Content uploaded by Wijerathne Bohingamuwa
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Wijerathne Bohingamuwa on Sep 20, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 23
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka:
A Historical Biography*
by
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa
Abstract
Mahātittha is frequently mentioned as the main sea
port of Sri Lanka in chronicles such as Mahāvaṃsa and
Dīpavaṃsa. It has long been identied with modern Māntai
in the Mannar district in the north-western province of
the island. Māntai, is considered as a vital sea link and
an entrepôt in the Indian Ocean for nearly two millennia
from ca. the mid-1st millennium BCE. Sri Lanka being an
island, ports such as Mahātittha acted as the only nodal
points of external interactions of the island. Ports played an
extremely important role in shaping the destiny of the island.
This makes it almost mandatary to place Mahātittha, the
main sea port mentioned in the Mahāvaṃsa, in its historical
context in any attempt to reconstruct the history of the island.
Consequently, this paper attempts to reconstruct the history
of Mahātittha, primarily based on Mahāvaṃsa accounts.
In doing so, however, it also incorporates other textual,
epigraphic and archaeological evidence. This analysis
challenges the main purpose of Mahātittha apparent from
events mentioned in the Mahāvaṃsa and the traditional
date of the demise of the port city.
* Historical part of this article was included in the catalogue of the
Author's PhD thesis submitted to the University of Oxford; W.
Bohingamuwa., ‘Historical record of Mantai’ in Sri Lanka and the
Indian Ocean Contacts: Internal Networks and External Connections;
Historical record of Mantai, 2017, pp.32-39. This is the revised version
that also includes some archaeological evidence and a discussion.
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
24
Introduction
The term Mahātittha is frequently mentioned in ancient literary
works such as the Sri Lankan chronicles Mahāvaṃsa and
Dīpavaṃsa. It is referred to as one of the main sea ports in ancient
Sri Lanka and has long been identied with modern Māntai in the
Mannar district in the north-western province of the island.1 The
meaning of the Pāli term ‘Mahātittha’ (Mahā + tittha) is the Great
Port. This port city is referred to in the literature and in inscriptions
by several names, including Mahātittha, Mahātottha, Mahā Tirtha
in Pāli and Sanskrit; Mahātoṭa, Māntai and Mahāvoti, in Sinhala
and Mathoddam in Tamil.2 These terms have the same meaning as
that in Pāli.3 Mahātittha is considered to have been once situated
at the mouth of the Aruvi Aru River (lower reach of Malwatu
Oya)4 and opposite the Palk Strait that separates Sri Lanka from
mainland South Asia and the Arabian Sea (Figure 1). The port was
strategically located to take advantage of riverine access to the
ancient capital, Anuradhapura (80 km southeast of Mahātittha)
and the trade routes between India and the Indian Ocean world
(Figures 2). Mahātittha was the main sea port of the Rajaraṭa
civilisation for nearly two millennia and played an important role
in shaping the destiny of the island. In an era when there was no
aerial communication, ports acted as the only nodal points of
external interactions of all islands. Mahātittha played this role
for Sri Lanka for centuries. The signicance of Mahātittha in
such external communications is made clear by the length of its
operation as the main sea port of the island. This makes it almost
mandatary to place Mahātittha in its historical context in any
attempt to reconstruct the history of the island at least up to the
collapse of the Rajaraṭa civilization.
Several scholarly attempts have already been made,
primarily based on historical sources, to reconstruct the history
of Mahātittha.5 Meanwhile, recent archaeological work carried
out by the present author and colleagues6 revealed fresh evidence,
including a large amount of artefacts, an inscription and new
radiocarbon dates, which demand reassessing historical sources.
Consequently, this article provides a historical biography of
Mahātittha. While this work is also largely based on textual evidence
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 25
Figure 1: Location of Māntai in relation to Anuradhapura and to the Adam’s Bridge
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
26
Figure 2: Sri Lanka’s connectivity with the India Ocean during the pre-modern period. (Bohingamuwa 2017, p. 34)
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 27
(primarily on the Mahāvaṃsa7), it also incorporates epigraphic
evidence as well as some archaeological data cited above. This
paper adopts a chronological perspective in reconstructing the
history of the great port. It follows a narrative style in detailing
references to Mahātittha in the Mahāvaṃsa8 and substantiates
them with other textual, epigraphic and material evidence; but only
so far as necessary to ll the gaps in the Mahāvaṃsa narrative. It
begins with the earliest reference to Mahātittha in the Mahāvaṃsa
in the rst millennium BCE and ends with Chandrabhānu’s attack
on Sri Lanka in 1268 CE. This article, however, briey introduces
results of recent archaeological investigations rst as backdrop to
historical analysis.
