‘Fair and Responsible’ Re-Presentation of Early Ethnographic Photography

Introduction

Recent scholarship on early photography examines the photograph as primary source material in order to identify and explore ‘veins of influence’ that operate on, through, and from it. The ‘veins of influence’ analysis developed in that research brings us, whether as professional creatives, academics, or other participants, into dialogue with the photograph. Through such engagement, we become active participants in and agents of influence, shaping how these early images continue to exert influence in both the contemporary and future contexts.[1]

As creative professionals, we bear a responsibility to the image, and primarily to the persons, communities, and cultures represented within the frame. How should we define that responsibility? What are the elements that we should consider in order to create ‘fair and responsible’ re-presentation, and thus better ensure a ‘fair and responsible’ influence of such images in the contemporary context, given what we know now? This responsibility necessarily extends to how we curate, exhibit, publish, digitise, catalogue, and otherwise present these images or maintain them for engagement.

This updated approach and revised discourse are especially important when the subjects involved are long gone, belong to shrinking communities, or otherwise lack a voice to contribute to the conversation and advocate for themselves. An optimal outcome of the fair and responsible treatment of these early photographs would be a re-evaluation of how, for example, Sri Lanka’s Vedda community is represented, to now improve engagement, fulfil unmet promises, and build meaningful dialogue that includes them in processes of community building and self-determination. The same images that once cast damaging shadows over this community, relegating them to positions of unimportance and primitiveness, have arguably contributed to their ongoing marginalisation. The way these images portrayed them in the past denied them the chance for progress. A retelling of that past, along with a re-assessment of the photographic documentation to present a more balanced narrative, would serve to celebrate Vedda identity in a respectful and empowering manner.

Through a case study of an extensive collection of early twentieth-century photographs of Sri Lanka’s Vedda community, taken by noted anthropologists Charles and Brenda Seligman, we will explore possible frameworks for what constitutes ‘fair and responsible’ re-presentation of these images today, in the many platforms which may potentially showcase them, including the physical gallery, digital feature, documentary review and record, and the archives. Respecting the principles espoused herein, this article will show photographs already in the public domain through the Seligmans’ own publication.

The Seligman Collection, comprising some 400 glass negatives and prints and now part of the British Museum’s collection, documents the Seligmans’ field research on the Veddas in 1908.[2] This body of work has not been examined in this manner before and remains largely unnamed and unnumbered.[3] The Seligmans published their findings in the seminal publication The Veddas, which includes 72 photographs from the Collection as illustrations.[4]

To provide a proper historical context for this Collection, we will begin with a brief review of British colonial presence in Ceylon and the role that early photography played there. We will examine period perspectives on the Veddas as reflected in writings by colonials and others. This review will shed light on the cultural context in which the Seligmans were operating, which likely influenced both their research approach and the visualizations, through the photographs they took and selected for their publication. We will then briefly analyse the Seligmans’ study itself, noting key aspects of their methodology, relevant findings, and the photographs. The photographic process that the Seligmans followed over a century ago differs significantly from contemporary visual anthropology practices. By comparing these approaches—albeit in broad strokes—we can understand how the field has developed and how these developments reflect on the subject matter. Such comparisons highlight the ethical and legal developments related to human rights and the preservation of cultural dignity, particularly in research. In this way, we can better inform our understanding of the processes needed to develop a framework for what might be considered a ‘fair and responsible’ re-presentation of the Collection images in a contemporary context.

Colonial Presence and Photographic Discourse

To understand the cultural context in which the Seligmans were operating, we need to consider the nature of British presence in Ceylon (since 1972 Sri Lanka), the colonial use of photography, and the prevailing perspectives on the Vedda community. Ceylon under the British contributed to the empire’s prime purposes of profit, power, and prestige. Propaganda about the colonial mission of civilising was an integral part of the colonial narrative, but the facts of the matter were somewhat different. As in India, so in Ceylon, there was a gap between the realities of imperial rule and the justifications of it which aimed to ward off criticism at home and among the colonial subjects. The administration’s approach to the Vedda community provides a clear example of this dissonance, with repeated efforts to ‘civilize’ and tame the community, which ultimately worked against Vedda interests and threatened their cultural existence.

