Prof A. V.

Suraweera's Contribution to Classical Sinhala Text Editing

Prof. A.V. Suraweera was a distinguished scholar who received numerous accolades and
appreciations from both the academia as well as the general masses for his work in Sinhala
Literature and creative writing. His knowledge in the fields of contemporary literature, history,
language studies and literary theory, cultural studies and art history made him a key figure
amongst a group of a few but eminent local scholars of the late !
th
century.
At a time when scholarly attention was paid less to preliminary sources in the study of historical
trends in literature and language, as well as in the study of historical studies, Prof. Suraweera
decided to research e"tensively into these areas. He pursued his research by following the most
current and up to date methodologies of te"tual editing while e"panding his research relating to
different areas in comparative studies. He is well known for his contributions to historical works
which included lengthy introductions covering the areas of history #mostly vignettes of the
common masses$, language cultural values and historical problems. %hese publications also
contained elaborate appendices, glossaries, and indices. &any consider this to be the greatest
academic contribution made by Prof. Suraweera.
His interest in the field of classical te"t editing began with his involvement in postgraduate
studies at the 'niversity of Peradeniya where he had the opportunity to work with eminent
scholars like Prof. Hettiarachchi under whose supervision he completed his &A and Ph(. )or
his &A, he edited the last two chapters of the Pjvaliya # the historical chapters$ as well as the
Rjvaliya, Alakvara Yuddhaya, Tisara Sandaya #with Prof. Vimala Vi*ayasuriya$ and
Pjvaliya #complete book + with Herbert Pathirana, H.A.P. Abhayavardhana$ which were
published as classical editions of the te"t.
Subse,uent to the publication of the Suraweera edition of the Pjvaliya #-h. ..+./$, ma*or
historians like Prof. Senarat Paranavitana and Prof. Amaradasa Liyanagamage began to use and
recommend it as an authoritative source thereby validating the academic credibility of this te"t.
)or the Pjvaliya, he compared four ola manuscripts and four early printed works. %his edition
of the Pjvaliya contains an introduction which includes information about kingship in ancient
Sri Lanka as well as information into religion, economic and political matters with a special
focus on issues relating to irrigation affairs. %his is considered to be important because the early
0editors1 of these classical te"ts fell short in terms of their roles and e"pectations, where they
failed to provide detailed information relating to the classical history of Sri Lanka. Suraweera on
the other hand having referred to various sources, identified names of persons, places and
irrigation tanks in ancient Sri Lanka that had not being identified as yet.
%his has become a valuable source not only to the scholars who speciali2e in language, literature
and socio+historical studies, but for students who study classical te"ts. Particularly since it has
clarified personal and place names, names of ancient irrigation works, as well as present a
chronology of Sri Lankan kings by referring to various manuscripts in this regard.
Prof. Suraweera1s work on the last two chapters of the Pjvaliya is most valued for being
representative of the continuity of Sinhala historical writings. Hence, Suraweera is credited not
only for presenting a work that is done in accordance with the methods of classical te"t editing
but also for selecting such a rare and valuable piece of writing for his research, which clearly
demonstrates his maturity on the sub*ect.
After the publication of the critical edition of the Pjvaliya, Suraweera3s attention was focused
onto other writings that fell under the minor tradition, which had not been commonly identified
as a part of main stream Sinhala literature by contemporary scholars. 4hile historical evidence
into the origin of these writings seems rather unclear, it is assumed that it originated during in the
latter part of the (ambadeniya era. 5y analysing the related writings related , it is clear that the
writers of these works were not aware of Pali and Sanskrit6 the classical languages of the learned
community and the original works on religion and their commentaries as well as historical
writings in Pali.%hese writings did not follow the standard grammatical rules and styles
established and preserved in classical Sinhala literature.
%hese works fall into the class of historical writings as it contains information available in the
traditional historical works as well as facts that are not available or refuted by traditional writers,
in addition to details on folklore and legends.
)urthermore, it contains a detailed account of ancient Sri Lankan society which had not been
depicted in any of the works of the great tradition. %he information, data, records and accounts
related to culture, were ignored by the great tradition but were presented in these kinds of work
by the writers of the minor tradition. 4hile the works in the great tradition was trying to preserve
the conventional7conservative forms of language, these types of works had protected the
naturally evolving living tradition of the language. %wo works in this genre were e"tensively
edited and published with comprehensive introductions by Prof Suraweera. )irst one is
Rjvaliya, which was submitted to the 'niversity of -eylon in 89:/ as the (octoral
(issertation, published in 89;< and the other is Alakvara Yuddhaya published in 89:<.

