The Aromatic Heritage of Sri Lanka
A Journey Through Its Essential Oils
Sri Lanka, the resplendent island once known as Serendib and Ceylon, has enchanted the world for centuries with its fragrant treasures. Its legacy as a major trading hub for spices has shaped both its history and its natural wellness industry. Today, Sri Lanka continues to shine through its rare and high-quality essential oils—aromas steeped in tradition, purity, and the lush biodiversity of the island.
- Ceylon Cinnamon Oil: The Crown Jewel
Often referred to as “True Cinnamon,” Ceylon cinnamon (Cinnamomum verum) is indigenous to Sri Lanka and is prized for its delicate, sweet aroma. Ceylon cinnamon oil and extracts are a staple in both natural medicine and perfumery.
Cinnamaldehyde, found mainly in Ceylon Cinnamon bark oil, has strong antibacterial, antifungal, and anti-inflammatory properties, while eugenol, found in the Ceylon Cinnamon leaf oil, is a natural antiseptic and pain reliever often used for oral care and muscle relief. What sets Ceylon cinnamon apart from other types (like cassia) is its sweeter, milder aroma and its low coumarin content, making it safer for regular use and more suitable for therapeutic and wellness applications.
2. Spice Oils with Deep Roots
Sri Lanka’s fertile soil and tropical climate give rise to an array of spice oils beyond cinnamon. Clove bud oil, with its intense, warm fragrance and eugenol richness, is a key export. Cardamom, Black Pepper, Ginger and Nutmeg oils are also highly sought after, valued not only for their aromas but also for their therapeutic benefits. These oils embody the ancient spice routes that once connected the island to the rest of the world.
3. Turmeric & Wild Turmeric: The Golden Healers
Both Turmeric (Curcuma longa) and the rarer Wild Turmeric (Curcuma aromatica) yield earthy, grounding oils revered in Ayurvedic and beauty traditions. These oils are celebrated for their anti-inflammatory, brightening, and skin-soothing properties—used in everything from facial oils to healing balms. These are specifically known for their deep cleansing properties. Sri Lankan typically use a traditional blend of Lime and Turmeric for cleansing and disinfecting premises and places of worship.
4. Sandalwood: Liquid Serenity
Though Indian sandalwood has become rarer, Sri Lanka also cultivates its own variety. Sandalwood oil, steam-distilled from the heartwood of mature trees, is deeply woody and meditative. It is a staple in spiritual rituals and high-end skincare, offering both emotional grounding and anti-aging benefits. Sandalwood is also used in the manufacturing of attars, which is a co-distillation of Sandalwood with another aromatic herb such as Saffron, Cinnamon or Lotus.
5. Blue Lotus: Sacred and Sublime
A rare gem among botanicals, blue lotus (Nymphaea caerulea) is extracted as an absolute. The Blue Lotus absolute, a very concentrated extract of Blue Lotus flowers, is seductive, floral, and intoxicating—used in perfumery and sensual wellness. However due to its cost of manufacturing the Blue Lotus absolute is considered a reserved delicacy. The Blue Lotus hydrosol, which is the floral water extract, can be considered a cheaper alternative to the oil. There are many other Lotus and Water Lily varieties such as Pink and White Lotuses and Pink and White Water Lilies. However Blue Lotus is considered the De Beers in the Lotus market due to their global popularity and reference across various cultures.
Conclusion
From ancient spice routes to modern wellness rituals, Sri Lanka’s essential oils capture the soul of an island rich in tradition, biodiversity, and aromatic splendor. As global demand for clean, conscious beauty and wellness grows, these oils continue to offer a fragrant bridge between heritage and healing.
These oils offer just a glimpse of Sri Lanka’s rich aromatic heritage. From rare spices to sacred florals, each one is a natural treasure—an enduring expression of the island’s soul.
About the Creator
Chanul Benedict
A digital marketer, content creator and wellness enthusiast @Caveman Redux
Keep reading
More stories from writers in Longevity and other communities.
Day 4 of Quitting
If this is how sobriety feels, maybe it’s better to go through life a little buzzed… this, along with other hits like, I want to kill myself, I wish I was dead, and I’m going to throw myself off a bridge have been the only thoughts on rotation these past few days. I promise myself that if, in a month, I still feel like this (‘this’ meaning despondent, full of rage, and simultaneously numb) I can go back to smoking. Until mid-February though? Nicotine is off the table.
