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 |
@ TheBrokenTusk: These are your references, Tambaih(2001) actually discredits Simon Chittys classification, you left out the complete citation by mistake.
Tambiah (2001) “ According to Swamy Vedachalam it is the Aryan priests who adopted the device of bringing all Tamils under three denominations: Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra and formulated rigid rules. He says : 2 "In this design the Aryan priests succeeded so well, that the Tamils whether kings or nobles ,rich or poor, learned or ignorant, all have become thorough slaves not only to Aryan priests but also to all who have joined the Aryan fold and bear the name of Brahmin. After this the further work of vilifying the Tamils was made much easier, and all those who in course of time, styled themselves Brahmins, discovered it to their great benefit and glory, to efface the three grades of distinction into which their predecessors classed the Tamils and to put them altogether under the general term "Sudra which means but the contemptuous menials as a whole. But in the Tamil country nobody will call himself a Sudra or a Vaisya or a Kshatriya. The Tamils are either agriculturists or traders, artisans, or labourers; every class of people follows a hereditary profession and calls itself by the name of that profession. But quite recently, a kind of mania has afflicted some classes; the people whose professions, though much useful, are looked upon as low by Brahmins and their imitators, to bring themselves under the Aryan appellation of Brahmins, Kshatriya and Vaisya, escape being called the Sudra." It is into this error that even such an erudite scholar like Simon Casie Chetty falls when in his work entitled: The Castes, Customs, Manners and Literature of the Tamils where he classifies the Vellalas under the Vaisya caste and even goes to the extent of calling the Vellalas 'The Poo Vasi Ya/ 1 The caste system in Jaffna as it exists today is ample proof of the theories advanced by Kanagasabai and Swamy Vedachalam.”
Casie(2016) Simon Casie Chitty died in 1860. After the the Vellalans were classified as shudras in all official govt census.
Desai (1975) says Vellalas “proclaim themselves” as Vaishyas
Sanghvi (1981) says there is a tradition “among the Vellalans” that there were 3 divisions of Vaishyas....
Usha (2010) is analysis of Karmandala Satakam of the Medieval Period
Thruston(2018) is just a commentary by some “VED from Victoria institutions” on the original castes and tribes published in 1909. Edgar Thurston died in 1935. Even in Thurstons original work he only states “Bhu Vaisya” was the name returned by Vellalas. (That is how they perceived themselves, not how they were classified though)
So basically all your sources either state how the vellalans perceived themselves, or about their past traditions of having once been a Vaisya caste under the Medieval Cholas.
So I’m reverting back the edit to accurately depict that they were once classified as a Vaishyas in the past. From the 1870s despite their protests they were classsified as Shudras. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 16:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Bold text
1)LD Sanghvi
"There is a tradition among the Vellalans that there were 3 divisions of the Vaisyas : ( 1 ) Bhuvaisyas or farmers , ( 2 ) Govaisyas or husbandmen and ( 3 ) Dhanavaisyas or merchants . The last division is claimed to have given rise to the Chettis who originally belonged to the Vellala tribe."
Tradition-the transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation, or the fact of being passed on in this way.
So LD Sanghvi is just stating what tradition the Vellalars believe in. It does not mean they were perceived as Vaisyas by society or by govt.
Rajannan, Busnagi (1992)
He just states the Kongu Vellalars are referred to 'Buvaisya' along with other terms like 'rayar', and 'Gangavansam'
This again does not equate to being classified as a Vaishya at present 'Buvaisya' is just a a name here, with roots in their past.
It's like 'rayar' means King, but it not proof of a Kshatriya status or 'Gangavansam' name being proof of their Ganga descent being accepted.
About the 'Manava Gotra'. According to your source the Mnava Gotra is just a substitute used for those who don't have a specific Gotra in ceremonies. The usage of Ammava Gotra itself is indicates the Vellalars dont have proper Gotras.
The sources for present classification of Vellalars are not convincing for the reasond I mentioned.
Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 21:35, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
I’ve gone through Edgar Thruston’s write up about Vellalans, here and it is contradicting their Vaishya status. I think you made an error here as well misled by the Snippets. Here is what the book says..
The Story of their origin is as follows. Many thousands of years ago, when the inhabitants of the world were rude and ignorant of agriculture, a severe drought fell upon the land, and the people prayed to Bhūdēvi, the goddess of the earth, for aid. She pitied them, and produced from her body a man carrying a plough, who showed them how to till the soil and support themselves. His offsprings are the Vellālas, who ASPIRE to belong to the Vaisya caste, since that includes Gōvaisyas, Bhūvaisyas, and Dhanavaisyas (shepherds, cultivators and merchants). A few, therefore, constantly wear the sacred thread, but most put it on only during marriages or funerals as a mark of the sacred nature of the ceremony."
In 'The Tamils eighteen hundred years ago,' Mr. V. Kanakasabhai writes that ....The Arivars were ascetics, but, of the men living in society, the farmers occupied the highest position. They formed the nobility, or the landed aristocracy, of the country. They were also called Vellālar.....But, in the chapter in which he describes the classes of society, the author omits all mention of the Arivar, and places the Brahmins who wear the sacred thread as the first caste. The kings, he says, very guardedly, and not warriors, form the second caste, as if the three kings Chera, Chola and Pāndy could form a caste; all who live by trade belong to the third caste. He does not say that either the kings or the merchants wear the sacred thread. Then he singles out the Vellālas, and states that they have no other they have no other calling than the cultivation of the soil. Here he does not say that the Vellālas are Sūdras, but indirectly implies that the ordinary Vellālas should be reckoned as Sūdras, and that those Vellālas who were kings should be honoured as Kshatriyas.
