Talk:Vellalar/Archive 2

The Vellalar were also called Gangakula or Gangavamsa, because they derived their descent from the great and powerful tribe named Gangavida, which inhabited in the valley of Ganges. (From People of India - Tamil Nadu by K. S. Singh, R. Thirumalai and S. Manoharan. Page no. 1609) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.207.166.197 (talk) 05:26, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Ganga Dynasty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganga_Dynasty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.207.166.197 (talk) 06:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Velirs don't claim desedence from Ayar community. Please give actual reputable sources to help your claim.

Quote "There is fairly strong literary and archeological evidence linking core Vellala subcastes with a group of chieftains called velir; the earliest references are found in the Sangam literature (first to third century a.d.). Until about the fourteenth century a.d., the velir were prominent in the Tamil polity, economy, and society, and they have been linked with virtually all the major ruling dynasties. They were autonomous and collectively wielded significant political influence. Although ineligible to be crowned as kings, they were bride givers to the three "crowned" kings. "

Please edit the page so it actually reflects facts and proper citations. Not some bogus religious websites, but historical facts. source: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/vellala — Preceding unsigned comment added by SRBABU01 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

VELIRS themselves claim descent from Ayar community. The Ayars are not Vellalars. VELIRS are not Vellalars.

Vellalars do not descend from Yadu / only VELIRS descend from Yadu clan. Ay Kandiran is an Ay King / Ayar king and not a Vellalar king. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.19.47 (talk) 20:37, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Following paragraph must be deleted from the Vellala article: Numerous poems in the ancient Sangam literature extol these chieftains' charity and truthfulness. Among the most prominent were those known as the 'seven patrons' (kadaiyezhu vallal); Vel-Pari, Malayaman Thirumudi Kaari, Ori, Adigaman, Began, Nalli and Ay Kandiran.[16]

They had close associations and held high positions of office with the three main Tamil dynasties, Chera, Chola and Pandya.[15] Some of them had marital relations; Ilamcetcenni, the king known for his fleet of warships, married a Velir princess, and his son Karikala Chola also married a Velir princess from Nangur.[17][full citation needed] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.19.47 (talk) 20:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Vellalars were Sudras

The ancestors of the Vellalans were Sudras and in their ancestry were debarred from the Temple. (Holmes (1980):227) They were born from the foot of Brama, thus can’t chant the Veda. According to the Tholkapiyam the Vellalas are Sudras. These Sudra Vellalas have to worship the twice born namly the three highest castes such as Brahmins, Kurukulam i.e Kshathriyas and Vaisiyas. They have to do coolly work under these three castes. (Kathiravetpillai 2002): 888). Many Scholars conclude that these Coolly Vellalas began to claim for themselves a higher rank during 19th Century. Melongi Kurukula Karaiyars of Singai dynasty families, Madapallis, and Barathavers consider Vellalars are lesser breeds. Mannar Vellalas The Vellalas at Nanattan division were from Pannaivedduvan where the earliest inhabitants were Odders who were chiefly engaged in the quarrying of stones, in the sinking of wells and in the construction of the Tank bunds. The earliest inhabitants of Kankanithevu at Nanattan were Potters. Now the Pallankaipillai Vellalas are living. Parapandandal Vellalas are Maravars and Koviers from Poovarasankulam and Vavuniya. There are three divisions in Suriya Kaddaikadu village. The centre place is called Thiru Mudi Suriya Kaddaikadu, because the earliest inhabitants of this place are SuriyaKulam i.e., Kurukulam. Other two divisions are Periyakaddaikadu and Sampankaddaikadu. According to Baptismal register few people of Periyakaddaikadu were Padaiyardchi, a Tamil caste, who came from India and assimilated into Vellalar identity. The former settlers of Sampankaddaikadu were Sampan means Pariars. Now Sinnakulathar from Karisal settled there and call them Vellalas. The descendents of Annamalai group of India call them Vellalas at Kaddaikadu. According to one of the Vellala(Palla) informants the “Annamalai “ families are not original Vellalas( Pallas). He informed me that the refugees who went to India traced their origin and found that they belonged to Nalava caste. That was why they try their best to avoid using the surname “Annamalai”. There are some Vedha Vellalars in Batticalloa.

https://karampon.wordpress.com/page/3/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.19.47 (talk) 20:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

@Wikipedia user SITUSH: You seem to be partial to some communities - adding VELIRS in VELLALARS and deleting any linkage from VELIRS to Yadavas!! Stop Patronising VELLALAR Community!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.245.16.100 (talk) 15:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Pattinappalai which is one of the greatest Tamil literary work, refers to Velirs as Shepherd Chiefs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajan.nainar (talk • contribs) 22:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

How is it possible that Irunnkovel is linked to Vellalas? Irunnkovel according to Tamil literature is a shepherd chief (Velir) and not a Vellalar. If Vellalars aristocratic society, how come they want associate themselves with Yadavas, Ahirs and Velirs?

Velirs are Ayars (Yadavas) !!!

I — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.19.47 (talk) 20:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC) Rural Society in Southeast India Par Kathleen Gough [1] page 29: "The Vellalar were the dominant secular aristocratic caste...".