By sleepy drafts12 days ago in Longevity
The Return of the Aircraft Carrier Truman Is Being Seen as a Snub to the Navy in the War of the Future
The return of the U.S. aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman to active deployment has sparked debate far beyond naval circles. While some see it as a show of enduring American naval power, others interpret the move as a symbolic snub—particularly in the context of how modern warfare is rapidly evolving. In an era dominated by drones, cyber warfare, hypersonic missiles, and artificial intelligence, the decision to once again lean heavily on a traditional aircraft carrier has raised uncomfortable questions about whether the Navy is preparing for the wars of tomorrow or clinging to the strategies of yesterday. A Floating Symbol of 20th-Century Power For decades, aircraft carriers have been the ultimate symbol of U.S. military dominance. These massive floating airbases project power thousands of miles from American shores and allow the U.S. to strike almost anywhere in the world. The Truman, like other Nimitz-class carriers, represents this legacy—housing nearly 5,000 sailors, dozens of fighter jets, and unmatched logistical capability. However, critics argue that what once made carriers indispensable now makes them vulnerable. Their sheer size, cost, and visibility turn them into high-value targets in a battlefield increasingly defined by precision strikes and long-range weapons. The “War of the Future” Looks Very Different Modern conflict is no longer limited to sea, land, and air. Cyber attacks can cripple infrastructure without a single shot fired. Drones can swarm targets at a fraction of the cost of traditional aircraft. Hypersonic missiles can reach targets faster than current defenses can respond. In this context, sending a massive carrier strike group into contested waters can appear less like a strategic necessity and more like a risky gamble. Critics argue that the return of the Truman reflects an outdated mindset—one that prioritizes visible force projection over adaptability and technological evolution. A Snub to Naval Innovation? Many analysts and serving officers believe the Navy’s future lies in distributed lethality—smaller, more agile platforms networked together, harder to detect and cheaper to replace. Unmanned surface vessels, autonomous submarines, and land-based missile systems are increasingly viewed as the backbone of next-generation naval warfare. Against this backdrop, recommitting to a traditional carrier is seen by some as sidelining innovation. It sends a message that, despite years of discussion about transformation, the Navy still defaults to familiar tools when tensions rise. This perception has led to frustration among those advocating for faster modernization. They argue that resources devoted to maintaining and protecting carriers like the Truman could instead accelerate investment in emerging technologies that are more relevant to future conflicts. The Strategic Signal to Allies and Rivals Supporters of the decision counter that the Truman’s return is not about nostalgia—it’s about deterrence. Aircraft carriers remain powerful political tools. Their presence reassures allies, signals commitment, and demonstrates readiness in a way few other assets can. Yet even here, the message is mixed. To technologically advanced rivals, the deployment may signal predictability rather than strength. Adversaries have spent years developing strategies specifically designed to neutralize carriers, including anti-ship ballistic missiles and advanced surveillance systems. Cost Versus Capability The financial reality cannot be ignored. A single carrier strike group costs billions of dollars to build, maintain, and operate. In contrast, drone fleets and missile systems can be produced and deployed at a much lower cost, often with greater strategic flexibility. Critics argue that continuing to rely on carriers drains resources from areas where the Navy needs to grow most urgently. In a future conflict defined by speed, dispersion, and digital dominance, the cost-benefit equation of aircraft carriers looks increasingly questionable. Why the Carrier Still Matters—For Now Despite the criticism, aircraft carriers are not obsolete—yet. They remain unmatched in their ability to sustain prolonged air operations without relying on foreign bases. In regions where access is limited or politically sensitive, carriers still provide options no other platform can. The real issue, many experts say, is not the existence of carriers like the Truman, but over-reliance on them. Using them as one component of a broader, more flexible strategy may still make sense. Treating them as the centerpiece of future war planning may not. A Turning Point for Naval Strategy The return of the USS Harry S. Truman highlights a deeper tension within modern military thinking. It represents a crossroads between tradition and transformation, between proven power and emerging threats. Whether history views this moment as a wise assertion of strength or a missed opportunity for innovation will depend on what comes next. If the Navy pairs legacy platforms with bold technological change, the carrier’s return may be justified. If not, it risks becoming a powerful symbol—not of dominance, but of reluctance to adapt in a rapidly changing world.
By Fiaz Ahmed Brohi7 days ago in Longevity
Comments