This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
the originial suriyani christians are now concentrated on kottayam,pathanamthitta,idukki,eastern ernakulam(kunnathnad,muvattupuzha,kothamangalam) and north eastern parts of kollam district. during the early times,before portugese arrival, from 8th century onwards, many persian jew converts also settled in the kollam region.there were many eastern christians who migrated from iran and other parts who became part of the travancore syrian christians. during tipu's invasions, the 4 lakh syrian christians who were dwelling upto mangalore and beyond fled to south and settled in alapuzha,ernakulam districts.
coming to the main allegation: the syrian christian claimants in thrissur region including angamaly,kaladi are doubtfully of any suriyani old converts.these people are converted by portugese,suspected since only 20-22 families in whole of thrissur district can claim their suriyani ancestory properly.most others have the prominent family names conveniently "lifted" and used. the regions doubtful of are syrian christians - n.paravoor,kodungallur,chavakkad,guruvayoor,kunnamkulam,thrissur.only syrian christian bastion is OLLUR,near thrissur.others are Latin Catholics Who disguised as Syro Malabar Christians.
Whatever told above are common knowledge among Travancore Suriyani Christians.No Offense Intended.I am seeking if there is any documented source to show this claim. 204.56.73.56 ( talk) 16:56, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Note that this is a deliberately foreshortened article, intended to share history among today's seven Christian churches, until the 17th century at which time the much larger local church broke free from the control of the much tinier Latin church, which has continued until the present day. Student7 ( talk) 00:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Student7 ( talk) 20:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
editors are please requested to check wikipedia pages before they create new pages, in order to avoid duplication. A separate article dealing with history of the saint thomas christian history already exists. It is called History of the Saint Thomas Christian tradition. It has been in existence for a long time and with references. It has been edited by several hundreds of people over a long time.
A new article without references has been created on the same topic called History of the Saint Thomas Christians by largely a single author user:student7 only two weeks ago on 2nd of may 2009. Much of the new article is without references and most of all the topic is a duplication of a page that already exists. It has to be redirected to the already existing article that is being constantly edited by several hunderds of people over a long time. Vagab ( talk) 10:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
this is a WP:CFORK issue, and it needs to be fixed. If you are aware of Saint Thomas Christian tradition, why do you develop a counter-article and refuse to crosslink it? There needs to be a {{ merge}} between the two (either direction) asap. -- dab (𒁳) 09:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
you are right, there is no deadline, but this needs to be done properly, and unresolved issues need to be duly tagged. As I said, the merger can go either way. The "tradition" article's content is mostly history. It may be a good idea to merge the articles and move the result to this title. -- dab (𒁳) 18:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with Dbachmann, this page has to be redirected to the already existing page on Saint Thomas Christian tradition. The editor user:student7 claims that he has copied material from other wikipedia pages to create a comprehensive section on the history of the Nasranis. However if one reads carefully, it would be seen that he has deliberately removed all the references to the referenced passages about the possible Jewish heritage of the Nasranis. He has also inserted statements by removing original passages from other pages that he has copied from. This in wikipedia terms is called as Vandalism. To insert ones own pov by removing referenced passages. He has also deliberately removed references to anything related to the Jewish origins of the Nasranis.
His real motive in creating the page is clear. It is to write his own version of nasrani history and remove all references to jewish heritage. He pretends to be a serious editor seeking footnotes. But instead he is removing references and passages and inserting statements. Vagab ( talk) 02:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
The editors have stopped the merger of materials of already existing pages on Saint Thomas Christian tradition on to this new page duplication. Hence this page duplication has to be redirected to the already existing page Saint Thomas Christian tradition Vagab ( talk) 18:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Two respected editors with credentials contacted me and stated the following:
"That template's content was of the view that Jacobite Syrian Church came under Antiochene Patriach only in the 16th century which is not a view accepted by all but a portion of the historians of Indian Church. Such a POV should not be put in that article."
Chart: "The Malankara Catholic Church split from the Malankara Orthodox Church not from Jacobite Syrian Church. You can check it over the internet."
