hanging gardens; he remarks that ‘each of these [traditions] has clear antecedents and successors within the Sri Lankantradition itself.’ As such, Silva attempts to hypothesize that Sigiriya was not a sudden occurrence in history, but that the already existing landscape design knowledge played a role in its landscape design. Bandaranayake goes one step further and hypothesizes that Sri Lanka had a tradition of landscape design and Sigiriyawas the climax of this tradition. Therefore, the above two statements focus on two important and interconnected theoretical issues that are central to research on historic built landscape in Sri Lanka: Did Sri Lanka possess a distinctive landscape tradition of its own?; Are historical examples, including Sigiriya,an outcome of this tradition? There is no doubtthat a number of factors, such as ideological, political, socio- cultural and technical contexts of the period, would have influenced this process. Although Bandaranayake (1990a, 1993a) briefly touches upon these issues from a historical point of view, there have been no serious and in-depthstudies carried out in this regard. Therefore, one of the tasks for researchers of all disciplines related to historic built landscapes in Sri Lanka is to contribute to addressing these issues. From a landscape design point of view, the above-mentioned theoretical issues lead to several important and again interconnected research questions that are related to the design of historical built landscapes in Sri Lanka:Do Sigiriya and other historical built landscapes belong to one family of common characteristics (of landscape design)?; Which work(s) provided design ingredients to the designersof Sigiriya?; Was Sigiriya a prototype where new architectural inventions were experimented with?; or Was it a synthesis of many elements of Sri Lankan landscape tradition?; or Was it both?; What role in turn was played by Sigiriya in this tradition?Inorder to answer such researchquestions, one has to first carry out separate studies on the landscape design of Sigiriyaand other significant historical built landscapes that have survived in order to see by what (architectural) means the elementsare arranged/organized in their composition and so to understand their characteristics of landscape design. The comparison of such characteristics of these various historical built landscapes will then provide insight into answering the above researchquestions. Since it is not feasibleto undertake such a vast scope in a singlestudy of limitedduration, as a point of departure the present study will focus on Sigiriya, which is the relatively best preserved, much explored and well-documented historic built landscape in Sri Lanka. Therefore, the main objective of the present study is to read Sigiriya as a landscape architectonic design with special emphasison the architectonic means (designtools, principles/rules, techniques) employed by the designers to arrange/organize the elements in the composition and thereby to understand its design characteristics. 1.3 The Secondary Objectives Apart from partially contributing to the answers of the research questions mentioned in 1.2 above, the present study has the followingsecondary objectives that have either scientific or practical significance. 1.3.1 Positioning Sigiriya in the GlobalLandscape Design Context In order to position Sigiriya among other international landscape traditions, several criteria could be proposed. Antiquity coupled with the degree of preservation is one of them. As far as antiquity is concerned, only age is involved as a factor, and as shown in Figure 1.13 there were numerous gardens belonging to Egyptian, Babylonian, Chinese, Assyrian, Persian and Roman landscape traditions that predate Sigiriya. If the degree of preservation of its physical fabric is brought into the equation, Sigiriya ranks only second to the gardens of Rome, such as the private and public gardens of Pompeii and Herculaneum and the imperial Villa Adriana at Tivoli (Bandaranayake, 1993a:25). Despite articles published at international level (for example, Bandaranayake, 1993a, 1986b, 1997; Bopearachchi, 1993; Cooray, N., 1997), and despite attempts to find international parallelisms and correspondence with the ‘three types of garden traditions’ at Sigiriya by Bandaranayake (1993a:25-26), many international publications on builtlandscapes suggest that Sigiriya is still almost unknown in the global landscape architectural design context.15 There is hardly any serious study so far that comparesSigiriya with otherinternational gardens (and traditions) in terms of a landscape design point of view. Therefore, one of the scientific objectives of the present study is to position Sigiriya in the global landscape designcontext through a comparison of its landscape design with those of other international landscape traditions. However, as will be pointed out later, the present attempt is confinedto a comparison of the landscape design of Sigiriyato those of the West European landscape tradition.16 Figure 1.13 Schedule showingthe antiquarian valueof Sigiriya in relation to other international garden traditions 15. For instance, there is no mentionof Sigiriya in The Landscape of Man (Jellicoe and Jellicoe, 1995),which is a concise global view of built landscapes from the prehistoric to present eras, and is regarded as the standard work on the subject, not only among landscape architects, but other academics interested in the subject. The International Symposium on Gardens held in Leiden,the Netherlands, in 1990 (Fat and De Jong, 1991), as a project of the World Decade of Cultural Development of the UN and UNESCO, is another instance where there was no mention of Sigiriya in the discussions and deliberations on gardens of Europe, the Middle East and Far East. One exception is Holmes (2001:12-13), in which Sigiriyais mentioned at a globallevel among other historic gardens. 16. For the justification, see section 6.2. 1.3.2 Conservation, Presentation and Management of the HeritageSite of Sigiriya Sigiriya has been conserved, presented and managed as a heritage site since the 1890s.17 The degree of scientific understanding of the site since then has no doubt influenced the shaping of the site’s conservation, presentation and management policies. As will be pointed out in Chapter3, the dominance of the archaeo-historical studies on Sigiriya would have also contributed to giving prominence to antiquarian values in deciding such policies. On the other hand, the increase in cultural tourismto the site since the 1980s has necessitated facilities for a betterinterpretation of the site, as well as the establishment of such facilitiesas toilets, parking and visitor access within the site, and a proper road network, restaurants, guest houses and hotels within its hinterland. Therefore, such demands also have an impact on policies regarding the presentation and management of the site. Since the present study is expected to provide scientific knowledge on the landscape designof Sigiriya, and thereby to underline its landscape architectural value, one of the practical objectives is to re-examine the validity of some of the interventions carried out so far at Sigiriya,and to discuss policy issues and make suggestions for the consideration of heritage professionals in reshaping the site’s future conservation, presentation and management. 1.4 The Approach, Method,Scope and Limitations Since the main objective of the present study is to read Sigiriya as a landscape architectonic design,the study will best be approached from a technical-analytical point of view.18 In such a study the availability of architectural theories, philosophy and the approach of the original designer, together with other works of the same designer, are vital sources. Moreover, the client’s functional requirements and his aspirations are major considerations in the design process. Access to such information makes a study very much easier. However,in the study of Sigiriya,a historical example of the distant past, the original designer is unknown. Unlike designers of the recent past, any clues to the designer’s architectural theories, philosophies and approachin the form of letters,diaries and sketchesare also 17 See section 3.2 for details. 18 See Chapter 4 for the justification of a technical-analytical study. absent. Further, there are no records of other works attributed to the same designer.19 Although the client for Sigiriya and his aspirations, at least during the major constructional phase, are brieflyindicated in the chronicles, it is difficult to rely on such information due to the biased nature of recording by the chroniclers. Such information may be useful only to cross-examine the results of the presentstudy. Therefore, all these suggest that the only option availableto carry out the presentstudy is to analyzeand interpret the existing materialremains at the site. As will be pointed in Chapter 3, Sigiriya is a multiperiod site with monastic phases preceding and following its royal phase. However, Sigiriya’s dominant identity is a royal complex, and hence this study will be limitedto analysis of the materialremains related to the royal phase. Therefore, analysis of the material remains related to other phasesis not within the scope of the present research. Being a site that has been overrun by nature for several centuries, and due to abandonment, the superstructure of almost all the built features has disappeared. As far as the original plantingscheme is considered, it has gone through fastercycles without leaving any physical trace of its original character.20 In its present form, therefore, the site does not provideall the data required for this study. Unlike in the western tradition there are no engravings of Sigiriya. Thus, the present study is limited to the material remains and the data that have been uncovered during the last 100 years of archaeological activity. This means that the outcomeof such a study cannot be treated as final, and will no doubt be elaborated on in the future with theexposure of more findings, employing advanced archaeological methods that will be developed in the future. With regard to the research questions raised in 1.2 above, finding answers to such questions will only be possible after identifying the landscape design characteristics of Sigiriya and other historical built landscapes in Sri Lanka.Since a detailedstudy of all these built landscapes to identify such characteristics is an enormous academicexercise, which is not feasible in a single study, the present study is limited to indentifying the design characteristics of Sigiriya, and hence becomesthe first step of this long process. The next stepsto be followed will be to study separately 19 As per the inscriptional evidence at Vessagiriya in Anuradhapura recordingthat Kasyapa has relaid the site as a monastery. De Silva, N. (2012) however opines that due to the use of Lapis Lazuli, a semi-precious stone imported from Afganistan, as a blue pigment in paintings found only at Sigiriya, Vessagiriya and Ranmasu Uyana and the similarities in design conceptsfound at these three sites (‘landscape driven architecture’ insteadof ‘architecture driven landscape’) are factors that can be considered as evidence to attribute all three of these works to the same architect or the same design schoolserved during Kasyapa’s reign. 20 Although there have been a few attempts to investigate the archaeological and palaeo environment of Sigiriya and plant micro-fossil remains,such as pollen and hydroliths, especially from pond sediments, with a view to identifythe plants of the originalSigiriya garden (Bandaranayake, 1994d), the resultsof such studies do not provide insightto the present study. other historical built landscapes to identify their individual design characteristics – subjects of a series of studies of a similar nature. The comparison of such characteristics of these various historical built landscapes will ultimately provide answers to the research questions raised in 1.2 above. Hence, answering the research questionsis not within the scope of the present study. 1.5 The Structure of the Thesis Chapter 2 provides a general cultural-geographic, technicaland historic context for the present study. Chapter 3 inquires into two aspects that are relevant to the presentstudy: first, the approaches to and conclusions of previous studiesand interpretations on Sigiriya by various scholars, with a view to see if such approaches are capable ofproviding a methodological framework for the present analysisof material remains at Sigiriya; and second, the policies and approaches of conservation, presentation and management activities carried out so far at the site. The intention of Chapter 4 is to derive a methodological framework for the present study. It also involves a survey of the existingmethodologies, analytical toolsand keys employedand developed by various researchers to study landscape design around the world. Considering the situation of Sigiriya, an appropriate methodology together with tools and keys will then be adapted to read the landscape design of Sigiriya. Chapter 5 deals with an analysisof the landscape design of Sigiriya by applying the methodological frameworkadopted in Chapter 4, and hence becomes the core chapterof the study. Based on the above analysis, Chapter 6 will derive specific statements with regard to the design characteristics and also make a comparison with other world garden traditions in order to position Sigiriya in the global design context to read Sigiriya as a landscape architectonic composition. Chapter 7 dealswith the perspectives that may arise out of the present study, in order to discuss policy issues and make suggestions to help reformulate overall policy and programs for the conservation, presentation and management of Sigiriya, and also to discuss the scientific and methodological aspectsof the present researchitself, based on the resultsof Chapter 5. This final chapter is also expected to suggest other possible future studies that may arise out of the present study. 2 Context for the Study 2.1 General Context 2.1.1 Environment, Topography and Society Situated approximately 50 kilometers off the southerntip of mainland Asia, Sri Lanka is an island in the Indian Ocean, measuring 430 kilometers north to south and 225 kilometers east to west (figure 0.1). The topographyconsists of a lowland coastal belt, an intermediate upland towards the interior, and highland in the center. The highland, which consists of a mountain mass, reaches a maximum elevation of about 2,500 meters abovesea level (figure2.1). Due to its locationin the Indian Ocean, the climate is influenced by the tropicalmonsoon system. This wind patterntogether with the central highland, which acts as a barrier more or less at right angles to the direction in which the monsoon blows, divide the country into two distinct climatic zones. The western, southwestern and central regions, which constitute the wet zone, receive a heavy rainfall, especially through the southwestmonsoon from May to September. Hot humid weather prevails in the lowlands, while it is cooler and more wholesome in the central highland. The dry zone, which constitutes about 70% of the total land area, in contrast, receives rain onlyfrom the northeast monsoon from mid-October to January, and suffers an annual severe drought for the rest of the year. Dry and harsh weather prevails in the north central, eastern and south central dryzone, while it is semi-arid in the northwest and southeast, and arid in the further north. The topography of the dry zone predominately consists of intermediate upland and lowland. The gently undulating terrain with several isolated erosion remnants and rocky hills in the north central plain gives way to monotonous, featureless flat landscape further north. The natural vegetation is characterized by rain forests in the wet zone with drier variants in the dry zone. Several rivers and streams that emerge from the central highland(the island’s hydrographic hub) flow in a radial pattern across both zones into the Indian Ocean. The rivers across the wet zone are perennial, while those across the dry zone are mostly seasonal in their flow with a tendency to dry out during droughts.One of the notable exceptions is the Mahaveli(the ‘Great Sandy River’), which flows in a northeasterly direction across the dry zone and reaches the sea at Trincomalee on the easternseaboard. Apart from the wet dolines (villu) to the northwestand northeast, naturallakes are lacking.However, the coastalbelt is characterized by severallagoons and beachesof scenic beauty. Figure 2.1 Map of Sri Lanka showingclimatic zones, topography, wind and the drainage pattern A Wet Zone B Intermediate Zone C Dry Zone D Arid Zone Contemporary research (Deraniyagala, S., 1992:686, 2001:54) reveals that by about 125,000 BP there were prehistoric settlements in the island. During the Prehistoric Iron Age (circa 900-600 BC), the inhabitants had already settleddown to communal living to farm the land (Deraniyagala, S., 1992:709).21 The geographic position of Sri Lanka in relation to mainland Asia also made it one ofthe terminal points of constantimmigration from the subcontinent. In or around 500 BC, therefore, the culture of the indigenous inhabitants was overwhelmed by immigrants from India, who predominantly spoke an Indo-Aryan dialect (Paranavitana, 1967:1).The two cultures merged, and it was this amalgamation that laid the foundation to form a distinctive island civilization in the succeeding centuries. These settlements were basically concentrated in the harsh dry zone. As at present rice was the staple food, and successful cultivation of rice in the dry zone depended upon proper storage and managementof rainwater. Initiallyexisting streams and rivers were dammed to construct reservoirs of modest scale to irrigatethe land during the dry season. These reservoirs thus became the first significant man-made features in the dry zone landscape. During the latterpart of the first millennium BC, initial signsof urbanization emergedat Anuradhapura, located in the north central plains. Buddhism was introduced to the island from its birthplace in northern India during the reign of Asoka, emperor of India in the 3rd century BC. Anuradhapura quickly became the center of both political power and the Buddhist religion. The new religion provided a serene philosophy of life, which served as an enduringsource of inspiration for creativity in art, architecture and literature. The social structure was based on the caste system, with the king at the apex and Buddhistmonks acting as the spiritual guardians of the nation, and as advisers to the king. Such features of state formation as the use of a script for writing, participation in external trade, emergence of Buddhist monasticestablishments, technological advances and the resultant social stratification contributed to make Sri Lanka a distinctworld civilization during the first millennium AC, with Anuradhapura as its great urban center. Sri Lanka’s close proximity to the South Asian mainland on the one hand and its isolation due to the ocean on the other– as Japan is to China, and England to the European mainland – has made it considerably influenced by the mainland and atthe same time has preservedits distinct individuality. 