Ceylon has a long history of occupation by conquerors and colonisers. From the early sixteenth century to the early nineteenth century, Ceylon was colonized in part, first by the Portuguese, then by the Dutch and finally by the British from 1802 until 1948, when the country gained its independence.[5] The advent of photography conveniently coincided with the growth and consolidation of Britain’s empire, providing an impetus to the medium. Indeed,

[t]hrough means often complex and subtle, […] [photography] engaged viewers to look at the colonized through a pictorial dynamic of realist exoticism with varied results. Colonial photographs nonetheless often engender ambiguous and fluctuating relationships between the photographer or observer and the subject peoples and terrains.[6] 

Frederick Fiebig’s 1850s salt print calotypes, now housed in the British Library, form the earliest known collection of ‘original’ (ie, not prints of originals) photographs of Ceylon. Other key commercial photographers operating in Ceylon in the mid-nineteenth century, either as travellers or through a more permanent presence on the island, included Samuel Bourne (Bourne & Shepherd), John Thompson, Joseph Lawton, Henry Cave, Colombo Apothecaries, AW Andree, Cyrus Koch, Henry Martin, Lawton & Co (Swaminathan Kandiah Lawton), Plate & Co, Scowen & Co, and Skeen & Co. Local photography studios tended to adopt standard classifications of photographic categories that included portraiture and ethnographical studies, often labelled as ‘native types’ or ‘racial studies’.[7] Gathering photographs under these broad headings helped to create ‘enduring markers’ of social status, religion, custom, ritual, ethnicity, and where various cultures stood in the indigenous hierarchies of high to low.[8]

Photographers found a ready market for portraits of the Veddas, indigenous people who wore few clothes. A notable example is the official album for the Royal Ophir Tour of the Duke and Dutchess of York in 1901, later King George V and Queen Mary, during which the couple visited Ceylon for a few days. That album features two images of Vedda men posed to show action with bows and arrows, and another of a cooking show.^[9] 

Early Writings on the Veddas

The earliest and much-referenced English-language account of the Veddas comes from Robert Knox’s 1680 publication, An Historical Relation of Ceylon. For centuries after, this work served as an important source of knowledge about Ceylon, including the Vedda community, and became a colonial classic, providing British leaders with new information about the island. Knox’s insights were based on nearly 20 years of captivity in Ceylon, during which he was in and out of ‘open’ jail, meaning he was allowed to roam the island freely. While his observations were undoubtedly shaped by his own prejudices, Knox was seen as providing an honest portrayal because he was perceived as a straightforward man who did not ‘dress the thought’.^[10] Ironically, Knox’s account of the Vedda community became an authoritative reference, despite the fact that it was based purely on hearsay—Knox himself admitted to never having seen one of the ‘wild men’ he described.^[11] His depiction of a Vedda man, described by later commentator John Bailey as a ‘fancy portrait and decidedly flattering’, is evidence of his unfamiliarity with the community.^[12] Yet Knox’s account, though inaccurate, provided a detailed description of Vedda character, customs, property rights, diet, rituals, and clothing, and remains highly influential. Even the Seligmans credited him as the first to accurately describe the Veddas.^[13]

By the mid- to late nineteenth century, further commentary on the Veddas emerged, mostly by colonial administrators who assumed the role of scholars due to their authority and access. One such administrator was John Bailey, who, based on his personal and repeated investigations, offered early ‘ground-truths’ about the Veddas. Bailey, who oversaw the Badulla region, home to the ‘most barbarous Vedda tribes’, took an interest in their habits and customs.^[14] He argued that the Veddas represented the ‘original’ and ‘pure’ indigenous man, focusing on the jungle-dwelling tribes because they maintained isolation from other races, thus preserving their supposed unique ‘peculiarities’.^[15] Like others of his time, Bailey also recorded the Veddas as intellectually inferior, stating that their frequent ‘perplexed’ manner was common among ‘people of weak intellect’.^[16]

Around the same period, the Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland (founded in 1845) published a few articles on the Veddas.^[17] These articles often repeated the ideas of previous writers like Knox and Bailey, with little grounding in field research. The earliest article, published in 1851 by Reverend J Gillings, already noted the perceived corruption of the ‘pure’ Vedda identity through intermarriage with the majority ethnic group, the Sinhalese, reflecting a concern among scholars that such assimilation would erase an opportunity to study this ‘rare and treasured human specimen’.^[18] Colonial efforts to civilize the Veddas were evident in their attempts to settle them in smallholder lots with houses, efforts that were largely unsuccessful. The Veddas, resisting domestication, returned to the forests, continuing their traditional hunting practices and eschewing formal education, remaining ‘totally destitute’.^[19] Furthermore, Gillings expressed disappointment in their resistance to Christianity, despite some success with coastal groups.^[20] His writing reflects the missionary zeal common among colonials, who saw the Veddas as untamed and in need of saving.