The archaeological record
Mahātittha has been subjected to archaeological investigations
since early 19th century, including extensive excavations undertaken
by Carswell and colleagues9 in early 1980's. Unfortunately, due
to various limitations cited in the report, Carswell et al.10 could
reconstruct only an ‘incomplete’ picture of Mahātittha. The entire
cultural sequence at Mahātittha (Māntai) was assigned to a time
period from the 1st or the 2nd to the 5th or the 6th centuries, although
the possibility of settlement’s continuation over the centuries was
not ruled out.11
Figure 3. Mahātittha (Māntai) site view from the air
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
28
The recent most archaeological investigations at Māntai
were carried out by the Oxford University based Sealinks Project
in 2009 and 2010.12 Although only a limited excavation was carried
out under this project, a considerable amount of archaeological
material was recovered; the vast majority of which were ceramics
(12,171), followed by beads (1580) (Figure 3). Ceramics include
those that are identied to have been originated from China and
South-east Asia in the east, India in the north to Arabia and Persia
in the west, illustrating the far and wide trade contacts Mahātittha
maintained. 24 radiocarbon dates were obtained for the excavated
cultural sequence, and they range from ca. the 2nd century BCE to
the 12th century CE, although the earliest date secured is ca. 1600
BCE (Table 1).13 However, Middle-eastern ceramics, originating
largely from Iran, Iraq and Arabia that are datable from the 11th
Table 1: Māntai (Mahātittha) Phase dates
(modied after Bohingamuwa 2017)
Phase Time period Cultural period
Phase -
Disturbed
Post-date 8th/9th century to
12/13th century
Late middle
historic
Phase - VII Early/mid-8th to late 9th
century
Mid-Middle
historic
Phase- VI Early/mid-8th century Middle historic
Phase – V Early 7th to mid-8th century Middle historic
Phase – IV Mid-3rd to early 7th century Middle historic
Phase – III Late 1st to late 2nd/ early 3rd
century
Upper early
historic
Phase – II Ca. 2nd century BCE to mid-
1st century CE
Mid-early
historic
Phase – I Ca. 1600 BCE Late Mesolithic
(? Neolithic)
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 29
to the 14th or 15th centuries account for 11.5% of the total Middle-
eastern assemblage. Similarly, 13% of the total Chinese ceramic
sherds at Māntai are those that could be dated to the 11th century,
or later periods up to the 13th century. The arrival of these ceramics
at Māntai (Mahātittha) typify to the larger trade and commercial
relations that continued well after the Chola attack in 993. This
also implies the continuity of the port city well beyond the
assumed date of demise of Mahātittha.14 Archaeological material
recovered from this excavation is incorporated in the following
historical assessment in order to observe how both sources pair
with each other.
The Mahāvaṃsa narrative and other sources of evidence on
Mahātittha
The earliest reference to Mahātittha in the Mahāvaṃsa is found
during the reign of King Vijaya (6th century BCE), the rst historical
ruler of the island. It is recorded that the Pandyan consort of Vijaya
landed at Mahātittha and proceeded to Tambapaṇṇi,15 a place
that appears to have been located south of Mahātittha. Vijaya,
who ruled 38 years from Tambapanni is said to have sent gifts,
including pearls to the Pandyan royal court annually. According to
Nicholas16 Tambapanni was located in the vicinity of pearl banks,
and thus likely to have been a place south of Mahātittha (present
day Arippu?). Since the Pandyan princess who became the queen
of Vijaya landed at Mahātittha, most of the gifts might have also
been sent through the same port.
Paṇḍuvāsadeva (ca.500 BCE), the nephew of King Vijaya,
is also believed to have arrived at Mahātittha as the Mahāvaṃsa
mentions that he landed at the mouth of Mahakanadara river.17
The Sangam literature, generally dated to between ca. 300 BCE
and 300 CE, describes Mahātittha as a great port, indicating its
links with South India at that time.18 Indian made ceramics from
Anuradhapura and elsewhere in the island are reported from ca. the
5th century BCE.19 Clearly identiable Indian origin ceramics such
as Rouletted Wares and Red Polished Wares from our excavations
at Māntai (Mahātittha) date only from ca. late 1st /2nd century CE.
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
30
However, it is likely that at least, part of these Indian ceramics
found in the interior sites cited above passed through Mahātittha,
although such information has gone unrecorded in the canonical
works.
According to the 17th century Sinhala chronicle, Rājāvaliya,
the South Indian invader Elara landed at Mahātittha.20 Bhalluka,
another South Indian general who is reported to have come with
a reinforcement army of 60,000 in 161 BCE in support of King
Elara during his war against King Dhuṭṭhagāmaṇī (161–137
BCE) landed at Mahātoṭṭa (Mahātittha).21 The next reference to
Mahātittha in the Mahāvaṃsa is in 103 BCE during the rst regnal
phase of King Vaṭṭagāmaṇī Abhaya (29–17 BCE). In this year, a
Tamil army, commissioned by seven Tamil generals, landed at
Mahātittha, captured the capital and ruled for the next fourteen
years.22 Vaṭṭagāmaṇī Abhaya defeated the invaders and ruled from
89 to 77 BCE. Similarly, King Ilanāga (33–43 CE) who was denied
his rightful place on the throne by the Lambakarṇas, ed to Kerala
though Mahātittha, seeking assistance to ght against them.23 This
is the rst recorded plea for military assistance from the kings of
South India. These references demonstrate that Mahātittha was a
port with a central role in various military endeavours throughout
its history.
By 3rd century BCE, Sri Lankan pearls were known to the
west as may be inferred by the references by Megasthenese.24
Mahātittha is likely to have been one of the main centres of pearl
processing as it was located adjacent to the famous pearl banks.
Bohingamuwa25 argued that even the development of Mahātittha
as an international trading port could have been partly inuenced
by these pearl banks.
By the beginning of the Common Era, western knowledge
of Sri Lanka had signicantly increased. Certainly by the time
of Claudius Ptolemy (150-200 CE), Māntai was known as an
important emporium, known as “Modutti”, in East-West trade.
The “Modutti Emporium” in northern Taprobane, mentioned
by Ptolemy, has been identied as Māntai on the basis of the
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 31
geographical description of its location, linguistic similarity to Pāli,
Sinhala and Tamil names for Māntai and nally, the international
character assigned to the port.26 No port in ancient Sri Lanka other
than Māntai qualies as a better candidate for Modutti. Francis27
has suggested that Modutti housed a colony of Roman traders
between about 80 and 140 CE. Bohingamuwa,28 however, has
argued that this was most probably a semi-permanent trading post
of Roman traders as the denition of a colony does not qualify
to the description given. During the same period, there appear
to have been a number of other communities such as Persians,
Ethiopians, Chinese and Indians at Mahātittha.