21 The latest research indicates that the farming of barley and oats was practiced at least from about 8,000 BC in central Sri Lanka (Premathilake, 2000). 2.1.2 Attitude towards Nature Ancient Sri Lankans, like those of many South Asian countries, did not distinguish themselves from nature, but believed that they were part of it. This attitude made them pay immense respect towards nature. The religio-cultural belief system of society alsoreflects this attitude. For instance, it is believed that deities (wruksha devata) live in association with trees,particularly those with large canopies, and the practiceof lighting oil lamps undersuch trees as a mark of respectto the deity is continued by villagers even today (de Silva, N., 1996:6). Buddhistteachings further promotedrespect towards nature.The three important events of the Buddha – birth, attainment of spiritual enlightenment and passing away – were directly associated with trees. The Bodhi-tree under which Buddha attained spiritual enlightenment and supreme wisdom is sacred to Buddhists. A sapling (southern branch) of this sacred tree at Bodhgaya in India, brought to Sri Lanka in the 3rd century BC and planted at the park of Mahameghavana at Anuradhapura, is still venerated by Buddhists as a supreme relic of the Master, and it is considered to be the world’s oldest, recorded, living historical tree. The cutting of trees was discouraged unlessfor a genuine purpose. The rituals to be performed before cutting a tree (for example, lighting an oil lamp under the selected tree for three nights to respectfully inform the associated deitythat the intention is for a good purpose,and to request the deityto leave the tree) also illustrate this point (de Silva, N., 1996:6). The consideration of ancient SriLankans towards treesis also verywell reflected in identifying man-made reservoirs, villages, and so on, in association with an individual tree or a grove of trees. The concept of a mountain cult of socio-religious life of pre-Buddhist Sri Lanka has also led to a respect for mountains, by assigning them some degree of numinous power (Basnayake, 1983:1). The association of pre-Buddhist deity Sumana Saman with the mountain peak Sri Pada is an example (Paranavitana, 1958). Special attention to mountainsis reflected in identifying rocky mountains with the shape of animals, such asAtu-gala (in the shape of an elephant), Ibba-gala (tortoise), Anda-gala (eel), Vandura-gala (monkey), Sigiriya (lion?), and so on. Since the natural environment was not harsh,but conducive to outdoor living,nature was not treated as an enemy of human existence or a rivalto be conquered or subordinated, but as a guardian.This attitude alsogave rise to a specific living pattern centeredon outdoor living. Therefore, most family activities of ancient Sri Lankans, such as cooking, eating, chatting and even entertaining outsiders, took place in outdoor spaces,while indoor spaceswere used, for example, for protection from rain and the privacy of female members. Hencetheindoor space of a house was very muchsmaller than the outdoor space.22 1 Also see De Silva, N. (1990:2) and Lewcock (1998:9-18). Apart from providing food, the trees gave shade for outdoor living under tropical climatic conditions. This attitude towards nature also promoted the least human intervention in the naturallandscape and the incorporation of natural featuresinto the built environment without significant alteration. Moreover, popular beliefs in the worship of nature were fully appreciated in the art of building construction, both secular and religious, as reflected by the contents of various ancient Silpa texts (Manjusri Vastuvidyasastra 1995:4). § 2.1.3 The Cosmology The ancient Sri Lankan view of the physical nature of the universe is best reflected in Buddhist cosmology and cosmography. Although adapted from Hinduism, the Buddhist cosmology has no creation myth. However, some aspects of Hinduism were absorbed into Buddhism, and such Hindu gods as Brahma and Indra (Sakra of the Buddhist tradition) were incorporated into Buddhism, not as world creators, but as devout followers of the Buddha (Adikaram, 1946:145) who were pious men during previous lives. According to Buddhist cosmology, world systems are destroyed and recreated inkalpas (cycles or great ages). The world system that exists during a kalpa has several planes of existence in the vertical sequence divided into several worlds: underworlds (including various hells, world of departed beings, demons, animal kingdom, and so on), world of humans, and heavenly abodes of the gods (sagga-loka) on top of the MountMeru, the cosmic mountain. All these planes are subdivisions of the world of sensation (laukika), and higher than theseplanes is the world of form (rupa-loka), the abodes of the Brahmas who have a material body. Above these planes is the fourfold arupa-loka, or the world of no-form, the abodes of the Brahmaswho do not possess a material body (Adikaram, 1946:153-154). Mount Meru, the mythical cosmic mountain which lies at the center of the universe is thought to be the axis of mundi joining the earth with abodesof the Brahmas at the highestplanes. The heavenly abode of god Sakra is on the summit of MountMeru. This cosmic mountain sits upon three peaks, the Trikuta, while a thick forest of silk cotton trees covers the mountainslopes. The palacesof the four guardians of the world adorn the slopes of the Meru. Below the Meru on Trikuta is the underworld. Mount Meru is surrounded by seven annular seas, which are in turn separated from each other by several mountain ranges. Beyond the last of these ranges lies an ocean containing four continents, one each at the cardinal directions (Duncan, 1990:42-48). Therefore, this cosmography gives rise to a bottom-up vertical sequence of cosmic landscape with increasing divine habitation above the layers of the human world. The belief system of the pre-Buddhist conceptof mountain cult, in whichmountain tops were the realmsof gods who reside abovehumans, would have also reinforced this cosmography. This cosmic landscape was a great inspiration to artists, sculptors and architects throughout the historical period.23 It is well reflected in the interior arrangement of the relic chambers of Buddhist stupas. These relic chambers, embeddedat the center of the masonry work of the totally inaccessible hemispherical dome of the stupa, functioned as repositories of the relicsof the Buddha, which signifies the presence of the Master withinthe stupa. A square pillarof stone, whichforms the central object of the relic chamber, represents the mythical Mount Meru. The small chambers below the Meru stone containthe objects connected with the world of Nagas (serpents) representing the underworld. The stone pillar sits upon three smaller stones representing the Trikuta. Placed on top of the pillar is the casket containing the relics of the Buddha,symbolizing the Buddha seated on the abode of god Sakra. The series of seven horizontal bands carved on the faces of the stone pillar represents the seven ranges of the mountains that surround Mount Meru (figure 2.2). In some cases, the northern, southern, eastern and western sides of the pillar are painted yellow, blue, white and red, respectively, which tallies with the accepted conventions about Mount Meru, where the northern, southern, eastern and western sides of the cosmic mountain are believed to be gold, blue sapphire, silver and coral, respectively (Paranavitana, 1946:20-24; Silva 2004:21-22; Seneviratne, 1991:366-376). The internal walls of the chamber in some instancesare painted with figures of gods of heavenly realms moving among clouds. Seneviratne (1991:366) concludes that the relic chamber therefore represents the middle world containing the earth and atmospheric region. The spatial divisions within the interiorof the painted Buddha imagehouses also symbolically re-createthe Buddhist cosmography representing the whole universe, where the lowermost painted register is divided vertically into panels depicting thevarious hells and underworlds, while ceiling paintings depict higher cosmicrealms (Bandaranayake, 1986a:22-23). Byciting several studies,Duncan (1990:48-49) remarks, 23 Also see Aryawansa (1958:61-70) for a description of the mythicalHimalayan region. ‘… the myth of Mount Meru became a paradigm for the spatial organization of state, capital and temple in much of Southeast Asia. Terrestrial space was structured in theimage of celestialspace. Many royal cities were exquisitely built to represent the cosmos in miniaturized forms, with the central part of the city representing the celestial city of the gods, high upon the cosmic mountain. These cities were built as a square or rectangleand fixed at the cardinaldirections. The squareform of the city was actually conceptualized as lying within a mandala, a circular cosmic diagram fixed at the fourcardinal directions and anchored by a fifth point in its center.By paralleling the sacred shape of the mandala, these cities were transformed into microcosms of the cosmos. The king, by situating his palace at the centerof this mandala, occupied the center of the universe and the summit of the Mount Meru, and hence maintained the liminal statusof a god on earth. By occupying this position at the center of the cosmos, he became a cakravarti who could controlthe world throughthe magical power of parallelism.’ Figure 2.2 Relic chamber of a stupa at Mihintale on display at the site museum showing the mythical cosmic mountain (MountMeru) sitting upon three smallervertical stone pillars(partly covered) representing Trikuta. Also note the seriesof seven horizontal bands carved on the faces of Mount Meru representing the seven ranges of mountainsthat surround the mythical cosmic mountain and the paintings on the internalwalls of the chamber. Angkor Thom in Cambodia (12th-13th century AC) is identified as the clearest example that set out to re-create the cosmic landscape (Kastof, 1991:172-173). Duncan (1990:53-58) argues that such principal politicalcenters in Sri Lanka as Anuradhapura (4th century BC-10th century AC), Polonnaruva (11th-13th century AC) and Kandy (17th-19th century AC) also have varying degrees of cosmic modeling and speculates that Sigiriyais perhaps the clearest exampleof a cosmic city in early Sri Lanka. Another aspect of cosmology is the cosmic ocean of milk, with water as the creative agent. Accordingly, the high up in heaven Ahas Ganga, the starry river of milk (the Milky Way), falls into Lake Anotatta on top of Mount Meru. At each cardinal direction,this cosmic lake, the most sacred of lakes in Buddhist literature, has an outlet in the shape of the mouth of an animal.The northern, southern,eastern and westernoutlets are shaped like the mouths of a lion, bull, elephant and horse, respectively. The four streamsthat emerge from these outletsthen flow around the lake three times,and at the eastern end of the lake become the Ahas Ganga, which drops into the ocean to the south. It is amrita, the fluid of creation, which circulates through the universe. The water containing amrita possesses the magical propertyof cleansing humansand making them fit for divine association (Duncan 1990:45). The 18th century, painted, Buddhist cave shrine at Kottimbulvala in Ratnapura District offers one of the best representations where the overalltheme of paintingsis inspired by Buddhist cosmological ideas. The major part of the rock ceiling of the central cave depicts the mythical Himalayan landscapecentralized around the cosmic lake Anotatta.The variant inhabitants of the mythicalregion and its physical features such as lakes, streams, rocks, trees and plants are represented in the liveliest manner. The paintings on the wooden ceiling of the verandah are completewith hells, the human world consisting of different continents and major rivers, heaven with presiding divinities and many mythical Himalayan scenes (Chutiwongs, Prematilleke and Silva 1990c:41).24 The elaborate landscape composition featuring the cosmic lake is also well illustrated in the 18th century wall paintings of the Buddhist cave shrine at Dambulla (figure 2.3). Here, the waters issuing from the mouths of the directional animals are seen flowing out in four directions.25 The one to the east flows over a mountain, enters Lake Anotatta and thereafter divides into five great rivers before finally enteringthe ocean (Bandaranayake, 1986a:160, 178-179; Chutiwongs, Prematilleke and Silva, 1990b:78-79). 24 Commenting on the Buddhist cosmology reflectedin the paintings at Kottimbulvala, Chutiwongs, Prematilleke and Silva (1990c) declarethat “such a remarkable monochromic scheme is rarelyfound in the paintings of Sri Lanka.” 