In 1881, prominent scientist Dr Rudolf Virchow published a study on the Veddas’ origins in the same journal, in which he claimed that the Veddas had biological links to other South Asian indigenous groups,^[21] with conclusions based solely on skull measurements sent to him in Germany.^[22] He never set foot in Ceylon. Virchow theorised that the Veddas were related to Dravidian or pre-Dravidian tribes of Hindustan, bore little resemblance to Tamils, and that the Sinhalese showed evidence of Vedda genetic influence, likely through intermarriage. Despite never observing a living Vedda, Virchow offered extensive commentary on their social behaviour, echoing earlier authors like Knox and Bailey. His assertions about their intellectual inferiority, based on the size of their skulls, reflected the pseudo-scientific racism prevalent in the era. Virchow concluded that their inability to count or plan beyond the present day, along with failed educational efforts, proved the ‘inferiority of the race’.^[23]

In 1902, American explorers HM Hiller and WH Furness documented their two-week visit with the Veddas, similarly describing them as primitive and noting their ‘unwashed, uncombed and all but unclad appearance’. Though their work has since been criticized as subjective and insubstantial, it reflected the prevailing colonial attitudes of the time. The explorers’ documentation included a few photographs, capturing these negative perceptions visually.^[24]

Virchow’s ideas on physiological distinctions and origins were later echoed by Swiss naturalists Fritz and Paul Sarasin, who conducted five scientific expeditions to Ceylon between 1883 and 1907. Initially focused on zoology, the Sarasins’ later expeditions shifted to anthropological research on the island’s indigenous peoples, the Veddas, likely inspired by Virchow’s studies.^[25] Unlike Virchow, the Sarasins conducted fieldwork in Ceylon, collecting over 400 artefacts, skeletal remains of over 90 individuals, and more than 500 photographs. In their collection of portraits, we find early studies of the Veddas, very much following the period anthropological oeuvre of ‘mug shots’, rather than sociological studies. The Sarasins, in their 1907 visit, just before the Seligman visit, also ‘established the existence of a stone age upon the island […] [and objects] most reasonably attributed to the Veddas’.^[26]

Their anthropological work included studies of Vedda skulls, following the period’s trend of racial anthropology, focusing on physical features over social or cultural contexts. They concluded that the Vedda phenotype was distinct from other Sri Lankan groups, but this assertion has been challenged by recent research. For example, Samanti Kulatilake’s study of the Sarasins’ collection found no significant cranial morphological differences between the Vedda and other Sri Lankan groups, suggesting that the long-held notion of Vedda distinctiveness may have been influenced by outdated or biased scientific approaches.^[27]

The recurring themes in these various writings—primitive, unintelligent, hopeless—reflect the colonial mindset that reduced the Veddas to a subhuman species, albeit one deemed worthy of study. The Seligmans operated within this cultural context, informed by both scientific and popular ideas that framed the Veddas as objects of curiosity, backwardness, and inferiority.

The Seligman Study, 1908

Dr Charles Seligman and his wife Brenda conducted a significant anthropological study of the Vedda community during their expedition to Ceylon in 1908. Their research, officially commissioned and supported by figures including Cambridge anthropologist Dr AC Haddon and colonial administrators Sir Henry Blake and Henry McCallum, was driven by the belief that the Veddas were one of the most ‘primitive’ surviving races, potentially on the verge of extinction, thus their remit was to explore the Veddas’ ‘social life and religious ideas […] as thoroughly as possible’.[28] As such, the Seligmans’ work was heavily publicized and people eagerly awaited the results, viewing the study as crucial to understanding both the past and future of Ceylon. Newspaper coverage of the time echoed these sentiments, reporting that:

Ceylon has perhaps more than any contemporary ‘modernised’ country—for she is not yet wholly and completely civilised […] [The] few surviving primitive Ceylonese, the fast disappearing Veddas, stand as one of the few remaining proofs of a branch of the great theory of evolution propounded by Darwin and since applied by such thinkers as Haeckel, Thomas, Henry Huxley, and Buckle.[29] 

The expectation was that the research would be ‘exhaustive in nearly all the details worthy of investigation’ regarding this ‘primitive’ and ancient group, though in fact the Seligmans only encountered and studied four families.[30]

In 1911, the Seligmans published the illustrated volume The Veddas, which remains the ‘standard work’ on this ‘very primitive and interesting people’, as the Royal Anthropological Institute website informs us today.[31] The publication gained iconic status that endures as a ‘pioneering ethnology’ and a ‘standard reference work of the social structure and material culture of the Veddas’. Even now, some Sri Lankan academics accept the Seligman ethnographic research methodologies without challenge.[32] 

While the study provided detailed accounts and extensive data, what should be kept in mind is that the photographic process may have been less that ‘fair and responsible’. At the time of the study, there were no photographing protocols. Some of their approaches appear questionable from today’s perspective. Nonetheless, the Collection remains extremely important for historical data, perspectives, and of course the images that were published. Photography was a key feature of the study and the Seligmans ‘devoted the whole of [their] attention to obtaining a reasonably complete series of photographs’.^[33] The methodology was new, there were no protocols, and the results were iconic.

The study recorded what were new findings for the time, particularly because Brenda Seligman gained access to Vedda women and children. This allowed her to photograph and study more intimate instances of their family life, including making phonograph recordings of lullabies. She gained access to activities which men were not allowed to witness. Of the nearly 400 photographic glass negatives that are now part of the British Museum collection, some 71 photographs appear as illustrations in the Veddas publication. Some of these Seligman admitted to touching up, in particular those documenting the dances at Sitala Wanniya and Bandaraduwa, to minimise the blurring from the movement.^[34] Some photographs cover the Vedda dances of Kirikorana, Bambara Yaka, and Pata Yaka. We know now that the Kirikorana has sacred features, as likely do the other dances. In the absence of protest and clarification from the living Vedda community, what is the best practise for the sharing of these dance and ritual photographs now? How should they be handled in the Seligmans’ publication now that we know what we do? If Brenda Seligman gained access to photograph the Vedda women and their children in situations where men were not allowed, how can we rationalise breaching that privacy by showing these photographs to the public eye?

Another aspect of the Seligmans’ published photography that has come under scrutiny is the potential staging of Vedda subjects. Seligman himself observed that the Veddas were often ‘fetched’ to meet travellers at rest houses, where they would appear dressed in traditional Vedda attire, despite normally dressing like neighbouring peasants when not on display.[35] This suggests that even during the Seligmans’ study, there may have been a performative element in the Veddas’ presentation to outsiders, raising doubts about the authenticity of some of the photographs and observations. Nishanka Wijemanna has justly criticised the way the Veddas were presented in these images, arguing that they were dressed up as ‘showpieces’ for the benefit of foreign observers, thus reinforcing the stereotype of them as uncivilized and barbaric.[36]

The Seligmans’ study also raises ethical questions in view of its scientific evaluations and suggestion that ‘the few unsophisticated Veddas of the present day do in fact represent the aboriginal inhabitants of Ceylon’. In support of this thesis, they referred to the work the Sarasins, using this and their own observations to separate the Veddas from the Sinhalese on the grounds that there were ‘obvious external characters in which the Veddas differ from the Sinhalese […] [at] a single glance’.[37] They compared certain measurements of the Vedda male being some three inches shorter than the Kandyan (Sinhalese) as further proof of such genetic distinction, not considering (as others before also failed to do) that such shorter height could have been due to nutrition.