A second editor states --Antiochean bishops in Kerala-- "The Jacobite Syrian Church came under Antiochene Patriarch only in the 16th century, is not a correct statement. A section of that Church came under the Antiochene Patriarch only in 1876. (ME. Edavom 19, 1051) at the Synod of Mulanthuruthi. (For details refer: Mulanthuruthi Padiola)"
"There is a common belief that bishops from Antioch who had visited the Malankara Church regularly, had some kind of jurisdiction over the Malankara Church. Many people may believe it. But there is no historical evidence to support this belief. To understand how they happened to come to Malankara (Kerala), purpose of their visit, how they spent their time there, and why most of them were banished from Kerala are given in the annals of the Dutch East India Company. (Ref:Press List of Ancient Dutch Records-1657-1825.)"
"Moreover, It is believed by many, that Mar Gregorius Abdul Jaleel who confirmed the consecration of Mar Thoma I in 1665 came from Antioch. But recent discoveries of some of his own papers, throw doubt on this claim."
The above, of course, is why we need a common history, not one that represents a single pov. That is what this history was trying to create. Student7 ( talk) 21:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
FYI. An editor has started to include the non-standard "ME" (Malayam Year) to some dates. This date must be added to 824 (or 825!) to obtain the standard year for Wikipedia. Student7 ( talk) 20:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Any objection in removing the unrelated Fictitious remarks given in the section The state of the church just prior to the arrival of the Portuguese. Neduvelilmathew ( talk) 07:25, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I recommend removing this article as its entirely forked by copying the various other articles. This forking has been going on some of the articles on Saint Thomas Christians, where some editors just wanted to club different articles with no references.
Recommend removal of the forked page. Pamparam ( talk) 16:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
There are Six articles which claim common history of Saint Thomas Christians out of this 4 have almost similar contents about the same period. To avoid repetitive articles and to improve the quality of the article, share about WP:RELY sources and re organization of these articles.
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian Christianity#About the articles on Saint Thomas Christians common history Pamparam ( talk) 02:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I think these words need to appear in common history. This canbe followed by a disclaimer that these titles appeared to favor the "old party", the Catholics over those rebelling from them and are now not used. Assuming this is true. This should not be the only place in the world where that is true! Student7 ( talk) 22:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The chart shows a schism in 1665, between West Syrian and East Syrian liturgy/control. Someone tried to explain this. This was deleted. Not sure why. It appears as a fork on the chart. Student7 ( talk) 22:09, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Very often comments appear in Wikipedia under the assumption that Saint Thomas Christians, before the arrival of Portuguese, had a common history, without realizing that there is no such history. The St. Thomas Christians before 1500, consisted of at least four groups: and so they have their own histories. At a close study of these groups, even today their differences in worship and beliefs are clearly visible. All these groups try to put their history and their beliefs into these articles with the result that all related articles become confused.
Visitors from Persia and Middle East used to visit Malabar to meet their friends, relatives (who came earlier from Persia) and their descendents. Whether they were bishops, priests or laymen, most of them were addressed as “Bava” (bishop). These visits made others believe that Syrian Christians were ruled by bishops from Persia. Neither knowing the language nor the culture, these visitors lived at the mercy of the Syrian Christians and spent their time teaching their mother tongue, Syriac. Some of these visitors returned, but most of them lived and died in Kerala. Neduvelilmathew ( talk) 22:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
(The above comment needs a good answer. Got one from Matan..cherry on another page.)
I would like to comment on Fernandez as a reliable source. See http://newhumanist.org.uk/1828/the-last-jews-of-kerala-by-edna-fernandes Reviewer is not that impressed because Fernandez left out too much. He does not recommend the book.