25 The conventional directions of the bull and horsehave been interchanged in the painting, perhaps due to a misconception of the artist (Chutiwongs, Prematilleke and Silva, 1990b:78-79). Figure 2.3 Cosmic lake of Anotatta, a painting from Dambulla cave shrine, 18th century AC (photo: M. W. E. flarunaratne) Being an agro-based society using irrigatedagriculture, this cosmic pattern represents the hydrologic cycle: the ocean, lakes, rivers and rainfallthat enable the earth’s fertility.Therefore, it reflects the ecological characteristic that is so essential for agrarian communities, where water is the essential commodity. Duncan (1990:53-54) argues that there is a link between the cosmic waters and the practical irrigation projects of the ancient Sri Lankan kings in modelingcosmic cities. Duncan (1990:38) identifies two major discourses within the larger discursive field pertaining to kingship in ancient Sri Lanka, the Asokan and Sakra. The Asokan model, which came with Buddhismduring the MauryanBuddhist missionary activities of India during the 3rd centuryBC, was based on the Mauryan EmperorAsoka, who was looked upon as an ideal Buddhist king. According to this model, the king should be pious, righteous and devoted to the fostering of Buddhism and to the welfare of the people (Duncan, 1990:5). This favored immensely the creation of a landscape dominated by religious structures and public works. As seen at Anuradhapura, during the time of the laying out of Sigiriya, the kings constructed monumental religious structures, such as stupas,26 that dominate the landscape. These stupas not only express the growing confidence and stability of the nation, but a determination to place a mark on the natural landscape (figure 2.4). Mahathupa or Ruvanvalisaya (2nd century BC, original height: approximately 90 meters), Abhayagiri (1st century BC/1st century AC, original height: approximately 106 meters) and Jetavana (3rd-4th century AC, original height: approximately 120 meters), the three mega stupas at Anuradhapura, are not only the largest monuments of their kind in the entire Buddhist tradition, but are still the tallest brick structures in the world, being surpassedin height only by the two stone-built great pyramids of Gizeh, Egypt. In the same way, kings devoted themselves to constructing massive man-made reservoirs at Anuradhapura, such as Abhayavapi (modern Basavakkulam, 4th century BC, 100 hectares in extent), Tissavapi (modern Tissavava, 3rd century BC, 160 hectares) and Nuwaravava (or City Tank, circa2nd century AC, 1,200 hectares), as public works to irrigate land to sustain agriculture. These towering stupas with large sheets of water (man-made reservoirs) in the foreground, symbolize the material and spiritual heights reached by ancient Sri Lankans. The landscape model of Asokan discourse on kingship was, therefore, simultaneously religious and utilitarian. The Sakran model, on the other hand, is based on Hinduism, where God Sakra (Indra of the Hindu pantheon) is considered the king of gods. With regard to this model, Duncan (1990:40) comments, ‘In the Sakran, as in the Asokan discourse on kingship, the king was also expectedto be just, pious, caringand attentive to the needs of the citizens. However,the former view stressed the glorious and divine qualityof kingship. The king was seen a cakravarti, a universal monarch who rules over his people and other kings just as the king of the gods, Sakra, rulesover the thirty-two gods in the Tavatimsa heaven.The Sakran modelof kingship stressedthe building of palaces, citiesand lakes that glorify the god-king. Theselandscapes were modeled upon textual descriptions of the cities of the gods in heaven on the top of Mount Meru.’ 26 The stupa is an important and essential ritual edifice of Sri LankanBuddhist worship. Originally, it was meantto enshrine the relics of the Buddha,but later becamea representation of Him. The striking and dominant element of the stupa is its hemispherical dome, which generallystands on an elevated square terrace. The dome is surmounted by a cubical structure and a cone. Constructed out of solid masonry, these elements of the stupa are arranged in a single vertical axis. The volume of each element gradually decreases as the eye travels upwards along this axis. The relics are enshrined withinsmall chambers of the solidmasonry of the hemispherical dome. The contrasting combination of square and circularplan forms and of hemispherical, cubical and conicalvolumes gives a dramatic form to this edifice. Although Buddhism incorporated God Sakra as a devout follower of the Buddha, the Sakran model, which promotedthe glorification of the king through buildingheavenly abodes, became oppositional to the Asokan one, and hence Buddhism during this period did not sanction the devotion of great expense to sacral kingship. However, Duncan (1990:53) points out that some aspects of the landscape model based on Sakran discourse were used by kings duringthis period as reflected in the erection of storied monasticmansions, such as Lohapasada (chapterhouse), in honor of the religion ratherthan as palaces for the glorification of the king himself. Figure 2.4 Mahathupa (Ruvanvalisaya), a colossal stupa at Anuradhapura, rising from the bank of an artificial reservoir 2.1.5 City Planning and Architecture Due to close cultural contacts with mainland India, the ancient Indian standard texts and treatises on city planning and architecture, such as Kautiliya Arthasastra, Manasara, Milindapanha and Mayamata, were known to the master builders of Sri Lanka from a very early date (Silva, 2000:50-51). The introduction of Buddhism to Sri Lanka from India during the 3rd century BC would have also provided an opportunity to associate with counterpart professionals in Indiaand to adapt prototypes of Buddhist ritualstructures that were developed in India. According to Pali literature and other Buddhist texts, the cities in India during Buddhist times (3rd centuryBC) were usuallysquare and defendedwith walls on all four sides. There were four gates, one in the middle of each wall facing the four quarters, and four main streets led from these gates to the center of the city. With regard to the fortifications, there were three successive moats: the ‘water moat,’ ‘mud moat’ and ‘dry moat’ (Geiger, 1960:53, 58). These descriptions also agree with the Kautiliya Arthasastra, accordingto which three moats, each narrower than the other, must surrounda royal residence with the gates located at the four cardinaldirections (Kangle, 1965:244). These treatises prescribe vastupurusa-mandala (figure 2.5), the gridded centralized diagram, as the basis of site planning(Mayamata, 1985:15-22). Manasara(1946:124-125) introduces 32 variants of vastupurusa-mandala that take the square or rectangular plan. As per this system, which prescribes the organization of the citadel, the royal palaceis to be located at the center,and several concentric precincts fortified by walls and entered through gateways facing cardinal directions are to be assigned for various other functions in a decreasing order of hierarchy(figure 2.6).27 Manjusri Vastuvidyasastra28 (1995) also prescribes the rules governing the selection of sites, locationof buildings according to a mandala concept, orientation, rules governing measurements, method of selectingtrees, and so on, for the laying out of Buddhist monasteries and construction of buildings.29 By the time of the laying out of Sigiriya in the 5th century AC, the royal city of Anuradhapura had an organically evolved and well-developed city plan with the citadel as its nucleus, which is surrounded by a series of concentric rings of monastic and suburban settlements (Silva, 2000:51-62). Although the citadel was not a true square,30 the city wall and the moat beyond with gates facing cardinal directions, the streets running in north-south and east-west directions, dividing the citadel into four quarters and connecting the entrances and extending beyond, are in accordance with the city planningprinciples prescribed in the Indiantexts. The royal palace including the household was located withinthe walled citadel. 27 Also see Mayamata(1985:38-44) for a description of the towns. 28 Manjusri Vastuvidyasastra, a unique manuscript of a Silpa text dealingwith Buddhist architecture, is attributed to the 14th-15thcentury period, but indicates the continuity of earlier compilation of technical texts (1995:16). 29 Also see De Silva, N. (1988, 1989). 30 De Silva, N. (1997:7)suggests that “the city of Anuradhapura is in the form of ‘Murudange’, the drum shapewhich is considered as a non-Aryancity form.” Figure 2.5 Vastupurusa-mandala, the griddedcentralized diagram (courtesy: Mayamata 1985) Figure 2.6 Bird’s-eye view of an ideal royal palaceby P. fl. Acharya as per the descriptions given in Manasara(1946) Also located withinthe citadel was the templeof the scared Tooth Relic of the Buddha and alms halls for the Buddhist monks. The five great Buddhist monasteries formed the inner ring outside the city walls. Established and patronized by royalty, as part of their program of fostering Buddhism, and developed from the 3rd century BC up to about the 5th centuryAC, each monastery had an extensive layout. The largestmonastery is about 200 hectares in extent, which is larger than the citadel itself (about 160 hectares). Located at the center of each monastery was a colossal stupa as a distinct architectural focal point. The highest reaching 120 meters, these stupas dominated not only the respective monastery, but the entire skyline of Anuradhapura. The artificial reservoirs, including the agricultural settlements located beyond these monasteries, formed the second ring of the city plan.The existing pre-Buddhist reservoirs of this ring were further developed by constructing additional reservoirs or by enlarging the existing ones by successive kings, again as part of their programto construct publicworks for the welfare of the people.In addition to serving a utilitarian purpose,these reservoirs were dominant elements in the cityscape, which also gave enchanting scenic beauty to the city. Therefore, Anuradhapura’s city plan and its morphology clearlyreflect the Asokan discourse on kingship as well as the socialhierarchy of the period. The location of Buddhist monasteries immediately around the city also portrays the influential role played by Buddhist monks as the advisors to the king in state affairs31 (figure 2.7). Although the chroniclesmention that numerous secular buildingsexisted from a very early date in Sri Lanka, the state of preservation of such buildings at present does not provide information to understand the character of secular architecture at the time of the laying out of Sigiriya. On the other hand, the religious architecture of ancient Sri Lanka shows that it is essentially a mixture of deeply rooted local buildingtradition and the naturaldevelopment of the forms introduced from mainland India during the Mauryan Buddhist missionary activity of the 3rd century BC (Paranavitana, 1967; Bandaranayake, 1974;Silva, 1988). Withina few centuries of the Christian era, architecture reached a very mature stage at Anuradhapura.The architectural designs of such Buddhist ritualstructures as stupas,vatadages and Bodhi-tree shrines show that although distinctive individuality had been acquired during the process, no profound modifications had taken place to obscure their origin. In India itself, the Buddhist architecture in vogue in the period during which the Buddhist religionwas introduced 31 The final phase of the city planning of Anuradhapura occurredwhen a certain section of Buddhist monks of the Great Monasteries of the inner ring preferred to be away from the busy urban environment and to lead a life based on meditation. The result was the establishment of several monasteries that were located beyond the ring of reservoirs and agricultural settlements. Therefore, these monasteries formed the outer ring of the city plan adjacentto the forests that were beyond. Thesemonasteries seem to have reliedon patronage from the middle ring of the agricultural community rather than on royaltyand the urban elite in the city center. This phase, beginning in around the 5th centuryAC, culminated in around the 10th century(Silva, 2000:62, 2008:231-232). had, by about the 5th century AC, been submerged by extraneous influences and developments within. The elaboration of detail at the expense of architectural form gradually becamethe rule in mainland India,both among Brahmanical sects as well as Buddhists. Sri Lanka, on the otherhand, preferred the ethical simplicity and monastic puritanism of the Theravada, the orthodox Buddhist church, which ceased to be of any influence in medieval India, to the mythological exuberance and metaphysical subtletyof Mahayana Buddhism and later Brahmanism. The keynote of religious architecture throughout the Anuradhapura period (which includesthe laying out of Sigiriyain the 5th century AC) was, therefore, its simplicity, harmonious proportions and dependence on the overall built form rather than on ornamentation and decoration to create an effect (Paranavitana, 1955:77). Figure 2.7 City plan of Anuradhapura 1 Citadel 2 Abhayagiri Stupa and Monastery 3 Mahathupa (Ruwanvalisaya) and Monastery 4 Jetavana Stupa and Monastery 5 Mirisaveti Stupa and Monastery 6 Dakkhina Stupa and Monastery 7 Ranmasu Uyana 8 Isurumuniya 9 Vessagiriya 10 Toluvila (Pancavasa Monastery) 11 Pacinatissa (Pancavasa Monastery) 12 Puliyankulama (Pancavasa Monastery) 13 Pankuliya (Pancavasa Monastery) 14 Vijayarama (Pancavasa Monastery) 15 Kiribath Vehera (PancavasaMonastery) 16 Halmillakulama (Reservoir) 17 Bulankulama (Reservoir) 18 Basavakkulama (Reservoir) 19 Tisavava (Reservoir) 20 Nuvara-vava (Reservoir) 21 Puliyankulama (Reservoir) 22 Malvatu Oya (Stream) 23 Western Monasteries (Tapovana)2.1.6 Irrigation Engineering Being agriculturists in a system based on paddy cultivation, the early settlements were concentrated on riverbanks of the dry zone. Although the Indo-Aryan colonizers brought with them a basic knowledge of irrigation, the need to combat the prolonged droughtsof the dry zone demandeda much more organized artificial irrigation system than before. In the pre-Christian era, village reservoirs of modest size to store water for irrigation became the characteristic feature of the agricultural and cultural landscape. From this basic understanding of water storage, a vast methodology of hydraulic engineering was developed within a short period. This consisted of building up a complexsystem of reservoirs, damming rivers, and constructing canals and anicuts. Thekings, influenced by the Asokandiscourse on kingship,initiated massive irrigation projects as public works for the sustenance of agriculture, not only within the principal political center of Anuradhapura, but in the whole of Sri Lanka’snorth central plain. Water was diverted along artificial canals to irrigate paddy fields. King Vasabha of the 1st century AC is regardedas the first significant builderof reservoirs and canals of great dimension. King Mahasena (276-303AC) was the greatest builderof tanks of colossalproportions. The Kalavapi of King Dhatusena (459-477 AC), father of the founder of Sigiriya, carriedwater to Tissavapiin Anuradhapura throughthe 86-kilometer-longartificial canal calledJaya Ganga.32 The country,which lacked inlandnatural lakes, was gradually transformed into a landscape dotted with hundreds of reservoirs of different sizes, which were interconnected by an intricate network of canals of different gradients traversing the gentlyundulating terrain of the dry zone. The philosophy of water conservation and management of this agro-based society was that ‘every drop of water that falls on the island must not flow into the ocean without serving its people’ (Culavamsa chapter LXVIII:8-10).33 Taking full advantage of the differences in the natural contours of the topography, reservoirs were organized into a linear cascading sequence (figure 2.8) to allow efficient watermanagement (Madduma Bandara,1985).34 The water management for 32 Also see Parker (1909),Brohier (1934-1935) and Fernando, D. N. (1980) for detaileddescriptions of irrigation works. 33 Ellepola (1990:173) comments that although this famous statementwas made by King Parakramabahu in the 12th century,other Sri Lankanmonarchs were probablyless articulate; yet the philosophy of water conservation was traditional from very earlytimes. 