This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Taprobanus is vendalazing this page!!!... He has removed the Kshatriya reference of vellalars!!... This guy has an agenda!!... He must belong to a low people, mafia organisation which is trying to rewrite tamil history. I noticed that he's spending his time on wikipedia writing false things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajkris ( talk • contribs) 19:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I removed reference to 'vellalars from srilanka' because the guy who wrote it is trying to rewrite history (without any proof); it seems he's an agenda... Some people (on wikipedia...) are trying to rewrite the history of tamils by reducing the image, reputation of vellalars. Vellalars along with Brahmins belong to the elite tamil class from time immemorial. Many different texts prove it... They were landlords, kshatriyas, no doubt on this.
Please show a single historical verifiable document that purports to show any Vellala subdivision as Kshatriyas ? if not in 30 daya i will remove the NPOV RaveenS 13:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
A lot of the stuff written on this is wrong. Who wrote this? What jati are you? How do you go about proving that Vellalas are shudras? That is plain wrong! Vellalas are the equivalents of Nairs. They are administrators and close the the powerful leading authorities. Later,as time passed, lower castes tried to change their last names and become Vellala Pillais. The same is the case with Nairs in Kerala. The varna is Kshathriya.
Im sorry but you need to provide a non-biased proof from a neutral perspective.-- Jack.Able ( talk) 05:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
The Rajputs/Thakurs/Nairs fulfill all off these requirements. Almost all books classify Vellalars as Shudra. Im going to change the page soon if you cant defend this. I am not promoting racial hatred. Im just disputing your POV that they are Kshatriyas, and you are defending it poorly. As user Raveen pointed out, please show a sentence from a book that shows CLEARLY that they were kshatriyas.-- Jack.Able ( talk) 05:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
BtW, I can provide you a link where you can check the racial features of Vellalars (racial appearance seems very important for you); but i will not lower myself to such stupid things. I let you search for. Rajkris ( talk) 02:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
One thing, I have already told you, but I prefer to repeat it so that it can enter into your brain (at least I hope so): in Hindu texts, Rama & Krishna (the 2 greatest Hindu heroes) are considered as the perfect Aryans. Rama was dark skinned & Krishna was black. So according to Hindu texts (from which the word aryan comes from), Aryan means a dark skinned with caucasian features. Two more precisions: Vyasa, the writer of the Vedas was black, Arjuna was dark-skinned (in spite of the meaning of his name: "pale"). Rajkris ( talk) 12:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
False. First of all, the evidence is that the Velir were claiming Yadava clan from a very ancient point in history, and doing so very frequently, and this claim was accepted by the people they ruled. The Vellalar are descended from the Velir. Secondly, R1a haplogroup is found in tribal indian populations as well as "Aryan" (whatever type of Aryan) populations, AS WELL as Dravidian populations. Finally, the Vellalar are mostly comprised of J2b2, not L1/L2/L3. 75.82.48.53 ( talk) 22:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)A Saiva Vellala Mudaliar
I dispute the argument that Vellalars are basically agriculturists. Even historian Mr. Vincent A Smith in his book 'The Oxford Student's History of India' says, Vellalars are one of the caste in Tamil Nadu which do not have any association with any one particular job. Like every caste of Tamil Nadu including Mudhaliar, Udayar, Vanniar, Nadar, Gownder, Vellalars too involved in farming. You can also refer the Gazette of Salem District publish by Tamil Nadu government.
Vellalars migrated to Kerala along with Pandiyan kings, as Pandians needed scholars with them when they had war with Cheras.
If no one replies to this dispute, I will re-write the contents about Vellalars's occupation A Soosai Prakash ( talk) 13:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
The Velirs of the Sangam literature are Vellalars. Read through the sources.
Velirs are the chiefs of the Vellalars. Review the references below.