Amazon reviewers did not care for it See http://www.amazon.com/Last-Jews-Kerala-Forgotten-Community/dp/1602392676
More importantly, she is not a historian, but a reporter. If it were that easy to "report" the landing of Jews 1000, 2000, 3000 years ago and we could show footage, well, no problem. It isn't that easy, and the history rather doubtful. We can only quote noted, scholarly, WP:RELY authors here. She clearly isn't one of those for this purpose. Student7 ( talk) 12:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
contents of this page has been merged to Saint Thomas Christian churches as per Talk:Saint Thomas Christians
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
the originial suriyani christians are now concentrated on kottayam,pathanamthitta,idukki,eastern ernakulam(kunnathnad,muvattupuzha,kothamangalam) and north eastern parts of kollam district. during the early times,before portugese arrival, from 8th century onwards, many persian jew converts also settled in the kollam region.there were many eastern christians who migrated from iran and other parts who became part of the travancore syrian christians. during tipu's invasions, the 4 lakh syrian christians who were dwelling upto mangalore and beyond fled to south and settled in alapuzha,ernakulam districts.
coming to the main allegation: the syrian christian claimants in thrissur region including angamaly,kaladi are doubtfully of any suriyani old converts.these people are converted by portugese,suspected since only 20-22 families in whole of thrissur district can claim their suriyani ancestory properly.most others have the prominent family names conveniently "lifted" and used. the regions doubtful of are syrian christians - n.paravoor,kodungallur,chavakkad,guruvayoor,kunnamkulam,thrissur.only syrian christian bastion is OLLUR,near thrissur.others are Latin Catholics Who disguised as Syro Malabar Christians.
Whatever told above are common knowledge among Travancore Suriyani Christians.No Offense Intended.I am seeking if there is any documented source to show this claim. 204.56.73.56 ( talk) 16:56, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Note that this is a deliberately foreshortened article, intended to share history among today's seven Christian churches, until the 17th century at which time the much larger local church broke free from the control of the much tinier Latin church, which has continued until the present day. Student7 ( talk) 00:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Student7 ( talk) 20:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
editors are please requested to check wikipedia pages before they create new pages, in order to avoid duplication. A separate article dealing with history of the saint thomas christian history already exists. It is called History of the Saint Thomas Christian tradition. It has been in existence for a long time and with references. It has been edited by several hundreds of people over a long time.
A new article without references has been created on the same topic called History of the Saint Thomas Christians by largely a single author user:student7 only two weeks ago on 2nd of may 2009. Much of the new article is without references and most of all the topic is a duplication of a page that already exists. It has to be redirected to the already existing article that is being constantly edited by several hunderds of people over a long time. Vagab ( talk) 10:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
this is a WP:CFORK issue, and it needs to be fixed. If you are aware of Saint Thomas Christian tradition, why do you develop a counter-article and refuse to crosslink it? There needs to be a {{ merge}} between the two (either direction) asap. -- dab (𒁳) 09:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
you are right, there is no deadline, but this needs to be done properly, and unresolved issues need to be duly tagged. As I said, the merger can go either way. The "tradition" article's content is mostly history. It may be a good idea to merge the articles and move the result to this title. -- dab (𒁳) 18:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with Dbachmann, this page has to be redirected to the already existing page on Saint Thomas Christian tradition. The editor user:student7 claims that he has copied material from other wikipedia pages to create a comprehensive section on the history of the Nasranis. However if one reads carefully, it would be seen that he has deliberately removed all the references to the referenced passages about the possible Jewish heritage of the Nasranis. He has also inserted statements by removing original passages from other pages that he has copied from. This in wikipedia terms is called as Vandalism. To insert ones own pov by removing referenced passages. He has also deliberately removed references to anything related to the Jewish origins of the Nasranis.
His real motive in creating the page is clear. It is to write his own version of nasrani history and remove all references to jewish heritage. He pretends to be a serious editor seeking footnotes. But instead he is removing references and passages and inserting statements. Vagab ( talk) 02:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
The editors have stopped the merger of materials of already existing pages on Saint Thomas Christian tradition on to this new page duplication. Hence this page duplication has to be redirected to the already existing page Saint Thomas Christian tradition Vagab ( talk) 18:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Two respected editors with credentials contacted me and stated the following:
"That template's content was of the view that Jacobite Syrian Church came under Antiochene Patriach only in the 16th century which is not a view accepted by all but a portion of the historians of Indian Church. Such a POV should not be put in that article."
Chart: "The Malankara Catholic Church split from the Malankara Orthodox Church not from Jacobite Syrian Church. You can check it over the internet."