34 Artificial reservoirs are linearly connected forming cascades, allowing surplus water from upstream reservoir(s) and return flow from upstreamcommand area(s) to reach the reservoir immediately downstream. This facilitates the reuse of water in the commandarea of the downstream reservoir, and in effectincreases the water available for irrigation. cultivation was developed with great skill using many expedients. Among these, the well-known cistern (Biso-Kotuwa) played a singular role. A valve-pit locked the waters of the tank, which were released through sluices in an ingenious method. Hydraulic engineering was thus one of the greatest skills acquired by the people. Consequently, there was a considerable agricultural surplus to provide a basis for a stable economy and sustain a large non-agrarian community of monks, artisans, craftsmen, and so on, in addition to the royal court and military personal. This surplus, on the other hand, allowed kings to construct monumental religious structures such as stupas, which dominate the landscape. Water was the most preciousand treasured commodity in this hydraulic civilization. This fact is vividly reflected in the famous Dhatusena- Kasyapa story as recorded in the chronicle Culavamsa (chapter XXXVIII:103). The response given by former King Dhatusena to his son Kasyapa, when the latter, in captivity and facing death, demanded treasuresof the state, was to show nothingbut the waters of Kalavapi, which he had constructed during his reign as the wealth of his prosperous kingdom. Therefore, at the time of the laying out of Sigiriya by Kasyapa in the 5th century AC, the country possessed a vast knowledge of hydraulic engineering with centuries of practical experience of water management (Ellepola,1990:175). Figure 2.8 Organization of reservoirs into a linearcascading sequence (courtesy: Abeywickrama, 1991) 2.1.7 Pleasure Activities of Royalty Despite making indirect reference to water festivals associated with royalty35 and having the physicalremains of pleasuregardens at Anuradhapura, such as RanmasuUyana, chroniclers do not specifically record the nature of the activities associated with pleasure gardens. Since such activities were connected with sensual pleasure,Dissanayake (2003:50-51, 2009:28) suggests that the author of the Mahavamsa deliberately omittedsuch activities as they were against the Buddhist philosophy. The insignificant location of Ranmasu Uyana in relation to the overall city plan of Anuradhapura (figure 2.7) also indicates that the Asokan discourse on kingship would have also discouraged an emphasis on the pleasureactivities of royaltyas a major item of the officialroyal program of kings. Although there are no records available in the chronicles on the nature of the pleasure activities of royalty, studiesof the Jataka stories and other Sinhalaliterary works, mostlydating from the 10th century onwards (Gooneratne, 1983; Dissanayake, 2003:231- 242), show that garden sports (uyan-keli) and water sports (diya-keli), which took the form of royal ceremony, were part of Sri Lankan courtly life,36 and the royal pleasure garden was the main theater for such activities. The pleasure gardens were not only meant for the king and his immediate family,but for a multitude including the nobility and harem as well. These studiesfurther indicate that these pleasureactivities were held for a significant duration of the day, and the water sports were held after thegarden sports, suggesting that water sportswere the climaxof the pleasure program of royalty. The rock-cut reliefs of elephantsdallying among lotuses and squirtingwater over themselves and each other, on either side of a royal bath house at Ranmasu Uyana, and the liveliness of the movementof the elephants carrying lotusesin their trunksand engaging in water sports,as depicted in a landscapecomposition painted on a rock ceiling at Kotiyagala, very well express the mood of water sports of the period.37 Moreover, water sports mainly involved women,and these literaryworks give vivid descriptions of the specificgarments, female make-upincluding the hair dress 35 The Mahavamsa mentions that King Devanampiyatissa (3rd century BC) arranged a water festival for dwellers in the capital before he set forth to the MissakaMountain (chapter XIV:1-2),and Prince Dutugemunu (2nd century BC) made a tank near Kasa Mountain near Anuradhapura and held a water festivalduring his campaignagainst King Elara of Anuradhapura (chapter XXV:50-51), and another with women in the harem for a whole day after his consecration ceremonyat Tisavava (chapterXXVI:6-10). 36 Also see Geiger (1960:62). 37 See Jayasinghe, G. and Rassapana (2003:26) for the reproduced paintings of elephants at Kotiyagala. and decoration, and the sensual mood associated with water sports. A painted female figure at Kotiyagala,38 in the attitude of decorating herself with flowers, also shows this. Gooneratne (1983:6) observesthat in most literary works the women participating in water sports are describedas wearing red dresses, while in some it is said that they wore red and blue garments. Very often, the Sinhala poet saw women engaged in water sports as lightningaccompanied by dark rain clouds,symbols associated with rainmaking (Gooneratne, 1983:7). Godakumbure (1970) suggests that water sports themselves could be considered as part of a fertility cult. Since ancient Sri Lankan society mainly depended on irrigated water, Godakumbure attempts to support his argument by considering the connection of the king with rainmaking, the role of the Rain-God and the relationship betweenwater, fertility and various Sri Lankan Buddhistfestivals and ceremonies. The connection between the pleasure parks themselves and rainmaking is furtherstrengthened by an incident recordedin the Mahavamsa (chapter XI:2-3), when a great cloud gathered over the site selected for the laying of a pleasure park at Anuradhapura by King Mutasiva(307-247 BC) and poured forth non-seasonal rain. Due to this incident the park was named Mahamegavana (the park of the great cloud). Dissanayake (2003:238) also suggests that it was customary for kings as the prosperity makers of the kingdom to engage in different activities associated with pleasuregardens to bring forth rain, and hence the pleasure gardens were considered as symbolsof rainmaking and prosperity. 2.1.8 External Contacts The island of Sri Lanka occupies the southernmost position of mainland Asia in the Indian Ocean,and latitudewise it is almoston the Equator, where the annual monsooneffects and navigational winds blow for three months of the year in one direction and change direction for another threemonths. It was also the halfway point between the two great empires of Rome and China. Due to the uniqueness of Sri Lanka’s geographical position, the island became a continuous navigational hub in relation to ancient and medieval trade between the Mediterranean and the China seas along the silk route of the sea39 (figure 2.9). Therefore, besides cultural contact with India due to close proximity to mainland Asia, the island has a long history of international exposure and transoceanic communication with otherparts of the ancient world, 38 See Jayasinghe, G. and Rassapana(2003:25) for the reproduced female figure at Kotiyagala. 39 Also see Huzayyin (1942). through international trade and commerce. The most valuable merchandise from Sri Lanka were pearls and gemstones, hence the island name of Ratnadipa (Island of Gems). Referring to the 6th century AC vivid account(Topographia Christiana XI) by the Greek writer Cosmas Indicopleustes, in which he refers to the chief Sri Lankan port at Mantaion the northwestern coast as the ‘greatemporium’, Silva (1988:1- 4) suggests that Sri Lanka was the port-of-return in the region for maritimetrade vessels from Chinese ports in the Far East and from Roman and other Red Sea ports in the West, and an ideal international center for barter and exchange.In the wake of such trade activity, the envoys of King Bhatika Abhaya (19 BC-9 AC) were sent to theRoman Empire (Weerakkody, 1990:158). Silva (2006:3-4) therefore argues that the financialresources for such massive undertakings as the construction of great stupas at Anuradhapura came equally from the income derived from exporting preciousitems and custom duties and other levies on international trade and commerce,and from agriculture.40 Figure 2.9 Ancient maritime trade routes betweenRome and China (based on Huzayyin, 1942) 40 Also see Kiribamune (2000). It is mentioned in 5th and 6th century foreign records41 that Arab merchants and a Persian community were living in the city of Anuradhapura, which was, no doubt, due to such international trade activity. Many items of trade from the Far East and the West, such as stoneware and porcelain from China, and glazed ceramics and glass vessels from West Asia and Rome, have been unearthed during excavations at the seaport of Mantai as well as at Anuradhapura (Ratnayake, 1990; Prickett-Fernando, 1990). The archaeological excavations conducted at Sigiriya have also unearthed Roman and Indo-Roman coins as well as earthenware utensilsbelonging to the Sassanian dynasty(222-651 AC) of ancient Persia (Codrington, 1924:32-33; Bandaranayake, 1984:17, 1993a:25-26; Bopearachchi, 1990, 1996:70-71). Graffiti numbers 219,221 and 230 on the MirrorWall of Sigiriyamention silk, whilein verse number399 “Chinese silk”is clearly mentioned (Paranavitana, 1956:134, 135-136, 141, 248). Therefore, in this context it could be assumed that international maritime trade andcommerce contributed considerably to raise funds to lay out the massive complex at Sigiriya in the 5th centuryAC. Sigiriya:ABasicIntroduction Historical Context Located in the dry zone of Sri Lanka’s north central uplands, Sigiriya is approximately 160 kilometers northeast by road of the present capitalcity of Colombo.The expansion of archaeological activityat Sigiriya in recent times reveals that the first occupant of this site was Mesolithic man (circa 3rd-2ndmillennium BC). Rock shelters, mainlyto the east of the central rock, were used with an occupational sequence starting nearly 5,000 years ago (Adikari, 1994; Karunaratne, P. and Adikari, 1994). However, the first significant interventions to the natural landscape occurred during the early historic period (3rd/2nd centuryBC up to the 1st century AC), with the establishment of a rock- 41 The accounts of a visiting Chinese scholar monk of the 5th century AC (A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms) and Greek writer CosmasIndicopleustes of the 6th centuryAC (Topographia Christiana XI), as citedby Silva (2000:59) shelter associated with Buddhist monasticsettlement on the western slopesadjacent to the main rock. At least 30 rock shelters in this area were adaptedas dwellings of the monastery. These earlymonastic cave dwellings are marked by a drip-ledge cut along the brow so as to prevent rainwater flowing into them. Some of the caves contain donor- inscriptions carvedjust below thedrip-ledge. The site became nationally famous due to a significant event of the island’s history, when Kasyapa (477-495), a son of King Dhatusena (459-477) by a wife of unequal birth, and hence not the lawful heir to the throne, assumed the kingship by a palace conspiracy, which ultimately led to the execution of his own father by having him walled in alive. Moggalana, his half-brother, born of the anointed queen and heir apparent to the throne, fled to India. According to the chronicle Culavamsa (chapter XXXIV:1-19), Kasyapa, fleeing the inevitable return of Moggalana, sought refuge in the inaccessible strongholdof Sigiriya (about 60 kilometers southeast of the then capital Anuradhapura). The chronicle further mentions that Kasyapa built a palace on the summit of the gigantic rock of Sigiriya by defending it with walls, and engineered a staircase in the form of a lion, which gave the name of the site Sihagiri(Lion Rock). Most of the remains exposedat the site are attributed to the major constructional phase of the 5th century AC (Kasyapan period), considered as the brightest age of Sigiriya (Bandaranayake 1993b:114). However, the capital was short-lived (only during the reign of Kasyapa), endingabruptly with the return of Moggalana from India and the subsequent death of Kasyapa by slashinghis throat with his own dagger on the battlefront. Moggalana, not interested in his rival brother’s royal center, handedover the site of Sigiriyato Buddhist monks. During the post-Kasyapan period commencing from the late 5th century to the 13th century AC, parts of the Sigiriya complex were converted for Buddhist monastic use by altering or modifying earlier structures to accommodate the needs of the monks. These latter interventions, however, did not affect the overall original physical layout of the Kasyapan period (Bandaranayake 1993a:24). Historical sources continue to record that there were two incidents of further assassination of royalty at Sigiriya, of Samghatissa II and Moggalana III at the beginning and end of the 7th century AC, respectively, indicating that the site did not entirelylose its politicalsignificance even afterits partial conversion for monasticuse (Basnayake, 1983:5-6). The graffiti inscribed at the site by numerousvisitors to Sigiriya, which are dated to a period from the 6th to the 13th or 14th centuries AC, also demonstrates that after the abandonment of the site as one of the major political centers at the end of the 5th century, it was visited purely for its secular and aesthetic value (Bandaranayake 1993b:122). Sigiriya has, therefore, a long-standing record of beinga destination of cultural tourism commencing from the 6th century. After the 13th or 14th century AC, the site was almost abandoned, and in the 16th and 17th centuries it was a distant military outpost of the Kandyan kings. With the final abandonment of the site after the 17th centuryAC, Sigiriya was overrun by the ever-advancing nature. The structures and numerous other creations, once viewed in elegance and splendor, were completely in ruins or buried in debris when Sigiriya came into focus as a site of antiquarian value in about the 1830s. Archaeological activity has been conducted from 1894. Mentioned in the chronicles as a hideout of a patricidal king, who seized the throne from his father,the primary attention of early archaeologists was to explorethe site as a stronghold (ASCAR, 1895:10). Although the evidence of a ‘pleasure garden’ was also noticed during this period (ASCAR, 1899:7), the unreachable rock summit,fortified by a series of moats and ramparts, would have undoubtedly encouraged early archaeologists to proceed on the abovelines. However, it was only from the late 1940s that archaeologists began to interpret the site as an example of built landscape, with the exposure of a water-associated pleasuregarden to the west of the rock (ASCAR, 1953:15-19; Paranavitana, 1972a:40). Sigiriya has been inscribed as the 202nd site on UNESCO’s World Heritage List in 1982 under Criteria II, III and IV,42 due to its outstanding universal values.43Physical Characteristics Since the physical elements of Sigiriya have been described in great detail in several publications (ASCAR, 1894-1900, 1902, 1905, 1949, 1951-1953, 1965; Paranavitana, 1950, 1956, 1961, 1972a; De Silva R. H., 1976; Bandaranayake, 1984, 1990a, 1993a, 1993b, 2005; Dissanayake, 2003, 2011), what is attempted below is not to reproduce or summarize such information, but to provide an overall picture of the physical characteristics to form a background for the presentstudy. As it appears today, Sigiriya is centered on a monumental rock, a residual of denudation, which rises abruptly to a height of about 180 meters above the surrounding plain or 360 meters above the mean sea level (MSL), with sheer cliffs on all sides. Like a giant pebble, the rock sits on a natural hill, whose escarpments are dotted with natural boulders of varying size and picturesque appearance. The outer limits of this hilly terrain, which roughly follow the 200-meter contour line, is defined by a massivewall of roughlydressed stone, faced with brick in the west, and 42 The definitions of the criteria whichwere current and in use at the time of the nomination of Sigiriya for inscription on the World HeritageList are as follows: Criterion II : Have exertedgreat influence, over a span of time or withina cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture, monumental arts, or town planningand landscaping. Criterion III: Bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a civilization which has disappeared. Criterion IV: Be an outstanding example of a type of structure which illustrates a significant stage in history. 