In an excellent summary of the Vellālas *[8] Mr. W. Francis writes as follows. "By general consent, the first place in social esteem among the Tamil Sūdra castes is awarded to them.
Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 05:51, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk Also, L.D Sanghvi is a Cancer Researcher [1] [2] and not an anthropologist or historian. This is a publication by the Indian society of human genetics [3]. Add the primary source that L.D Sanghvi references. It’s probably one or the sources already discussed here. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 07:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Also Thurston just states the “tradition of Vellalans” he DOES NOT classify them as Vaishyas or Shudras he only states what OTHER AUTHORS have classified them as.
The Bramahal record story does not even have the word ‘Vaisya’ in it.
>I have given proof that later British records like the Travancore Government Gazette accorded the Vellalas the Vaishya statu
One author Rao writes that they are Vaishyas. That is far from ‘British records’ classifying them as such. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 07:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk the ‘gotras’ among Jats and Vellalans are not the same as the ‘Rishi Gotras’ of the Brahmins and Vaishyas, every community has gotra like subcastes.
>The caste (jati) is an endogamous group, and gotra (clan) is an exogamous division within it. Normally, some of the larger castes, such as Rajpt, Jat, Vellala, and Brahman, have many constituent exogamous subgroups."
Yes. But Rishi gotra and clan cannot be used interchangeably
In Hindu culture, the term gotra ( Sanskrit: गोत्र) is considered to be equivalent to lineage. It broadly refers to people who are descendants in an unbroken male line from a common male ancestor or patriline. Generally the gotra forms an exogamous unit, with the marriage within the same gotra being prohibited by custom, being regarded as incest. [1]
A gotra must be distinguished from a kula. A kula is equal to a particular family , or equal to modern day "clans", Kula does relate to lineage or caste. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 08:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk about Upanayana
Several texts such as Sushruta Sutrasthana, however, also include the fourth varna, the Sudras, entering schools and the formal education process, [2] stating that the Upanayana samskara was open to everyone. [3] [4] Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 08:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk This karmandala Sathakam analysis [4] does not yield any results for the terms Vaishya, Vysya, Vaisya etc, it cannot be used as a source to claim that Vellalans were Vaishyas, Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 08:18, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
>The terms Bupaalan used in the Karmandala Satakam is synonymous with Buvaisya as is referenced by Busnagi Rajannan here: Quote: "VELLALAR , Kongu . A major caste of farmers in the district . They are variously referred to as Bupaalan , Buvaisya , Dhevar , Gangavamsam , Rayar , and most commonly as Kudiyaanavar and Vivasaayi
This just gives the commonly used terms to refer to the Kongu Vellalar. It does not say they are “SYNONYMS”. By your logic all the other terms are interchangeable too. So does Rayar, Dhevar and Vivasaayi mean Bhuvaishya now?
You’re quoting Karmandala Satakam, and Baramhal record mentioned my Edgar thurston as citations for them being classified as Vaishyas, but no where do both of them even mention the term “Vaishya”. You’re then using Salem Cyclopedia to claim Bhuvaisya and Bhupalan are synonyms. But that’s absolutely false. Because they’re two separate terms, like multiple others mentioned there to refer to them. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 10:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
{{ Admin help}} Requesting dispute resolution. As a consensus wasn’t reached. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 13:26, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk with your edits here [5] you have deleted my references [5] [6] [7] stating they are a century old , but they are references I provided for the statements that Vellalars have been classified as “Shudras” since colonial times. So they are bound to old as they are colonial era sources.
And along with those references you deleted a 2008 one by Pillai [8] where he says ”The Brahmin goes with the Vellala and others of the Sudra caste in this affair”.
This means the Brahmin of the Brahmin Varna goes with the ‘Vellala and others’ of the Sudra varna.
But okay, you disagreed with this, and claim the Vellalas are not being classed as Sudra here. Okay. But what about this edit of your then? [6]
This source you added . [9] says “Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business” How are you passing this off as the Vellalar communities being classified as Vysya? Theyre not saying anything of that sort, This by no means can be twisted to imply that the Karnataka government classified the Chettiar, Gounder etc as Vaishyas. Vysa is a the name of a separate caste of Karnataka. Check this out [7], they’ve listed Vysya as a separate caste and Mudaliar, Chettiar, Pillai, separately too. here are other sources example [8] [9] Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 14:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@TheBrokenTusk Here look at page 607 and 633 of the 1981 census [10], it clearly, differentiates between them as separate castes in the table. I don’t know if you’re joking now. You cannot extrapolate one citation(Pillai 2008) (Gupta 1988) to another completely different one (census 1981) And draw your own conclusions. Does it say Nammalvar was a vysya in the census 1981 article [11]? NO. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 17:35, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@TheBrokenTusk
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia to present things as they are, but in the Varna sectiion you’ve drawn your own conclusions and made the following statement
The evidences of the Dvija Gotras being held by the Vellalas[89][90], along with the long documented tradition of them wearing the sacred thread[91][92][93][94][95] or Yajñopavita & the Vaidika Upanayana ceremonies having been performed by the Vellalar community,[96][97][98] which are traditionally restricted to the 3 upper varnas, namely Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya respectively.[99] reaffirms their traditional Dvija Vaishya status[100] & contradicts these additional Shudra classifications of the Vellalars from the colonial period onwards[101], as Shudras do not have Dvija Gotras & are not given the Vaidika upanayana ceremonies.
