This article was downloaded by: [Temple University Libraries]On: 19 April 2013, At: 00:47Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Asia Pacific Journal ofAnthropologyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtap20

‘A Tulip in Lotus Land’: History andAgency in Colonial Sri LankaDr Rosita HenryVersion of record first published: 29 Aug 2008.

To cite this article: Dr Rosita Henry (2008): ‘A Tulip in Lotus Land’: History and Agency in ColonialSri Lanka, The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 9:3, 210-218

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14442210802251654

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

‘A Tulip in Lotus Land’: History andAgency in Colonial Sri LankaRosita Henry

The present paper considers the historical processes and human agency involved in the

creation of a particular identity category, the Dutch Burghers of Sri Lanka, by reflecting

upon Karl Marx’s maxim that ‘People make their own histories, but not just as they

please’. I pay homage to the guidance I received from my supervisor, Doug Miles, who

enabled me to recognise that people are not so weighed down by colonial pasts that they

cease to be creative agents in constituting their own life worlds and who encouraged me

to analyse Dutch Burgher writings, published in the Journal of the Dutch Burgher

Union, as cultural products and as material evidence of social agency.

Keywords: Burgher; Sri Lanka; Dutch Burgher Union; Social identity; Structure and

agency

The present paper reflects upon research I conducted during the 1980s, under the

supervision of Douglas Miles, for my Masters thesis on the Burghers of Sri Lanka.1 I

remember debating with Doug the appropriateness of the thesis title, because he

thought ‘Lotus Land’ was generally used with reference to Thailand, not Sri Lanka.

However, I pointed out that the phrase was taken from a text written by a Burgher.2

Doug wisely suggested a subtitle that would eliminate any confusion. Thus, the full

title became: ‘‘A Tulip in Lotus Land’: The Rise and Decline of Dutch Burgher

Ethnicity in Sri Lanka’ (Henry 1986).

I had originally started the thesis at The Australian National University (ANU)

under the supervision of Anthony Forge and James Urry, planning to spend a

respectable amount of time conducting ethnographic research. However, upon

discovering that I was pregnant, I cut my fieldwork to only two months. I travelled to

Sri Lanka in May 1981, just two years before the terrible events of 1983 and the

outbreak in July that year of ten days of unmitigated ethnic violence against Tamils.

‘Black July’ was to mark the beginning of an era of war and destruction in the country

Correspondence to: Dr Rosita Henry, Department of Anthropology, Archaeology & Sociology, School of Arts

and Social Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld 4810, Australia. Email: rosita.henry@jcu.edu.au

ISSN 1444-2213 (print)/ISSN 1740-9314 (online)/08/030210-09

# 2008 The Australian National University

DOI: 10.1080/14442210802251654

The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology

Vol. 9, No. 3, September 2008, pp. 210�218

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

that has lasted for almost twenty-five years. Yet, although I was aware of simmering

tensions in 1981, that there would soon be a protracted civil war in this beautiful

country was not then imaginable. Nor could I conceive that my intellectual

engagement with ‘primordialism’ and ‘circumstantialism’, as ways of interpreting

the historical constitution of ethnic identities, may have any relevance at all to

understanding the violence that was to come.

I travelled back and forth along the west coast from Colombo to Matara, as well as

to Kandy and Nuwara Eliya in the hill country, visiting Burgher families and pouring

over material in the university and the Dutch Burgher Union libraries. I managed to

learn much in just two months, but certainly not enough. Upon my return to

Australia, I was barely able to collate my notes before the birth of my child.

Enamoured with motherhood, I put the thesis aside and was only able to tackle it

intermittently during the all-too-brief moments that my daughter slept.

It was not until 1983, after moving to Adelaide, that I began once again to think

about completing the thesis. I fronted at the office of Bruce Kapferer at the University

of Adelaide and begged him to allow me affiliation with his department so that I

could tap into its vibrant intellectual environment. By this time, Anthony Forge had

almost given up on me, but he decided to give me one last chance to complete and

asked Doug to take over the supervision of this ‘hopeless case’. Doug was reluctant to

accept such a problematic student, but Kathy Robinson, who had come to know me

at the ANU through our shared experience of a ‘Reading Dutch’ class, persuaded him

that I would be a worthy candidate. Kathy introduced us at the Australian

Anthropological Society Conference that year and we danced together at the dinner.

Doug has joked since that he was not aware at the time that he was being courted as a

supervisor!