Sources:
1. Tamil Studies: Essays on the History of the Tamil People, Language, Religion, and Literature By Muttusvami Srinivasa Aiyangar
2. Heritage of the Tamils: Education and Vocation - Page 269 by Shanmuga Velayutham Subramanian, Ca. Vē Cuppiramaṇiyan̲, Vē. Irā Mātavan̲ - Education - 1986 - 506 pages
3. Racical Synthesis in Hindu Culture - Page 156.
4. The Early History of the Vellar Basin, with Special Reference to the ... - Page 21 by M. Arokiaswami - Vellalas - 1954 - 166 pages
5. Peoples of India - Page 29 by William Harlen Gilbert - Ethnology - 1944 - 86 pages
Irungkovel, Ma-Vel Ewi are all vellalars "The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago By V. Kanakasabhai". Mayank12 ( talk) 18:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Vellalar had the hereditary right to marry and crown the kings--"Contributions to Indian Sociology By Research Centre on Social and Economic Development in Asia, Institute of Economic Growth (India), Institute of Economic Growth" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayank12 ( talk • contribs) 21:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
"The Velir or Velala tribes"--->Studies in Tamil Literature and History
By V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar [7].
Mayank12 ( talk) 22:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
The below references come from books which deal with ancient Tamil history (Chera/Chola/Pandya/Sangam era):
1. The Harappan civilization and its writing: a model for the decipherment of the Indus Script... By Walter Ashlin Fairservis page 52/53: " The relationship of vellalan (Tamil) and vellalar (Malayalam) to terms for ancient chiefs velir, etc., provide us with a term for the system of chiefs as a whole, vellalar" Rajkris ( talk) 21:33, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
2. Ancient Indian History and Civilization By Sailendrda Nath Sen Page 205 & 207: "... the Vellalars were the aristocratic classe and were held in high esteem...", "The bulk of the land was owned by Vellalar who occupied a high social status. They employed labourers to till the land." Rajkris ( talk) 21:43, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
3. History of agriculture in India up to c. 1200 A.D. By Lalanji Gopal, Vinod Chandra Srivastava, Project of History of Indian Science, Philosophy and Culture Page 418 & 420: "Vellalars were responsible for the triumphs of their kings. They were the supervisors, the managers of their cultivable land." Rajkris ( talk) 21:43, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
4. Meluhha and Agastya: Alpha and Omega of the Indus Script by Iravatham Mahadevan, Indus Research Centre, Roja Muthiah Research Library, Chennai, India, page 16: "The Velir/Vellalar group constituted the ruling and land owning classe in the Tamil country since the beginning of recorded history..." Rajkris ( talk) 21:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
5. Racial Synthesis in Hindu Culture page 156: "...Velir/Vellala nobility..." Rajkris ( talk) 21:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
6. Encyclopedia of Indian Tribes by S.S. Shashi page 216: "...Sage Agastya repaired to Dwarka and, taking with him eighteen families of Vels or Velirs, moved on to the south..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
7. Journal of Tamil Studies By International Association of Tamil Research: "Vellalar of the Tamil Country,descendants of the Velir,..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
8. Meluhha and Agastya: Alpha and Omega of the Indus Script by Iravatham Mahadevan, Indus Research Centre, Roja Muthiah Research Library, Chennai, India, page 16: "Agastya agreed and, on his way, visited ‘Tuvarapati’ (Dvaraka) and led eighteen families of the Velir, the descendants of netu-muti-annual (Krishna), to the south" (Precision: this is only myth, legend, no historical proof). Rajkris ( talk) 22:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
9. Kingship and political practice in colonial India By Pamela G. Price page 61: "Vellalars were the ruling authority and the lords of the lands and villages..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
10. Irunkovel and the Kottai Vellalar - The possible origins of a closed community By P. Ramanathan: "He was an important chief among the Velir and his ancestors belonged to the Yadu Vamsa in which Krishna was born..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
11. The hollow crown: ethnohistory of an Indian Kingdom By Nicholas B. Dirks Page 139 to 149: "... the ruling Vellalars...", ".... forts built by Vellalars...".... Rajkris ( talk) 23:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I have other ref, but i think it is enough for the moment. The ref above CLEARLY show that the Vellalars were the nobility, the ruling class of the ancient Tamil order, they were involved in war activities as military officers... Some myths, legends even link them to the Yadu clan. Their Kshatriyas status is indisputable!. Rajkris ( talk) 23:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