This is your POV and you’re pushing it, I’m removing this and adding that
‘The Varna status of the Vellalars is a contested and complex topic, they have been classified as Shudras and as Vaishyas by different sources.’ in the intro of the Varna section.
Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 15:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
see Khatri#Origin_and_ritual_status as an example, the Wikipedia page should just state what the sources and authors have to say. Editors cannot write their own conclusions they arrived at using the sources. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 16:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
In the intro i changed They went “traditionally classified as Vaishyas” to according to their traditions they are classified as Vaishyas. Because the Varna tradition was foreign to south (As stated by Swami Vedachala, and various historians like Edgar Thurston, Gail Omvedt, James Manor etc). [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] So I changed it to ‘according to their traditions’ they are classified as Vaishyas, the Baramahal record and the Karmandala satakam don’t even mention the word vaishya. Busnagi does NOT claim that. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 16:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk Here look at page 607 and 633 in the 1981 census you cite [12], it clearly lists Goundar, Mudaliar, Chettiar etct as separate castes from Vysya in the table.
The Karnataka census you cite does not state they are Vaishyas at all, you’re literally making up statements now. You cannot combine another source and reinterpret what the census means. It has to be taken verbatim. Does it classif them as Vaishyas? NO. Only the 1911 gazette states they are Vaishyas Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 17:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
3O Response: This is clearly a heated and controversial topic, and clearly also one that's quite impenetrable to an outsider. I have no opinion on how Vellalars should actually be classified, but to me it seems clear that the proposed introduction "The Varna status of the Vellalars is a contested and complex topic, they have been classified as Shudras and as Vaishyas by different sources." is a statement of fact and should be retained. It might also make sense to add three subheadings, presenting the case for Vellalars (1) being Vaishya, (2) being Shudra, and (3) the final argument by Swami Vedachalam that varnas are (were) historically alien to Tamil society, so Vellalars aren't (weren't) really either. As a side note, the nomenclature in the article seems highly inconsistent, I would strongly recommend using Vaishya (not "Vysya" etc) and Shudra (not Sudra etc) since those are the agreed names on Wikipedia. Jpatokal ( talk) 09:09, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Jpatokal: Thank you for mediating, I have requested User:TheBrokenTusk to follow your suggestion. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 03:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Jpatokal: Thank you for the mediation. I have added the changes you suggested, and the changes to the chronological order of the Vaishya section as put forth by @Beatrix_Kiddo2004. I have reproduced the article with these changes below, for future reference, it now clearly reflects the Vaishya status traditionally, historically and as per government records.
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location (
link):”The Vellala are a Sudra race of Hindus Tamil and the Kodun - Tamil , which so widely who speak Tamil. They assume the honorific designation of Mudali or Mudaliar meaning first man, and are chiefly farmers, but many of them are soldiers.”
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link):"Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business ."
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link):"Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business ."
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link):"Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business ."
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In South India, There were essentially three classes: Brahmin, non-Brahmin, and Dalit. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Vellalars were considered non-Brahmin Upper castes. [6] [7] [8]
Although, Vellalars were Vaishya both traditionally and historically. [9] [10] [11] [12] According to historian C. Hayavadana Rao, Vellalars belong to Bhu- Vaishya along with the classification of the Travancore state and Sri Lanka. [13] [14] [15]
Reliable additions for the "Varna classification" section.
Phonex01 (
talk)
18:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
{{
edit extended-protected}}
template.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
18:28, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
By 1650s non-Brahmin upper caste Vellalar were...
higher non-brahmin castes of Vellalar...
The landlords came from the high ranking Non-Brahman caste of Vellalar...
Travancore state.. Vellalas belong to vaishya...
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
...when government census officers placed Vellalar in the Sat-Sudra or Good Sudra category in its 1901 census, Vellalar castemen petitioned this designation, protesting this designation..
The four fold vedic system of caste hierarchy did not exist during sangam period. The society was organised by occupational groups living apart from each other... Then there were aristocratic classes like Vellalar and Karalar...
the larger part of the Tamil society remained casteless. With state formation and the emergence of ruling houses such as Pallavas, Pandyas, Cheras and Cholas, since the sixth century A.D., there was a wave of migration of Brahmins from northern India... As a quid pro quo for the conferment of the status of Kshatriyas on Vellalas, who were until then treated on a par with Vaishyas, the Vellala rulers gifted prime land in major river valley tracts to Brahmins...
Those involved in Justice Party politics were drawn mostly from the upper strata of non-Brahmin castes such as Mudaliars, Chettiars and Vellalars among Tamils, Rajus, Reddys and Naidus (Kammas) among Telugus and Nairs among Malayalis.