Doug was faced with a difficult task. I had done much archival research but little

ethnography. My aim was to do an ethnographic history*a study of the dynamic

production, or creation through time, of an identity category and the social relations

that go with that, as opposed to the study of a particular people or society at a specific

point in time, past or present. I had written drafts of two chapters, but had no idea

how to focus my analysis. That I was eventually able to pull it together was in no

small measure due to Doug’s gifted supervision.

My historical approach addressed theoretical debates among anthropologists

concerning the relationship between history and anthropology (Hastrup 1992, p.

6). However, back in 1983, I was not particularly interested in agonising over the

nature of the discipline. Nor was I particularly interested in anxiously deconstructing

my own position as a ‘native anthropologist’ exploring her own roots (my mother

identifies as a Burgher). I was simply seeking understanding of how ethnic categories

come about and I was particularly fascinated by Marx’s statement in the Eighteenth

Brumaire, where he wrote: ‘Die Menschen machen ihre eigene Geschichte, aber sie

machen sie nicht aus freie Stucken . . .’ (Marx 1852/1934). Marx argued that although

people make their own histories, they do not make them freely, but under

circumstances given and transmitted from the past. He stressed that it is precisely

The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 211

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

when people seem to be engaged in creating something new, that they ‘anxiously

conjure up the spirits of the past to their service and borrow from them names, battle

cries and costumes in order to present the new scene of world history in this time-

honoured disguise and this borrowed language’ (Marx 1851�52, p. 1). I was interested

in how people use the past in the creation of ethnic identities and was puzzled by the

nature of the relationship between structure and agency that Marx identifies in this

statement.

I posted Doug what I had written and travelled to Canberra with my daughter, by

then a toddler, for some face-to-face supervision. Doug set to work to help me

sharpen my focus by suggesting that within the 400 years of colonial history I was

attempting to cover, I should especially concentrate on the rise and decline of the

identity category ‘Dutch Burgher’ during the last forty years or so of British rule and

immediately after independence. Doug was also concerned that, because I had spent

only two months in the field, I had little ethnographic material on which to base my

analysis. He therefore suggested that. in order to actually find the Burghers in all this

historical material, I should look at some of the cultural texts they themselves had

produced. I had drawn his attention to the Journal of the Dutch Burgher Union,

produced by Burghers during the period of British rule and he recommended that I

examine this and other texts. I treated these not as resources, but as social products*products of a history of both complicity and resistance to colonial discourse and

structures of power. It was very fortunate that a complete set of the Journal was

available at Adelaide University in the private collection of Michael Roberts, who very

kindly allowed me access to his library. Michael was at that time writing his own book

on the Burghers of Ceylon (Roberts, Raheem, & Colin-Thome 1989) and I benefitted

greatly from our exchanges.

In guiding me towards the idea of analysing Burgher writings as cultural texts that

may reveal how people creatively constitute themselves, Doug set me thinking about

some of the then cutting-edge theoretical concerns. He also referred me to Edward

Said’s (1978) Orientalism in the hope that it would enable me to think more critically

about the texts I had been reading and to consider how ethnic categories are

generated within colonial relationships of power and domination.

As a researcher I asked the question, ‘Who are the Burghers?’ Yet, this was also a

question that Burghers were asking themselves. I interpreted their historical attempts

to answer it as a kind of constitutive practice*that is, in the very act of researching

and writing about themselves and their history, they were, in fact, making their own

history by creating an identity category.

The people identified as Burghers in the Census of Ceylon are a minority (at no

time ever more than approximately 0.7% of the total population) that arose out of

the island’s colonial history (Roberts 1997b, p. 44). The Maritime Provinces of the

Island were under the nominal control and influence of the Portuguese from 1505 to

1656, under the Dutch East India Company (VOC3) from 1656 to 1796, and under

the control of the Madras Presidency of the British East India Company until 1802,

212 R. Henry

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

after which Ceylon became a Crown Colony. British rule on the Island continued

until independence in 1946.

Burgher writers in the Journal stressed that during the Dutch period, Burgher was

not an ethnic category but merely a civic title given to the European free settlers; that

is, those Europeans not under contract to the VOC.4 The descendants of the

Portuguese had been distinguished under the Dutch administration as Tupassen5 or

Swarte Portugeezen. The Company’s attitude towards the Portuguese descendants in

the early years of its rule is expressed in the memoir of Governor Van Goens to his

successor (Van Goens 1663/1932, p. 18):

Your Excellency should also as a fixed principle for your government unceasinglyproceed against and drive away from the country the Portuguese canaille, such astoepasses and similar folk . . . they do nothing but continually pursue the nativewomen who are married to Netherlanders in order to debauch them, live without

toil, seduce the slaves to thieving, correspond with the papists on the opposite coastand spy on all our activities . . .