From about the middle of the rst millennium BCE, direct
sail from Tāmralipti to Sri Lanka was established,29 linking the
more northerly ports of the eastern coast of India with Mahātittha
(and Jambukolapaṭṭhana30). By the time the Samanthapāsādikā
was written (5th century CE), travel between Mahātittha,
Tāmralipti and Suvaṇṇabhūmi was common practice31 and regular
naval routes had been established between the northern and north-
western ports of Sri Lanka, South East Asia and China. The arrival
of the Chinese pilgrim, Fa-Xian (Ca. 412 CE), on the island and
the Kashmiri monk Guṇavarman who later proceeded to Java,
illustrates such regular connections. In CE 426, Sri Lankan
Buddhist nuns went to China with a Sri Lankan ship owner/mariner
called Nan-ti (Nandi). Nandi returned to the island and in 429
CE took another shipload of nuns headed by T’ieh-sa-lo (Tesara/
Devasara) for conferring higher ordination.32 Gunawardana33
identies Nan-ti (Nandi) with a Sri Lankan merchant Nandi who
was residing at the port of Mahātittha.34 The Nandi mentioned in
Sahassavatthupakaraṇa, who is said to have gone on four-year-
long foreign trade journeys, is believed to have lived in a mansion
at Mahātittha. Sahassavatthupakaraṇa mentions another merchant
prince called “Vanija Kumara”.35 These references indicate the
wealth and the social status of traders involved in overseas trade at
Mahātittha. The Sahassavatthupakaraṇa also refers to a minister
called Siva, who lived at Mahātittha.36 He was probably among
those ofcials who were in charge of administrative arrangements.
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
32
It was also during this period that large irrigation schemes
such as the giant tank (Manamatta vāpī),37 built by King Dhātusena
(459–477 CE) about 10 km inland from Mahātittha, began to be
developed in this area. In fact, construction of minor irrigation
networks, such as the Kohala tank built by King Vasabha (67–111
CE) near Mahātitthapatthana,38 was already underway by the
second century CE. This infrastructure was most likely a response
to increased demand for food resources around Mahātittha, perhaps
indicating an increase in local population and settlements at this
time, which we might link to the growth in the port’s importance
as a centre for trade and commerce.
By the 6th century CE, Sri Lanka had become one of the
greatest entrepôts of Indian Ocean maritime trade. The description
of Cosmas39 testies to the island’s key position in East-West
trade at that time. Although Māntai is not mentioned by name, it is
certain that the port referred to in Cosmas’ description is Māntai.40
Thus, by this time Māntai received ships from India, Persia and
Ethiopia. The cargo included silk, aloes, clove-wood, sandal-
wood and various other products from overseas, which were
redistributed along with Sri Lanka’s products to ports in eastern
India, Persia and north-east Africa, including Adulis in Eritrea.41
Mahātittha, therefore, would have housed a large number of
foreign merchants from the eastern and the western littorals of the
Indian Ocean as well as from South Asia.42 Evidence of Māntai’s
cosmopolitan nature is evident from the references to a Persian
church at Mahātittha in Cosmas43 as well as a Hindu temple,
which is described in the 6th Century CE poem of Suntaramūrti
Nayanar. Archaeological nds provide similar evidence of
cosmopolitan connections and perhaps practices. These include a
clay bulla typical of the 6th/7th century CE with impressions of a
two-humped Bactrian camel alongside a Persian inscription and
Nestorian cross.44 Epigraphic and literary evidence (discussed
below) as well as the remains of a Buddhist Temple at Māntai
further testify to the varied nature of worship at the port city. It
is also interesting, in the context of the present study, that while
praising Siva (the deity at Tiruketisvaram temple), Suntaramūrti
Nayanar described Māntai as a port frequented by many ships that
possessed pearls in abundance.45
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 33
The prosperity of Māntai during this period reected in
historical sources is also attested by the archaeological ndings.
Our excavation at Māntai uncovered a considerable amount of
cargo or storage wares of Middle-eastern and unknown overseas
origins. These large vessels indicate the arrival of enormous
quantities of goods from overseas regions. In addition to these
imported wares, a rapid increase in the production of Sri Lankan
ceramics is also evident. Besides ceramics, there is ample evidence
of the production of beads, bangles and metal objects at Māntai.
The implications are of a ourishing trading mart and a production
centre.46
It was during this period that an Indian monk named
Vajrabodhi saw 35 Persian ships at Mahātittha. He travelled with
this convoy from Mahātittha to Canton,47 indicating the east-west
maritime trade routes linked to this great port.
There is then a reference to Māntai in the chronicles during
the time of Mānavamma (684–718 CE).48 The Sinhala prince, who,
with the military assistance of the Pallava Kings (Narasinhavarman
I and II) twice invaded Sri Lanka, landed each time at Mahātittha
and secured the throne on his second attempt. Towards the end
of the 8th century, Pandyan power in South India expanded so
rapidly that the Sri Lankan King Aggabodhi VII (772–777 CE)
anticipated an invasion. Prince Mahinda was accordingly stationed
at Mahātittha, the most probable place of enemy disembarkation.49
The seemingly inevitable invasion took place during the reign of
Sena I (833–853 CE), and Nicholas50 assumes that the Pandyans
landed at Mahātittha and other northern ports from which they
captured the Northern Province (Uttararaṭṭha).
While King Sena II (833–887 CE) was in power, the
Pandyan prince, Varaguna, came to Sri Lanka seeking military
assistance from the Sinhalese king to secure the Pandyan crown
from his own father, Śrīmāra Śrīvallabha, who had invaded the
island at the time of Sena I (833–853 CE). Sena II sent an army
through Mahātittha to invade the Pandya Kingdom. It is believed
that the king himself oversaw the embarkation of the army from
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
34
Mahātittha, and greeted the returning victorious army, which
brought with it the Lankan royal regalia and treasures that were
taken away by Srīmara Sīvallabha.51
Archaeologically, an unprecedented increase of Middle-
eastern, Chinese as well as South-east Asian ceramics are found
from contexts dated to ca. the 8th/ 9th centuries. These ceramics
include both cargo or storage wares and luxury table wares. Besides
these, there are also imported beads, indicating the presence of
an elite class either at Māntai or in the interior; mostly probably
at Anuradhapura. By now, Māntai had established far and wide
external trade connections as well as production of local ceramics,
beads and bangles of glass and shell.52
By the beginning of the 10th century CE, Chola power was
on the increase in South India and the Cholas imposed a severe
blow on the Pandyan army in 915 CE. The Pandyan king requested
urgent military assistance from the Sri Lankan King Kāśyapa V
(914–923 CE). Kashyapa’s army left from Mahātittha and joined
the Pandyan forces in their battle against Cholas, but the joint
Pandyan-Lankan force was severely defeated. The defeated Sri
Lanakn army was withdrawn, though the Mahāvaṃsa mentions
that the forces were called back due to an outbreak of plague
among the troops.53 This record is more likely a cover-up to safe-
guard the dignity of the Sri Lankan forces. What is signicant;
however, is that Mahātittha was the port of exit-entry point in both
cordial and adversary relations with India.