The anthropologist James Brow, who undertook extensive field research on the Veddas in the 1980s, draws our attention to the problem that ‘the search of racial and cultural purity became an increasingly dominant theme in their [European’s] inquiries, and that their ability to discover it was greatly enhanced by the division of the Veddas into two kinds. Even the Seligmans, whose ethnography ushers in the period of modern anthropology as applied to the Veddas, were still under the spell of these concerns’.[38] Indeed, the Seligmans repeatedly note that the ‘Veddas have been regarded as one of the most primitive of existing races’.[39] Their aim was to ‘isolate the customs of the ‘pure blooded’ Veddas from those of the ‘half-breed’ combination of Sinhalese and Vedda strain, so that the ‘authentic’, ‘original’, and ‘ancestral’ customs of the Veddas can be discovered’.[40]

Nonetheless, we should also be aware of the potentially harmful biases that the photographs cast. Today, the Collection remains extremely important There is thus a need to establish a more effective approach to managing and disseminating the Collection through appropriate contextualisation.

Ethical Extrapolations

At the time of the Seligmans’ anthropological work in the early twentieth century, there were no formalised research ethics or institutional guidelines. Credibility relied heavily on the reputation of the researcher and photography, while used, was not yet recognised as a rigorous anthropological tool. This began to shift in the 1930s with the pioneering work of Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson, whose fieldwork in Bali (1937-9) contributed to the foundation of visual anthropology. Mead and Bateson aimed to document cultural behaviour as it unfolded naturally, stating that their goal was ‘to shoot what happened normally and spontaneously, rather than to decide upon the norms and then get [the subjects] to go through these behaviours’.[41] Their methodological approach, centred on a ‘disciplined subjectivity’, treated the camera as a neutral recording instrument rather than an illustrative device, thereby setting a precedent for ethical engagement through visual media.[42]

The aftermath of the Second World War catalysed a global movement toward codifying human rights and dignity, influencing how research, representation, and consent were subsequently framed. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasised the ‘inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family’, while Articles 26 and 27 underscored the right to education and cultural participation.[43] The 1945 founding Constitution of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) likewise spoke to the importance of accurate cultural representation, stressing that member governments are ‘agreed and determined to develop and to increase the means of communication between their peoples and to employ these means for the purposes of mutual understanding and a truer and more perfect knowledge of each other’s lives’.[44] Later frameworks, such as the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, affirmed that Indigenous communities ‘have the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories, and aspirations [to be] appropriately reflected in education and public information’.[45] Although these instruments do not address photographic representation directly, they provide a foundational basis for ethical reflection on the use of such media in research, publication and exhibition contexts.

Today, a growing number of academic and research institutions, along with the communities they engage, have developed comprehensive ethical frameworks to guide responsible scholarship, particularly in cross-cultural and historically asymmetrical settings. Guidelines such as the ‘Code of Ethics for Research in the Social and Behavioural Sciences involving Human Participants’ (Netherlands)[46] and the ‘Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings’ articulate frameworks premised on concepts of fairness, respect, care, and honesty. The latter’s Article 8 (Respect) advises researchers to explore potential cultural sensitivities to avoid violating customary practices, while Article 12 stresses the importance of tailoring informed consent procedures to local contexts for meaningful understanding.[47] The ‘National Inuit Strategy on Research’, co-developed with Inuit leadership, frames research as a tool for achieving social equity and calls for ‘respectful relationships’.[48] Similar concerns are addressed in the ‘Protocols for Native American Archival Materials’, which guide institutions in handling sensitive heritage content.[49] Notably, the Warburg Institute’s decision to remove select early photographs of the Pueblo community from public access, citing cultural sensitivity, demonstrates the growing institutional recognition of ethical responsibility in archival and visual practices, as does that Institute’s development of a protocol for those materials. These evolving norms form a crucial backdrop against which we can ethically reconsider the Seligmans’ visual anthropological work.

These policies and conventions reflect ethical values that touch people’s lives, operating not only to grow community conscience but also to inform personal micro ethics, including those that assist in evaluating and rationalizing ‘ethically important moments in research practice’.[50] Guillemin and Gillam, in their astute coverage of ethical values, ask us to be ‘reflexive in an ethical sense [which] means acknowledging and being sensitized to the micro-ethical dimensions of […] practice and, in doing so, being alert to and prepared for ways of dealing with the ethical tensions that arise’.[51]

