Yes, the Sinhalese have their origins in Bengal, Odisha

[Indika]

The “Mahavamsa”, arguably the greatest chronicle of Sri Lanka, narrates that the founder of the Sinhalese community had his roots among ancestors from East India.
146
SHARES
Adrija Roychowdhury | New Delhi | Published:September 13, 2016 5:50 pm

Sinhalese, who make up about 75 per cent of the Sri Lankan population have descended from inhabitants of ancient East India. REUTERS (Picture used for representational purpose)
When three years back, a Sri Lankan envoy sought Indian support on the basis of the claim that the Sinhalese people are descendents of Bengalis and Odias, there was an upsurge of perplexity and outrage among large sections of the Indian population. However, subsequent research has shown that the Sinhalese, who make up about 75 per cent of the Sri Lankan population might very well have descended from inhabitants of ancient East India.

The “Mahavamsa”, arguably the greatest chronicle of Sri Lanka, narrates an interesting episode that marks the origin of the Sinhalese people. As per the mythological record, the foundation stone of the Sinhalese community was laid by King Vijaya who had travelled there from North-West India in 543 BC and founded the first Sinhalese town by the name of Tambapani. One of the murals at the Ajanta caves carry an elaborate depiction of King Vijaya’s travel to the Sinhalese town.

One of the murals at the Ajanta caves carry an elaborate depiction of King Vijaya’s travel to the Sinhalese town. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)
King Vijaya was the son of Sihabahu the ruler of Sihapura in Gujarat. Sihabahu’s mother in turn was the daughter of the king of Kalinga in Eastern India. Legend goes that she conceived Sihabahu (etymologically meaning lion’s arm) with a lion who had kidnapped her.

×
The nature of origin myths is such that it can never prove or disprove a certain theory. However, by becoming part of local folklore, they do give some indication to the way in which the Sinhalese people remember their past. In the case of the hereditary lineage of King Vijaya, while the exact details of the story may or may not be true, what can be said with certainty is that the Sinhalese community does trace some connection to present day Bengal and Odisha. The legend gains particular currency when one realises the importance of the lion’s symbol in Sinhalese tradition.

In a recent book, “The ocean of churn: How the Indian ocean shaped human history”, writer Sanjiv Sanyal remarks that the symbol of the lion that is so important among the Sinhalese is equally revered among the Odiyas and Bengalis. While the Narasimha (God Vishnu as half man and half lion) is worshipped in Odisha, among Bengalis the image of Goddess Durga is incomplete without the lion upon which she rides. In the opinion of Sanyal, the image of the lion on the Sri Lankan flag and the religious symbolism of the lion in Odisha and Bengal have the same cultural origins.

But it is not just mythology that reflects upon this connection. In his study titled “Genetic affinities of Sri Lankan Populations”, Gautam Kumar Kshatriya found that 25.41 per cent of the genetic make up on the Sinhalese population was contributed by the Bengalis. Linguistically too, scholars have for long remarked upon the Indo-Aryan origins of the Sinhalese speech.

In her celebrated account on the development of the Bengali language, Suniti Kumar Chatterjee comments upon the Indo-Aryan content in the Sinhalese speech in the following words: “The first immigrants who carried the Indo-Aryan speech to Ceylon seem to have been from the Western Indian coast. Later from 3rd century BC onwards Ceylon seems to have come in touch with Magadha through Bengal and traditions of intimate connections between Bengal and Ceylon are preserved in Bengali literature.”

Historically speaking, what further seems to corroborate the link between Odisha, Bengal and Sri Lanka is the thriving trade between the two regions. While Ceylon (old name of Sri Lanka) depended upon Kalinga for import of elephants, Kalinga imported pearl and silver from Ceylon. Records have shown that by the 5th century BC, a strong relationship had developed between the two regions as a result of the commercial ties that spread fast enough to have its impact upon the socio-cultural and political arena.

Over the years, Sri Lanka came to be inhabited by several different communities who went on to impact the genetic make up on the population. The colonial encounters with the Portuguese, the Dutch and then the British had its impact on the local population. Genetic studies have shown that Tamils from South India have contributed to the majority of the genetic composition of present day Sinhalese. However, the genetic, cultural and linguistic relation that the Sinhalese population shares with the Bengalis and Odiyas, though of scholarly interest, has remained largely ignored by the popular masses.