After the collapse of the traditional Tamil Royal dynasties, they lost their ruling status and got involved only, mainly in farming related activities. Rajkris ( talk) 23:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
RESPONSE TO JACK ABLE Jack Able, I'll explain two reasons why I think you are wrong, and why Vellalar ARE kshatriya in any sense of the word:
1. As far as I can tell, the main reason you object is because the kshatriya are "vedic aryans" whereas the vellalar are "dravidians." Large-scale genetic studies have demonstrated that there is no evidence of an external invasion of aryan-speakers into India, ie both north indian Aryans and south indian Dravidians existed INSIDE India from a period of time dating back to over 30,000 years ago. And the dravidians were not always in the south, they were at one time widespread over the indian subcontinent - South India does not have an archaeologically-attested copper age, it transitions directly from the stone age to the steel age (because of north-south migration). While there is a genetic gradient that goes from north to south, this is less evident in upper-caste south indians (which includes saiva vellalar), and anyways, it is clear that both aryan/dravidian indian populations existed in India before the end of the last ice age. You claim that R1a1 is the marker of the Aryan, but according to recent studies this marker most likely originated in India (over 30 thousand years ago), and is found at high frequencies and of ancient origin in tribal as well as caste populations ie this cannot be explained simply by upper-caste "Aryans" impregnating the tribal women in the past few thousand years, instead researchers explain it as the caste-hindus emerging from the tribal populations. Therefore, the argument that Dravidians can't be kshatriya is inaccurate, since they were both living side by side during the Indus Valley Days and both are "indigenous" to India.
2. In fact, there are some people who think the ancient Yadava Kshatriya were dravidian for one simple reason - they had (seemingly approved of) cross-cousin marriages, something which is considered forbidden in North Indian culture but historically considered ideal in south indian (dravidian) culture. As long as you accept that vellalar are the velir of ancient tamil history (something that mainstream scholarship accepts), the most common lineage the Velir claimed was that of Yadu. The fact that numerous copper and pottery inscriptions have been found of Velir chiefs (who, by the way, were a technologically advanced group, generally credited with introducing advanced agricultural techniques to the Tamil lands) claiming Yadava lineage from before the Christian era means that these are some of the most ancient claimants to the kshatriya status (the vedic aryans themselves can only claim an ATTESTED history going back a few centuries before Buddha, so these Yadava claims are only a few centuries after), certainly older than the rajputs.
Summing up - So we have the velir of ancient times claiming kshatriya status, and the vellalar of recent times claiming vaisya status or in some cases accepting shudra status. Which should we believe about the vellalar? Obviously, the older the claim, the more likely (not certain) that it is based in some form of tradition. Everyone knows exactly why Vellalar were called shudras by the iyer brahmins of tamil nadu - the brahmins thought that anyone who was not living in the north indian "aryavarta" was not an aryan. What they failed to account for was the possibility that the vellalar may have migrated from the "aryavarta" at a point in time so ancient as to be forgotten, whereas they themselves were only calculating back to the time period of the Manusmriti, which is not particularly old. Although being called "sudra" offended the sensibilities of Vellalar (who, by tradition, were considered above all servile occupations), they claimed vaisya and not kshatriya varna because by that time the Aryan-Dravidian racial theory (introduced by western thinkers) was considered beyond reproach, and so of course there would be a logical issue with claiming kshatriya status as a Dravidian (the same mistake YOU make). That same logical issue applies to vaisya as well, but the vellalar were determined to not be called sudra so they simply insisted on vaisya and got it. But these are modern classifications, within the last one or two centuries, at which point there was no surviving evidence to directly link ANYONE back to the ancient kshatriya clans, so you would consider this more legitimate than 2000+ year old claims by the Velir chieftains (much celebrated in Tamil literature)? By the time the British came to India, the vellalar were not classified as a "Martial race" because they were the educated administrators, the dubashs and zamindars (my great-grandfather, for example, was the Salem Zamindar) who were the equivalent of provincial governors. And also because, whenever the Vellalar wanted to scare the British, they would simply ask the lower-castes to make a ruckus on their behalf. As a final note, I believe saying that Vellalar are comprised of L1, L2, L3 haplogroups is wrong, they are comprised of a majority J2b2 haplogroup.