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
The page has many flaws (one sided view and author's personal views) and insufficient information. It's most of the information (including summary) was contributed by 2 editors only. The two were fighting like kids in the talk page as you can see. You can compare the page with Rajputs, Khatri, Vokkaliga and many dominant society of Indian regions. These pages are well constructed by genuine editors from various backgrounds. Literally, The Vellalar page summary is author's pov (their claim starts "seems to be rather"). The page need major improvements, cleanups and more sources.
The Wikipedia's purpose is to benefit readers by acting as a widely accessible and free encyclopedia that contains information on all branches of knowledge. If the page can be edited by admins only, what's the need of wikipedia editors? The information should be contributed by volunteers and genuine editors without any restrictions and opinionated moderators rivalry.
Thank you. Exhistorian ( talk) 18:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Editors kindly add this updated information to the varna section.
As Varna (Hinduism) concept, vaishyas are agriculturists and traders. This is [24] secondary source that supports the vaishya and shudra classifications. The varna classification started in the 1800s and the British government recognized there was no proper 4-fold Vedic varna system in south India. Also, many Vellalar were Jains. Later British colonial period, Govt of India classified all respectable castes of south India are non-Brahmins. Periyavelar99 ( talk) 18:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
{{
Edit extended-protected}}
template. User has been indeffed, closing edit request.
TG
HL ↗ 🍁
18:30, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
References
By 1650s non-Brahmin upper caste Vellalar were...
higher non-brahmin castes of Vellalar...
The landlords came from the high ranking Non-Brahman caste of Vellalar...
Travancore state.. Vellalas belong to vaishya...
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
...when government census officers placed Vellalar in the Sat-Sudra or Good Sudra category in its 1901 census, Vellalar castemen petitioned this designation, protesting this designation..
The four fold vedic system of caste hierarchy did not exist during sangam period. The society was organised by occupational groups living apart from each other... Then there were aristocratic classes like Vellalar and Karalar...
the larger part of the Tamil society remained casteless. With state formation and the emergence of ruling houses such as Pallavas, Pandyas, Cheras and Cholas, since the sixth century A.D., there was a wave of migration of Brahmins from northern India... As a quid pro quo for the conferment of the status of Kshatriyas on Vellalas, who were until then treated on a par with Vaishyas, the Vellala rulers gifted prime land in major river valley tracts to Brahmins...
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Despite being a relatively lowly group, they were dominant communities in Tamil agrarian societies for 600 years until the decline of the Chola empire in the 13th century, with their chieftains able to practice state-level political authority after winning the support and legitimisation of Brahmins and other higher-ranked communities with grants of land and honors.
to
From the Sangam period to the Chola period of Indian history (A.d. 600 to 1200), state-level political authority was in the hands of relatively low, Vellalar chieftains, who endowed local and nonlocal Brahmins with land and honors, and were in turn legitimized by them.
additional context (request) on the first para of the social status:
They were more orthodox than the Brahmins in their religious practices. [1] [2] The Vellalar nobles had marriage alliances with Chola royal families. [3] [4] Bhumihar means (maharaja) ( talk) 15:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the post-Sangam period section, add this requested line after "... dynasty called Kalabhras." to support the context.
Historians believe that the Kalabhras belonged to the Vellalar community of warriors who were possibly once the feudatories of the Cholas and the Pallavas. [1] 42.105.220.218 ( talk) 17:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is the basic necessary helpful overview (Compiled from already existing and reliable sources) of the article to add to the history section but above the Sangam literature on the main article.
Historians consider the Vellalars originated from the Velir clans who claim descent from the Yadu king or Yadu dynasty. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Historically, they held various occupational positions from petty kings and aristocrats, governors of provinces, and commanders of armies, to ordinary agricultural landlords and traders. [6] [7] [8] [9] Vino678777 ( talk) 14:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
References
Historian M. Arokiaswamy "Origin of the Vellalas, 1955, p 25" stresses that Vellalar originated as Velir chieftains of the sangam age.
An Ay chief described as vennir vellala, not as Yadhava. Although Vellalas themselves trace their descent from yadu. Thus Ay velirs are vellalas.
The Nankudi vellalars directly trace their ancestors to the Irunkovel line of Velir kings.
To conclude that, then: the Velir families who, as states in the preceding pages, emigrated from velpulam and settled as rulers in several parts of the south, and the great community of Velalas who were their followers and kinsmen have...
Velirs or Vellalas were landed agricultural aristrocrats.
Vellalar of these, the former, i,e, Uluvithunbor were employed by the reigning monarchs as governors of provinces and districts, and commanders of their armies and they were entitled to high privileges... being born of the families of the petty kings and nobles, bride givers to royals ...
{{
cite journal}}
: line feed character in |quote=
at position 286 (
help)
Vellalas were landed agricultural aristocrats and associated with kings and nobles in blood...
Vellalas held eight kind of positions, they were: Being a King, a Prince, Kosar...
The Vellalar were dominant secular aristocratic caste under the Chola kings, providing the courtiers, most of the army officers.... , Thondamandala Vellalar subjects there to have been traditionally "landlords, warriors, and officials of the state class".
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 |
@ TheBrokenTusk: These are your references, Tambaih(2001) actually discredits Simon Chittys classification, you left out the complete citation by mistake.