When the British East India Company won control of the Maritime Provinces, it was

faced with a highly heterogeneous population that had arisen during three centuries

of Portuguese and Dutch rule. Throughout the British period this heterogeneity was

increasingly captured and contained by administrative encompassment within a

single ethnic category, officially recognised yet stigmatised as racially inferior. The

general attitude of the British to the Burghers was articulated in print by an army

captain, Percival (1803/1975, p. 110):

Complexions of all sorts are indeed found among this mongrel race, from jettyblack to sickly yellow, or tawny hue . . . They are lazy, treacherous, effeminate, andpassionate to excess . . . They are . . . usually esteemed the worst race of people inIndia.

Thus, the name ‘Burgher’, no longer possible as a civic title, became the official British

label for a single race-based identity category encompassing all people of mixed

descent*a synonym for half-caste or Eurasian, whether of Dutch, Portuguese or,

later, British descent.

During the Dutch period, although trading activities were heavily regulated, some

Burghers were granted privileges on the basis of essentialist ideas about race and

‘purity of blood’. Van Goens Jr, governor between 1675 and 1679, noted in his

memoir (1679/1910, p. 12) that marriage with native women was forbidden by the

VOC because there were sufficient numbers of women descended from European

fathers and recommended that the prohibition be maintained. Thus, there arose a

category of Burgher who, in terms of the discourse of race, asserted stronger claims to

Dutch-ness or European-ness. They were favoured by the VOC in educational and

employment opportunities (Boxer 1965, p. 230).

After the British takeover, those Burghers who wished to stay in Sri Lanka were

required to take the British Oath of Allegiance. According to Cordiner (1807, p. 87),

The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 213

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

approximately 900 took the oath. Many of these were people with property on the

island and/or who had spouses of native or mixed descent, which inspired Percival

(1807/1975, p. 109) to write: ‘It is in particular very common in Ceylon to see a

respectable and wealthy Dutchman married to a Portuguese woman . . . a connection

which our countrymen look upon with the greatest abhorrence and would not enter

into on any account’.

Many of the Burghers were employed in administrative positions because their

knowledge of the island and the customs of its people made them good mediators in

the changeover to British rule. In a letter to the Directors of the British East India

Company dated 5 October 1799, Governor North mentioned that he had requested

that the Burghers accept judicial situations under the British. Eventually, as North

noted, many ‘respectable personages have offered their Services’ (North, according to

Kannangara 1966, p. 134). To circumvent the rule that all Civil Service appointments

be made from Britain, Governor North (1798�1805) established ‘certain offices which

were not considered as exclusively appropriated to the Civil Service’. These included

the offices of Custom Master, Registrar of Lands, Judges, Fiscals and Registrars of

Courts, and the offices of Master attendant, Civil Engineer and Surveyor General. The

creation of these special offices was to have far-reaching effects. It set the stage for the

specialisation of Burghers in government service, where particular areas became

almost exclusively their preserve (Roberts 1997a, p. 229). By employing Burghers as

brokers between the government and the local people, the British fostered the

emergence of a privileged group that would later define itself against Portuguese and

other categories of Burgher, in terms of a racialist discourse reinforced by class.

It could be argued that people became trapped in colonial categories. Yet, this is

not my argument; Burghers were not imprisoned in British constructions. Rather,

what is revealed in the texts is a dynamic interplay of identities, of active ontological

constructions and reconstructions, which are integrally constituted within and by

historical, political and economic interests.

Burghers were themselves complicit in this racialist discourse. Some Burghers of

the more privileged class responded to their stigmatisation by attempting to remove

themselves from association with others categorised with them. They chose to

emphasise their European descent or, more specifically, their Dutch-ness, calling

themselves Dutch Burghers. In their elaboration of their European heritage, Dutch

Burghers sought to appropriate a share of the symbols of British power, European

blood and Western civilization. Yet, unlike Anglo Indians described by Caplan (1995),

in their emphasis on their Dutch heritage they also distanced themselves from the

British. They could claim legitimacy in Ceylon, which the British, as the colonial

rulers, could not. Indeed, a small number of Burghers even actively opposed colonial

domination, including my own great grandfather (MMF), Alfred Ernst Buultjens,

who played a key role in the rise of the labour movement in Ceylon (Jayawardena

1972). As Bartholomeusz (1998, p. 137) points out, Buultjens was ‘ . . . one of the

most vociferous critics of the Portuguese, the Dutch, and the British in the island’.