Signed ( talk) 20:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC) A Saiva Vellala Mudaliar
I will add summary of the discussion. Rajkris ( talk) 02:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Most of these conclusions are wrong.
Fact 1 (Revised). The velir claimed the Yadavas as their ancestors.
Fact 2 (Revised). The question is not about mythology, it is a question of which communities are descendants from those ancient, living clans who were considered Kshatriya in ancient Indian text.
Fact 3 (Revised). The Vellalars were a landlord caste (simply because landlords obviously have farmable land does not make them farmers. They were not the farm hands, which is what "a huge farming caste" implies). The Saiva Vellalar WERE vegetarian (at least from a certain point in medieval history), and the shudra classifications are recent classifications, while ancient classifications never hinted that the Vellalar were in any way considered a "low" people (or more specifically a non-politically privileged group, which IS a general concept that is a part of shudra status - the shudra were not privileged).
Fact 4 (Revised). The brahmans performed coronation ceremonies on the tamil kings and chieftains, many of whom were the clansmen of the Vellalar.
Fact 5 (Revised). Simply because the British did not classify Vellalar as martial race does not mean they lacked battle prowess (why would you imply that the British were somehow the ultimate arbiters of this question?). Vellalar are the descendants of Velir, who are clearly described as warrior-kings - the dominant military forces of Tamil Nadu, along with the Vendar (who were Velir in origin).
Fact 6 (Revised). This "minor section" comprises the entire Saiva Vellalar group (as descendants of the Velir specifically, which includes the Chera/Chola/Pandya dynasties). This is who we are really talking about, since it is understood that the non-Saiva vellalar groups are in many cases different communities who began calling themselves Vellalar quite recently. Special:Contributions/ ( talk) 22:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC) A Saiva Vellala Mudaliar
Ippa MGR, J, Kalaignar were all head of Tamils. But are they Tamil? Ithu nalla koothu. Sasisekar ( talk) 06:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
How could the term Kshatriya and the 4 varnas that were predominantly used in North India apply to Tamil castes? The first time the term Kshatriya became dominant was during the British rule when they tried to conduct a caste census based on the 4 varnas. Castes in Tamilnadu jostled among themselves to prove one was superior to another. I don't think the term Kshatriya was applied to any rulers including the Velirs and the Chera, Chola and Pandyas in any old Tamil literature like the Sangam literature. It would be right to call a caste as a warrior caste but use of the term kshatriya may not be right.
I also object to the reference to 'sanskritization' in this article because most Vellalar subcastes are not sanksritized in the sense the term implies, because many are non-vegetarian and their rituals are very different from the rituals of brahmins. Also historically Jainism was widespread in Tamilnadu during ancient days and Jains were the first ones to advocate vegetarianism in India even while vedic texts encouraged animal sacrifice. It is possible that some Vellalar castes may have adopted vegetarianism due to the Jain influence. It must be remembered that Thirunavukkarasar, a Vellala converted to Jainism and then converted back to Saivam. Shaan1616 ( talk) 12:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Cholas were of Velir lineages, whos descendants are sub-castes of Velaalars [9]. Velir clan ruled during sangam [10] -- Kaikolamudali ( talk) 07:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I have just reverted the inclusion of an image that purports to be some sort of diagram relating to surnames of the Vellalar community. I can see nothing to verify that the six names mentioned are the only names used by the community, or even the most common. I also do not really understand the purpose of the diagram, although perhaps that could be resolved with a better caption. If this information is valid then surely it would be better presented as text within the body of the article? We are not a gallery for the artwork of contributors. - Sitush ( talk) 11:56, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Taprobanus is vendalazing this page!!!... He has removed the Kshatriya reference of vellalars!!... This guy has an agenda!!... He must belong to a low people, mafia organisation which is trying to rewrite tamil history. I noticed that he's spending his time on wikipedia writing false things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajkris ( talk • contribs) 19:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I removed reference to 'vellalars from srilanka' because the guy who wrote it is trying to rewrite history (without any proof); it seems he's an agenda... Some people (on wikipedia...) are trying to rewrite the history of tamils by reducing the image, reputation of vellalars. Vellalars along with Brahmins belong to the elite tamil class from time immemorial. Many different texts prove it... They were landlords, kshatriyas, no doubt on this.