Tambiah (2001) “ According to Swamy Vedachalam it is the Aryan priests who adopted the device of bringing all Tamils under three denominations: Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra and formulated rigid rules. He says : 2 "In this design the Aryan priests succeeded so well, that the Tamils whether kings or nobles ,rich or poor, learned or ignorant, all have become thorough slaves not only to Aryan priests but also to all who have joined the Aryan fold and bear the name of Brahmin. After this the further work of vilifying the Tamils was made much easier, and all those who in course of time, styled themselves Brahmins, discovered it to their great benefit and glory, to efface the three grades of distinction into which their predecessors classed the Tamils and to put them altogether under the general term "Sudra which means but the contemptuous menials as a whole. But in the Tamil country nobody will call himself a Sudra or a Vaisya or a Kshatriya. The Tamils are either agriculturists or traders, artisans, or labourers; every class of people follows a hereditary profession and calls itself by the name of that profession. But quite recently, a kind of mania has afflicted some classes; the people whose professions, though much useful, are looked upon as low by Brahmins and their imitators, to bring themselves under the Aryan appellation of Brahmins, Kshatriya and Vaisya, escape being called the Sudra." It is into this error that even such an erudite scholar like Simon Casie Chetty falls when in his work entitled: The Castes, Customs, Manners and Literature of the Tamils where he classifies the Vellalas under the Vaisya caste and even goes to the extent of calling the Vellalas 'The Poo Vasi Ya/ 1 The caste system in Jaffna as it exists today is ample proof of the theories advanced by Kanagasabai and Swamy Vedachalam.”
Casie(2016) Simon Casie Chitty died in 1860. After the the Vellalans were classified as shudras in all official govt census.
Desai (1975) says Vellalas “proclaim themselves” as Vaishyas
Sanghvi (1981) says there is a tradition “among the Vellalans” that there were 3 divisions of Vaishyas....
Usha (2010) is analysis of Karmandala Satakam of the Medieval Period
Thruston(2018) is just a commentary by some “VED from Victoria institutions” on the original castes and tribes published in 1909. Edgar Thurston died in 1935. Even in Thurstons original work he only states “Bhu Vaisya” was the name returned by Vellalas. (That is how they perceived themselves, not how they were classified though)
So basically all your sources either state how the vellalans perceived themselves, or about their past traditions of having once been a Vaisya caste under the Medieval Cholas.
So I’m reverting back the edit to accurately depict that they were once classified as a Vaishyas in the past. From the 1870s despite their protests they were classsified as Shudras. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 16:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Bold text
1)LD Sanghvi
"There is a tradition among the Vellalans that there were 3 divisions of the Vaisyas : ( 1 ) Bhuvaisyas or farmers , ( 2 ) Govaisyas or husbandmen and ( 3 ) Dhanavaisyas or merchants . The last division is claimed to have given rise to the Chettis who originally belonged to the Vellala tribe."
Tradition-the transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation, or the fact of being passed on in this way.
So LD Sanghvi is just stating what tradition the Vellalars believe in. It does not mean they were perceived as Vaisyas by society or by govt.
Rajannan, Busnagi (1992)
He just states the Kongu Vellalars are referred to 'Buvaisya' along with other terms like 'rayar', and 'Gangavansam'
This again does not equate to being classified as a Vaishya at present 'Buvaisya' is just a a name here, with roots in their past.
It's like 'rayar' means King, but it not proof of a Kshatriya status or 'Gangavansam' name being proof of their Ganga descent being accepted.
About the 'Manava Gotra'. According to your source the Mnava Gotra is just a substitute used for those who don't have a specific Gotra in ceremonies. The usage of Ammava Gotra itself is indicates the Vellalars dont have proper Gotras.
The sources for present classification of Vellalars are not convincing for the reasond I mentioned.
Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 21:35, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
I’ve gone through Edgar Thruston’s write up about Vellalans, here and it is contradicting their Vaishya status. I think you made an error here as well misled by the Snippets. Here is what the book says..
The Story of their origin is as follows. Many thousands of years ago, when the inhabitants of the world were rude and ignorant of agriculture, a severe drought fell upon the land, and the people prayed to Bhūdēvi, the goddess of the earth, for aid. She pitied them, and produced from her body a man carrying a plough, who showed them how to till the soil and support themselves. His offsprings are the Vellālas, who ASPIRE to belong to the Vaisya caste, since that includes Gōvaisyas, Bhūvaisyas, and Dhanavaisyas (shepherds, cultivators and merchants). A few, therefore, constantly wear the sacred thread, but most put it on only during marriages or funerals as a mark of the sacred nature of the ceremony."
In 'The Tamils eighteen hundred years ago,' Mr. V. Kanakasabhai writes that ....The Arivars were ascetics, but, of the men living in society, the farmers occupied the highest position. They formed the nobility, or the landed aristocracy, of the country. They were also called Vellālar.....But, in the chapter in which he describes the classes of society, the author omits all mention of the Arivar, and places the Brahmins who wear the sacred thread as the first caste. The kings, he says, very guardedly, and not warriors, form the second caste, as if the three kings Chera, Chola and Pāndy could form a caste; all who live by trade belong to the third caste. He does not say that either the kings or the merchants wear the sacred thread. Then he singles out the Vellālas, and states that they have no other they have no other calling than the cultivation of the soil. Here he does not say that the Vellālas are Sūdras, but indirectly implies that the ordinary Vellālas should be reckoned as Sūdras, and that those Vellālas who were kings should be honoured as Kshatriyas.