Though the Seligmans did not benefit from these policies to guide their photographic protocols and research, we now have the advantage of them and of hindsight. Given the iconic and pioneering stature of their study, it becomes imperative to properly frame the Collection images, not only to qualify their authority in light of recent learnings but to develop different approaches. A sad truth that underscores the importance of obtaining better narratives is that these past biases, including those depicted through visual media, may have contributed to the colonial and later Sri Lankan government’s poor treatment of the Veddas. The Veddas were forced out of their natural habitats starting with colonial development because they were considered ‘primitive’ and ‘totally destitute’, imagery that stayed in the wider community consciousness. These actions of neglect continue today with forced displacement and attempts to erase the identity of the group. In recent times, the Sri Lankan census even removed the classification of ‘Vedi’ in 1963.[52]

Recent publications surveying the plight of the Vedda community conclude that ‘these communities are faced with insurmountable challenges that rob their dignity and self-esteem when identifying themselves as the people of this land’.[53] The migration and / or forced displacement of the Vedda communities into areas where the government promised them land—promises that have not been met to this day—remains an ongoing issue.[54]

Engagement with the Collection and its ‘Re-Presentation’

Knowing what we do now, the central issue is how we should approach this collection to present it in the various platforms on which these images could feature, in such a way as to be ‘fair and responsible’ including, essentially, in ways that dignify the Vedda community. How can we display these photographs in a manner that avoids reinforcing outdated and harmful stereotypes—such as portraying the Vedda as primitive, unintelligent, or unworthy of recognition—that have historically caused them so much harm? In this context, re-evaluating the Seligman Collection and reframing the narrative may offer an opportunity to challenge existing biases against the Veddas and provide an alternative perspective that highlights their history and lifestyle, thereby elevating their recognition and status.

While a comprehensive review of the entire collection is beyond the scope of this study, several key points emerge that guide and contribute to the principles of ‘fair and responsible’ re-presentation, that include the following:

1. Preface the Collection with Historical and Ethical Context: The archival presentation should include a preface contextualizing the Collection’s development within its historical period, noting the absence of ethical frameworks that might have influenced the Seligmans’ methodology. It is likely that Charles and Brenda Seligman may have unconsciously perpetuated the cultural biases and stereotypes prevalent at the time regarding the Vedda community. Acknowledgment of this potential bias should precede the Collection.

2. Engage the Vedda Community and Local Scholars: Such local involvement, along with connecting to points of origin, can inform and culturally sensitise curation. Collaboration with contemporary Vedda community leaders and local scholars to notate and comment on the collection and individual images, would further inform the archival depth of these images by including community perspectives, memories, and contemporary treatment of the images. Their insights should inform the contextualization of the images using culturally relevant knowledge. Representatives from the Sri Lankan Ministry of Culture, responsible for safeguarding Vedda heritage, could be involved in this process. Each photograph should be individually reviewed and annotated by Vedda community members to incorporate their perspectives on content and optimal display practices. These annotations should form part of the Collection’s archival documentation, ensuring that the presentation is guided by Vedda community authority in both public and archival contexts.

3. Protect Private and Sacred Content: Images that infringe on personal privacy or depict sacred rituals should remain restricted and reserved solely for scholarly research, governed by institutional protocols. Public access should only be granted with explicit consent from the Vedda community, and such permissions must be formally documented. In particular, photographs depicting female activities, rituals, and sacred dances should not be publicly exhibited until the Vedda community authorizes their display or provides interpretive guidance to enable a nuanced understanding.

4. Establish Institutional Guidelines: Institutions should develop and publicly share guidelines that reflect best practices for re-evaluating early photographic collections. The current lack of transparency in these efforts limits broader learning and collaboration. Public dissemination of these protocols would benefit institutional teams and stakeholders by incorporating the perspectives of those directly impacted by the presentation, promoting equitable and informed representation of colonial-era photographic archives.

Conclusion

Early authorities on the Veddas became experts primarily by extolling new knowledge and through repeated, often unchecked validation. By contrast, the Seligmans’ study was more rigorous, with focused attention on gathering findings for publication, further supported by funding. This study was not only pioneering but also credible, gathering important observational data that, while possibly distorted through a colonial lens, can nonetheless be reviewed in a contemporary context. Furthermore, the Seligmans’ objective appears to have been honourable, demonstrating a commitment to gaining ground truths and showing an appreciation for firsthand contact to enhance research credibility. Photography was a critical component of this endeavour, introducing a novel methodology that illuminated and supported his findings.