Please show a single historical verifiable document that purports to show any Vellala subdivision as Kshatriyas ? if not in 30 daya i will remove the NPOV RaveenS 13:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
A lot of the stuff written on this is wrong. Who wrote this? What jati are you? How do you go about proving that Vellalas are shudras? That is plain wrong! Vellalas are the equivalents of Nairs. They are administrators and close the the powerful leading authorities. Later,as time passed, lower castes tried to change their last names and become Vellala Pillais. The same is the case with Nairs in Kerala. The varna is Kshathriya.
Im sorry but you need to provide a non-biased proof from a neutral perspective.-- Jack.Able ( talk) 05:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
The Rajputs/Thakurs/Nairs fulfill all off these requirements. Almost all books classify Vellalars as Shudra. Im going to change the page soon if you cant defend this. I am not promoting racial hatred. Im just disputing your POV that they are Kshatriyas, and you are defending it poorly. As user Raveen pointed out, please show a sentence from a book that shows CLEARLY that they were kshatriyas.-- Jack.Able ( talk) 05:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
BtW, I can provide you a link where you can check the racial features of Vellalars (racial appearance seems very important for you); but i will not lower myself to such stupid things. I let you search for. Rajkris ( talk) 02:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
One thing, I have already told you, but I prefer to repeat it so that it can enter into your brain (at least I hope so): in Hindu texts, Rama & Krishna (the 2 greatest Hindu heroes) are considered as the perfect Aryans. Rama was dark skinned & Krishna was black. So according to Hindu texts (from which the word aryan comes from), Aryan means a dark skinned with caucasian features. Two more precisions: Vyasa, the writer of the Vedas was black, Arjuna was dark-skinned (in spite of the meaning of his name: "pale"). Rajkris ( talk) 12:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
False. First of all, the evidence is that the Velir were claiming Yadava clan from a very ancient point in history, and doing so very frequently, and this claim was accepted by the people they ruled. The Vellalar are descended from the Velir. Secondly, R1a haplogroup is found in tribal indian populations as well as "Aryan" (whatever type of Aryan) populations, AS WELL as Dravidian populations. Finally, the Vellalar are mostly comprised of J2b2, not L1/L2/L3. 75.82.48.53 ( talk) 22:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)A Saiva Vellala Mudaliar
I dispute the argument that Vellalars are basically agriculturists. Even historian Mr. Vincent A Smith in his book 'The Oxford Student's History of India' says, Vellalars are one of the caste in Tamil Nadu which do not have any association with any one particular job. Like every caste of Tamil Nadu including Mudhaliar, Udayar, Vanniar, Nadar, Gownder, Vellalars too involved in farming. You can also refer the Gazette of Salem District publish by Tamil Nadu government.
Vellalars migrated to Kerala along with Pandiyan kings, as Pandians needed scholars with them when they had war with Cheras.
If no one replies to this dispute, I will re-write the contents about Vellalars's occupation A Soosai Prakash ( talk) 13:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
The Velirs of the Sangam literature are Vellalars. Read through the sources.
Velirs are the chiefs of the Vellalars. Review the references below.