Alakvara Yuddhaya is the hitherto revealed only prose work of the S=t>vaka Period. ?t
begins with the account of the capture and deportation of a king of this island to -hina and the
founding of the city named @ayavardhanapura and the con,uering of Arya -akravarti, the
provincial king of @affna by a -eylonese minister named Alakesvara. )urthermore it depicts the
historical legend of the kingdom of Aotte from the enthronement of Parakramabahu ?V, the
account of the arrival of the Portuguese and wars that were waged against them, as well as the
description of the beginning, rise and the decline of the S=t>vaka kingdom %he first print edition
of the Alakvara Yuddhaya, transcribed by A. (. A. 4i*esinghe from a single ola leaf
manuscript, appeared in the local *ournal entitled Jndaraya during 89!9+88. Prof
Suraweera3s critical edition of the Alakvara Yuddhaya was a comparison of three ola leaf
manuscripts and the Jndaraya version. Alakvara Yuddhaya is identified as one of the
sources on which the Rjvaliya, the ne"t scholarly edition done by Prof. Suraweera, was
compiled. ?t depended and based for its narration, the history of the island in the late mediaeval
period. Rjvaliya can be recogni2ed as the historical tradition of the common folk of Sri
Lanka. Rjvaliya mainly illustrates the history of Sri Lanka from Vi*aya to the enthronement
of Vimaladharmasurya ??. As an introduction to the accounts of the kings of Sri Lanka, it presents
the 3depiction of 5uddhist cosmology3, 3the tale of ?ndia of the 5uddhist folk tradition
#Jambudvipa$ and surrounded legendary countries3 and 3the account of the legendary epoch and
the genealogy of legendary kings3 ?t is clear that the author of Rjvaliya has not utili2ed the
ahvam! sa, the original source of the history of Sri Lanka. ?t seems to be that he mainly
depends on works and which do not appear in Sinhala works are taken from local folk lore. )or
the introductory sections of the Rjvaliya , the author is indebted to classical Sinhala prose
works as Pjvaliya, Thpavam! saya and Saddharmlakraya. %he historical descriptions from
Vi*aya, the first Aing of ancient Sri Lanka to Aing Vi*aybahu of (ambadeniya are taken from
the Pjvaliya and the rest from the time of Vi*ayabahu of (ambadeniya to the end of the reign
of &ayadunne of S=t>vaka is taken from the Alakvara Yuddhaya " )or the rest of his work and
for some e"planatory parts in the former sections, he has referred to other kinds of work.
According to Suraweera, and -. B. Codakumbure too, these might be folk lore, legends,
contemporary records prevailing among common people, and some minor literary works that
have emerged from common people who have not learned Pali and other classical languages but
have the ability to be creative.
?t can be proved that the author of the Rjvaliya has borrowed and copied the relevant sections
mainly from Pjvaliya and Alakvara Yuddhaya and from other sources he referred to and it
seems be another version of the original work. Prof Suraweera describes this condition in his
introduction to the -ritical Bdition of the Rjvaliya as followsD E%he task of the author of
Rjvaliya seems to be choosing some historical records on several incidents and periods and
compiling them to form as a single work. %he thing what he has to combine is some folk
legendaries and a few contemporary records only.E %his work represents a novel tradition of
historical writing. After the compilation of 3originalE Rjvaliya up to the enthronement of the
Vimaladharmasurya ??, compiling various versions and adaptations of it in the same title lengthen
out by appending other details on folk lore is an e"ceptional feature of this popular tradition of
historical writing.

Rjvaliya is the only Sinhala work written before the colonial period. %he main remarkable
aspect of it is the inclusion of some information related to the history of Sri Lanka which is not
found in works such as ahvam! sa and Pjvaliya. 5y confirming the information which
prevailed in folk lore it obviously informs us that the Rjvaliya is the historical work of folk or
popular tradition. ?t verifies as some of these information in the literary works related to folk
rituals are found in books on boundary #kadayim po#$ and books on legendary lore #vi##i po#$.
Prof Suraweera argues on this bestowing with e"amples in his lengthy introduction to the $i#i%al
&di#ion o' Rjvaliya "
3%he writing style and grammatical condition of the Rjvaliya verify that the author has
rewritten the passages which had been taken from Pjvaliya and Alakvara Yuddhaya
according to his own style and grammatical rules. Rjvaliya is of value for its linguistic and
grammatical aspects and not as a historical record of the country since it contains 8;
th
century
linguistic features of Sinhala. According to the current usage some of these patterns and usages
are regarded as incorrect. %he scholars who published Rjvaliya prior to Prof Suraweera had
corrected these 3errors3 and had tried to give a most consistent copy of it according to the current
and correct usage. 5ut Prof Suraweera3s attempt is to furnish a most reliable te"t close to the
original work done by the author. He has identified te"tual errors done by late copyists and
documented all variant readings in various manuscripts as foot notes. As he has pursued the
academic discipline related to classical te"t editing to the e"tent to which, we have a reliable
edition of this work and it will be a fine opportunity to study the linguistic condition of late 8;
th
century as a transitional period in the evolution of the Sinhala language. ?t clearly shows how
the Sinhala language developed with its collo,uial traditions and the difference between the
traditional classical language which was controlled according to conservative grammatical
traditions and rules as well as the collo,uial language which progressed without such constraints.
%he language used in Rjvaliya is enriched with %amil and Portuguese le"icons and folk
usage. ?n the $ri#i%al &di#ion o' #h( Rjvaliya by Prof Suraweera the words derived from
%amil and Portuguese languages as well as folk usage are compiled as an appendi". %his -ritical
Bdition is brought together comparing 8. ola leaf manuscripts and two previous 3printed
editions3.
4e can clearly introduce both Alakvara Yuddhaya and Rjvaliya as historical works in the
minor tradition and they are valuable sources in Sri Lankan history, Sinhala )olk lore and
collo,uial speech. Prof Suraweera3s contribution in critically editing them according to the
standard techni,ues and scientific methodology is a great endeavour in enriching the Sinhala
academic arena. He accomplished this attempt almost a half century ago and later proceeded to
translate them into a universal languageD Bnglish. Suraweera3s Bnglish translation of the
Rjvaliya was published in 899F and the translation of the Alakvara Yuddhaya comes to
light as a posthumous publication. %hese two works, indeed, are landmarks in -lassical Sinhala
te"t editing and they will facilitate to position the contribution made by Prof Suraweera in the
foremost chapters in the history of Sinhala literature.
Ratnasiri Arangala