Al-Hind: Early medieval India and the expansion of Islam, 7th-11th centuries By André Wink page 321 [2]:
"... Rajaraja's army was raised and commanded by Vellalas".
"Not only the Vellalas were the landowning communities of South India, but they also formed, in alliance with the brahmans, a rulin stratum which was quite comparable to the Rajput of the North, even if such communities continued to be regarded as shudras rather than as kshatriya."

velirs are separate no link between velirs and velallars velirs didnt told they are velallars — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srinivasan107 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC) "It further appears that from the eleventh century onwards, the nadu which originally was largely represented by the dominant Vellala land-holding groups,...".

Peasant History of Late Pre-colonial and Colonial India, Volume 8 by B. B. Chaudhuri, page 664 [3]: "The Vellalas ('lord of the land') (...) were initially the people who had 'landed wealth and good stock'. The source of their landed status and the power associated with it was presumably their enterprise in the organization of the wet farming. The 'ritual division' between this group and the other gradually occured, largely as a result of the conscious efforts of the vellala, 'this noble stratum', to mark itself off culturally from the rest.'

An outline of the cultural history and principles of Hinduism by C. Sivaratnam, page 36 [4]: Velirs or Vellalas were landed agricultural aristocrats.

Based on the all the refs provided here & in the article, what we can tell is:

Vellalar is originally an aristocratic root caste, known for their control over the lands. they are linked to a group of chieftains called or untitled Vel or Velir during the Sangam age. Throughout time, some impoverished Vellalars got involved in non aristocratic activities such as land owning peasant labour, etc. while other enriched groups started claiming Vellalar status. Till the 14th century & the end of the 'pure' Tamil Kingdoms (Chola/Chera/Pandya), Vellalars held the top positions of the Tamil society. After the downfall of these kingdoms, Vellalar became known just as a farming, agricultural community eventhough some of them still remained big land lords.

Rajkris (talk) 22:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Velirs claim a descent from Ayar community; Velir had clan names Ay and Avi representing their Ayar heritage. Velirs are associated with the Yadava of Dwaraka and Velirs are a particular segmentary lineage of Yadava. Source: Pivot Politics: Changing Cultural Identities in Early State Formation Processes Paperback – 1994 by Martin Van Bakel, Renee Hagestenijn & Pieter Van De Velde (Author) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.245.16.100 (talk) 13:00, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

The Velirs are Ayar or Konar or Idaiyar kings (who are also called Yadava). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.245.16.100 (talk) 13:08, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

According to the research done by S.D.Nellai Nedumaran & S.Ramachandran in their project The Velir: Were they the Velalas? they reason that Velirs are clearly different from Vellalars. http://www.sishri.org/velir.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajan.nainar (talk • contribs) 21:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't agree with with what you wrote based on ref 17: "...the Velir tribes were a Shepherd class and different from the Vellalars" because does not say that, it is an addition from your part.Fyi, even if they may have sheperd roots, aristocrat are not sheperds... They own lands... Your ref only rejects the etymological connection between Velir & Vellalar.Rajkris (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

In ref 7, you have not completely mentioned what is told by the author, we should add everything to avoid undueweight.Rajkris (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Chronicleof COGRLAHEPETA (talk) 14:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

  Note: No request was made. --ElHef (Meep?) 15:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I've just reverted this way back. There has been an edit war and just prior to that there was some stuff from a prolific sockpuppet - Buddhakahika (talk · contribs). I'm not convinced that the war was over as such: it seems to me that Rajkris might have just waited for an opportune moment and, sorry, I am very aware that Rajkris tends to rely on snippet views from Google Books etc even though they've been told before that such usage is not acceptable.

I'm not opposed to reinstating the content in a piecemeal fashion provided that the sourcing is indeed ok. Given the history, which goes back at least as far as events on Talk:Tamil Kshatriya, I think that we'll have to insist on having sight of all sources & for such sightings to includes pages before and after the one(s) of direct relevance to the article.

I know that I'm supposed to assume good faith, Rajkris, and indeed I've always thought you to be well-intentioned. However, you do have big problems with using sources and I can't just ignore that. - Sitush (talk) 15:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

No pb but you have removed both snip views & full ones.Rajkris (talk) 23:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Should include Christianity in the religion Chronicleof COGRLAHEPETA (talk) 07:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

velirs are diffrent from velallars velirs are kshatriyas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.193.182.22 (talk) 07:19, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Pillas are not just from Chola Nadu but also from Pandya Nadu too.