Sources:
1. Tamil Studies: Essays on the History of the Tamil People, Language, Religion, and Literature By Muttusvami Srinivasa Aiyangar
2. Heritage of the Tamils: Education and Vocation - Page 269 by Shanmuga Velayutham Subramanian, Ca. Vē Cuppiramaṇiyan̲, Vē. Irā Mātavan̲ - Education - 1986 - 506 pages
3. Racical Synthesis in Hindu Culture - Page 156.
4. The Early History of the Vellar Basin, with Special Reference to the ... - Page 21 by M. Arokiaswami - Vellalas - 1954 - 166 pages
5. Peoples of India - Page 29 by William Harlen Gilbert - Ethnology - 1944 - 86 pages
Irungkovel, Ma-Vel Ewi are all vellalars "The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago By V. Kanakasabhai". Mayank12 ( talk) 18:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Vellalar had the hereditary right to marry and crown the kings--"Contributions to Indian Sociology By Research Centre on Social and Economic Development in Asia, Institute of Economic Growth (India), Institute of Economic Growth" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayank12 ( talk • contribs) 21:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
"The Velir or Velala tribes"--->Studies in Tamil Literature and History
By V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar [7].
Mayank12 ( talk) 22:46, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
The below references come from books which deal with ancient Tamil history (Chera/Chola/Pandya/Sangam era):
1. The Harappan civilization and its writing: a model for the decipherment of the Indus Script... By Walter Ashlin Fairservis page 52/53: " The relationship of vellalan (Tamil) and vellalar (Malayalam) to terms for ancient chiefs velir, etc., provide us with a term for the system of chiefs as a whole, vellalar" Rajkris ( talk) 21:33, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
2. Ancient Indian History and Civilization By Sailendrda Nath Sen Page 205 & 207: "... the Vellalars were the aristocratic classe and were held in high esteem...", "The bulk of the land was owned by Vellalar who occupied a high social status. They employed labourers to till the land." Rajkris ( talk) 21:43, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
3. History of agriculture in India up to c. 1200 A.D. By Lalanji Gopal, Vinod Chandra Srivastava, Project of History of Indian Science, Philosophy and Culture Page 418 & 420: "Vellalars were responsible for the triumphs of their kings. They were the supervisors, the managers of their cultivable land." Rajkris ( talk) 21:43, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
4. Meluhha and Agastya: Alpha and Omega of the Indus Script by Iravatham Mahadevan, Indus Research Centre, Roja Muthiah Research Library, Chennai, India, page 16: "The Velir/Vellalar group constituted the ruling and land owning classe in the Tamil country since the beginning of recorded history..." Rajkris ( talk) 21:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
5. Racial Synthesis in Hindu Culture page 156: "...Velir/Vellala nobility..." Rajkris ( talk) 21:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
6. Encyclopedia of Indian Tribes by S.S. Shashi page 216: "...Sage Agastya repaired to Dwarka and, taking with him eighteen families of Vels or Velirs, moved on to the south..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
7. Journal of Tamil Studies By International Association of Tamil Research: "Vellalar of the Tamil Country,descendants of the Velir,..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
8. Meluhha and Agastya: Alpha and Omega of the Indus Script by Iravatham Mahadevan, Indus Research Centre, Roja Muthiah Research Library, Chennai, India, page 16: "Agastya agreed and, on his way, visited ‘Tuvarapati’ (Dvaraka) and led eighteen families of the Velir, the descendants of netu-muti-annual (Krishna), to the south" (Precision: this is only myth, legend, no historical proof). Rajkris ( talk) 22:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
9. Kingship and political practice in colonial India By Pamela G. Price page 61: "Vellalars were the ruling authority and the lords of the lands and villages..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
10. Irunkovel and the Kottai Vellalar - The possible origins of a closed community By P. Ramanathan: "He was an important chief among the Velir and his ancestors belonged to the Yadu Vamsa in which Krishna was born..." Rajkris ( talk) 22:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
11. The hollow crown: ethnohistory of an Indian Kingdom By Nicholas B. Dirks Page 139 to 149: "... the ruling Vellalars...", ".... forts built by Vellalars...".... Rajkris ( talk) 23:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I have other ref, but i think it is enough for the moment. The ref above CLEARLY show that the Vellalars were the nobility, the ruling class of the ancient Tamil order, they were involved in war activities as military officers... Some myths, legends even link them to the Yadu clan. Their Kshatriyas status is indisputable!. Rajkris ( talk) 23:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