In an excellent summary of the Vellālas *[8] Mr. W. Francis writes as follows. "By general consent, the first place in social esteem among the Tamil Sūdra castes is awarded to them.
Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 05:51, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk Also, L.D Sanghvi is a Cancer Researcher [1] [2] and not an anthropologist or historian. This is a publication by the Indian society of human genetics [3]. Add the primary source that L.D Sanghvi references. It’s probably one or the sources already discussed here. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 07:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Also Thurston just states the “tradition of Vellalans” he DOES NOT classify them as Vaishyas or Shudras he only states what OTHER AUTHORS have classified them as.
The Bramahal record story does not even have the word ‘Vaisya’ in it.
>I have given proof that later British records like the Travancore Government Gazette accorded the Vellalas the Vaishya statu
One author Rao writes that they are Vaishyas. That is far from ‘British records’ classifying them as such. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 07:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk the ‘gotras’ among Jats and Vellalans are not the same as the ‘Rishi Gotras’ of the Brahmins and Vaishyas, every community has gotra like subcastes.
>The caste (jati) is an endogamous group, and gotra (clan) is an exogamous division within it. Normally, some of the larger castes, such as Rajpt, Jat, Vellala, and Brahman, have many constituent exogamous subgroups."
Yes. But Rishi gotra and clan cannot be used interchangeably
In Hindu culture, the term gotra ( Sanskrit: गोत्र) is considered to be equivalent to lineage. It broadly refers to people who are descendants in an unbroken male line from a common male ancestor or patriline. Generally the gotra forms an exogamous unit, with the marriage within the same gotra being prohibited by custom, being regarded as incest. [1]
A gotra must be distinguished from a kula. A kula is equal to a particular family , or equal to modern day "clans", Kula does relate to lineage or caste. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 08:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk about Upanayana
Several texts such as Sushruta Sutrasthana, however, also include the fourth varna, the Sudras, entering schools and the formal education process, [2] stating that the Upanayana samskara was open to everyone. [3] [4] Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 08:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk This karmandala Sathakam analysis [4] does not yield any results for the terms Vaishya, Vysya, Vaisya etc, it cannot be used as a source to claim that Vellalans were Vaishyas, Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 08:18, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
>The terms Bupaalan used in the Karmandala Satakam is synonymous with Buvaisya as is referenced by Busnagi Rajannan here: Quote: "VELLALAR , Kongu . A major caste of farmers in the district . They are variously referred to as Bupaalan , Buvaisya , Dhevar , Gangavamsam , Rayar , and most commonly as Kudiyaanavar and Vivasaayi
This just gives the commonly used terms to refer to the Kongu Vellalar. It does not say they are “SYNONYMS”. By your logic all the other terms are interchangeable too. So does Rayar, Dhevar and Vivasaayi mean Bhuvaishya now?
You’re quoting Karmandala Satakam, and Baramhal record mentioned my Edgar thurston as citations for them being classified as Vaishyas, but no where do both of them even mention the term “Vaishya”. You’re then using Salem Cyclopedia to claim Bhuvaisya and Bhupalan are synonyms. But that’s absolutely false. Because they’re two separate terms, like multiple others mentioned there to refer to them. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 10:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
{{ Admin help}} Requesting dispute resolution. As a consensus wasn’t reached. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 13:26, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk with your edits here [5] you have deleted my references [5] [6] [7] stating they are a century old , but they are references I provided for the statements that Vellalars have been classified as “Shudras” since colonial times. So they are bound to old as they are colonial era sources.
And along with those references you deleted a 2008 one by Pillai [8] where he says ”The Brahmin goes with the Vellala and others of the Sudra caste in this affair”.
This means the Brahmin of the Brahmin Varna goes with the ‘Vellala and others’ of the Sudra varna.
But okay, you disagreed with this, and claim the Vellalas are not being classed as Sudra here. Okay. But what about this edit of your then? [6]
This source you added . [9] says “Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business” How are you passing this off as the Vellalar communities being classified as Vysya? Theyre not saying anything of that sort, This by no means can be twisted to imply that the Karnataka government classified the Chettiar, Gounder etc as Vaishyas. Vysa is a the name of a separate caste of Karnataka. Check this out [7], they’ve listed Vysya as a separate caste and Mudaliar, Chettiar, Pillai, separately too. here are other sources example [8] [9] Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 14:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@TheBrokenTusk Here look at page 607 and 633 of the 1981 census [10], it clearly, differentiates between them as separate castes in the table. I don’t know if you’re joking now. You cannot extrapolate one citation(Pillai 2008) (Gupta 1988) to another completely different one (census 1981) And draw your own conclusions. Does it say Nammalvar was a vysya in the census 1981 article [11]? NO. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 17:35, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@TheBrokenTusk
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia to present things as they are, but in the Varna sectiion you’ve drawn your own conclusions and made the following statement
The evidences of the Dvija Gotras being held by the Vellalas[89][90], along with the long documented tradition of them wearing the sacred thread[91][92][93][94][95] or Yajñopavita & the Vaidika Upanayana ceremonies having been performed by the Vellalar community,[96][97][98] which are traditionally restricted to the 3 upper varnas, namely Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya respectively.[99] reaffirms their traditional Dvija Vaishya status[100] & contradicts these additional Shudra classifications of the Vellalars from the colonial period onwards[101], as Shudras do not have Dvija Gotras & are not given the Vaidika upanayana ceremonies.