43 The Outstanding Universal Value means culturaland/or natural significance which is so exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity (UNESCO, 2008:14). by high earthen ramparts in the northeast and southeast (figures 2.10, 2.11, 2.12). This walled-in hilly terrain is roughly elliptical in plan and about 15 hectares in extent. Extending to the east and west beyond it are two inner rectangular precincts, each fortifiedby an earthen rampart and a moat in succession. The inner eastern rectangular precinctmeasures about 500 meters north to south, and 700 meters east to west, while corresponding measurements of the inner western rectangular precinct are 900 meters by 800 meters. The inner western rectangular precinct is further fortified by abrick-built (middle) rampart beyond the inner moat. An outer earthen rampart, which forms a large and elongated rectangle, encompasses the central rock, the walled-in hilly terrain and two rectangular precincts to the east and west. This rectangle, which measures about one kilometer north to south and three kilometers east to west, thus creates two outer precincts to the east and west beyond the inner eastern and inner western precincts. Just inside the outer rampart on the western limit of the outer western precinctis another wide moat. All the rectangular enclosures are symmetrically laid out on a single east-west axis, which cuts across Sigiriya rock at its center. The principal gatewaysof the complex in the east-west directionare also set on this axis. Extending further southwards from the outer limits of the hilly terrain is the partly man-made and partlynatural Sigiri Mahavava(great Sigiriya reservoir), which is formedby an earthen bund nearly eight kilometers long. A rocky fortification, presently known as Mapagala (Rock of the Viceroy), borders the Sigiri Mahavava to the west, as well as the outer earthen rampart to the south. This fortification is linked to the hilly terrain at the south throughthe earthen bund of Sigiri Mahavava (figure2.13). Figure 2.10 Satellite image of Sigiriya and its immediateenvirons (courtesy: Google Earth) Figure 2.11 Semi-aerial view of Sigiriya from the northwest (photo: Dominic Sansoni/ThreeBlindMen) Figure 2.12 Plan, Sigiriya 1. Palace on Rock Summit 2. Walled-in Hilly Terrain 3. Inner Western Precinct 4. Outer Western Precinct 5. Inner Eastern Precinct 6. Outer Eastern Precinct 7.Sigiri Mahavava Figure 2.13 Greater Sigiriya showing Mapagala, Pidurangala, Ramakele and Mahavava The inner western rectangular precinct (average elevation: 195 meters above MSL) has gateways on the north, south and west across its inner moat and through the rampart (figure 2.14). An axial pathway traverses the whole east-west length of this precinct from the westerngateway to its eastern limit,where the main gateway to the walled-in hilly terrain is placed. The central zone of this precinct is dominated by water- associated structures, such as reflecting pools and ponds, fountains and serpentine streams, bathing pools and changing rooms, moated island structures and summer palaces, arranged in a symmetrical order along its east-west axis (figures 2.15, 2.16,2.17). These water bodies are fed by a network of surface and subsurface hydraulics, which operates on the principle of gravity and pressure. A rectangular compound associated with a ‘four-quartered’ landscape feature is located transversely across the east-west axis within this precinct (figure2.18). This landscape feature originally had a central pavilionat the intersection of the main axis and the transverse axis. This landscape feature is reminiscent of the well-known garden form found within the ‘paradise gardens’ of ancient Persia, of which the Sigiriya version is one of the oldest surviving examples(Bandaranayake, 1993a:24-25, 1993b:123). Figure 2.14 Plan, western precincts 1. Outer Rampart 2. Outer Moat 3. Middle Rampart 4. Inner Moat 5. Inner Rampart 6. ‘Four-quartered’ Feature 7. Miniature Water Garden 8. Summer Palace 9. Western Approach 10.Northern Gate 11.Southern Gate Figure 2.15 Plan, central zone of the western precincts 1. Four-quartered Feature 2. Outer Compartment 3. Miniature Water Garden 4. Summer Palace 5. Octagonal Pond 6. AxialPathway Figure 2.16 Central zone of the inner western precinctfrom the rock summit Figure 2.17 Plan, Miniature Water Garden Figure 2.18 Plan, four-quartered feature 1. Moated Central Pavilion 2. L-shaped Pond 3. Northern Outer Compartment 4. Southern Outer Compartment 5. Pavilion Dotted with natural boulders of varying size and picturesque appearance, the hilly terrain is formed into a series of ascending terraces towards the base of the rock (figures 2.19, 2.20). These terraces are linked to each other by means of flights of steps. The cut-marks on nearly all the boulders indicate that they had a structure erected on top while the natural overhanging at their base served as rock-shelters (figures 2.21, 2.22). These rock-shelters were originally utilized by Buddhist monks of the pre-Kasyapan monastic phase. A few constructional works associated with the interiors of the rock-shelters and some retaining walls are also attributed to this period (Bandaranayake, 2005:10-15). The soffits of these rock-shelters below their drip-ledges were plastered and painted duringthe Kasyapan phase and have close similarities to those of the main rock face. The ceiling painting on the rock-shelter popularly known as the Cobra-hood Cave is of a different type showing a geometric pattern (figure 6.1). Winding pathways are laid out through the arches, courtyards and alleys formed by these boulders (figures2.23, 2.24). Two main access routes to the rock summit in the form of ascending flights of steps traverse the western and southwestern escarpments to convergeat a brick-built gatehouse on the southwestbase of the main rock (about 250 meters above MSL). 1. Western Entrance to Hilly Terrain 2. Western Route 3. Southwestern Route 4. Pathway associated with Mirror Wall 5. Lion Plateau 6. Main Rock Figure 2.19 Plan, western escarpment Figure 2.20 Semi-aerial view of the westernescarpment (photo: R. Swathe Inc.; courtesy: Bandaranayake, 1993b) Figure 2.21 Boulder showing the cut-marks on the top to receivethe brick masonryof a structure Figure 2.22 A rock-shelter at the base of a boulder Figure 2.23 Boulder arch No. 01 Figure 2.24 Boulder arch No. 02 An elevated pathway, punctuated by a short flight of steps and set along a collar-like declivity of the westernrock face, at an averageheight of 15 meters abovethe base of the rock,runs northwards fromthis gatehouse. Thispathway is protected by a highbrick-built parapet wall on its western edge, and by the natural overhang of the rock on top (figure 2.25).Popularly known as the MirrorWall, due to its highlypolished plaster on the internalsurface, this parapet wall contains poems and other graffiti inscribed by ancient visitors to the site from the 6th to the 13th or 14th centuries AC, who recorded their emotional expressions of the site (Paranavitana, 1956; Priyanka, 1990, 1994, 2010). The drip-ledge cut at the brow along the entire length of the western andpart of thenorthern rock faces prevented rainwater flowing along the surface intothis pathway. Thisprotected pathway winds around the northwest corner of the rock and continues alongthe northern face as rather a steep stairwaybuilt on firm ground, to lead on to an elevated and elongated plateau.This plateau (about300 meters above MSL), which protrudes northwards from the northernrock face, measuresabout 64 metersnorth to southand 32 meters east to west (figures 2.26, 2.27). Built on this plateau against the northern vertical face of the rock and facing north is a staircase-house in the form of the forepart of a colossallion. At present, only the massive forepaws of the so-called Lion-Staircase-House and an internal passage with flights of steps leading up towards the rock summit have survived (figure 2.28). The final ascent to the summit of the rock from this so-called Lion Plateau is, therefore, firstlythrough this Lion-Staircase-House and then along a protectedzigzag stairway above it, built on the northern vertical face of the rock, of which only the crevices cut on the rock surface to support the masonry work of the stairway have survived. Figure 2.25 The Mirror Wall and the pathway Figure 2.26 Plan, Lion Plateau 1. Lion-Staircase- House 2. Pathway/Stairway associated with Mirror Wall 3. Main Rock 4. U-shaped Structure Figure 2.27 Semi-aerial view of the Lion Plateauwhich protrudes from the northernrock face (photo:Dominic Sansoni/ ThreeBlindMen) Figure 2.28 Remains of the Lion-Staircase-House (note the crevicescut on the upper part of the rock surfaceto support the masonry work of the zigzag stairwayabove the Lion-Staircase-House to reach the rock summit)(photo: Dominic Sansoni/ThreeBlindMen) The area belowthe horizontal drip-ledge cut high up along the length of the westernand northern rockfaces was originally plastered and paintedwith the famousSigiriya Ladies (Sigiri landun), only 19 of which have survived on adjacent depressions of the western rock face above the protected pathway44 (figure 2.29). This painted band was originally about 140 meters long and, at the widest, about 40 meters high (Bandaranayake, 1986a:26). According to some graffiti scrawled on the Mirror Wall, there had probably been approximately 500 such figure paintings originally. This would have been, according to John Still (1907:43), a British civil servant of the early 20th century, perhaps the largest picture in the world.In this painting composition, only the upper partof the body of the ladies, cut off about 20 centimeters below the waist by clouds, are shown floating among the clouds.45 Similar paintings of the ladies are also found on one of the rock-shelters 44 Three more depressions, higher up on the western rock face, also contain plaster and pigments and fragments of a paintedfigure. 45 The terracotta figurines unearthed in excavations at the western escarpment of the hilly terrain display close similarities in general form and conceptto the ladies painted on the rock face. Bandaranayake (1993c) dates theseexquisite figurines to the periodbetween the 7th and 10th centuries, and believes that they may have been replicasof the painted ladies, used as souvenirs to be carriedaway by visitorsto Sigiriya. situated on the hilly terrain, the only difference being that theyare not cut off belowthe waist by clouds, and hence are full figurerepresentations with legs bent in a flyingposture. A paintedlady and pigments discovered on the plastered outer surface of the Mirror Wall in2004 (Wagaachchi, 2005)indicates that thewhole of theouter surface of the MirrorWall was also paintedin a similar manner to that of the rockface. However, the surviving paintedfigure indicates thatit is also a fullfigure representation verymuch similar to the paintedfigures of the rock-shelters of the hillyterrain. Figure 2.29 Remnants of the plasterband on the rock face showing the Sigiriya Ladiesffoating among clouds(photo: Gamini Jayasinghe; courtesy: Bandaranayake 1986a) Roughly elliptical in plan and about 1.5 hectares in extent, the summit of the rock is occupied by palace buildings, servicestructures, rock-cut and brick-built pools and water retainingstructures as well as gardensand terraces (figures2.30, 2.31, 2.32). Another interesting feature is an east-facing rock-cutseat which was originally providedwith a canopy (figure 2.33). Running at the middle and entire north-south length of the rock summit is a limestone-paved pathwaywhich links variousspaces on either side (figure 2.34).The entire rock summit was originally surrounded by a parapet wall rising from the slopes below the edge, on almost the total periphery of the rock (figure 2.35). Originally concealed within the parapet wall surrounding the rock summit, a north-south running drain of considerable cross-section cut on the western cliff was used to collect the rainwater run-off of the western sector of the rock summit. A vertical drain cut on the southwestface of the rock carriedthe water down to a cistern built at the base of the rock. Figure 2.30 Plan, rock summit 1. Main Palace 2. Other Palace Structures 3. Upper Palace Garden 4. Lower Palace Garden 5. Pool 6. Rock-cut Seat 7. Limestone-paved Central Pathway Figure 2.31 Rock summit (viewfrom southeast) (photo:Dominic Sansoni/ThreeBlindMen)

T.R. PREMATHILAKE, S. EPITA WATTE, ANURA YASAPALA, EVA MYRDAL- RUNEBJER This is a list of plants and material of plant origin used in the household, listed in the course of the village survey. Samples were examined in situ by T.R. Premathilake of the PGIAR and identified by him. The identifications are based on the samples examined. The species are identified by their botani­ cal names. The local names are mostly ones in general use in the Dry Zone but in some cases relate only to the sample species examined. The same name may also be applied in some instances to other botanical species, but these alternatives are not indicated here as they did not feature in the sample examined. MATERIAL FOR TOOLS AND CONSTRUCTION ETC 1. SINHALA NAME: AND ARA WOOD FAMILY: MIMOSACEAE Dichrostachys cinerea (L) Wight & Arn. USAGE Village survey: Handle for katta. General: Timber used for house building. 2. SINHALA NAME: BATA FAMILY: POACEAE Ochlandra stridula Thw. USAGE Village survey: Kollu-paha (basket for znz-oil pre­ ssing). General: Fruit eaten, stem used for roof construc­ tion and furniture. 3. SINHALA NAME: BURUTA WOOD FAMILY: RUTACEAE Chloroxylon swietenia DC. USAGE Village survey: Yota (unusual material for a yota - water-lifting device in irrigation), divided buruta- log used to hold the paha (basket) for mf-oil press­ ing. Used for the pointed stick placed at the bottom of a boruvala (pit-fall) and in an uladamilla (poi­ nted stick inside chena, close to fence to trap ani­ mals jumping over the fence), vamgediya (wooden mortar). General: Furniture, tool handles. 4. SINHALA NAME: DADUVAHA WOOD FAMILY: MYRTACEAE Eugenia rotundata Trim. USAGE Village survey: Pointed wooden stick placed at the bottom of the boruvala (pit-fall), uladamilla (poi­ nted sticks placed inside chena, close to fence, to trap animals jumping over the fence). 5. SINHALA NAME: DAMBA WOOD FAMILY: MYRTACEAE Syzygium cumini (L) Sked. USAGE Village survey: Vamgediya (wooden mortar). General: Timber used for house building. 6. SINHALA NAME: DAMUNU WOOD FAMILY: TILICEAE Grewia tiliaefolia L. USAGE Village survey: Handle for katta (bill-hook). General: Oars, shafts, gunstocks, root for medicine, fruit eaten. 7. SINHALA NAME: DIKKANDA (BRANCHES) FAMILY: ANNONACEAE Artabotrys eylanicus Hook.f. and Thoms. USAGE Village survey: Parts of karaka (a fishing device) General: Wood for plywood boxes, small resinous, seed edible, oil used for lighting. 8. SINHALA NAME: DEMATA WOOD FAMILY: VERBENACEAE Gmelina asiatica L. USAGE Village survey: Handle for loku katta (big billho- ok/axe) and katta. 9. SINHALA NAME: GALLAHA-PAN FAMILY: CYPREACEAS Cyperus exaltatus Hoult. USAGE Village survey: Panmalla (basket - for example for carrying the seeds when sowing dry grains in thechena). General: Plaited mats. 10. SINHALA NAME: GAMSURIYA WOOD FAMILY: MALVACEAE Thespesia populnea (L.) Soland. ex Corr. USAGE Village survey: Mate (stirring implement for curd making). General: For furniture, boats and carts. 11. SINHALA NAME: GATAKULA (BRANCHES) FAMILY: RUBIACEAE Benkara malabarica (Lam.) Tir. USAGE Village survey: Gira tonduva (parrot-trap), bow part of galdunna (stone-throwing device to scare cattle from home garden or fields). 12. SINHALA NAME: HALMILLA WOOD FAMILY: TILIACEAE Berry a cordifolia^wM.) Burret. USAGE Village survey: Wood for blade of the govi-poruva (hand-drawn leveller), handle of kopi pihiya (kn­ ife). Halmilla leaves: tied around honey combs to carry them home from the jungle. General: Wood for boats, bent works, beams; uni­ versally useful. 13. SINHALA NAME: IBIKATUVAL FAMILY: CELASTRACEAE Reissaantia indica (willd.) Halle. USAGE Village survey: Wickers used to bind the paddy straw bundles forming the cylindric vi bissa (paddy storage structure). 14. SINHALA NAME: ILUK FAMILY: GRAMINACEAE Imperata cylindrica Var. major (Nees) C.E. Hubb. USAGE Village survey: Roof cover material. 15. SINHALA NAME: INDI FAMILY: PALMAE Phoenix pussilia Gaertn. USAGE Village survey: Kemana (fishing device). 16. SINHALA NAME: KALAVAL FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Derris scandens (Dalz.) Bak. USAGEVillage survey: String for gira tonduva (parrot­ trap), snare of valikukul ugula (wild fowl’s trap), snare of len ugula (squirrel-trap), string for galdun­ na (stone-throwing device for scaring away cattle from home garden or fields). 17. SINHALA NAME: KALUVARA WOOD FAMILY: EBENACEAE Diospyros ebenum Koenig. USAGE Village survey: Pestle to vamgediya (wooden mor­ tar). General: Wood for masts, furniture, chopsticks, o- pium pipes, fruit as medicine and fish poison. 18. SINHALA NAME: KANDA LEAVES FAMILY: EUPHORBIACEAE Macarangapeltata (Roxb.) Muell. Arg. USAGE Village survey: Leaves were tied around honey­ combs to bring them home from the jungle. General: Wood for temporary work. 19. SINHALA NAME: KIRI KON FAMILY: MELIACEAE Walsura piscidia Roxb. USAGE Village survey: Branch for fixed spear (uladamil- la). 20. SINHALA NAME: KI RIVAL FAMILY: RUBIACEAE Morinda umbellata L. USAGE Village survey: Binding of the karaka (fishing de­ vice), kudaya (basket also used for catching small fish), part of net in habaka (dead-fall trap in the chena land fence), rope for fastening snare of the kaballava trap, kude (basket used for example for holding kurakkan ears when cutting), string hold­ ing the triggering mechanism of the valikukul ug­ ula (wild fowl’s trap), binding the sticks of the mi habaka (rat-trap) together. 21. SINHALA NAME: KOHOMBA FAMILY: MELIACEAE Azadirachta indica A. Tuss. USAGE Village survey: Leaves dug down together with ash around vi bissa wall-and-roof-carrying pillars as protection against white ants.General: Wood durable, insect-proof, used for dec­ orative works and ships. 22. SINHALA NAME: KURATIYA FAMILY: EUPHORBIACEAE Phyllanthus polyphyllus Wiild. USAGE Village survey: Branches for rila ugula and uru- manda. 23. SINHALA NAME: LABU FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Lagenaria siceraria Mol. USAGE Village survey: Dried fruit used as a vessel. General: Fruit eaten, oil extracted, fruit shell used as vessels, or to make musical instruments. 24. SINHALA NAME: MILLA WOOD FAMILY: VERBENACEAE Vitex pinnata. L. F. forma Vitex altissima Mol- denke. USAGE Village survey: Divided milla log holding the paha (basket) for pressing mf-oil. General: Durable wood, used for house construc­ tion in various parts of southern India; in Burma for making wooden bells. 25. SINHALA NAME: MORA WOOD FAMILY: SAP1NDACEAE Dimocarpus longana. Lour. Euphoria longana Lam. USAGE Village survey: Pointed wooden post placed at the bottom of the boruvala (trap-pit). General: Wood for building and furniture. 