214 R. Henry

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

On 12 November 1907, a number of men identifying as Dutch Burgher called a

meeting to discuss the establishment of a Union to institutionalise family alliances

and to draw boundaries between these families and the rest of the Burghers, especially

those they classified as Portuguese Burghers and Eurasians. The first meeting of the

Dutch Burgher Union of Ceylon was held on 18 November 1908. Membership was

only open to Dutch ‘descendents in the male line of all those of European nationality

who were in the service or under the rule of the Dutch East India Company in

Ceylon, and the children of such descendants in the female line by marriage with

Europeans’. The full Constitution and By-Laws of the Union, including rules of

membership, were published in the first issue of the Journal of the Dutch Burgher

Union (1908). The European identity of members was considered so important that

the Union later ruled (in 1939) that ‘lady members’ be expelled on marriage with a

person not eligible for membership unless the marriage was with a European. This

provision was subsequently repealed by unanimous vote in 1981.

The Journal was issued quarterly. Typically, volumes contain one or more

obituaries for leading Dutch Burghers, articles on the history of the Dutch in

Ceylon, discussions on the etymology of the name ‘Burgher’ and articles on Dutch

cultural heritage in Ceylon*forts, furniture, food etc. Most importantly, at least one

family genealogy is published in each volume.

The Union, which ran Dutch language classes6 and celebrated St Nicholas day,

hoped that all eligible people would eventually join.

A Burgher I interviewed while in Sri Lanka in 1981 joked that the Dutch Burgher

Union would be better referred to as the ‘Doubtful Burgher Union’. Another noted

that after the great exodus of Burghers to Australia in the days of the White Australia

Policy, the following ditty was sung in some quarters: ‘Oh, I wish I were a burgher, so

I could burgher off to Australia’. Many Burghers were able to use the genealogies

collected by the Dutch Burgher Union to prove the ‘whiteness’ required for migration

to Australia (Weerasooria 1988, p. 32). Thus, an identity category constituted within

particular historical circumstances and in a different cultural context became a useful

tool for negotiating advantage in a new social situation.

Although people, through their practices, indeed contribute to the constitution of

their own identity categories, these are concretised and authorised by state structures

and administrative processes (Australian and Sri Lankan). Categorical identities

become the basis for state practices of inclusion/exclusion that have significant

material impact on people’s lives. In the context of Sri Lanka, such practices have

unleashed a heart-breaking situation of violent ethnic conflict.

My materialist approach sometimes led me to focus too closely on historical

circumstances, forgetting to consider the agency of people in the creation of their

own political identities. Doug guided me to balance my emphasis with a stronger

focus on the first part of Marx’s maxim, that people make their own histories. He

guided me to recognise that people are not so weighed down by colonial pasts that

they cease to be agents creatively constituting themselves through dynamic processes

of identification and differentiation. Yet, as he also acknowledged, collective identity

The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 215

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

construction is not simply a matter of free choice. To repeat Marx’s words, ‘People

make their own histories, but not just as they please; they do not make them under

circumstances chosen by themselves’ (1852/1934, p. 1). This is why a ‘great man’

(or even a not so great man) approach to history must be considered inadequate.

For example, although I do not intend to be an apologist for my great grandfather

A. E Buultjens, to argue, as Bartholomeusz (1998) has, that he was an architect of a

Sinhala�Buddhist ‘fundamentalism’ that continues to violently thrust itself into the

present is to grant perhaps too much emphasis to individual agency and not enough

to ‘circumstances’ of the long history between Buddhism and the state (Henry 1979).

