Talk:Monarchy of Ceylon

This page was proposed for deletion by DrKay (talk · contribs) in the past.
It was contested by Xoloz (talk · contribs)

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Sri Lanka

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Sri Lanka, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sri Lanka on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sri LankaWikipedia:WikiProject Sri LankaTemplate:WikiProject Sri LankaSri Lanka articles

Monarchy of Ceylon

The British Monarchy of Ceylon began when the country became a colony not when the country became independent. This is a colonial link. Please don't edit war.--Blackknight12 (talk) 07:46, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but should the list go back to 1796 when the British took over the Dutch possessions on the island?--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 14:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. The King of Great Britain was certainly recognized as King of Kandy, unusually, at the British annexation of Ceylon. However, Ceylon until 1948 was not a sovereign independent state, nor a protectorate of Britain, and furthermore the style of 'King/Ceylon of Kandy/Ceylon' was not used in any official, separate way, nor was their supposed to be a distinct Kandyian office held by the British monarch distinct from his/her British dignity, as there is today between the British monarch's separate roles as, say Queen of the UK and as Queen of Canada. Sovereign states (or protectorates or tribute states) have monarchs, colonies do not, and Ceylon after the British annexation and prior to 1948 was a British colony, and no more had a separate 'monarchy' as say, the Falkland Islands do today.

This article, at any rate was intended to be a page detailing the distinct monarchy that existed prior to 1972 and from 1948, under the Commonwealth Realm. It was not intended to have anything to do with the period under British rule JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 23:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The date 1796 was the date the British landed on the Island of Ceylon, however it was not until the signing of the Kandyan Convention, in March 1815, that the British Monarch was recognized by both parties. See here

The intention of this article was supposed to be the Monarchy of the island under the British, hence 1815-1972.--Blackknight12 (talk) 03:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be some confusion here. 1948-1972, Ceylon was not 'under the British': it was a completely independent, sovereign state that was a member of the U.N. It just happened Elizabeth II, Queen of the United Kingdom was also at the same time Queen of Ceylon, as she is today as regards Ceylon was fully independent from Britain after 1948, and in no way, shape or form was Ceylon in any way subservient in any way to Britain. It was just in a personal union with Britain.

Yes, under the articles of the 1815 Kandyan convention, Ceylon was ceded to the British and the British monarch was recognised as King of Kandy, (which merits mention in this article), Ceylon 1815-1948 did not constitute a separate state, it was merely British territory, just like, in the case of Fiji, the British monarch was recognised as Tui Viti (and still was til 2012), but Fiji until 1970 was simply a Crown Colony.

Please see the articles Commonwealth realm and personal union, as well as Dominion of Ceylon and Statute of Westminster.

Also, whilst I'm not in any way implying page ownership, I created this page in line with the other pages describing the monarchies of the other former Commonwealth Realms, it was not intended to have anything to do with the period 1815-1948 when Ceylon was a British Crown Colony.JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 13:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a lot of information here on the evolution of the monarchy and I don't see why it all cant be placed in the history section.--Blackknight12 (talk) 05:11, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These articles are about the monarchies as independant commonweatlh monarchies not colonial ones:

80.249.56.85 (talk) 15:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Also the Monarchy of Fiji is in the process of being improved. 80.249.56.85 (talk) 15:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Merge and disambiguate

Consensus to merge and disambiguate implemented by User:DrKay on December 30, 2015. Viriditas (talk) 00:18, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should the content of this article be merged into Dominion of Ceylon and the page turned into a disambiguation page? 14:46, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes. The article title, in relation to this topic, is essentially a wikipedia neologism. In older sources, the pre-colonial monarchs are meant when referring to monarchs in Ceylon, e.g.:

Tribune by Ceylon News Service (1975): "From the beginning of its history, Ceylon has been a monarchy, with two and often three kingdoms within its small..."
Tribune (1971): "for over 2000 years, it is asserted, Ceylon had a history of monarchy"
The Approach to Self-Government by Ivor Jennings (1958), p. 8: "There had been a monarchy in Ceylon for some two thousand or two thousand five hundred years."
The Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (1957): "The Ramayana refers to Ravana, the Rakshatha king of Ceylon, as a monarch of great culture and prowess"
On the Chronicles of Ceylon by Bimala Churn Law (1947), p. 15: "Dhatusena is the only king of Ceylon after Mahasena who finds an incidental mention in the Mahdvamsa"
Commercial Ceylon by Samuel Ernest N. Nicholas (1933), p. 104: "at times help was sought and rendered from ruling dynasties of Southern India, with whom the kings of the Island during the last stages of the Ceylon monarchy were linked by marriage"
The Early History of Ceylon and Its Relations with India by G. C. Mendis (1932): "received as tribute gems and elephants from the king of Ceylon."
Ceylon and the Portuguese, 1505-1658 by Paulus Edward Pieris (1920), p. 256: "the monarchy that prevailed in Ceylon was the only form of government that the Sinhalese could conceive"
Ceylon in the Jubilee Year by John Ferguson (1887), p. 391: "the ancient capital of the Sinhalese monarchy in Ceylon"
Memoir on the History of the Tooth-relic of Ceylon by Joseph Gerson da Cunha (1875), p. 47: "would marry a daughter of the king of Ceylon"
Ceylon, an Account of the Island by James Emerson Tennent (1860): "crushing by elephants continued to the latest period of the Ceylon monarchy"
The Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (1849): Besides having been the great headquarters of Buddhism, and long the seat of an active and splendid monarchy, Ceylon is the theatre were nature has displayed as many and as curious attractions as any portion of the Globe."

Although nowadays the pre-colonial monarchies are called Sri Lankan monarchies, there are also sources that refer to the post-colonial Dominion of Ceylon and its monarch as Sri Lankan, e.g.:

Ideas for Constitutional Reform by Chanaka Amaratunga (1989): "the restoration of the British monarchy in Sri Lanka would detract from our independence"
Sri Lanka Today, vol. 25, p. 12 (1978): "the 1972 Republican Constitution ... broke away from that and vested the sovereignty not in the monarch who was the Queen of Sri Lanka but in the legislature, in the people."

Therefore, the term "monarchy of Ceylon" is ambiguous and, as far as I can tell, is only used in two books, neither of which refers to the current topic of the article:

The Edinburgh Encyclopaedia (1830): "The monarchy of Ceylon is completely elective, according to the fundamental laws of the kingdom".
Tobias Smollett in The Critical Review (1811): "The monarchy of Ceylon, though situated in an island, does not command an inch of coast." DrKay (talk) 14:46, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

yes - Dominion of Ceylon is quite enough. There do not appear to be sufficient reliable sources specifically for the Monarchy. Note also that Monarchy of India has been recently made a redirect. - Kautilya3 (talk) 00:46, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.