The Pandyan King, Rājasiṃha, abandoned his kingdom
during a Chola attack and took refuge in Sri Lanka during the
reign of King Udaya III (935–938 CE), arriving via Mahātittha.
Rājasiṃha, having failed to secure military assistance from Sri
Lanka to ght against the Cholas, ed to Kerala, to his maternal
relatives, leaving his crown and royal insignia with the Sri Lankan
king for safety.54 Having learnt this, Parantaka I, the Chola king,
demanded that the Sri Lankans hand over the royal insignia of
Pandyas. When Udaya IV refused to comply, Parantaka invaded Sri
Lanka around 946/947 CE. The defeated Udaya IV left for Rohaṇa
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 35
with the Pandyan regalia. The Chola army had to return to South
India without securing the Pandyan royal insignia.55 Mahātittha
is likely to have been the port of landing and embarkation of the
Cholas as Padyan king used the same during his arrival and return
to South India.
Nicholas56 cites an inscription assigned to King Kassapa V
(914-923) that is reported to have been found at Māntai, which
that mentions a grant made to the Bahadurasen Meditation Hall
at Mahavihara at Anuradhapura.57 It speaks about immunities
granted to ofcials in charge of Mahaputu (Mahātittha). Similarly,
another inscription attributed to the same king records a place
named Samadatiya of Mahaputu (Mahātittha). According to
Nicholas58 the four villages and the two Viharas mentioned in
these inscriptions were in the vicinity of Mahātittha. This rare
information reveals the settlement pattern in the area during that
period.
According to the Mahāvaṃsa, during the weak rule of
Mahinda V (914–923 CE), Keralan mercenaries revolted against
the king who was forced to ee to Ruhuṇa in southern Sri Lanka.
Observing the lack of royal power in Anuradhapura, a horse
trader, probably a South Indian, informed the situation to the
Chola king. Thus, King Rajaraja I conquered Sri Lanka in 993
CE and made the northern part of the island a province of the
Chola Empire.59 A Chola general named Tali Kumāran is credited
to have constructed a temple at Matottam (Mahātittha), which was
renamed Rājarājapura.60
Chola control and activities at Māntai are demonstrated
by several Tamil inscriptions at the site that are datable to post-
8th century CE. They provide invaluable insights into the socio-
economic, religious and administrative situation at Māntai, as well
as into how the port city functioned.61 A fragmentary inscription
recovered from the old Dutch Port at Kayts, northern Sri Lanka62
is related to the Chola invasion in 1017 CE.63 It records Chola
Muventa’s (the general of Rājendra 1 (1012–1044 CE) conquest
of Sri Lanka and abduction of the Sri Lankan King, Mahinda
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
36
(V) and his queen, and the stealing of the royal insignias. With
regard to the present discussion, it refers to Māntai as ‘Matoṭṭam
Iracaracapura (Rājarājpura), city of Rājarāja indicating the Chola
control of port city. How this affects the urban centre and its
international trade can be inferred from another a pillar inscription
claimed to have been removed from the Rājarājeśvaram temple
at Māntai and now housed at the National Museum in Colombo.
Dated to the 11th century CE, this inscription credits Tali Kumaran,
a noble from Tamilnadu for the construction of the Rājarājeśvaram
(Hindu) temple at Matottam. Moreover, it records the making of
provisions by Tali Kumaran for the annual festival of “Vicakam”,
the Vaisakapunnami (the birth celebration of the Buddha) seven
days in the month of Vaikaci (May-June).64 This edict sheds rare
insights on the religious coexistence at Māntai during the 11th
century CE, and also on the functioning and planning of the city,
which at the time was located in the administrative division of
Nakalaikkoti-nadu. There were roads leading to the city, one of
which was known as Rājarāja Perunteru.65 The metropolitan
seems to have had different sectors or estates designated for
various social groups/ ranks. Thus, the mansion and the garden of
Munran Kaman were situated east of Rajaraja Perunteru (street).
This estate, though situated in the land granted to the temple, was
exempted from the grant.66
There had been different quarters at Māntai for various
artisans as well. Thus the “Kammana-ceri”, the blacksmiths
lived in an area north of the land granted to the temple.67 Based
on archaeological ndings, Juleff68 mentions that black smiths
were located at the southern end of the site. However, Graham69
reports the largest amount of iron objects from Trench H and
evidence for metal working throughout the excavated sequence.
(Figure 4) While Graham was the main excavator of Carswell et
al. excavations at Māntai, Juleff studied the resultant metallurgical
remains. Both epigraphic and archaeological evidence illustrate
that Mahātittha has a main metallurgical production site. Similarly,
our excavations70 and those of Carswell et al.71 as well as our
surface explorations clearly illustrate the production of glass
products as well at Mahātittha.
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 37
Figure 4. Part of structures excavated by Hocart (1926-27), repro-
duced in Carswell et al. 2013:159, *Our excavation (2009/2010)
next to Trench D. Note Trench H where a lot of iron slags are
reported.
*
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
38
There are references to weavers, oil millers and traders
in the inscriptions and perhaps they also had quarters designated
to them at Māntai.72 Such quarters were present as early as 500
BCE in Anuradhapura, to which the port was directly linked.73
As per this edict, various taxes and imposts were charged from
different industries such as weaving as well as from the roads.