In the 25 years since I wrote my thesis and while I travelled in a different direction,

there has been much excellent scholarship on ethnic identities and ethnic conflict in

Sri Lanka (eg. Kapferer 1988, 1997, 2001; Ferdinands 1995; Bastin 1997, 2001, 2002;

Roberts 1997b, 1998; Bartholomeusz & de Silva 1998; Jayawardena 2006). In addition,

the literature has been enriched by feminist theory on essentialism, as well as a

flourishing of studies on colonial identity formations, subaltern consciousness and

hybridity (e.g. Bhabha 1994; Moore 1994; Schor & Weed 1994). It was to these

sources that I turned during my doctoral research (Henry 1999). My ethnography

concerned social conflict in a small Australian town, but my earlier research on Sri

Lanka provided me with invaluable comparative understanding of how structure and

agency operate in the constitution of identity categories in the Australian context.

Throughout my growth as an anthropologist, Douglas Miles has been ever present.

For the past 14 years he has been my colleague and friend at James Cook University.

Doug is now retired, but he is still in the office opposite mine and we share lunch

together almost every day. He continues to make an invaluable contribution to the

anthropology teaching program and is actively and passionately engaged in writing

anthropology, not least by ‘connecting the miles’ with this festschrift.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Jenny Alexander, Kathy Robinson and David Poignand for their

encouragement and support, which enabled me to submit this paper. I also thank

Bruce Kapferer and Rohan Bastin for inspirational discussions. Although, of course,

responsibility for the substance of the paper ultimately rests with me, I also thank the

two anonymous reviewers for their invaluable suggestions for improvements. Given

the strict word limit, I do hope I have been able to meet their expectations, at least in

part.

Notes

[1] Until 1972, the island was known as Ceylon.

[2] B. R. Blaze under the pseudonym of A. N. Ohnimesz (1934).

[3] The Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie.

[4] To acquire the privileges of citizenship, a sum of money had to be paid to the VOC. This was

later abolished by Governor Schreuder (1756�61; see Schreuder 1762/1946).

216 R. Henry

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

[5] For a discussion of the etymology of this term, see Boxer (1947, p. 1).

[6] These classes were run intermittently. In 1909, classes were started in Wolvendaal and in

Galle. These were suspended in 1910 owing to poor attendance, but a class for adult men was

set up in 1911. There is no further mention of this class in later Dutch Burgher Union annual

reports. However, in 1916, classes were started again at the Union Hall in Colombo. These

were also soon suspended.

References

Bartholomeusz, T. (1998) ‘Buddhist burghers and Sinhala Buddhist fundamentalism’, in Buddhist

Fundamentalism and Minority Identities in Sri Lanka, eds T. Bartholomeusz & C. de Silva,

SUNY Press, Albany, NY, pp. 167�85.

Bartholomeusz, T. & de Silva, C. (1988) Buddhist Fundamentalism and Minority Identities in Sri

Lanka. SUNY Press, Albany, NY.

Bastin, R. (1997) ‘The authentic inner life: complicity and resistance in the Tamil Hindu revival’, in

Sri Lanka: Collective Identities Revisited, Vol. 2, ed. M. Roberts, Marga Institute, Colombo,

pp. 385�438.

Bastin, R. (2001) ‘Globalisation and conflict’, in A History of Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka, Marga

Monograph Series on Ethnic Reconciliation, No. 23, eds M. Roberts, G. Gunatilleke &

D. Nesiah, Marga Institute, Colombo.

Bastin, R. (2002) The Domain of Constant Excess: Plural Worship at the Munnesvaram Temples in Sri

Lanka, Berghahn Books, New York & Oxford.

Bhabha, H. K. (1994) The Location of Culture, Routledge, London.

Boxer, C. R. (1947) The Toepasses of Timor (Medeling No.73, Afdeling Volkenkunde No. 24),

Koninklijke Vereeniging Indisch Instituut, Amsterdam.

Boxer, C. R. (1965) The Dutch Seaborne Empire, 1600�1800, Hutchinson, London.

Caplan, L. (1995) ‘Creole world, purist rhetoric: Anglo-Indian cultural debates in colonial and

contemporary Madras, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, vol. 1, no. 1, pp.

743�62.

Cordiner, Rev. J. (1907) A Description of Ceylon, Containing an Account of the Country, Inhabitants

and Natural Productions, Longman, Hurst, Rees and Orme, London.

Ferdinands, R. (1995) Proud and Prejudiced: The Story of the Burghers of Sri Lanka, F. R. L.

Ferdinands, Melbourne.

Hastrup, K. (ed.) (1992) Other histories, Routledge, London.

Henry, R. (1979) ‘‘The threefold parasol’’: religion, politics and ideology in medieval Sri-Lanka’,

Canberra Anthropology, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 63�7.