A second editor states --Antiochean bishops in Kerala-- "The Jacobite Syrian Church came under Antiochene Patriarch only in the 16th century, is not a correct statement. A section of that Church came under the Antiochene Patriarch only in 1876. (ME. Edavom 19, 1051) at the Synod of Mulanthuruthi. (For details refer: Mulanthuruthi Padiola)"
"There is a common belief that bishops from Antioch who had visited the Malankara Church regularly, had some kind of jurisdiction over the Malankara Church. Many people may believe it. But there is no historical evidence to support this belief. To understand how they happened to come to Malankara (Kerala), purpose of their visit, how they spent their time there, and why most of them were banished from Kerala are given in the annals of the Dutch East India Company. (Ref:Press List of Ancient Dutch Records-1657-1825.)"
"Moreover, It is believed by many, that Mar Gregorius Abdul Jaleel who confirmed the consecration of Mar Thoma I in 1665 came from Antioch. But recent discoveries of some of his own papers, throw doubt on this claim."
The above, of course, is why we need a common history, not one that represents a single pov. That is what this history was trying to create. Student7 ( talk) 21:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
FYI. An editor has started to include the non-standard "ME" (Malayam Year) to some dates. This date must be added to 824 (or 825!) to obtain the standard year for Wikipedia. Student7 ( talk) 20:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Any objection in removing the unrelated Fictitious remarks given in the section The state of the church just prior to the arrival of the Portuguese. Neduvelilmathew ( talk) 07:25, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
I recommend removing this article as its entirely forked by copying the various other articles. This forking has been going on some of the articles on Saint Thomas Christians, where some editors just wanted to club different articles with no references.
Recommend removal of the forked page. Pamparam ( talk) 16:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
There are Six articles which claim common history of Saint Thomas Christians out of this 4 have almost similar contents about the same period. To avoid repetitive articles and to improve the quality of the article, share about WP:RELY sources and re organization of these articles.
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian Christianity#About the articles on Saint Thomas Christians common history Pamparam ( talk) 02:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I think these words need to appear in common history. This canbe followed by a disclaimer that these titles appeared to favor the "old party", the Catholics over those rebelling from them and are now not used. Assuming this is true. This should not be the only place in the world where that is true! Student7 ( talk) 22:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
The chart shows a schism in 1665, between West Syrian and East Syrian liturgy/control. Someone tried to explain this. This was deleted. Not sure why. It appears as a fork on the chart. Student7 ( talk) 22:09, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Very often comments appear in Wikipedia under the assumption that Saint Thomas Christians, before the arrival of Portuguese, had a common history, without realizing that there is no such history. The St. Thomas Christians before 1500, consisted of at least four groups: and so they have their own histories. At a close study of these groups, even today their differences in worship and beliefs are clearly visible. All these groups try to put their history and their beliefs into these articles with the result that all related articles become confused.
Visitors from Persia and Middle East used to visit Malabar to meet their friends, relatives (who came earlier from Persia) and their descendents. Whether they were bishops, priests or laymen, most of them were addressed as “Bava” (bishop). These visits made others believe that Syrian Christians were ruled by bishops from Persia. Neither knowing the language nor the culture, these visitors lived at the mercy of the Syrian Christians and spent their time teaching their mother tongue, Syriac. Some of these visitors returned, but most of them lived and died in Kerala. Neduvelilmathew ( talk) 22:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
(The above comment needs a good answer. Got one from Matan..cherry on another page.)
I would like to comment on Fernandez as a reliable source. See http://newhumanist.org.uk/1828/the-last-jews-of-kerala-by-edna-fernandes Reviewer is not that impressed because Fernandez left out too much. He does not recommend the book.
Amazon reviewers did not care for it See http://www.amazon.com/Last-Jews-Kerala-Forgotten-Community/dp/1602392676
More importantly, she is not a historian, but a reporter. If it were that easy to "report" the landing of Jews 1000, 2000, 3000 years ago and we could show footage, well, no problem. It isn't that easy, and the history rather doubtful. We can only quote noted, scholarly, WP:RELY authors here. She clearly isn't one of those for this purpose. Student7 ( talk) 12:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
contents of this page has been merged to Saint Thomas Christian churches as per Talk:Saint Thomas Christians