The coins mentioned in the inscription are akam and vattam and
kacu74 (gold).75 Further information regarding the economic and
administrative activities at the port city, hardly recorded in the
chronicles, are found in two fragmentary inscriptions, reported to
have been found from the Tiru-Itumisvaram temple at Matottam.76
It refers to a bequest of kacu (gold coins) to the temple for paying
oil-mangers, betel and banana merchants, presumably traders and/
or service men of the temple.
There are also inscriptions written in Sinhala dating to
the 9th and 10th centuries CE that indicate strong Hindu inuence
at Mahātittha. They speak about great sins of killing cows at
Mahavuvu (Mahāvutu/Mahātittha), illustrating the sacredness of
Mahātittha for Hindus during that time.77 The occurrence of such
inscriptions in faraway, interior places in the island demonstrates
the fame of Mahaitittha as a holy place of Hindus as well as the
mutual respect that seems to have existed amongst followers of
different religions and communities.
With regard to the functioning of the Māntai port city, an
inscription found at Visākapattanam in India provides interesting
information. It refers to the presence of an Anjuvannam mercantile
community of West Asian origin both at Mātoṭṭam and Kerala,78
indicating the trading networks at operation during that time.
Despite military interventions since the 9th century cited
above, Māntai remained a main trading port of the Indian Ocean.
The 10th century Arabic book Hudud Al Alam (ca. 982 CE) mentions
a city called Muvas, situated on the side of Sri Lanka facing India.
Many products from all over the island were carried to the city,
at which point they were exported around the world. This city is
identied with Mahātittha,79 which would imply that Māntai was
still a great trading port at the end of the rst millennium CE.
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 39
The continuation of Mahātittha as a port city of international
repute during and after the Chola attack in 993 CE is clear from
archaeological ndings. The largest quantities of imported and
locally made ceramics, beads and bangles in our excavation are
found from around 10th/11th centuries. As mentioned earlier, the
quantity of Middle-eastern and Chinese ceramics datable from11th
to 14th or even 15th century is considerable. However, from around
11th century, there is evidence for the changing trading patterns, as
the ports in the east were growing in signicance.
According to textual evidence, Chola occupation of northern
Sri Lanka and Mahātittha continued without much challenge up
to the crowning of Vijayabāhu (ca. 1055/56 CE). Having learnt
of Vijayabāhu’s preparations for war against the Cholas, the
Chola king sent a powerful reinforcement army, which landed at
Mahātittha and proceeded to Ruhuṇa in the south, overpowering
the regions passed along the way. In the 11th year of his reign,
Vijayabāhu defeated the Chola invaders at Ruhuṇa.80 The Chola
king dispatched another army as reinforcement. They also landed
at Mahātittha and proceeded to Anuradhapura where a erce battle
took place. According to the Mahāvaṃsa, Vijayabāhu’s army
experienced a huge loss.81 Later, Vijayabāhu led a two-pronged
attack on the Cholas; one column of army advanced from the
western coast and reached Mahātittha then captured it depriving
any reinforcements from the Chola Kingdom. Then they marched
to Polonnaruwa. The other battalion, which went along the east
coast (southern route) also reached and captured Polonanuwa
ending the Chola power in the island.82
In 1085, Vijayabāhu I (1065–1120 CE) sent two battalions
to Mahātittha and Matiwaltoṭa (in the north) intending to invade
the Chola kingdom, but decided against it as his own (South
Indian) Vellakkāra generals revolted against such a move. This
indicates the presence of powerful South Indian mercenaries
even in Vijayabāhu’s army, which fought a erce battle against
Cholas.83 However, Vijayabāhu I, having learnt of the arrival of
a Chola army, came to Mahātittha (c.1100/1101 CE) and awaited
their arrival, which did not take place.84
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
40
The next reference to Mahātittha comes during the reign of
Vikramabāhu I (1207 CE). Veeradeva (1111–1112 CE), a warrior
chief of Ariya country landed at Māntai with an army. Vikramabāhu
I, having failed to defeat him at Mahātittha, nally defeated and
killed him at Polonnaruwa.85
There are several references to Mahātittha during the
reign of Parakramabāhu I (1153–1186 CE).86 In the 11th year of
his reign, Parakramabāhu I defeated a rebellion at Mahātittha.87
In the same year, the king invaded the Pandyan kingdom and the
army embarked from Mahātittha. However, according to a Chola
inscription (ca. 1178 CE), having learnt of Parakramabāhu’s
intended attack and ship building at Matottam (Mahātittha) in
preparation, the Chola king sent an army that landed at Mahātitha.
Mahātitha and several other places were captured and destroyed,
and the Cholas returned to India immediately after the attack.88
By the time of Nissankamalla (1187–1196 CE), Mahātittha
was apparently a peaceful place where he is said to have built
an alms hall at Mahāputupa, suggesting the presence of a
large number of Buddhist pilgrims in the city. The city is also
described as having attractive buildings and gardens at this
time.89 Saddharmalaṅkāraya and Kokila Sandeśaya, (13th and 15th
centuries) also provide vivid descriptions of the city.
However, peace did not last long because between 1188
and 1200 CE, the Cholas landed at Mavatu (Mahātittha) and
proceeded up to Anuradhapura. But they were forced to return
soon. Chandrabhānu, a Javanese prince, landed at Mahātittha in CE
1268 and conquered Sri Lanka. Even during the Chola invasions
and occupations of Sri Lanka after 1283 CE, Mahātittha was
considered to have been the port of landing and communication.90
Historical references to Mahāitittha, and particularly those
in the Mahāvaṃsa, thus, illustrates its signicance as a sea port
through time. Epigraphic and archaeological sources reveal
information missing in the texts and different roles Mahātittha
seems to have played during its long history. More importantly,
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 41
its continuity beyond the assumed date of demise is clearly visible
from historical sources and more clearly from the material remains
recovered from the port city.
Towards some conclusions
In all islands, ports are vital interfaces between interior settlements
and the external world. Thus, the history of ports is as important
as those of interior settlements themselves. When any given port
serves as the main sea port of a capital city for over 1500 years, it
leaves a legacy of it is own in the annals of that country. Such has
been the case of Mahātittha.
