That Tale of Ancient Jaffna.
The Editor “Ceylon Observer"

Sir: The article by Mr. P. R. Sittampalam in last Sunday’s Observer in which he tells a tale of ancient Jaffna revives an old controversy in which the efforts of many earlier disputants eager to make a hero of Luis Pooth­athamby of Jaffna were in the end found to be vain and fruitless.

In the course of this pious endeavor two Tamil works supposed to treat of the career in Jaffna of Mudaliyar Don Manuel D’Anderado saw the light of day, the authenticity and historical value of which have been severely criticised and their pretensions unmasked. They were written about seventy-five and hundred and forty years respectively after the event and the imaginative author of the so called history and the drama evolved new aspects of Andrado’s career in Jaffna which are unknown to contemporaries and the eye witness of his actions.

Mr. Sittampalam’s article does not rest on a careful examination of well-known documents such as Dutch Gov­ernment Records, Minutes of Council, etc. In writing history the best evidence is always to be found in the works of eye­witnesses.

The Rev. Philip Baldaeus whose testimony is supreme gives us first hand information of what took place about three’ months after the capitulation of Jaffna. This Minister of the Word of God says that Portuguese soldiers and a large number of prisoners of War who were in the Castle together with the natives, formed a conspiracy against the.Dutch. The intention of the conspirators was to kill all the head officers present at the service while Rev Mr. Baldaeus preached out­side the fort, and to master the fort itself.

It so happened that during the sermon ‘Don Manuel Andrado, a Sinhalese Captain and a Mudaliyar in the service of the noble Company” together with his attendants stood before the entrance of the church, as he suspected a Portuguese rising.

A few days after, the whole conspiracy was discovered by Jacob Van Rhee and the conspirators were strictly kept to meet in time their due punishment. Shortly after (after they had been carefully examined and the truth had been heard from their own mouths) they were condemned to be hanged, beheaded and put on crosses. The leader of this impious conspiracy was a native of Mannar, together with a Don Louis and five Portuguese.

A Father named Calderoe was beheaded for having con­cealed this plot the knowledge of which he received through a letter addressed to him by these rascals. He did not approve this impious purpose but as he could not betray his own countrymen he had to pay for his silence with his death (Baldaeus, Ceylon (1672) ch. 44 p159.)

Let us compare this account of an eyewitness with Vaipawa Malai written about three quarters of a century after these events and with Puthathampi Nadakam a more recent work. To point out some instances: According to Balda­eus, Andrado was a Mudaliyar while the other was only a Don Luis. But the Vaipawa Malai refers to them (Andrado and Poothathamby) as Co-Mudaliyars of the Dutch and the Nadakam calls Poothathamby, the second Mudaliyar.

The Nadakam says nothing about the dinner, the blank paper and the signature, though the Vaipawa. Malai does refer to them. Then again your contributor takes it for gran­ted that the forged letter was addressed to King Raja.Sinha of Kandy offering to betray the fort to him.

On the other hand the Vaipawa Malai shows that the setter was sent to the Portuguese and the Nadakam mentions a letter sent to Kirti Sinha, King of Kandy who lived about hundred years after the events described therein.

The Rev. P. Baldaeus distinctly says that the letter was addressed to Father Calderoe but not to the Portuguese in general nor to any King of Kandy and that the lelter was sent by six others beside Don Luis.

Baldaous, further states that the execution of the conspirators took place a few days before September the 15th, 1658, on which latter date he held a thanksgiving service. Mr. Sittampalam tells us that immediately after this, Antonio Amrali and his friend Andrado were both ordered to proceed to Colombo to defend themselves, each of whom on their way hither met with a tragic death.

Antony Amral was the last Captain General of Jaffna and Mannar under the Portuguese. Anthony Pavilioen was the Commandeur of Jaffna who received instructions from Admiral Ryckloff Van Goens dated 31st Oct., 1658. It appears from these instructions that the Court at Jaffnapatam included the Commandeur and Mudaliyar Andrado. The Secretary is referred to as Harmen Heesters.

There is no evidence to show that Poothathamby was the Brahmin referred to in the private, letter addressed to Governor Adrian Van Der Meyden at Colornbo in 1658. The Admiral further makes a note to the effect that Sabandaar Don Manuel Andrado must be consulted in all cases in which natives are concerned. Don Manuel Andrado Adigar is refe­rred to in other correspondence (for instance in a personal letter addressed to Ryckloff Van Goens dated 6th February, 1659 as Principal Secretary to the Court of Jaffnapatam.

It is worthy of note that Warnakula Aditta Arsanilay­itta Don Manuel D’Andrado was guarding the pass at Kalutara with his lascoreens (Pieris vol. 1.454). He than became Mudaliyar of Kalutara. He was sent to Jaffna in the expedition of Admiral Ryckloff Van Goens and rendered signal services in 1658.

One year after the suppression of the conspiracy we find Don Manuel D Andrado very much alive and having been appointed a Member of the Dutch Political Council of Ceylon. His name appears in the Minutes of Council dated 11th Sept­ember, 1659. In the Memoirs of Admiral Ryckloff Van Goens. dated 26th December, 1663 reference is made to him as well as to his cousin Louis D’Andrado, Adigar of Wallallawltte Korale. ..

Several historical inaccuracies have crept into Mr. Sittampalam’s article. However, it would be interesting to know what he has to say about what may be described as the resurrection of Mudaliyar Andrado of the Kürukula caste.

Yours etc.,

GUSTAVUS JAYEWARDENE.

Moratuwa, Feb; 6, 1940.

Note: P. R. Sittampalam mentioned in this letter was the secretary of the Royal Asiatic Society. His work was severely criticized by the Karava of the era as these letters indicate.