This is your POV and you’re pushing it, I’m removing this and adding that
‘The Varna status of the Vellalars is a contested and complex topic, they have been classified as Shudras and as Vaishyas by different sources.’ in the intro of the Varna section.
Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 15:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
see Khatri#Origin_and_ritual_status as an example, the Wikipedia page should just state what the sources and authors have to say. Editors cannot write their own conclusions they arrived at using the sources. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 16:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
In the intro i changed They went “traditionally classified as Vaishyas” to according to their traditions they are classified as Vaishyas. Because the Varna tradition was foreign to south (As stated by Swami Vedachala, and various historians like Edgar Thurston, Gail Omvedt, James Manor etc). [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] So I changed it to ‘according to their traditions’ they are classified as Vaishyas, the Baramahal record and the Karmandala satakam don’t even mention the word vaishya. Busnagi does NOT claim that. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 16:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
@ TheBrokenTusk Here look at page 607 and 633 in the 1981 census you cite [12], it clearly lists Goundar, Mudaliar, Chettiar etct as separate castes from Vysya in the table.
The Karnataka census you cite does not state they are Vaishyas at all, you’re literally making up statements now. You cannot combine another source and reinterpret what the census means. It has to be taken verbatim. Does it classif them as Vaishyas? NO. Only the 1911 gazette states they are Vaishyas Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 17:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
3O Response: This is clearly a heated and controversial topic, and clearly also one that's quite impenetrable to an outsider. I have no opinion on how Vellalars should actually be classified, but to me it seems clear that the proposed introduction "The Varna status of the Vellalars is a contested and complex topic, they have been classified as Shudras and as Vaishyas by different sources." is a statement of fact and should be retained. It might also make sense to add three subheadings, presenting the case for Vellalars (1) being Vaishya, (2) being Shudra, and (3) the final argument by Swami Vedachalam that varnas are (were) historically alien to Tamil society, so Vellalars aren't (weren't) really either. As a side note, the nomenclature in the article seems highly inconsistent, I would strongly recommend using Vaishya (not "Vysya" etc) and Shudra (not Sudra etc) since those are the agreed names on Wikipedia. Jpatokal ( talk) 09:09, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Jpatokal: Thank you for mediating, I have requested User:TheBrokenTusk to follow your suggestion. Cyberanthropologist ( talk) 03:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
@ Jpatokal: Thank you for the mediation. I have added the changes you suggested, and the changes to the chronological order of the Vaishya section as put forth by @Beatrix_Kiddo2004. I have reproduced the article with these changes below, for future reference, it now clearly reflects the Vaishya status traditionally, historically and as per government records.
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location (
link):”The Vellala are a Sudra race of Hindus Tamil and the Kodun - Tamil , which so widely who speak Tamil. They assume the honorific designation of Mudali or Mudaliar meaning first man, and are chiefly farmers, but many of them are soldiers.”
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link):"Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business ."
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link):"Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business ."
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link):"Other locals belonging to Chettiar , Goundar , Mudaliar and Vysya communities are also doing a substantial business ."
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In South India, There were essentially three classes: Brahmin, non-Brahmin, and Dalit. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Vellalars were considered non-Brahmin Upper castes. [6] [7] [8]
Although, Vellalars were Vaishya both traditionally and historically. [9] [10] [11] [12] According to historian C. Hayavadana Rao, Vellalars belong to Bhu- Vaishya along with the classification of the Travancore state and Sri Lanka. [13] [14] [15]
Reliable additions for the "Varna classification" section.
Phonex01 (
talk)
18:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
{{
edit extended-protected}}
template.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
18:28, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
By 1650s non-Brahmin upper caste Vellalar were...
higher non-brahmin castes of Vellalar...
The landlords came from the high ranking Non-Brahman caste of Vellalar...
Travancore state.. Vellalas belong to vaishya...
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
...when government census officers placed Vellalar in the Sat-Sudra or Good Sudra category in its 1901 census, Vellalar castemen petitioned this designation, protesting this designation..
The four fold vedic system of caste hierarchy did not exist during sangam period. The society was organised by occupational groups living apart from each other... Then there were aristocratic classes like Vellalar and Karalar...
the larger part of the Tamil society remained casteless. With state formation and the emergence of ruling houses such as Pallavas, Pandyas, Cheras and Cholas, since the sixth century A.D., there was a wave of migration of Brahmins from northern India... As a quid pro quo for the conferment of the status of Kshatriyas on Vellalas, who were until then treated on a par with Vaishyas, the Vellala rulers gifted prime land in major river valley tracts to Brahmins...
Those involved in Justice Party politics were drawn mostly from the upper strata of non-Brahmin castes such as Mudaliars, Chettiars and Vellalars among Tamils, Rajus, Reddys and Naidus (Kammas) among Telugus and Nairs among Malayalis.