The criteria for evaluating whether there is ‘fair and responsible’ re-presentation in these early images should consider the methodologies of picture-taking acceptable at the time, acknowledging that no formal guidelines existed, as well as to consider the objectives of the researchers. Those early studies and imaging exercises operated under different guidelines than those known and recommended today. While it can be argued that the Seligmans acted in good faith, this does not imply that they adhered to the standards of respect expected by contemporary human rights norms. Prefacing the context of the photographs encourages us to reflect, learn, and engage, utilising valuable historical endeavours to reshape narratives. My hope is that this review raises critical questions that we must address to gain new knowledge and consciously build upon the ‘fair and reasonable’ re-presentation of early photographs of peoples, generally, and in doing so also strengthen our individual and community consciences when we interact and intersect with these early images.

---

Shalini Ganendra

Shalini Amerasinghe Ganendra is an interdisciplinary scholar whose research integrates nearly three decades of programming experience with a foundation in legal training. She actively investigates theoretical frameworks through the lens of creative practices and cultural histories, particularly in under-researched regions such as Sri Lanka. Her work foregrounds the complex interplay between tradition and contemporary dynamics, offering alternative modes of engagement that are deeply attuned to diverse cultural contexts.

Shalini has received numerous accolades for her contributions to cultural development and community impact, including the Knighthood of St Gregory the Great (DSG) from the Holy See and the Chevening Fellowship from the United Kingdom. She has held visiting academic appointments at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, serving also as an Associate Academic in Oxford’s Department of the History of Art. Shalini read law at the University of Cambridge, earned an LL.M. from Columbia University Law School, and qualified as both a Barrister (UK) and an Attorney in New York.

---

[1] Shalini Amerasinghe Ganendra, Veins of Influence: Colonial Sri Lanka (Ceylon) in Early Photographs and Collections (Neptune Publishing Pvt Ltd 2023).

[2] CG Seligman and Brenda Z Seligman, Collection of Seligman Glass Slides (396) and Prints from Those Slides: Photographs of Vedda Community, Ceylon (1908).

[3] James Hamill, ‘Charles Seligman Glass Slides and Photos, British Museum, Nature of Current Cataloguing’ (11 September 2024).

[4] CG Seligman and Brenda Z Seligman, The Veddas (Cambridge University Press 1911).

[5] GC Mendis, Ceylon Under the British (first published 1952, Gyan Press 2020) 12.

[6] Eleanor M Hight and Gary D Sampson, Colonialist Photography, Imag(in)Ing Race and Place (Routledge 2002) 15.

[7] Other categories included plantation views, railways, archaeological sites (and buried cities), British royal visits, botanical gardens (and tropical plants), urban landscape, and elephant captures.

[8] Benita Stambler, ‘Context and Content: Colonial Photographs from Kandy, Ceylon’ in H Hazel Hahn (ed), Cross-Cultural Exchange and the Colonial Imaginary: Global Encounters via Southeast Asia (NUS Press 2019) 233.

[9] George JA Skeen, The Royal visit to Ceylon, April 1901 (Government printer 1901) image numbers 28-30. See <https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/PH-QM-00002/> accessed 9 November 2025. By contrast, the private album of Queen Mary covering that tour has no images of the Veddas, indicating a lack of personal interest in them. See Royal Tour Ophir, 1901. ‘Queen Mary’s Photograph Album Volume 7’ (1901).

[10] Robert Knox, An Historical Relation of Ceylon (Tisara Prakasakayo Ltd 1981) 48.

[11] John Bailey, ‘An Account of the Wild Tribes of the Veddahs of Ceylon: Their Habits, Customs, and Superstitions’ (1863) 2 Transactions of the Ethnological Society of London 278.

[12] ibid 284.

[13] Seligmann and Seligmann (n 4) 6.

[14] Bailey (n 11) 279.

[15] ibid 278.

[16] ibid 284.

[17] The Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland (RAS) has a long and illustrious history as an influential organisation, starting with its grant of royal status in 1823 by King George IV. The RAS’s elite colonial membership, commitment to scholarship, and subsequent, inclusion of elite local members in its various branches reinforced this enduring legacy. The Royal Asiatic Society of Ceylon was the society’s first branch, established in 1845.

[18] Rev J Gillings, ‘On the Veddahs of Bintenne’ (1853) 2(2) The Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland 83.

[19] ibid 88.

[20] ibid 85.