During a period when the nautical engineering was
rudimentary, it is likely that the sea travel was coastal. Seafarers
between India and Sri Lanka in all probability hugged the coasts
and crossed the shortest possible distance. Mahātittha being the
closest point to India was a likely port that the earliest seafarers
crossed. However, Sri Lankan chronicles, Mahāvaṃsa in
particular, which were written primarily to record religious and
political history of the island, paid less attention to foreign trade
and external relations, for which the ports such as Mahāitittha
were crucial.
Consequently, Mahāvaṃsa and other Sri Lankan canonical
works have largely conned to recording political and military
interactions that took place through Mahātittha. As per these
chronicles, the earliest and the strongest external interactions of
Mahātittha appear to have been with India and particularly with
its southern and eastern coasts. This prompted Kiribamune91 to
conclude that, Mahātitittha was the entry-exit point for almost
everyone who came from and left for India since the rst century
BCE.
Mahāvaṃsa would have made us believe that Mahātittha’s
external relations were largely conned to India. Considering the
geographical proximity and cultural connections between two
countries this is natural. The epigraphic and material evidence
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
42
discussed in this essay, however, clearly illustrates Mahātittha’s far
and wide interactions with the wider Indian Ocean, at least from
the middle of the rst millennium BCE. The arrival of Fa-Xian,92
Chandrabānu’s attacks on Sri Lanka,93 Nandi’s naval expeditions
to China,94 Vajrabodhi’s journey in Persian ships across the Bay
of Bengal and Parākramabāhu’s military expedition to Burma,95
to mention but a few, illustrates Mahātittha’s relations with
Southeast Asia and China. Mahātittha’s interactions with India
and Far-Eastern countries that are visible from historical sources
are mainly political and religious, though there are occasional
references to commercial engagements as well. Sources from the
Western Indian Ocean region, such as the descriptions of Procopius
and Cosmas and the reference in the Arabic book Hudud Al Alam,
cited earlier, demonstrate Mahātittha as a vital international
entrepôt in the Indian Ocean. As per these sources, Mahātitttha’s
interactions with the Western Indian Ocean region appear to have
been focused on trade and commerce. In fact, the emergence of
Mahātittha as an important trading mart appear to coincide with
the rise of Roman maritime trade with Asia. Mahātittha’s location
adjacent to the famous pearl banks was also likely to have attracted
traders, seafarers as well as invaders from the earliest times.
Historical events recorded in the Mahāvaṃsa projects
Mahātittha more prominently as a port used for military purposes.
Regular movements of tropes through this port prompted some
scholar to question the suitability of Mahātittha as an international
entrepôt.96 However, textual, epigraphic and material evidence
collectively illustrate that Mahātittha was not only an important
international trading port throughout it occupation but it also
played a number of other roles such as in politics, diplomacy, and
religion throughout its occupation. Moreover, there are no direct
references to military activities in the Mahāvaṃsa during the time
period between 200 and 700 CE at Mahātittha. This is the period
when Procopius and Cosmas mentions Mahātittha as one of the
main entrepôts of the east–west trade of the Indian Ocean. The
majority of the military related references to Mahātittha in the
Mahāvaṃsa are found after 700 CE. Arabic records, however,
clearly indicate that even in the late tenth century Mahātittha
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 43
was still a ourishing international trade centre. Archaeological
evidence found at the port city clearly illustrates the continuity
of the port and its international trade at least until the 13th/ 14th
centuries CE, challenging the popular claim that the port was
completely destroyed due to the Chola attack in 993 CE. This may
also indicate that the port was largely at peace during most of its
history, except during the time of military expeditions.97
Epigraphic and archaeological ndings clearly indicate that
Mahātittha has been a production centre for various industries
such as metal, weaving, beads, bangles and pottery and the city
was well planned with streets and separate quarters for industries
cited above. It was a cosmopolitan settlement with various ethnic
communities and religious faiths. This vital information is missing
in the chronicles.
Geographical location of Mahātittha in a critical sea link
in the pre-modern navigation route of the Indian Ocean made
it an unavoidable port of call. Its links with interior settlements
and resource bases, nonetheless, were equally important for
its rise and sustenance.98 Chronicles and their commentaries
illustrate how both Jambukolapaṭṭana and Mahātittha were
linked by highway to the capital Anuradhapura.99 Mahātittha’s
location, however, brought it both fortunes and misfortunes alike;
trade and commercial opportunities and invitations to invaders.
Consequently, the rise and the fall of Mahātittha is likely to have
been linked to a combination of factors within and outside Sri
Lanka such as the shifting of capitals and change in political and
economic strategies as well as changing patterns of the Indian
Ocean trade.100
Endnotes
1 Nicholas, C. W. Historical Topography of Ancient and Medieval
Ceylon. Vol. VI. Colombo: Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic
Society.,1963, p.75
2 Paranavitana and Codrington, Epigraphia Zeylanica, Vol. IV, Oxford,
1934, p.246, 252.
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
44
3 While these terms are interchangeably used in this essay - depending
on the source referred to -, Mahātittha, which is the most frequently
found term in historical sources such as Mahāvaṃsa is the main
term used. However, Māntai, its present name, is employed while
referring to modern works.
4 Aruvi Aru River currently ows about 18 km south of the site.
5 Kiribamune, S. ‘The Role of the Port City of Mahātittha (Māntota)
in the Trade Networks of the Indian Ocean.’ Sri Lanka Journal
of Humanities XVII & XVIII, 1991, p.171–92.; Carswell, J.,
Deraniyagala, S. and Graham, A. Māntai-City by the Sea. Linden
Soft Verlag, Aichwarld, 2013.
6 Bohingamuwa, W. ‘Sri Lanka and the Indian Ocean Contacts:
Internal Networks and External Connections’. PhD Unpublished
Thesis, University of Oxford, Oxford, 2017.
7 The present work refers to Mahāvaṃsa. All references to Mahāvaṃsa
are given as for example, Mv. 8: 10-12, indicating verses 10-12 of
Chapter 8 in Mahāvaṃsa, Mahāvaṃsa, National Museum, Colombo,
1912.