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
The page has many flaws (one sided view and author's personal views) and insufficient information. It's most of the information (including summary) was contributed by 2 editors only. The two were fighting like kids in the talk page as you can see. You can compare the page with Rajputs, Khatri, Vokkaliga and many dominant society of Indian regions. These pages are well constructed by genuine editors from various backgrounds. Literally, The Vellalar page summary is author's pov (their claim starts "seems to be rather"). The page need major improvements, cleanups and more sources.
The Wikipedia's purpose is to benefit readers by acting as a widely accessible and free encyclopedia that contains information on all branches of knowledge. If the page can be edited by admins only, what's the need of wikipedia editors? The information should be contributed by volunteers and genuine editors without any restrictions and opinionated moderators rivalry.
Thank you. Exhistorian ( talk) 18:13, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Editors kindly add this updated information to the varna section.
As Varna (Hinduism) concept, vaishyas are agriculturists and traders. This is [24] secondary source that supports the vaishya and shudra classifications. The varna classification started in the 1800s and the British government recognized there was no proper 4-fold Vedic varna system in south India. Also, many Vellalar were Jains. Later British colonial period, Govt of India classified all respectable castes of south India are non-Brahmins. Periyavelar99 ( talk) 18:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
{{
Edit extended-protected}}
template. User has been indeffed, closing edit request.
TG
HL ↗ 🍁
18:30, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
References
By 1650s non-Brahmin upper caste Vellalar were...
higher non-brahmin castes of Vellalar...
The landlords came from the high ranking Non-Brahman caste of Vellalar...
Travancore state.. Vellalas belong to vaishya...
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
...when government census officers placed Vellalar in the Sat-Sudra or Good Sudra category in its 1901 census, Vellalar castemen petitioned this designation, protesting this designation..
The four fold vedic system of caste hierarchy did not exist during sangam period. The society was organised by occupational groups living apart from each other... Then there were aristocratic classes like Vellalar and Karalar...
the larger part of the Tamil society remained casteless. With state formation and the emergence of ruling houses such as Pallavas, Pandyas, Cheras and Cholas, since the sixth century A.D., there was a wave of migration of Brahmins from northern India... As a quid pro quo for the conferment of the status of Kshatriyas on Vellalas, who were until then treated on a par with Vaishyas, the Vellala rulers gifted prime land in major river valley tracts to Brahmins...
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Despite being a relatively lowly group, they were dominant communities in Tamil agrarian societies for 600 years until the decline of the Chola empire in the 13th century, with their chieftains able to practice state-level political authority after winning the support and legitimisation of Brahmins and other higher-ranked communities with grants of land and honors.
to
From the Sangam period to the Chola period of Indian history (A.d. 600 to 1200), state-level political authority was in the hands of relatively low, Vellalar chieftains, who endowed local and nonlocal Brahmins with land and honors, and were in turn legitimized by them.
additional context (request) on the first para of the social status:
They were more orthodox than the Brahmins in their religious practices. [1] [2] The Vellalar nobles had marriage alliances with Chola royal families. [3] [4] Bhumihar means (maharaja) ( talk) 15:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the post-Sangam period section, add this requested line after "... dynasty called Kalabhras." to support the context.
Historians believe that the Kalabhras belonged to the Vellalar community of warriors who were possibly once the feudatories of the Cholas and the Pallavas. [1] 42.105.220.218 ( talk) 17:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
References
This
edit request to
Vellalar has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This is the basic necessary helpful overview (Compiled from already existing and reliable sources) of the article to add to the history section but above the Sangam literature on the main article.
Historians consider the Vellalars originated from the Velir clans who claim descent from the Yadu king or Yadu dynasty. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Historically, they held various occupational positions from petty kings and aristocrats, governors of provinces, and commanders of armies, to ordinary agricultural landlords and traders. [6] [7] [8] [9] Vino678777 ( talk) 14:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
References
Historian M. Arokiaswamy "Origin of the Vellalas, 1955, p 25" stresses that Vellalar originated as Velir chieftains of the sangam age.
An Ay chief described as vennir vellala, not as Yadhava. Although Vellalas themselves trace their descent from yadu. Thus Ay velirs are vellalas.
The Nankudi vellalars directly trace their ancestors to the Irunkovel line of Velir kings.
To conclude that, then: the Velir families who, as states in the preceding pages, emigrated from velpulam and settled as rulers in several parts of the south, and the great community of Velalas who were their followers and kinsmen have...
Velirs or Vellalas were landed agricultural aristrocrats.
Vellalar of these, the former, i,e, Uluvithunbor were employed by the reigning monarchs as governors of provinces and districts, and commanders of their armies and they were entitled to high privileges... being born of the families of the petty kings and nobles, bride givers to royals ...
{{
cite journal}}
: line feed character in |quote=
at position 286 (
help)
Vellalas were landed agricultural aristocrats and associated with kings and nobles in blood...
Vellalas held eight kind of positions, they were: Being a King, a Prince, Kosar...
The Vellalar were dominant secular aristocratic caste under the Chola kings, providing the courtiers, most of the army officers.... , Thondamandala Vellalar subjects there to have been traditionally "landlords, warriors, and officials of the state class".