After the collapse of the traditional Tamil Royal dynasties, they lost their ruling status and got involved only, mainly in farming related activities. Rajkris ( talk) 23:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
RESPONSE TO JACK ABLE Jack Able, I'll explain two reasons why I think you are wrong, and why Vellalar ARE kshatriya in any sense of the word:
1. As far as I can tell, the main reason you object is because the kshatriya are "vedic aryans" whereas the vellalar are "dravidians." Large-scale genetic studies have demonstrated that there is no evidence of an external invasion of aryan-speakers into India, ie both north indian Aryans and south indian Dravidians existed INSIDE India from a period of time dating back to over 30,000 years ago. And the dravidians were not always in the south, they were at one time widespread over the indian subcontinent - South India does not have an archaeologically-attested copper age, it transitions directly from the stone age to the steel age (because of north-south migration). While there is a genetic gradient that goes from north to south, this is less evident in upper-caste south indians (which includes saiva vellalar), and anyways, it is clear that both aryan/dravidian indian populations existed in India before the end of the last ice age. You claim that R1a1 is the marker of the Aryan, but according to recent studies this marker most likely originated in India (over 30 thousand years ago), and is found at high frequencies and of ancient origin in tribal as well as caste populations ie this cannot be explained simply by upper-caste "Aryans" impregnating the tribal women in the past few thousand years, instead researchers explain it as the caste-hindus emerging from the tribal populations. Therefore, the argument that Dravidians can't be kshatriya is inaccurate, since they were both living side by side during the Indus Valley Days and both are "indigenous" to India.
2. In fact, there are some people who think the ancient Yadava Kshatriya were dravidian for one simple reason - they had (seemingly approved of) cross-cousin marriages, something which is considered forbidden in North Indian culture but historically considered ideal in south indian (dravidian) culture. As long as you accept that vellalar are the velir of ancient tamil history (something that mainstream scholarship accepts), the most common lineage the Velir claimed was that of Yadu. The fact that numerous copper and pottery inscriptions have been found of Velir chiefs (who, by the way, were a technologically advanced group, generally credited with introducing advanced agricultural techniques to the Tamil lands) claiming Yadava lineage from before the Christian era means that these are some of the most ancient claimants to the kshatriya status (the vedic aryans themselves can only claim an ATTESTED history going back a few centuries before Buddha, so these Yadava claims are only a few centuries after), certainly older than the rajputs.
Summing up - So we have the velir of ancient times claiming kshatriya status, and the vellalar of recent times claiming vaisya status or in some cases accepting shudra status. Which should we believe about the vellalar? Obviously, the older the claim, the more likely (not certain) that it is based in some form of tradition. Everyone knows exactly why Vellalar were called shudras by the iyer brahmins of tamil nadu - the brahmins thought that anyone who was not living in the north indian "aryavarta" was not an aryan. What they failed to account for was the possibility that the vellalar may have migrated from the "aryavarta" at a point in time so ancient as to be forgotten, whereas they themselves were only calculating back to the time period of the Manusmriti, which is not particularly old. Although being called "sudra" offended the sensibilities of Vellalar (who, by tradition, were considered above all servile occupations), they claimed vaisya and not kshatriya varna because by that time the Aryan-Dravidian racial theory (introduced by western thinkers) was considered beyond reproach, and so of course there would be a logical issue with claiming kshatriya status as a Dravidian (the same mistake YOU make). That same logical issue applies to vaisya as well, but the vellalar were determined to not be called sudra so they simply insisted on vaisya and got it. But these are modern classifications, within the last one or two centuries, at which point there was no surviving evidence to directly link ANYONE back to the ancient kshatriya clans, so you would consider this more legitimate than 2000+ year old claims by the Velir chieftains (much celebrated in Tamil literature)? By the time the British came to India, the vellalar were not classified as a "Martial race" because they were the educated administrators, the dubashs and zamindars (my great-grandfather, for example, was the Salem Zamindar) who were the equivalent of provincial governors. And also because, whenever the Vellalar wanted to scare the British, they would simply ask the lower-castes to make a ruckus on their behalf. As a final note, I believe saying that Vellalar are comprised of L1, L2, L3 haplogroups is wrong, they are comprised of a majority J2b2 haplogroup.