26. SINHALA NAME: POL ENGLISH: COCONUT PALM FAMILY: PALMAE Cocos nucifera L. USAGE Village survey: Pol kendi, coconut fibre used to twine a string, kohulanu, used for example as a binding around karaka orifice; pol katu, (coconut shell) for the mugaya, milk-pail; in traditional me­ dicine used for holding the burning woodapple leaf when treating poisonous hunga bites; pol kuru, le­ af-stem part of kemana; pol hanasu ("bud-cover") sieve for honey; pol kola (leaves) for roof cover, decorations in festival times and at funerals; wood used for roof construction. General: Fruit is eaten, also used to produce al­ cohol, vinegar, toddy, cooking oil, soap; leaves for thatching material; fibre for making ropes, brushes, brooms; nutshell for bowls, spoons. 27. SINHALA NAME: SERU FAMILY: RUBIACEAE Canthium dicoccum (Gaerth.) Merr. USAGE Village survey: Branch for fixed spear. 28. SINHALA NAME: TAL FAMILY: PALMAE Borassus flabellifer L. USAGE Village survey: Palm leaves as roof cover, umbrel­ la. 29. SINHALA NAME: TALA ENGLISH: GINGELLY FAMILY: PEDALIACEAE Sesamum indicum (L.) USAGE Village survey: Straws covering pit-trap in home­ garden. General: Cooking oil, for sweetmeats, soap. 30. SINHALA NAME: TANAVI, TANAHAL FAMILY: GRAMINACEAE Setaria italica (L.) P. Beauv. USAGE Village survey: Seed is eaten, bait for the len ugula (squirrel-trap). General: Seed is eaten. 31. SINHALA NAME: ULKANDA BRANCHES FAMILY: ANNONACEAE Poly althia korinti (Dunal.) Thw. USAGE Village survey: Gira tonduva (parrot trap), part of kemana (stationary fishing device), part of karaka (fishing device). General: Fruits eaten by children. 32. SINHALA NAME: VI ENGLISH: RICE FAMILY: GRAMINACEAS Oryza sativa L. USAGE Village survey: Goy am piduru (paddy straw), fod­ der, bundled to form the cylindric vi bissa; seeds eaten. General: Seeds eaten. 33. SINHALA NAME: VELAM FAMILY: STERCULIACEAE Pteros permum canescens Roxb. USAGE Village survey: Handle of the govi-poruva (hand drawn leveller), handle of udalla (hoe), handle of porava (axe). General: Wood for boxes, poles and spars. Fire can be produced by rotating the point of one piece of wood upon the side of another. 34. SINHALA NAME: VIRA WOOD FAMILY: EUPHORBIACEAE Dry petes sepiaria (Wight & Arn.) Pax Hoffm. USAGE Village survey: Handle of porava. 35. SINHALA NAME: VEVAL FAMILY: PALMAE Calamus rotang L. USAGE Village survey: String holding the mi habaka (rat- trap) lid, kudaya (basket). HOME GARDEN Fruits, berries, leaves 36. SINHALA NAME: AMBA ENGLISH: MANGO FAMILY: ANACARDIACEAE Mangifera indica L. Mangifera zeylanica (BL) Hook.f. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten, perennial. General: Wood for boxes, dugout canoes, plywood. 37. SINHALA NAME: BELI FAMILY: RUTACEAE Aegle marmelos (L.) Correa. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Home garden or jungle. Collected September-October. Perennial. 38. SINHALA NAME: BILIM FAMILY: OXALIDACEAE Averrhoe bilimbi (L.) USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested year round. Perennial. General: Medicinal plant. 39. SINHALA NAME: DELUM FAMILY: PUNICACEAE Punica granatum L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten raw. Leaf used as med­ icine for eyes. September-October. Perennial. 40. SINHALA NAME: DIVUL ENGLISH: WOOD-APPLE FAMILY: RUTACEAE Limonia acidissima L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Home garden or jungle. Perennial 41. SINHALA NAME: DODAM, (AMBUL- and PE- NI-) ENGLISH: SOUR ORANGE FAMILY: RUTACEAE Citrus aurantium L. Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested in April- May. Perennial. 42. SINHALA NAME: AMBILLA FAMILY: MYRSINACEAE Embelia ribes Burm. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested April-May. Perennial. 43. SINHALA NAME: GASLABU FAMILY: CARICACEAE Carica papaya L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Used for curry. Ripe fruit eaten raw. Plucked especially in April. Planted in rainy season. Harvesting after one month, then continuously for six months. General: Medicinal plant. 44. SINHALA NAME: GASNIVITIYA LEAF FAMILY: BASELLACEAE Basella alba L. USAGE Village survey : Leaf eaten. Harvested during rainy season. General: Medicinal plant. 45. SINHALA NAME: GATAANODA FAMILY: ANNONACEAE Annona squamosa L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. End of August-Octo­ ber. Perennial. 46. SINHALA NAME: GOTUKOLA (LEAF) FAMILY: UMBELLIFERAE Cenitella asiatica L. USAGE Village survey: Leaf eaten. Bigger domesticated variety in homegarden. Smaller wild variety around tanks and ponds. Planted in September. Collected October-January. 47. SINHALA NAME: JAMBU FAMILY: MYRTACEAE Syzygium malaccensis (L.) Marr. USAGE Village survey: Not so common in this Dry Zone area. Fruit eaten. Harvested in April. Perennial. 48. SINHALA NAME: JAYAM FAMILY: TILIACEAE Muntingia calabura USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested April-May. Home garden or jungle. 49. SINHALA NAME: JUMBOLA FAMILY: RUTACEAE Citrus grandis L. USAGE Village survey: Perennial. General: Harvested May-June. 50. SINHALA NAME: KAJU ENGLISH: CASHEW NUT FAMILY: ANACARDIACEAE Anacardium occidentale L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested March-May. Perennial. 51. SINHALA NAME: KAMARAMGA FAMILY: OXALIDACEAE Averrhoa carambola L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Perennial. General: Harvested September-October. 52. SINHALA NAME: KARA VILA ENGLISH: BITTER GOURD FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Momordica charantia L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. General: July-October. 53. SINHALA NAME: KATUANODA FAMILY: ANNONACEAE Annona muricata L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Perennial. General: Harvested June-July. 54. SINHALA NAME: KESEL ENGLISH: BANANA FAMILY: MUSACEAE Musa sapientum L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Perennial. 55. SINHALA NAME: KOS ENGLISH: JAK FRUIT FAMILY: MORACEAE Artocarcus heterophyllus Lam. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Perennial. General: Harvested March-April. Timber used for furniture building. 56. SINHALA NAME: KOMADU ENGLISH: WATERMELON FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Colocynthis citrullus L. USAGE Village Survey: Fruit eaten. Home garden or che- na. Planted in September-October. Harvested Feb­ ruary-May. 57. SINHALA NAME: LOLU FAMILY: BORAGINACEAE Cordia monoica Roth. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested in August. Perennial. 58. SINHALA NAME: MIDI FAMILY: VERBENACEAE Permna serratifolia L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested year round, especially in April. Perennial. 59. SINHALA NAME: NARAM FAMILY: RUTACEAE Citrus reticulata Blanco. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Perennial General: Harvested July-September. 60. SINHALA NAME: NIVITIYA FAMILY: BASELLACEAE Basella alba L.USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten Home garden or chena. Planted end September. Stem can be harvested from end November, seeds after end December. 61. SINHALA NAMES: PERA ENGLISH: GUAVA FAMILY: MYRTACEAE Psidium guasava L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested year round. Perennial. General: Medical plant. 62. SINHALA NAME: POL ENGLISH: COCONUT PALM FAMILY: PALMAE Cocos nucifera L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit andpol kuru, leaf-stem, eaten. Harvested year round. Perennial. 63. SINHALA NAME: VALDODAM ENGLISH: PASSION FRUIT FAMILY: PASSIFLORACEAE Passiflora edulis. Sims. USAGE Village survey: Fruit eaten. Harvested year round. Perennial. 64. SINHALA NAME: VALIANODA FAMILY: ANNONACEAE Annona reticulata L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested April to June. Perennial. Roots. 65. SINHALA NAME: ALAKOLAALA FAMILY: DIOSCOREAE Dioscorea intermedia Thw. USAGE Village survey: Planted in rainy season. Harvested year round except August, when it is difficult to dig. 66. SINHALA NAME: BATTALA FAMILY: CONVOLVULACEAE Ipomoea batatas (L.) Cam. USAGE Village survey: Planted in rainy season. Harvested after four months, all at once. 67. SINHALA NAME: KAHATANGALA-ALA FAMILY: DIOSCORIACEAE Dioscorea oppsitifolia L. USAGE Village survey: Around fence in home garden. Planted end-September. Harvested year round, ex­ cept August. 68. SINHALA NAME: KONDOLALA FAMILY: DIOSCOREACEAE Dioscorea tomentosa Herne ex Roth. USAGE Village survey: In home garden around fence. Boiled for curry. Planted end-September. Har­ vested year round, except August. 69. SINHALA NAME: MANNOKKA ENGLISH: CASSAVA FAMILY: EUPHORBIACEAE Manihot esculenta Crantz. Manihot utilissima Phol. USAGE Village survey: Planted end September to Novem­ ber. Harvested February to June, sparingly. Root, leaf, for curry. 70. SINHALA NAME: MUKUNUVANNE FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Alternanthera triandrar (L.) DC . USAGE Village survey: Grows wild around tanks, or in home gardens. Harvested year round. 71. SINHALA NAME: RATAKAJU ENGLISH: GROUND NUT FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Arachis hypogaea L. USAGE Village survey: Planted in October, harvested Feb­ ruary-March. Home garden or chena. PLANTS COLONIZING HOME-GARDEN 72. SINHALA NAME: TAMPALA FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Amaranthus dubius Mart. USAGE Village survey: For curry. Grows naturally in home garden or chena. Collected October-January. 73. SINHALA NAME: VALPENELA FAMILY: SAPINDACEAE Cardiospermum halicacabum L. USAGE Village survey: For tea. Boiled with coconut milk and rice ("kenda"). For curry. Natural in homegar­ den or abandoned chena. Collected October-Jan­ uary. VILLAGE AREA COMMON LAND Fruits, flowers, leaves 74. SINHALA NAME: MI FAMILY: SAPOTACEAE Bassia latifolia USAGE Village survey: Fruits for oil-pressing. Collected mid-September. Flowers for nectar. Collected in May and June. 75. SINHALA NAME: RANA VARA FAMILY: CAESALPIN1AE Cassia auriculata L. USAGE Village survey: Leaf for tea. Collected year round except in August. 76. SINHALA NAME: SIYAMBALA ENGLISH: TAMARIND FAMILY: CAESALPINIAE Tamarindus indica L. USAGE Village survey: Fruit boiled. Can be kept for 2-3 months. 77. SINHALA NAME: TIMBIRI FAMILY: EBENACEAE Diospyros malabarica Desr. Koskel. USAGE Village survey: Village area or jungle. Perennial. Collected October-December. PURANA VI: TRADITIONAL PADDY VARIETIES PREVIOUSLY GROWN IN TALKOTE VILLAGE Ripening in 2 1/2 months Hinati Kalu hinati Oryza sativa L. Ripening in 3 months Panca Perumal Oryza sativa L. Sudu Hondaravala Oryza sativa L. Ripening in 4 months Dikvi. distinguishable by long and slender shape. Hodaravala Oryza sativa L. Ilankalyian Oryzja sativa L. Murungakaliyan Oryza sativa L. TRADITIONAL DRY GRAINS/PLANTS CULTIVATED MIXED TOGETHER ON CHENA LAND IN THE STUDY AREA 78. SINHALA NAME: ABA ENGLISH: MUSTARD FAMILY: CRUCIFERAE Brassica juncea (L.) coss. Brassica interfolia (we­ st.) O.E. Schulz. USAGE Village survey: On good soil, where forest has rec­ overed to previous burning; cash-crop often mixed with batu. Leaf used for "mixed curry" (several plant leaves used together for curry). 79. SINHALA NAME: ALUPUHUL ENGLISH: ASH PUMPKIN FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Benincasa hispida (Thunb) Cogn. USAGE Village survey: Harvested February-March. 80. SINHALA NAME: ASAMODAGAM FAMILY: UMBELLIFERAE Trachyspermum roxburghlanum (DC.) Craib. USAGE Village survey: Leaf for mixed curry. Collected November-December. Atta (seeds) ground for use in "mixed curry". Boiled for tea, medicine. Har­ vested February. 81. SINHALA NAME: ATTIKA FAMILY: MORACEAE Ficus racemosa L. USAGE Village survey: Leaf, fruit consumed the same day as harvested. Harvested December-January. 82. SINHALA NAME: BADA IRINGU ENGLISH: MAIZE FAMILY: GRAMINACEAE Zeamays indentata L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested end-December. 83. SINHALA NAME: BATU FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Solanum surattense Burn. USAGE Village survey: Cash crop often mixed with aba on good soil where forest has recovered to previous burning. Harvested from end-December to July, twice a month. 84. SINHALA NAME: IDALIRINGU ENGLISH: SORGHUM FAMILY: GRAMINACEAE Sorghum vulgare Pers. USAGE Village survey: Sometimes mixed. Harvested end- December. 85. SINHALA NAME: KARA VILA ENGLISH: BITTER GOURD FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Momordica charantia L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested end-November to Feb­ ruary, every tenth day. 86. SINHALA NAME: KAKIRI ENGLISH: CUCUMBER FAMILY: CUCURBITACE Cucumis callosa (Rottl.) Cong. Cucumis melo Var. egrestis Naud. USAGE Village survey: Harvested end-February to mid­ March. If the "natta\ stem, is taken with the kekiri it can be kept for two months. 87. SINHALA NAME: LABU FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Standi. USAGE Village survey: Leaf taken November-December, used for "mixed curry"). Fruit harvested from end- December-January. After that, fruits are taken to be dried for use as vessels. 88. SINHALA NAME: KURAKKAN ENGLISH: FINGER MILLET FAMILY: GRAMINACEAE Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaetn. USAGE Village survey: Harvested mid-February. 89. SINHALA NAME: KOLLU ENGLISH: HORSE GRAM FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Dolichos biflorus L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested end of February. 90. SINHALA NAME: KOMADU ENGLISH: WATER MELON FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Colocynthis citrullus (L.) Kun. USAGE Village survey: Harvested February to May. 91. SINHALA NAME: MAKARAL FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Vigna cylindrica (L.) Skeels. USAGE Village survey: Leaf for mixed curry. Collected November-December. Fruit boiled for curry before ripening. Seeds boiled after ripening. Eaten as Rice. Harvested January-February. 92. SINHALA NAME: MUM ENGLISH: GREEN GRAM FAMILY: PHASEOLUS AUREUS USAGE Village survey: Harvested December to February. 93. SINHALA NAME: NIVITIYA FAMILY: BASELLACEAE Basella alba L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested from November to Feb­ ruary. 94. SINHALA NAME: PALA FAMILY: COMMELINACEAE Commelina diffusa Burm.f. USAGE Village survey: Harvested end-December-March. 95. SINHALA NAME: RATALA FAMILY: RACEAE Alacosia indica (Roxb.) Schoott. USAGE Village survey: Planted in October, harvested Feb­ ruary-March. Chena or home garden. 96. SINHALA NAME: RATAKAJU FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Arachis hypogaea L. USAGE Village survey: Planted in October, harvested Feb­ ruary to March. Chena or home garden. 97. SINHALA NAME: TALA ENGLISH: GINGELLY FAMILY: PEDALIACEAE Sesamum indicum (L.) DC. USAGE Village survey: Mixed or separate. Harvested end of January. 98. SINHALA NAME: TANAVI ENGLISH: ITALIAN MILLET FAMILY: GRAMINACEAE Setaria italica (L) Beaur. USAGE Village survey: Harvested end of January-Febru­ ary. 99. SINHALA NAME: TIYABARA FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Cucuruis sativus L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested February-March. 100. SINHALA NAME: UNDU ENGLISH: BLACK GRAM FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Phaseolus mungo L. USAGE Village survey: Harvested in March. 101. SINHALA NAME: VANNI MIRIS ENGLISH: CHILI FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Capsicum Var. acuminatum L. USAGE Village survey: Especially grown in chena condi­ tions, smaller than the other variety. Harvested Ja­ nuary to March. 102. SINHALA NAME: VATTAKKA FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Cucurbita maxima Duchesn. USAGE Village survey: Leaf used in ’’mixed curry”. Col­ lected November-December. Fruit boiled for curry. Harvested January-February. During growing se­ ason 1-2 fruits are plucked for curry. When plants die in February, before the kurakkan harvest, all remaining fruits are harvested. Can be stored 3-4 months. TRADITIONAL DRY GRAINS/PLANTS GROWN SEPARATELY ON CHENA LAND IN THE STUDY AREA 103. SINHALA NAME: MENERI ENGLISH: PANICUM MILLET FAMILY: GRAMINACEAE Panicum miliaceum Lin. USAGE Sown separately two weeks later in same chena as mixed crops. Only for family consumption, not for sale. Considered very tasty and especially used for "milk-rice”. Usually not more than 50-100kg har­ vested. Straw thrown away - thin, like paddy straw. Harvested all at once in February. 104. SINHALA NAME: TALA ENGLISH: GINGELLY FAMILY: PEDALICEAE Sesamum indicum (L.) DC. USAGE Village survey: Grown separately in Ka/fl-season chena. Clearing end-April, sowing in May, harvest in August. PLANTS NATURALLY GROWING IN OR COLONIZING NEWLY BURNED CHENA LAND 105. SINHALA NAME: GIRAPALA (LEAF) Village survey: In waterlogged part of chena. Col­ lected December-February. 106. SINHALA NAME: KARAKOLA FAMILY: RUBIACEAE Canthium parviflorum L. USAGE Village survey: The tree survives the burning of the chena, the new leaves that emerge after burning are plucked. Fruits are collected from December to February. 