© The Indian Express Online Media Pvt Ltd

@Gibbs how much of it is true?

@Levina

 

[Levina]

Yes!
It should be true. Just a few days back i was listening to a speech by Sanjeev Sanyal.
In his speech, he said Sinhalese link to eastern India matches genetic, linguistic and cultural evidence and survives in many little ways. For example the lion is considered an important symbol of the Sinhalese people, which comes very close to how our own ppl in Odisha worship Narasimha (the god Vishnu as half-lion and half-man). @thesolar65 @TejasMk3

outrage among large sections of the Indian population

why should there be an outrage over it?
What ppl dont understand is if injection of Indian DNA into Australia can take place around 2000 BC then our ppl living on India’s eastern seaboard were capable of sailing long distances even before the Iron Age. The original inhabitants of SL are supposed to be Vedda.
Some 16000 years back, Indian subcontinent was linked to Sri Lanka but with the melting of ice (of last ice age), SL was separated from Indian subcontinent.
If we were to go by the folklore, Kubera was the king who established his capital in SL and that Ravana was actually from central India.

@Nilgiri

 

[Nilgiri]

Its also why Sinhala is an Indo European language and not Dravidian one.

Of course the original Pali prakrit got influenced by local influences (including tamil and indigenous SL tribal languages) so Sinhala is quite distinct compared to most others in the family.

 

[SrNair]

Yes!
It should be true. Just a few days back i was listening to a speech by Sanjeev Sanyal.
In his speech, he said Sinhalese link to eastern India matches genetic, linguistic and cultural evidence and survives in many little ways. For example the lion is considered an important symbol of the Sinhalese people, which comes very close to how our own ppl in Odisha worship of Narasimha (the god Vishnu as half-lion and half-man). @thesolar65 @TejasMk3


why should there be an outrage over it?
What ppl dont understand is if injection of Indian DNA into Australia can take place around 2000 BC then our ppl living on India’s eastern seaboard were capable of sailing long distances even before the Iron Age. The original inhabitants of SL are supposed to be Vedda.
Some 16000 years back, Indian subcontinent was linked to Sri Lanka but with the melting of ice (of last ice age), SL was separated from Indian subcontinent.
If we were to go by the folklore, Kubera was the king who established his capital in SL and that Ravana was actually from central India.

@Nilgiri

Its weird .Because they dont have that much genetic influence from western coast starts from Kerala up to Gujarat.

 

[Gibbs]

@Indika The origin story of the Sinhala are quasi fictional.. The genetic makeup of the Sinhalese do show the linkages to Eastern India and Gujarat but more nationalistic Sinhalese claim that the race originated from the island itself and called themselves the Sinhale or the 4 tribes of Hela as the island was known in prehistoric times, And the North Indians assimilated in to the original inhabitants thus creating the Sinhalese race.. If that's the case which i'm not so sure about the original inhabitants may well have been of Dravidian origin

But whatever the story there are distinct differences when it comes to the two main communities in the Island both in appearances and customs, language and history

One of the murals at the Ajanta caves carry an elaborate depiction of King Vijaya’s travel to the Sinhalese town. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Wow Thanks for this, It's a startling revelation.. So in India itself there was some kind of historical acknowledgement of the Vijaya story.. Interesting

 

[livingdead]

I thought its known among Sinhalese..
@Indika why is it that tamils who are much closer to lanka are only limited to north part, should not they be the early migrant and majority?

 

[Gibbs]

I thought its known among Sinhalese..
@Indika why is it that tamils who are much closer to lanka are only limited to north part, should not they be the early migrant and majority?