[21] Rudolf Virchow, ‘The Veddás of Ceylon, and Their Relation to the Neighbouring Tribes’ (1886) 9 The Journal of the Ceylon Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland 349.

[22] Richard L Spittel, Vanished Trails. The Last of the Veddas (Geoffrey Cumberlege, OUP 1950) xii.

[23] Virchow (n 21) 371.

[24] Richard Boyle, ‘Visiting the Veddahs, 1899’ The Sunday Times (Sri Lanka, 12 June 2016) <http://www.sundaytimes.lk/160612/plus/visiting-the-veddahs-1899-196988.html> accessed 10 August 2024.

[25] Samanti Kulatilake, ‘The Sarasins’ Collection of Historical Sri Lankan Crania’ (2020) 128 Anthropological Science 119, 120.

[26] Seligman and Seligman (n 4) 18. 

[27] Kulatilake (n 25) 122.

[28] Seligman and Seligman (n 4) vii.

[29] ‘Seligman’s Lecture to the Asiatic Society - A Link with Old Ceylon’ Ceylon Observer, Supplement (Ceylon, 26 May 1908).

[30] ‘The Sociology of the Ceylon Veddas: Final Investigation by Dr. and Mrs. Seligman’ Ceylon Observer (Ceylon, 26 May 1908).

[31] ‘Charles Gabriel Seligman’ (Royal Anthropological Institute) <https://www.therai.org.uk/archives-and-manuscripts/obituaries/charles-gabriel-seligman> accessed 10 September 2024.

[32] Alex Perera, ‘Centenary of a Classical Study’ The Sunday Times (London, 2 October 2011) <https://archives.dailynews.lk/2001/pix/PrintPage.asp?REF=/2010/12/22/art32.asp> accessed 30 October 2023.

[33] Seligman and Seligman (n 4) 4.

[34] ibid 235 fig 2. 

[35] ibid vii.

[36] Nishanka Wijemanna, ‘Myths and Reality about the Veddas’ (2023) 3 Voice of Citizens 15 <http://citizenslanka.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Issue-03-English-Final-2.pdf> accessed 5 July 2025.

[37] Seligman and Seligman (n 4) 415.

[38] James Brow, Vedda Villages of Anuradhapura, A Historical Anthropology of a Community in Sri Lanka, vol 33 (University of Washington Press 1978) 15.

[39] Seligman and Seligman (n 4) vii.

[40] Brow (n 38) 15.

[41] Ira Jacknis, ‘Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson in Bali: Their Use of Photography and Film’ (1988) 3(2) Cultural Anthropology 166.

[42] ibid 161.

[43] United Nations, ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ (1948) <https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights> accessed 28 October 2023.

[44] ‘Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (1945) Preamble <https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%204/volume-4-I-52-English.pdf> accessed 9 November 2025.

[45] United Nations, ‘United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’ (13 September 2007) <https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/declaration-on-%20the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples.html> accessed 3 September 2024.

[46] ‘Code of Ethics for Research in the Social and Behavioural Sciences Involving Human Participants’ (2016) <https://www.eur.nl/eshcc/media/67289> accessed 12 July 2025.

[47] ‘Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings’ <https://www.globalcodeofconduct.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Global-Code-of-Conduct-Brochure.pdf> accessed 12 July 2025.

[48] ‘National Inuit Strategy on Research’ (2018) <https://www.itk.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ITK_NISR-Report_English_low_res.pdf> 23.

[49] ‘Protocols for Native American Archival Materials’ <https://www2.nau.edu/libnap-p/> accessed 10 September 2024.

[50] M Guillemin and L Gillam, ‘Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research’ (2004) 10 Qualitative Inquiry 261, 278.

[51] Marilys Guillemin and Lynn Gillam, ‘Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research’ (2004) 10(2) Qualitative Inquiry 278.

[52] Lionel Guruge, ‘Editor’s Note’ (2023) 3 Voice of Citizens 4-5 <http://citizenslanka.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Issue-03-English-Final-2.pdf> accessed 5 July 2025.

[53] ibid.

[54] Ahinsaka Perera, ‘Issues Facing the Eastern Indigenous Community’ (2023) 3 Voice of Citizens 9 <http://citizenslanka.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Issue-03-English-Final-2.pdf> accessed 5 July 2025.