8 The present work makes no difference between Mahāvaṃsa and
Dīpavaṃsa
9 Carswell et al., Op. Cit.
10 Graham, A. Synthesis, In Carswell et al., Op. Cit., p.184
11 Ibid., p.185.
12 ‘Sri Lanka and the SEALINKS Project’ was a collaborative project
involving the Oxford University based SEALINKS project of Dr.
Nicole Boivin, University College London, the Department of
Archaeology, Sri Lanka and the University of Ruhuna. The author
was one of the project co-directors and analyzed the material
culture recovered from this excavation and discussed here. Author
acknowledges the institutions and colleagues involved. Dating was
paid by Prof. D. Fuller’s Early Rice Grant.
13 There appears to be a cultural hiatus between this earliest date and
the 2nd century BCE whence the continuous occupation is evident.
This cultural hiatus was also noted by Carswell et al. (2013).
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 45
14 Bohingamuwa, Op. Cit.
15 Nicholas, Op. Cit., p.76; Mv.6:47
16 Nicholas, Op. Cit., p.76
17 Kiribamune, Op. Cit., p. 183; Mv.8:10–12
18 Ray, A Maritime India, Ports and Shipping. Munshiram Manoharlal,
New Delhi, 1995, p. 78; Sahassavattuppakarana. Buddhadatta, A. P.
Rev., (ed.). Anula Press, Colombo, 1959 (Here onwards referred to
as Sv.)
19 e.g.: Deraniayagala, S. U. (1992) 2004. The Prehistory of Sri Lanka:
An Ecological Perspective. Department of Archaeological Survey of
Sri Lanka, Colombo, (1992) 2004.
20 Nicholas, Op. Cit., 76
21 Mv.25:78-80
22 Mv.33:37–81
23 Mv.35:14–45
24 (McCrindle and Jain 1972:159n; cf. Kiribamune, S. ‘The Role of the
Port City of Mahātittha (Matota) in the Trade Networks of the Indian
Ocean.’ In Māntai-City by the Sea, Carswell, J., Deraniyagala, S.,
and Graham, A. (eds.), 40–52. Linden Soft Verlag, Aichwarld, 2013,
p. 45)
25 Bohingamuwa, Op.Cit., p.446
26 Francis, P. ‘Western Geographic Knowledge of Sri Lanka and Māntai
C. 325 B.C. to 1170 A. D.’ In Māntai: City by the Sea, Carswell, J.,
Deraniyagala, S., and Graham, A. (eds.) 53–60. Linden Soft Verlag,
Aichwarld, 2013b, pp. 53-60.
Silva, R. Environment, Town, Village and Monastic Planning. Vol.
X. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of Ceylon. Department of
Archaeology, Colombo, 2006.
Nicholas, Op. Cit.
27 Francis, Op. Cit.
28 Bohingamuwa, Op. Cit., p.512
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
46
29 Gunawardana, R. A. L. H. ‘Seaways to Seilediba: Changing Patterns
of Navigation in the Indian Ocean and Their Impact on Precolonial
Sri Lanka.’ In Sri Lanka and the Silk Road of the Sea, Bandaranayake,
S. Dewaraja, L., Silva, R. and Wimalaratne, K. D.G. (eds.), 17–36.
Central Cultural Fund, Colombo, 2003, p. 24
30 Jambukolapatthana, an ancient port that was located in the
northernmost point in the island.
31 Gunawardana, Op. Cit., p. 24
32 Pao-chang, Pi-Chiu-ni-chuan, (trans.). Li Jung-his, Tohokai, Osaka,
1981, pp. 68-70, 89
33 Gunawardana, Op. Cit.
34 Kiribamune, 1991, p. 185
35 Ibid.
36 Sv: p.145
37 Mv.35:94–100
38 Vp: 653 (Vaṃsatthappakāsinī. Malalasekara, G. P. (ed.). Vol. I&II.
Pāli Text Society, London, 1938)
39 McCrindle, J. W. The Christian Topography of Cosmas, an Egyptian
Monk. Vol. 98. Haklyt Society, London, 1897, pp. 365–367
40 Francis, Op. Cit., pp. 53–60; Kiribamune, Op. Cit., p.186
Prickett-Fernando, M. ‘Māntai-Mahātittha: The Great Port and
Entrepot in the India Ocean Trade.’ In Sri Lanka and the Silk Road of
the Sea, Bandaranayake, S. Dewaraja, L., Silva, R. and Wimalaratne,
K. D.G. (eds.), Central Cultural Fund, Colombo, 2003, pp. 107-13.
Silva, R. and Bouzek, J. “Māntai a second Arikamedu: a Note
on Roman Finds”. In Sri Lanka and the Silk Road of the Sea,
Bandaranayake, S. Dewaraja, L., Silva, R. and Wimalaratne, K. D.G.
(eds.), Sri Lanka National Commission for UNESCO and the Central
Cultural Fund, Colombo, 2003, pp. 115-117.
Siriweera, W. I ‘Pre-Colonial Sri Lanka’s Maritime Commerce with
Special Reference to Its Ports.’ In Sri Lanka and the Silk Road of the
Sea, Bandaranayake, S. Dewaraja, L., Silva, R. and Wimalaratne, K.
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 47
D.G. (eds.), Central Cultural Fund, Colombo, 2003, pp. 117-26.
Nicholas, C. W. ‘The North-West Passage between Ceylon and
India’. In Sri Lanka and the Silk Road of the Sea, Bandaranayake,
S. Dewaraja, L., Silva, R. and Wimalaratne, K. D.G. (eds.), Central
Cultural Fund, Colombo, 2003, pp. 263-68.
Perera,’The foreign trade and commerce of Ancient Ceylon’. The
Historical Journal, Vol. I, No.3, 1952, pp. 109-113.
41 For a different view, see Wolters, O.W. Early Indonesian Commerce,
Cornell University Press, Ithaca N.Y., 1967.