Signed ( talk) 20:21, 16 June 2011 (UTC) A Saiva Vellala Mudaliar
I will add summary of the discussion. Rajkris ( talk) 02:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Most of these conclusions are wrong.
Fact 1 (Revised). The velir claimed the Yadavas as their ancestors.
Fact 2 (Revised). The question is not about mythology, it is a question of which communities are descendants from those ancient, living clans who were considered Kshatriya in ancient Indian text.
Fact 3 (Revised). The Vellalars were a landlord caste (simply because landlords obviously have farmable land does not make them farmers. They were not the farm hands, which is what "a huge farming caste" implies). The Saiva Vellalar WERE vegetarian (at least from a certain point in medieval history), and the shudra classifications are recent classifications, while ancient classifications never hinted that the Vellalar were in any way considered a "low" people (or more specifically a non-politically privileged group, which IS a general concept that is a part of shudra status - the shudra were not privileged).
Fact 4 (Revised). The brahmans performed coronation ceremonies on the tamil kings and chieftains, many of whom were the clansmen of the Vellalar.
Fact 5 (Revised). Simply because the British did not classify Vellalar as martial race does not mean they lacked battle prowess (why would you imply that the British were somehow the ultimate arbiters of this question?). Vellalar are the descendants of Velir, who are clearly described as warrior-kings - the dominant military forces of Tamil Nadu, along with the Vendar (who were Velir in origin).
Fact 6 (Revised). This "minor section" comprises the entire Saiva Vellalar group (as descendants of the Velir specifically, which includes the Chera/Chola/Pandya dynasties). This is who we are really talking about, since it is understood that the non-Saiva vellalar groups are in many cases different communities who began calling themselves Vellalar quite recently. Special:Contributions/ ( talk) 22:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC) A Saiva Vellala Mudaliar
Ippa MGR, J, Kalaignar were all head of Tamils. But are they Tamil? Ithu nalla koothu. Sasisekar ( talk) 06:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
How could the term Kshatriya and the 4 varnas that were predominantly used in North India apply to Tamil castes? The first time the term Kshatriya became dominant was during the British rule when they tried to conduct a caste census based on the 4 varnas. Castes in Tamilnadu jostled among themselves to prove one was superior to another. I don't think the term Kshatriya was applied to any rulers including the Velirs and the Chera, Chola and Pandyas in any old Tamil literature like the Sangam literature. It would be right to call a caste as a warrior caste but use of the term kshatriya may not be right.
I also object to the reference to 'sanskritization' in this article because most Vellalar subcastes are not sanksritized in the sense the term implies, because many are non-vegetarian and their rituals are very different from the rituals of brahmins. Also historically Jainism was widespread in Tamilnadu during ancient days and Jains were the first ones to advocate vegetarianism in India even while vedic texts encouraged animal sacrifice. It is possible that some Vellalar castes may have adopted vegetarianism due to the Jain influence. It must be remembered that Thirunavukkarasar, a Vellala converted to Jainism and then converted back to Saivam. Shaan1616 ( talk) 12:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Cholas were of Velir lineages, whos descendants are sub-castes of Velaalars [9]. Velir clan ruled during sangam [10] -- Kaikolamudali ( talk) 07:11, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I have just reverted the inclusion of an image that purports to be some sort of diagram relating to surnames of the Vellalar community. I can see nothing to verify that the six names mentioned are the only names used by the community, or even the most common. I also do not really understand the purpose of the diagram, although perhaps that could be resolved with a better caption. If this information is valid then surely it would be better presented as text within the body of the article? We are not a gallery for the artwork of contributors. - Sitush ( talk) 11:56, 19 November 2012 (UTC)