My take on this is probably from a somewhat neutral point of view.. (I belong to neither ethnic group) That even though Dravidians particularly Tamils have been in existence on the island for as long as anybody else but was never established bar maybe a few settlements in the North and the North West

Basically the Sri Lankan or as i would like to call it the Ceylonese civilization came in to being with the arrival of the people from the Northern and Eastern regions of the sub continent, With the Advent of the Sinhalese race the distinct Ceylonese civilization began, From Aquaculture, Agriculture, Architecture, Language, Customs etc you get in Sri Lanka were all unique to the Sinhalese and found nowhere else in the world, And with the arrival of Buddhism and the state patronage it was given by the Sinhalese kings added to that advancement particularly architecture and sanitation, Also planned cities, Irrigation, Conservation of natural flora and fauna were inbedded to the new Sinhala Buddhist nationhood

So in essence the Ceylonese civilization revolved around the Sinhalese civilization.. This will be very evident even physically to anyone who visits there and not just theoretical

Ofcause they adopted other cultures and traditions from the Dravidians, Middle Eastern, European and the South East Asian as migrations of those people to evolved in to what you see today

 

[Indika]

I thought its known among Sinhalese..
@Indika why is it that tamils who are much closer to lanka are only limited to north part, should not they be the early migrant and majority?

If you are asking about the northern part, most of them are british imports to work in the tea plantations during 18th or 19th century.

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

@Indika The origin story of the Sinhala are quasi fictional.. The genetic makeup of the Sinhalese do show the linkages to Eastern India and Gujarat but more nationalistic Sinhalese claim that the race originated from the island itself and called themselves the Sinhale or the 4 tribes of Hela as the island was known in prehistoric times, And the North Indians assimilated in to the original inhabitants thus creating the Sinhalese race.. If that's the case which i'm not so sure about the original inhabitants may well have been of Dravidian origin

But whatever the story there are distinct differences when it comes to the two main communities in the Island both in appearances and customs, language and history



Wow Thanks for this, It's a startling revelation.. So in India itself there was some kind of historical acknowledgement of the Vijaya story.. Interesting

Okay. So basically Sri Lanka = Tamils + Bengalis + Gujaratis. So when are you joining India ?

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

If you are asking about the northern part, most of them are british imports to work in the tea plantations during 18th or 19th century.

There are 2 distinct classes of Tamils in Lanka. They differentiate among themselves as Sri Lankan Tamils and Indian tamils and both community exists in Lanka.

 

[Gibbs]

If you are asking about the northern part, most of them are british imports to work in the tea plantations during 18th or 19th century.

Nah mate, Tamil's in Sri Lanka had three distinctive migrations.. First the Sri Lankan Tamils of Jaffna settlers from very early times natural migration possibly even before the Sinhalese and then through invasions from South India through the millenia

Second major wave was in the 16th century when the Dutch brought over slave labor from South India largely from the Malabar and Corromadel coastal areas to work in the tobacco plantations in the Wanni region(Large flat area in the North) and in the East, Most of those settled in the East were Muslims of TamilTelingu(andra) origin (Not to be mistaken for Sri Lankan Moors who are of different ethnicity).. These people constitute the largest number of the population of Tamils, Though most would have been originally Telingu and Malayali

The third and the last were brought over were the Madrasi by the British in the 18th century to work in the coffee and later Tea plantations in the central highlands, again as indentured labor as they did to many parts of their empire from Fiji to Guyana, these people are what you call today the Indian origin or Plantation Tamil community

Okay. So basically Sri Lanka = Tamils + Bengalis + Gujaratis. So when are you joining India ?

Sri Lankans are of many other ethnicity not just the Sinhalese

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

Sri Lankans are of many other ethnicity not just the Sinhalese

Sinhalese + Tamils make up almost 95% of Lankans.

Anyway I was kidding

 

[Indika]

The third and the last were brought over were the Madrasi by the British in the 18th century to work in the coffee and later Tea plantations in the central highlands, again as indentured labor as they did to many parts of their empire from Fiji to Guyana, these people are what you call today the Indian origin or Plantation Tamil community

Get it, I was only referring to the last wave.

 

[Gibbs]

Sinhalese + Tamils make up almost 95% of Lankans.

Anyway I was kidding

Well the Moors, Malays and Burghers together constitutes for a bout 12% of the population, So you're a bit off the mark there..

 

[Nilgiri]

Well the Moors, Malays and Burghers together constitutes for a bout 12% of the population, So you're a bit off the mark there..

One could make the case the Moors are mostly Tamil by DNA, even the ones that trace lineage to Arab traders etc..