107. SINHALAN NAME: KI RIH AND A FAMILY: AMARANTHUS Celosia argentea L. USAGE Village survey: Colonizes newly burnt chena land. Collected from end-October to January. 108. SINHALA NAME: KURU-PALA FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Amaranthus viridis L. USAGE Village survey: Colonizes newly burned chenas and other cleared places. Collected from October to June. 109. SINHALA NAME: LEE-KOLA FAMILY: VERBENACEAE Premna procumbens Moon. USAGE Village survey: The tree survives the burning of the chena, the new leaves that emerge are plucked. Used in "mixed curry". 110. SINHALA NAME: TAMPALA FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Amaranthus oleraceus L. USAGE Village survey: Colonizes newly burned chena la­ nds and home gardens. Collected October to June. 111. SINHALA NAME: THELATIYA - DALU and - GEDI FAMILY: EUPHORBIACEAE Excoecaria crenulata Wight. USAGE Village survey: Colonizes newly burned chena la­ nd. Fruit collected August and September. Leaf, October to June. 112. SINHALA NAME: THORA-KOLA FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Cassia tora L. USAGE Village survey: Colonizes newly burnt places. Col­ lected October to November. WILD PLANTS COLLECTED, TANK OR PADDYFIELD ASSOCIATED 113. SINHALA NAME: GIRAPALA (LEAF) FAMILY: COMMELINACEAE Commelina clavata Hook. f. USAGE Village survey: Grows wild in tanks or ponds, in waterlogged part of chena. Collected October to February. 114. SINHALA NAME: GOTUKOLA (LEAF) ENGLISH: INDIAN PENNYWOAT FAMILY: UMBELLIFERE Centella asiatica (L.) Urb. USAGE Village survey: Grows wild around tanks and po­ nds. There is a bigger domesticated variety grown in home gardens. Collected October to May. 115. SINHALA NAME: IKIRIYA FAMILY: ACANTHACEAE Asteracantha longifolia (L.) Ness. USAGE Village survey: Grows around tanks. Collected Oc­ tober-January. Leaf used for curry, whole plant for tea. 116. SINHALA NAME: KEKATIYA-ALA FAMILY: APONOGETONACEAE Aponogeton echinatus, Aponogetum undulatus USAGE Village survey: Flowers collected from tank, December to January; root in August. 117. SINHALA NAME: KIRIUDATTA FAMILY: AIZOACEAE Mallugo cerviana L. Ser. ox DC. USAGE Village survey: Found around tanks and in other wet places. Leaf used for "mixed curry". Collected November-February. 118. SINHALA NAME: MUKUNUVANNE FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Alternthera triandra (L.) R. Br. Prodr. USAGE Village survey: Grows on paddy field bunds, arou­ nd tanks. Collected October-January. 119. SINHALA NAME: NELUM-ALA (ROOT) ENGLISH: CHINESE WATERLILY FAMILY: NYMPHAEACEAE Nelumbo nucifera gaertu Abw. USAGE Village survey: Dug from tank in August when it has dried. Seed collected April to June. 120. SINHALA NAME: OLU - DANDU (STALK), G- EDI (FRUIT), ALA (ROOT), HAL (SEED) ENGLISH: LOTUS FAMILY: NYMPHAEACEAE Nymphaea lotus L. USAGE Village survey: Grows inside tank. Stalk and fruit collected December-January. Root in August. Seed husked and boiled like rice, June-August. 121. SINHALA NAME: SERA ALA FAMILY: GRAMINAE Cymbopogon citratus DC. USAGE Village survey: Collected in August. Boiled for curry. WILD PLANTS, ROOTS COLLECTED, JUNGLE OR ABANDONED CHENA 122. SINHALA NAME: ATTIKKA FAMILY: MORACEAE Ficus racemosa L. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Fruit used for curry. Col­ lected November-February. Bark dried any time of the year above the fire - used for betel. 123. SINHALA NAME: DIYAMENERI FAMILY: COMMELINACEAE Commelina benghalensis L. USAGE Village survey: In jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf for curry. Collected November-February. 124. SINHALA NAME: GEDAPALA FAMILY: PORTULACEAE Portulaca oleraceae L. USAGE Village survey: In jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf for curry. Collected November-February. 125. SINHALA NAME: GEKARAL FAMILY: OCHNACEAE Ochna lanceolata Sprang. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Bark dried above fire to be used for betel. Any time. 126. SINHALA NAME: GONA ALA FAMILY: DIOSCOREACEAE Dioscorea spicata Roth. USAGE Village survey: In jungle. Dug from a depth of 0.6-0.9m. Collected September-October. Boiled for curry. 127. SINHALA NAME: IRAMUSU ENGLISH: INDIAN SARSAPARILLA FAMILY: ASCLEPIADACEAE Hemidesmus indicus (L.) Ait.f. USAGE Village survey: In abandoned chena. Collected Oc­ tober-January. For tea. Dried and stored hanging from the roof in the verandah, for example. 128. SINHALA NAME: KARAKOLA FRUIT FAMILY: RUBIACEAE Canthium parviflorum L. USAGE Village survey: In jungle. Collected October-Nov­ ember. Can be kept 3-4 days. General: Leaves edible, also used for medicine, snakebite poisoning. 129.SINHALA NAME: KATU-ALA FAMILY: DIOSCOREACEAE Dioscorea pentaphylla L. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected October-January. Boiled, curry. 130. SINHALA NAME: KIRIHANDA FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Celosia argentea L. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf used for "mixed curry". 131. SINHALA NAME: LOLU FAMILY: BORAGINACEAE Cordia monoica Roth. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf for curry. Collected October-December. Fruit raw. Collected November-December. 132. SINHALA NAME: MULLAKOLA FAMILY: VERBENACEAE Premna alstoni Moldenke Var. alstoni Moldenke. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf used for "mixed curry". Collected November-Feb­ ruary. 133. SINHALA NAME: POLPALA FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Aerva lanata (L.) Juss. ex Schult. USAGE Village survey: Leaf for curry, whole plant for tea. In abandoned chena. Collected in March. Vegetables 134. SINHALA NAME: BATU-KARAVILA FAMILY: CUCURBTACEAE Momordica spp. USAGE Village survey: Wild karavila, found in abandoned chena, or around chena. Only for medical pur­ poses. Collected October-January. 135. SINHALA NAME: RATA-TIBBATU, ATTIBB- ATU FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Solanum capsicoides All. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena. Collected Dec­ ember-January. 136. SINHALA NAME: TITTA-TIBBATU FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Solanum violaceum Ortega.Village survey: Jungle. Fruit used for curry. Col­ lected November-February. Bark dried any time of the year above the fire - used for betel. 123. SINHALA NAME: DIYAMENERI FAMILY: COMMELINACEAE Commelina benghalensis L. USAGE Village survey: In jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf for curry. Collected November-February. 124. SINHALA NAME: GEDAPALA FAMILY: PORTULACEAE Portulaca oleraceae L. USAGE Village survey: In jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf for curry. Collected November-February. 125. SINHALA NAME: GEKARAL FAMILY: OCHNACEAE Ochna lanceolata Sprang. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Bark dried above fire to be used for betel. Any time. 126. SINHALA NAME: GONA ALA FAMILY: DIOSCOREACEAE Dioscorea spicata Roth. USAGE Village survey: In jungle. Dug from a depth of 0.6-0.9m. Collected September-October. Boiled for curry. 127. SINHALA NAME: IRAMUSU ENGLISH: INDIAN SARSAPARILLA FAMILY: ASCLEPIADACEAE Hemidesmus indicus (L.) Ait.f. USAGE Village survey: In abandoned chena. Collected Oc­ tober-January. For tea. Dried and stored hanging from the roof in the verandah, for example. 128. SINHALA NAME: KARAKOLA FRUIT FAMILY: RUBIACEAE Canthium parviflorum L. USAGE Village survey: In jungle. Collected October-Nov­ ember. Can be kept 3-4 days. General: Leaves edible, also used for medicine, snakebite poisoning. 129.SINHALA NAME: KATU-ALA FAMILY: DIOSCOREACEAE Dioscorea pentaphylla L.USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected October-January. Boiled, curry. 130. SINHALA NAME: KIRIHANDA FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Celosia argentea L. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf used for "mixed curry". 131. SINHALA NAME: LOLU FAMILY: BORAGINACEAE Cordia monoica Roth. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf for curry. Collected October-December. Fruit raw. Collected November-December. 132. SINHALA NAME: MULLAKOLA FAMILY: VERBENACEAE Premna alstoni Moldenke Var. alstoni Moldenke. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Leaf used for "mixed curry". Collected November-Feb­ ruary. 133. SINHALA NAME: POLPALA FAMILY: AMARANTHACEAE Aerva lanata (L.) Juss. ex Schult. USAGE Village survey: Leaf for curry, whole plant for tea. In abandoned chena. Collected in March. Vegetables 134. SINHALA NAME: BATU-KARAVILA FAMILY: CUCURBTACEAE Momordica spp. USAGE Village survey: Wild karavila, found in abandoned chena, or around chena. Only for medical pur­ poses. Collected October-January. 135. SINHALA NAME: RATA-TIBBATU, ATTIBB- ATU FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Solanum capsicoides All. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena. Collected Dec­ ember-January. 136. SINHALA NAME: TITTA-TIBBATU FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Solanum violaceum Ortega. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena. Collected Dec­ ember-January. Eaten but very bitter. Mixed with other plants also a medicine for treating injuries etc. 137. SINHALA NAME: TUMBA-KARA VILA FAMILY: CUCURBITACEAE Momordica dioica Roxb. ex Willd. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena. Does not grow in jungle. Collected December-January. These vegetables are cut into slices, dried in the sun for 3-4 days and stored in a pan pattiya for 6-8 months. They are collected around the chena, in the jungle along the footpath towards the chena, or in last year’s chena. Fruits, berries 138. SINHALA NAME: ATATIMBIRI FAMILY: EBENACEAE Diospyros oocarpa Thw. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected in April. 139. SINHALA NAME: ATKELIYA FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Bute a superba L. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Fruit eaten raw. Collected October-December. 140. SINHALA NAME: BOLPANA FAMILY: RUTACEAE Glycomis angustifolia linoll in Wall ex Wight & Am. USAGE Village survey: jungle or abandoned chena. Fruit eaten raw. Collected November-December. 141. SINHALA NAME: DAMBA FAMILY: MYRTACEAE Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected in September. 142. SINHALA NAME: DAMUNU FRUIT FAMILY: TILIACEAE Grewia tiliaefolia Vahl. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected September-Oc­ tober.143. SINHALA NAME: DEHELBATU FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Solanum capsicodes All. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena or jungle. Col­ lected year round. 144. SINHALA NAME: ERAMINIYA FAMILY: RHAMNACEAE Zizyphus oenophiloa Mill. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected in April. 145. SINHALA NAME: INDI FAMILY: PALMAE Phoenix pussilia Trim. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected in April-May. 146. SINHALA NAME: KARAMBA FAMILY: APOCYNACEAE Carissa spinarum (L.) Mant. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected September-Oc­ tober. 147. SINHALA NAME: KARUVALA FAMILY: EBENACEA Diospyros ebenum Koenig. USAGE Village survey: In jungle or abandoned chena. Fruit eaten raw. Collected August-October. 148. SINHALA NAME: KATTAMBERIYA FAMILY: FLACCURTLACEAE Scolopia pusilia (Gaerth.) Willd. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected in April. 149. SINHALA NAME: KATUKALIYA FAMILY: LEGUMINOSAE Erythrina fusca Lour. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Fruit eaten raw. Collected October-December. 150. SINHALA NAME: KATUPITTU FAMILY: FLACOURTIACEAE Scolopia accuminata Clos. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena or jungle. Col­ lected in April. 151 .SINHALA NAME: MALABOTU GEDI FAMILY: SOLANACEAE Solanum ferox L. USAGE Village survey: In jungle or abandoned chena. Used for curry. Collected November-February. 152.SINHALA NAME: MATTANGUNA FAMILY: APOCYNACEAE Aganosma cymosum (Roxb.) G. Don. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena or jungle. Col­ lected in April and again in September-October. 153. SINHALA NAME: MIGONKARAPINCA FAMILY: RUTACEAE Clausena indica (Dulz.) Oliver. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena or jungle. Fruit eaten raw. Collected November-December. 154. SINHALA NAME: PALU FAMILY: SAPOTACEAE Manilkara hexandra (Roxb.) Dubard. USAGE Jungle. Collected October-December. 155. SINHALA NAME: TIMBIRI FAMILY: EBENACEAE Diospyros malabarica (Lam.) Koster. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or village area. Collected October-December. 156. SINHALA NAME: VALDEHI FAMILY: RUTACEAE Citrus limon (L.) Burm. USAGE Village survey: Abandoned chena or jungle. Col­ lected in April-May. 157. SINHALA NAME: VIRA FAMILY: EUPHORB1ACEAE Dry petes seperia Wight & Arn. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected in April-May. These fruits and berries are consumed the same day or the next. 158. SINHALA NAME: DIVUL EMGLISH: WOODAPPLE FAMILY: RUTACEAE Limonia acidissima L. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or home garden. Leaves: smoke from burning w.a.b. to treat poisonous hunga bite. Fruit eaten. Collected September to early October. 159. SINHALA NAME: ATAMBA FAMILY: ANACARDIACEAE Mangifera zeylanica (Bl.) Hook. f. USAGE Village survey: Jungle or abandoned chena. Col­ lected October-December. 160. SINHALA NAME: GALSIYAMBALA FAMILY: CAESALPINIAE Dialum ovoideam Thw. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected mid-September to early October. Fruit boiled, kept 2-3 months. Bark dried above fire and used for betel. Taken any time. 161. SINHALA NAME: HIMBUTU FAMILY: HIPPOCRATEACEAE Salacia reticulata Wight. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected in August to Sep­ tember. Can keep for 1-2 weeks. 162. SINHALA NAME: KON FAMILY: SAPINDACEAE Schleichera oleosa (Lour.) Dken. USAGE Village survey: boiled with salt. Collected August to September. Kept 1-2 months. 163. SINHALA NAME: MORA FAMILY: SAPINDACEAE Dimocarpus longana Lour, Euphoria longana Lam. USAGE Village survey: Jungle. Collected August-October. Mushrooms 164. Lenairi bimmal. Agricas bisporus. Grows on dead trees. Boiled, water thrown away; then used for curry. 165. Kotan bimmal. Lentinoas edodns. Grows in abandoned tank beds, abandoned paddy fields and similar places. Boiled...see above. 166. Kukulbadaval bimmal. Volvaria volvaceae. Grows on abandoned ant hills. Boiled... see above. 167. Kuttan bimmal. Agaricus spp. Grows on dead trees. Boiled...see above. Mushrooms are collected from December-January. Con­ sidered very tasty. Lenairi bimmal (Agaricus bisporus) and Kukulbadaval bimmaX (Volvaria volvaceae) look very like poisonous fungus. Usually young people are not entrusted with collecting these two mushroom species. REFERENCES Dassanayake, M.D. and F.R. Fosberg. 1985. A Revised Han­ book to the Flora of Ceylon. Vol.5. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. De Thabrew, W.H. 1983. Water plants of Ceylon. England: Suhada Press. De Zoysa, N. and R. Raheem. 1987. Sinharaje. A rain forest in Sri Lanka. Colombo: March for Conservation. Dittus, P.J. 1977. The ecology of a semi evergreen forest community in Sri Lanka. Kandy: Institute of Fundamental Studies. Dittus. P.J. 1985. The influence of cyclones on the dry zone evergreen forest of Sri Lanka. Kandy: Institute of Fun­ damental Studies. Hettiaratchi. D.E. 1967. Sinhalese Encyclopaedia Vol. 1-3. Colombo: Publications Department of the Cultural Affairs Ministry, Government of Ceylon. Jayasuriya, M.D.A. 1980. Medicinal Plants Used in Ceylon. Part 1-5. Colombo: The National Science Council of Sri Lanka. Senewirathne, S.T. and R.R. Appadurai. 1966. Field Crops of Ceylon. Colombo: Lake House Ltd. The Sri Lanka Forester. 1974. Vol. XI. Nos. 3 & 4 (New. Series) The Sri Lanka Forester. 1984. Vol. XVI. Nos. 3 & 4 (New Series). Worthington, T.B. 1959. Ceylon Trees. Colombo: The Colo­ mbo Apothecaries Co. Ltd.

