Fossil remains are our principal guide. Stone artifacts and organic and inorganic remains directly associated with fossil finds may help in ‘dating’ the unearthed complexes and provide clues as to the ‘level of advancement’ of the putative human types that the fossils represent. The sad truth is that no significant fossil finds that shed light on the early evolution of man have ever been found in Sri Lanka. Despite the local ballyhoo about a ‘Balangoda Man’ (A fictitious posit of an over-enthusiastic Museum Zoologist) it can be stated with fair confidence that Sri Lanka was never a theatre of Primate Evolution.
l by R. Chandrasoma
(04 July, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) In speaking of the first people or indigenes of Sri Lanka, two things must be remembered that set close limits to our hypothesizing. The first is that historical records and archeological findings of the ordinary kind are valueless in working out the ‘late anthropogenesis’ of our species. Fossil remains are our principal guide. Stone artifacts and organic and inorganic remains directly associated with fossil finds may help in ‘dating’ the unearthed complexes and provide clues as to the ‘level of advancement’ of the putative human types that the fossils represent. The sad truth is that no significant fossil finds that shed light on the early evolution of man have ever been found in Sri Lanka. Despite the local ballyhoo about a ‘Balangoda Man’ (A fictitious posit of an over-enthusiastic Museum Zoologist) it can be stated with fair confidence that Sri Lanka was never a theatre of Primate Evolution. As a continental outpost of limited size it ‘received’ early human types from centres of anthropogenesis in Eurasia and the Far East. From Africa – widely regarded as the ‘cradle’ of the human race – there is no evidence for the direct transfer of human genes to Sri Lanka
Let us fill in the details. Who were the first humans to cross our shores? It is pretty obvious that any definition cannot be couched in terms that are cultural, linguistic or ethnographic. Our mainstay must be a characterization of the physical features of the earliest remains discovered. Skulls and other osseous remains – well dated and expertly characterized - must be our primary guide. Unfortunately, this is exactly the kind of evidence that is sadly lacking in the pre-historic studies relating to our island. We need physical anthropologists and comparative anatomists to lead the investigations into the pre-history of man in that intriguing island known as Sri Lanka. In this connection, the recent discovery of bony remains estimated to be about 11K years is of high significance for the unraveling of local pre-history - even if its significance as a global marker of human evolution cannot be very great. Accurate dating – easily done these days given the high sophistication of chronometric assessment (carbon dating, thermofluorescence etc.) - and an expert review of the osseous organization constitute the necessary groundwork for more speculative forays in this field. Most important is the task of ‘placement’ – has it archaic features that foreshadow the Australoid complex seen in the genuine Veddhas? (the ‘Ardhivedhis’ currently ‘exhibited’ are largely dark Caucasoids of the mainstream Southern population of Sri Lanka.) Suppose we see marked prognathism, low cranial capacity, high and flat cheek-bones, beetling brow-ridges, broad nasal bones etc. These characteristics – readily identified - will show if that archaic ‘person’ was a direct predecessor of the ancient Veddhas of Sri Lanka. This find will then provide strong conformation that an ancient Australoid stock from East Asia were the earliest people of Sri Lanka. The Andaman Islanders are Australoids – hinting strongly that Sri Lanka was first colonized by sea-farers from the East – not migrants from India. Indeed, Australoid stocks are found in Southern India - indicating a general migration of people from the East at a time when sea-levels were low and ‘Island-Hopping’ was possible.
It is conceivable - indeed, very likely – that another ancient stock of East Asian origin entered Sri Lanka at about the same time as the Veddha-Australoid group. They are the Negrito or pigmy-like people found widely dispersed in in South-East Asia. These ancient East-Asians must not be confused with the foetalized Negro stocks found in Africa. The reference to the Nittavo or Dwarf Forest People in some ancient chronicles of the island suggest that this sub-species of humans lived alongside the Australoid Veddhas in ancient Sri Lanka. The identification of the recently-discovered remains as Veddha or Negrito would not be a blow to conventional wisdom except that a very early colonization of so ‘remote ‘ a region as Sri Lanka would be a great surprise to the "Out of Africa’ theorists. More dramatic would be the finding that the supposedly 12K fossil had ‘Dark Caucasoid’ or Indo-Semitic features. Here we must remind readers that long before the so-called "Aryan invasion’ of the Sub-Continent, civilized or semi-civilized people had spread over India and, doubtless, intruded into Sri Lanka. Who were these people? There is confusion here because science mixes with legend and dreams. A well-established view is that Dravidic civilization commenced when Elamite stocks from the famed Babylonian region reached peninsular India by sea. These Elamo-Dravidians were also termed ‘dark Caucasoids’ or Indo-Semitic people. (The word Elam has no connection with ‘Eelam’ of the Tamil separatists.) The Elamites were a major force in ancient Mesopotamia and are credited with the pioneer use of a written script – an invention that passed on to the Elamo-Dravidians of India. The current population of Peninsular India is a mix of the Indo-Semitic or Elamo-Dravidian intrusive stocks with the early Australoid and Negrito indigenes.
A question of very great interest is the timing of these events. When did the first invasion of India by Indo-Semitic stocks occur? This may have been around 2000 BC and well after the arrival of the Australoids and Negritos in India. That these crucial events were spread out in time is a basic fact we must keep in mind. When did the first Indo-Semitic (or Elamo-Dravidian) stocks reach Sri Lanka? Well before the Vijayan invasion of course but how many thousand years before the dawn of recorded history? It is here that the recently discovered fossil can be critically important. Suppose the fossilized skull shows features that are ‘advanced’ and suggestive of an Indo-Semitic connection - then the consequences can be dramatic. That ‘advanced’ humans lived in Sri Lanka at so early an age is a big blow to conventional concepts in Pre-History – although the European Theatre saw the enaction of great transformative events at about the same time. In many ways our Island is strangely unique and we must be prepared for historical revisions of a surprising kind. It is said that one swallow does not make a summer. This recently-found fossil may turn out to be the remains of an unexciting denizen of recent age.
Post a Comment