Henry, R. (1986) ‘A Tulip in Lotus land’: The Rise and Decline of Dutch Burgher Ethnicity in Sri

Lanka, Masters thesis, Australian National University.

Henry, R. (1999) Practising Place, Performing Memory: Identity Politics in an Australian Town, the

‘Village in the Rainforest’, PhD Thesis, James Cook University, Australia.

Jayawardena, K. (1972) The Rise of the Labour Movement in Ceylon, Duke University Press, Durham.

Jayawardena, K. (2006) Nobodies to Somebodies: The Rise of the Colonial Bourgeoisie in Sri Lanka,

Zed Books, London & New York.

Journal of the Dutch Burgher Union of Ceylon (1908�1962).

Kannangara, P. D. (1966) The History of the Ceylon Civil Service, 1802�1833, Tisara Prakasakayo

(The Ceylon Historical Journal, 1), Dehiwala, Ceylon.

Kapferer, B. (1988) Legends of People, Myths of State: Violence and Political Culture in Sri Lanka and

Australia, Crawford House, Bathurst.

Kapferer, B. (1997) ‘State and insurrectionary violence: Sri Lanka’, in The Legitimatization of

Violence, ed. D. E. Apter, Macmillan Press, Basingstoke, pp. 159�88.

The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology 217

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013

Kapferer, B. (2001) ‘Globalization, the state and civil violence in Sri Lanka’, Bulletin of the Royal

Institute for Inter-Faith Studies, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 59�111.

Marx, K. (1934) The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, Progress Publishers, Moscow.

(Original work published 1852)

Moore, H. (1994) A Passion for Difference, Polity Press, Cambridge.

North, F. (1798�1805) Letters from Hon. F. North [5th Earl of Guilford 1766�1827] to Lord Wellesley

(5 June, 1798 to 29 November, 1805) [Manuscript on microfilm], Barr-Smith Library,

University of Adelaide.

Ohnimesz, A. N. (pseud.) (1934) The Lees of Lanka, Ceylon Examiner Press, Colombo.

Percival, R. (1975) An Account of the Island of Ceylon, Tisara Prakasakayo (The Ceylon Historical

Journal, 22), Dehiwala, Ceylon. (Original work published 1807)

Roberts, M. (1997a) ‘Elite formation and elites, 1832�1931’, in Sri Lanka: Collective Identities

Revisited, Vol. 1, ed. M. Roberts, Marga Institute, Colombo, pp. 191�265.

Roberts, M. (ed.) (1997b) Sri Lanka: Collective Identities Revisited, Vol. 1, Marga Institute,

Colombo.

Roberts, M. (ed.) (1998) Sri Lanka: Collective Identities Revisited, Vol. 2, Marga Institute, Colombo.

Roberts, M. Raheem, I. & Colin-Thome, P. (1989) People in Between: The Burghers and the Middle

Class in the Transformations Within Sri Lanka, 1790s�1960s, Sarvodaya Book Publishing

Services, Ratmalana, Sri Lanka.

Said, E. W. (1978) Orientalism, Pantheon Books, New York.

Schor, N. & Weed, E. (1994) The Essential Difference, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Schreuder, J. (1946) Memoir of Jan Schreuder, Governor of Ceylon, Delivered to his Sucessor Hubbert

Jan Baron Van Eck on March 17, 1762 (E. Reimers, Trans.), Ceylon Government Press,

Colombo. (Original work published 1762)

The Constitution and By-Laws of the Dutch Burgher Union of Ceylon (1908) Journal of the Dutch

Burgher Union, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 52�60.

Van Goens, R. (1932) Memoirs of Rijkloff Van Goens, Governor of Ceylon, Delivered to his Successors

Jacob Hustaart on December 26, 1663 and Rijkloff Van Goens the Younger on 12 April 1675

(E. Reimers, Trans.), Ceylon Government Press, Colombo. (Original work published 1663

and 1667)

Van Goens, R. Jr (1910) Memoir Left by Rijkloff Van Goens, Jun., Governor of Ceylon, 1675�1679, to

his Successor, Laurens Pyl, Late Commandeur, Jaffanapatnam (S. Pieters, Trans.), H. C. Cottle,

Government Printer, Colombo. (Original work published 1679)

Weerasooria, W. S. (1988) Links between Sri Lanka and Australia, The Government Press, Colombo.

218 R. Henry

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Tem

ple

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ries

] at

00:

47 1

9 A

pril

2013