PRISHANTHA GUNAWARDANE Figure 19.1 A Laha used for measuring dry grains. Nagalavava Village. Photo: Prishantha Gunawardane. The system of measurement prevailing in and around the remote village of Nagalavava can be traced back to earlier times. While the system of measuring grain and medicines is common to other purana settlements and used even in mo­ dernised urban areas, the system of apportioning land, as practised, seems peculiar to Nagalavava and its environs. Units of measuring grain The pata, hunduva, naliya, seruva, laha, pala, amuna and kiriya are old units of grain measure still in use today. Of these the pata, hunduva, naliya and seruva are common do­ mestic measurements. The laha, pala, amuna and kiriya are used for wholesale transactions and measuring grain or bata (as it is referred to) on the threshing floor. The pata This is the amount of grain that can be held in the open palm. This very convenient measure is the basic unit of measure­ ment and used in day to day domestic situations. The villagers have no system of compensating for the varying proportions of the human hand. On verification, a pata varied between 95-100mgs. Knox writing about the measuring scales used in the Kandyan kingdom, states that the pata was the smallest measurement. Four pata equalled one bandara naliya (Knox 1984: 255). The hunduva In practice the hunduva was equivalent to three pata. Al­ though there exists a traditional vessel of accepted measure­ ment called a hunduva, none of the homes in Nagalavava possessed one. The probable reason being that it is simpler to measure the three pata, (palmfuls) than to obtain a hunduva measure. On weighing the three pata it was found to be between 230-250mgs. An improvised hunduva measuring vessel was obtained, and its contents weighed too. This was approximately 325mgs. So there is a difference of 75 to 85mgs between the two measurements. The traditional hunduva was made of cane or wood (see technology below). Today, in some homes, a tin 6cm high with a base 6cm in diameter is improvised for a hunduva. In the Kandyan period, according to notes by Davy, the hunduva was the basic unit. It had been used to measure dry grains and liquids (Davy 1983 (1821): 181). The naliya (2 hundu = 1 naliya) This is a traditional measurement in use in the villages of Sri Lanka, but Nagalavava seems an exception, as this device is not in current use here. But traditionally, according to the informants, a naliya was equal to 2 hundu. On weighing 2 hundu of rice using the customary practical measure of 2 pata per hundu, it was found to weigh 650mg. The seruva (1 seruva = 2 naliya) Although the people spoke of a seruva measuring utensil having been used in times past, no such utensil is in use today. According to our informants, a seruva equalled 2 nali. If 2 hundu equalled 1 naliya and 2 naliya equalled a seruva, then a seruva equals 4 hundu. But in practice only 3 1/2 hundu were measured out per seruva. No explanation was given as to why this was so. The laha This is the next unit of measurement for dry grain. As the agro-economic base of the village widened, methods had to be devised for measuring out larger quantities of grain, to facilitate day to day trade, barter or taxation. For this purpose the laha was used. Under the now dead feudal system, the vel vidane was the officer responsible for collecting the revenue on the harvest. He appointed the day on which harvesting was to be done. So all the fields in the area were harvested simultaneously. This ensured that the vel vidane could collect his dues before the farmer disposed of his crop. Harvesting and threshing were done under the eagle-eyed supervision of the vel vidane, or his representative. Each farmer was taxed one half of his harvest. This traditional feudal transaction was called thalaris by the villagers. This portion was measured out with the laha. According to Codrington, in the Kandyan period each household had to pay 5 pala of paddy as a tax. In addition, a tax called the marala badda (death tax) was also levied. A duty of 5 pala had to be paid if a person had died 30 years prior to the institution of this tax. If the death had occurred five years previously, the tax was 4 pala; if four years, 3 pala was the due to be paid. If the person had died 2 years or 1 year before, the tax was 2 pala or 1 pala respectively. If less than one year had elapsed since the date of death, the tax was 5 seru only. These taxes were abolished by Kirti Sri Rajasinghe (Codrington 1938: 4-6). There was a belief that once measuring of bata (grain) was begun on the kamata (threshing floor) it had to continue until the entire stock of paddy was measured. This rule had to be meticulously followed to ensure an increase in the harvest, otherwise it was feared the grain would decrease in quantity (Wijesekara 1988: 48). The laha and the busal A laha equalled six seru (singular: seruva). Today the laha measure is seldom used. The larger (busal) is used in its stead. The villagers equate five laha to one busal. When checked, it was found that 1 busal equalled 5 1/2 laha. This means a difference of 1/2 laha, or 3 seru, between the two measurements. Wijesekera observes that villagers had me­ asured the paddy on the threshing floor with a laha or a kurini (Wijesekara 1988: 134-135). Davy notes that there were two sizes of laha, one small and the other big. The big laha was the largest dry measure in actual use. This is both a grain measure and a land measure. Ten laha equal one pala. (Davy 1983 (1821): 181). Table of measurements referred to by Knox (Knox 19- 84:255-256) According to Davy, the then current system of measure­ ment was as follows (Davy 1983 (1821): 181) The current table of measurement in use: Techniques of making utensils for measuring grain Every household in the study area did not have in its posses­ sion a set of measuring devices. Lending or borrowing a seruva or laha was a common practice. So it was not surpris­ ing that we were able to find only one laha in the whole of Nagalavava. This points to the affinity and mutual co-exist- ence that prevails in the village. We were also told that should anyone feel he was not welcome to use another’s measuring device he would turn one out for his own use. As the techni­ que of creating these measuring devices was common knowledge, it did not call for any specialist’s help. To make these measuring utensils, the rural folk used kirival wood (Apocynaceae), cane (Palmae), jak wood (Moraceae), mar- gosa wood (Meliaceae), cow dung and resin from the seeds of the timbiri tree (Ebenaceae). The traditional hunduva was cylindrical in shape, 6-7cm in height and approximately 20cm in circumference. The base was about 6cm in diameter, 3cm thick and usually made of jak, mango (Anacardiaceae) or kolon (Erioculan) wood. Per­ forations were made very close to one another, along the edge of the base. Pieces of cane, or kirival, were fixed into the perforations as uprights. Next, strips of cane, or kirival, were passed between the uprights and interwoven closely to a height of about four finger widths. Three pata (palmfuls) of rice or other grain was poured into the vessel and its capacity check­ ed. The grain was levelled and the height marked on the uprights. The weaving was finished off at this point. The rim was reinforced with an extra overcasting of cane to prevent wasting away or damage during use. A paste of the resin from crushed timbiri seeds and paddy bran (hal kudu) was applied to caulk up the crevices in the weave. To repair any damage to a hunduva in use, a paste of cowdung was applied. The cowdung acts as an insecticide too. Its disinfectant qualities were known to the people of past times. This was the basic technique applied in making all dry grain measuring utensils. Only the measurements of height and base differed according to capacity. According to Davy’s notes, both kinds were employed only in measuring grain and oil. For grain, the measure was made of rattan, for oil, of bamboo (Davy 1983 (1821): 181). The laha was a much larger vessel than the hunduva. Here the same technology (as for the smaller vessels) was followed, but the shape was changed. As a larger quantity of grain was poured into the vessel, the weight too increased, so to facilitate easy lifting and manipulation the vessel was wider at the mouth than at the circular base. The system of land measurements In a totally agriculture based society, it is not surprising to find the same linguistic term that stands for a measurement of produce being used to denote an extent of sowing land. So, the terms laha and pala referred to above as measures of grain, also connote that area of land over which a laha or pala of grain could be sown. The extent was calculated as the area over which a particular measure of bittara vi (seed paddy) could be sown. A pala was equivalent to the land extent over which 10 laha of paddy could be sown. This area brought under the plough would be approximately an half acre. An amuna was equal to 40 laha. Thus, an atnuna of land should be about 2 or 2 1/2 acres (Ariyapala 1964: 164; levers 1899: 175-176). But villagers calculated this extent to be only 1 3/4 acres. A kiriya equalled 160 laha. The extent of a kiriya would then be 8 acres. When surveyed, this area was in fact about 8 3/4 acres in extent. Thus, there were discrepancies between the actual area of land and the proximate area calculated by the villagers. Apportioning land Generally in the sharing and dividing of cultivable land among the villagers, a sense of brotherhood and amity seemed to prevail. This could arise mainly from the mutual interdependence of chena cultivators. The first step in open­ ing land for cultivation was for a group to scour the area for suitable land. The extent of land chosen was divided equally among them. Each holding was identified as a catta. The Mahavamsa and Rasavahini inform us of six brothers of Gotaimbara who went to the forest to cut down the trees, to lay out a bean field (Mav. 1959: 28-51) (Rsv.II 1889: 87). According to Davy’s notes "the king possessed the whole chena land. No one was allowed to cultivate without the king’s permission" (Davy 1983 (1821): 21-26). If anyone wished to offer his land to a monastery he should first gain permission from the king (Codrington 1938: 4-6). The villagers had the privilege of cutting grass, fishing and hunting in the land (Peiris 1964: 254). Cultivators were attached to the large estates belonging to royalty, the nobility and the religious institutions. There were, as in later times, people who cultivated their small (plots of land held in the divel or paraveni tenures (Bandaranayake 1990: 33). levers records in the late 19th century that the whole area around Sigiriya rock was chena land (levers 1899: 187-189). But Codrington says that in the Kandyan period, in almost every province, there were forbidden forests (tahanchi kale) in which no chena could be cut (Codrington 1938: 5). Two methods of dividing land were adopted: the mulk- ataye hena and irivali hena. Which was to be used was dec­ ided once the land was located. The mulkataye hena According to this system of division, once the plot of land is selected, a peg three spans in length is planted at a point.Radiating from it are stakes planted at two-yard intervals. If there are ten claimants, ten stakes are driven into the ground. Then ropes or jungle creepers tied to the centre peg are led along the line of the stakes. These lines of demarcation are called catta. A stick fence, four spans high, separates one plot from the other. The plots are almost triangular in shape, being widest at the edge farthest from the centre. This outer bound­ ary borders the jungle and a stout fence of tree trunks is put up to prevent damage to the crops from wild animals. The whole collective cultivation area opened up in this manner is in the form of a circle, bound by the forest. The catta fence is kept low, so all the plots are visible from any one of the watch huts that are built on trees. There is unstinted cooperation among the owner- cultivators. A system of watch-keeping and guard duty evolved, one or two people taking turns to overlook the entire cultivation area. Guarding the chena was a collective responsibility. According to Codrington, mulkataye land could be sold only among the villagers. The mulkata hena, which belonged solely to the king, was located very close to the settlements. Gingelly and mum were the common crops cultivated on these lands (El- lawala 1969: 131; Parker 1984 (1909): 57). The irivali method Here the strips were rectangular in shape and equal in extent. In the Kandyan period, villagers obtained 40% of their in­ come by chena land cultivation (Peiris 1964: 80). The system of liquid measures For liquids like coconut oil, kerosene oil and medicinal brews, a system of liquid measure was followed. The stand­ ard measure was the hunduva. This was smaller in capacity than the hunduva used to measure grain. Yet smaller quan­ tities were portioned out by hundu bage (half of a hundu) and the hundu kala (quarter of a hundu). A bivalve mollusc shell (retrieved from the bed of a water course) that could hold approximately two teaspoonfuls of liquid, was used to dispense medicine (Kirtisinghe 1978: 134; Parker 1984 (1909): 57). Two shells were kept for this pur­ pose, called a Ravana katta. The accepted dosage was two shellfuls for adults and one drop for an infant. This practice was followed until the recent introduction of spoon measures. In preparing a kasaya, or medicinal brew, the usual method was to add eight parts of water to the prescribed herbs and boil it till the liquid reduced to one part of the original quantity. The concentration of the decoction was always given in the terms of proportionate measure: for example, 8:1 would mean eight parts of water boiled down to one. Utensils for measuring liquids Our informants told us that long ago the people of the study area had used utensils for the purpose of measuring liquids, applying the same techniques as for making dry grain measuring devices. Such articles could not be traced at Nagalavava. Instead of these traditional utensils, tin measur­ ing cups are in use. They are of the following proportions: The system of weights The villagers say they are unaware of a traditional system for weighing bulk goods. For bulk quantities they apply the modern system of pounds and ounces and recently, the metric system. But a traditional system of measuring medicines ex­ isted and is still in use today. These quantities are very small and a pair of small scales (not unlike the apothecary’s scales) is used. The weights are: In the Kandyan period, goldsmiths, silversmiths and those who practised the indigenous system of medicine used a bronze coin for a kalanda, as well as 24 red madid seeds, weighing from 3 to 3.9 grains (Davy 1983 (1821): 180-181). The system of measuring distance and lengths The villagers do not have a precise measurement for distan­ ces. They speak vaguely of a ‘hu kiyana dura \ relying on the distance to which the human voice can be carried. Miles and kilometers have little or no value to them in their day to day village living. But based on the distance that a full-throated hoot can be heard, they follow a set and accepted measure­ ment of distance. This is not surprising, as there are no strictly demarcated roads between chena fields and settlements. As Davy has recorded "the smallest measure in common use is the whoo." (Davy 1983 (1821): 181). He says a two-w/ioo distance is called an attakme, which must mean a hatakme, or one mile. This measurement is not in use in the present study area. The next unit of distance is the gauva, which at a rough estimate is up to four miles. Four gauva, or 16 miles, equals one yoduna. Davy mentions that five gauva equals the dis­ tance a man can journey in a day (Davy 1983 (1821): 181). It is not surprising that in this agriculture-oriented culture, the length of a paddy seed, or vi ate, should have been taken as a measurement of length. Davy also records the use of minute units of measurement. He says "their smallest measure is the seventh part of a veeta1 (a grain of paddy)" (Davy 1983 (18- 21): 181). The table of linear measurement accordingly was as follows: He explains that a doona is a Sinhalese bow 9ft. long. There is a discrepancy in calculations, probably due to the fact that all these were not precise measures. Commenting on the angula, Rhys Davids (Rhys Davids 1877: 15) says he could not find the angula in actual use. According to our information, these are traditional devices for measuring lengths in use. The length between a man’s outspread arms (approximately 5-6ft.) was called a bambaya. If lengths had to be measured, a stick or rope the length of such a bambaya was cut off and used. The bandara bambaya had been used in the Kandyan period: the height to which a man could reach above his head with his hand was equivalent to 9ft. and 500 bandara bamba made a mile. In Nagalavava, the study area, they used voice distance and all other lengths were called units of bamba, e.g. bamba dahaya (10 bamba ap­ proximately 60ft.), bamba siya (100 bamba approximately 600 ft.). At Nagalavava, as elsewhere in the island, use of the tradi­ tional measuring systems is fast dying out in the wake of modernisation and new economic trends. But from informa­ tion available and residual usages and practices, we could accept that two generations ago the residents of this hamlet must have used them for their day to day transactions. It is interesting to note that the system of collectively guarding the chena plots, described above, and the system of thalaris taxa­ tion, discussed here, are mentioned by Knox. This goes to show that this region called ‘Sigiri Bim’ shared common links with the Kandyan provinces that Knox knew. 1. veeta refers to vi ata - paddy seeds 2. veata referred to here is the viyata which means a span length. 3. doona refers to a dunna, or bow.