42 Nicholas, Op. Cit.
43 Carswell, J., and Prickett, M. E. 1984. ‘Māntai, A Preliminary
Investigation.’ Ancient Ceylon V, 1980, 3–80.; McCrindle, Op. Cit.
44 Carswell et al., Op. Cit. For a different view, see Walburg, R. ‘Roman
Coins on Ceylon: A Puzzling and Hardly Known Chapter of Ancient
Numismatics in Sri Lanka.’ In Past and Present. Archaeology
Geography Economics, Domroes, M. and Roth, H. (eds.), Margraf
Verlag,1988, pp. 52–60.
45 Boake, W. J. S. ‘Tirukketisvaram, Mahātittha, Matoddam or
Mantoddai.’ JRASCB X, 1887.
46 Bohingamuwa, Op. Cit.
47 Kiribamune 2013, p. 50
48 Nicholas, Op. Cit., p.76
49 Mv.46 (48):68–74
50 Nicholas, Op. Cit. p.75
51 Ibid.; Mv.49 (51):22–50
52 Bohingamuwa, Op. Cit.
53 Nicholas Op. Cit., p. 77
54 Mv.52(53):4–10
55 Mv.53 (54):40–45; Nicholas, Op. Cit. p. 78
56 Nicholas, Op. Cit., p. 80
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
48
57 Mv.36:70-71
58 Nicholas, Op. Cit.
59 Mv.54:1–22
60 Nicholas, Op. Cit., p. 78
61 The majority of these Tamil inscriptions were studied by K. Indrapala
from whose work the present author has drawn extensively in
writing this section. Indrapala, K. ‘The Nainativu Tamil Inscription
of Parakrambahu I.’ University of Ceylon Review XXI (1), 1963,
pp. 63ff. A fragmentary inscription from Fort Hammenhiel, Kayts,
Epigraphia Tamilica Vol.I.1 Jaffna, 1971b, pp. 10-13
62 Discovered from Matottam/ Mahātittha
63 Indrapala, K. ‘Invasions from South India and the Abandonment of
Polonnaruva.’ In The Collapse of the Rajaraṭa Civilisation in Ceylon
and the Drift to the South-West. Peradeniya: Ceylon study seminar,
1971a.
———. A fragmentary inscription from Fort Hammenhiel, Kayts,
Epigraphia Tamilica Vol.I.1 Jaffna, 1971b, pp. 10-13
———.Inscription no.2 from Fort Hammenhiel, Kayts, Epigraphia
Zeylanica. Vol.VI, 2 Colombo, 1991, pp.154-160.
———. ‘Historical Evidence: Tamil Sources.’ In Māntai-City by the
Sea, Carswell, J., Deraniyagala, S., and Graham, A. (eds.), Linden
Soft Verlag, Aichwarld, 2013, pp. 61-72.
64 Indrapala 2013, p.65
65 Ibid.
66 Ibid.
67 Ibid.
68 Juleff, G. ‘Metal-Working at Māntai.’ In Carswell et al., Op. Cit.
pp.277-310
69 Graham, A ‘The Metal Artifacts.’ In Carswell et al., Op. Cit.pp.273-
276.
70 Bohingamuwa, Op. Cit.
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa JRASSL(NS), Vol. 62 Part 2 - 2018 49
71 Carswell et al., Op. Cit.
72 Indrapala, Op. Cit.
73 Mv.10:76–106
74 Could be Illankacu, (Sri Lankan coin) usedin Tamilnadu (Indrapala,
Op. Cit. p. 66).
75 Ibid.
76 Sastri 1939 cited in Indrapala, 2013, p. 66
77 Nicholas, Op. Cit. p. 76
78 Indrapala Op. Cit. p.65; Subbarayalu, Y., and Shanmugam, P.
‘Anjuvannam: “A Maritime Trade Guild of Medieval Times”.’ In
Kaveri: Studies in Epigraphy, Archaeology and History, Rajagopala,
S. (ed.), 144–52. Panpattu Veliyiittakam, Chennai, 2001, pp. 144-52.
79 Perera Op. Cit. p. 50
80 Mv.57 (58):11–12
81 Mv.57 (58):25–28; Nicholas, Op. Cit. p. 78; however, states that
Cholas were intercepted while advancing to Anuradhapura by a
Sinhalese army who inicted a paralyzing defeat.
82 Mv.57 (58):39–59
83 Mv.60:27–37
84 Mv.60:45–47
85 Mv.60:36–47
86 He built fortications at Matota and Mannaram Patthana Mv.83:16;
Kiribamune 2013, p.43
87 Mv.76:7–9
88 Sastri, K. A. N. The Cholas, University of Madras, Madras, 1935.
89 (EZ. II: 78; JRASCB XXXI: 385)
90 Nicholas, Op. Cit. p.79
91 Kiribamune, 1991:p.189
92 Grimes, A. ‘The Journey of Fa-Hsien from Ceylon to Cantan.’ The
Ancient Mahātittha (Māntai) in Sri Lanka: A Historical Biography
50
Journal of the Malayan Branch of Royal Asiatic Society XIX (1),
1941, pp. 76–92.
93 Nicholas, Op. Cit. p.79)
94 Sv:145
95 Kiribamune, S. ‘Trade Patterns in the Indian Ocean and Their
Impact on Politics of Medieval Sri Lanka.’ In K. W. Gunawardena
Felicitation Volume, De Silva, C. R. and Kiribamune, S. (eds.), 67–
78. T. B. S. Godamunne & Sons, Peradeniya, 1987, pp. 70–71
96 Kiribamune 2013, 1991:p.189
97 Kiribamune, 1991:p.189
98 Bohingamuwa, Op. Cit., P.482
99 cf. Nicholas, 1964:18; Vidanapatirana, P. 2012. Settlement Patterns
of the Malvatu Oya and Kala Oya Basins. Postgraduate Institute of
Archaeology, Colombo, 2016:46, pp. 133-142)
100 Bohingamuwa, Op. Cit.