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 13:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Tholkappiyam which dates from fifth or sixth century contains a passage which mentions velanmantar; which later commentators and recent scholars equated to vellalas.^[1] However, the Velanmantar do not necessarily refer to the Vellala.^[1] Some references are found in Niganthas such as the Pingalanikanthu, for Vellalars. Quebec Leslie mentions them as follows:

...the tenth century lexicon Pingalanikanthu does not consistently identify Vellalas as the "fourth caste" but informs us that this term is a synonym of both Vaiciyar (Sanskrit Vaishya) and of cuttirar (Sanskrit Sudra) (Pingalanikanthu 773 and 780). Another lexicon, Tivakaram, which is thought to be of slightly earlier date than Pingalanikanthu, lists the six kinds of works of the Vellalas: agriculture, tending animals, trade, playing on musical instruments, spinning and weaving, and serving the twice-born (MTL 3843-44). The references from these two lexicons suggest that neither a definition based on varna nor one based on occupation had become fixed by the beginning of the Chola period. This should be contrasted with Stein's (1989, 84, 448) characterization of the Vellalas of the early Chola period as being sat (clean) sudras, having a ritual status second only to that of Brahmans, and as firmly connected with cultivating the land, and being, indeed, the dominant peasant group.^[1]

I have removed the above content for the following reasons :

1. The author deals with women in (South) India and not about history of India. And above all, her statement regarding Vellalar contradicts scholars opinion of this caste : a ruling, land owning community (I have provided multiple sources written by historians dealing with Indian history)
2. The author uses a primary source: this is not because 1 or 2 historical sources assert something that it is true unless it is accepted as such by the current scholars which is not the case here
3. The last sentence of the author ("This shoudl be contrasted with Stein's...") is challlenged by the historian, scholar Andre Wink: [5]: "Here Stein's dichotomy of warrior and peasant is highly misleading,..."
   

Therefore, using this ref is clearly an undue weight.Rajkris (talk) 16:24, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

page 110 and 111 , Ancient to Medieval South Indian Society in Transition ,Noboru Karashima. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/ancient-to-medieval-south-indian-society-in-transition-9780198063124?cc=us&lang=en&

he says "The Second Point I wish to add here for future discussion concerns the caste system based on hierarchy .These Thirty or Fourty years Scholars have been discussing the issue of caste hierarchy,Concentrating their arguments on the question of which of the two,Brahmanas or the King(Kshatriya),occupied the pinnacle of the hierarchy , or which of the two, religion or politics ,played crucial role in maintaining social order in traditional India,by quoting A.M . Hocart and/or Louis Dumont , it seems to be more important ,however , To realize the independence of the two, Brahmana and King, or Religious and the Political , if we consider empirically the function of the so-called caste hierarchy.In the Long course of Indian History , the opposition between the allies of Brahmana and King(Kshtriyas or dominant caste) as rulers on the one hand,and the others groups(classified theoretically as Vaishya or sudra ) as the ruled on the other,has had much significance in society ,Though no communities properly called Kshatriyas have existed in south India, we are able to regard the Vellalas , Who were the dominant caste , as having played the role of Kshatriya in ancient and medieval Tamil Country, A good example of Brahmana/Vellala coordination can be seen in the Thirukkachchur incription, quoted above , contrasting the (good) behaviour of Brahmana and Vellala with the (lowly) behaviour of the lower jatis and missing the former . The best example of the conforntation between the Brahmanas/Vellalas allies and other communities organized as idankai and valankai may be found in the revolt inscriptions of the fifteenth century referred to above"

Request to wiki editor to add this info into wiki page of vellala — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.222.186.175 (talk) 15:28, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Please provide references for the following sentences in article per wiki Verifiability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability

1. "archeological sources trace the origin of the Vellalars to a group of royal house chieftains called Vel or Velir" -- It will be great to see valid references for these.

2. According to old Hindu, Tamil texts, the Velirs were warriors from the Yadu Kshatriya clan (Chandravanshi lineage); they came to south from the city of Dvārakā in north India under the leadership of the Vedic sage Agastya. It will be great to see valid references for these.

Sangitha rani111 (talk) 01:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)Sangitha rani111

Please add this

It derives from the word Vel meaning a spear or lance and alar meaning "people of Vel", an old and archaic Tamil weapon. 2601:246:A01:2771:3064:58EC:50C7:CBE1 (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

•   Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.
• The etymology section of this article is already well sourced. If you want to add to it you must provide a source as well. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:01, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Please add this

Post 13 century Jaffna saw the migration of many Mudaliyars from Thondai Nadu — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.150.18 (talk) 14:43, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Wow.. Everyone you ask would tell you that the Vellalar migrated to the Southern region from around Gujarat, but it seems someone has removed this information.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.150.18 (talk) 21:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Vellalar doesn't means water or shower water, it means Spear Pari2343 (talk) 20:44, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

  Not done - we have 5 citations for water or flood based etymologies, but you have cited none for spear - Arjayay (talk) 07:28, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Velirs are Yadavas. Linking Velir to Vellalars is incorrect.

One can link Velirs with Vellalrs only if Yadavas = Vellalars, which is not the case.

Although some tamil Yadavas have a Vellala title, as a caste Vellalas are not the same as Yadavas.

Http://viswamurugu.com/link3.html

The Velala that is referred to in the book (page 32) A social history of Early India by Brajadulal Chattopadhyay is the one that carried out agriculture as occupation. This Velala is actually the people from "cattle-herding" caste (Yadavas) who also ventured out into agriculture.

The Vellalars to which this current Wikipedia article refers to is not the same as Velala referred by Brajadulal Chattopadhya - if Vellalars are aristocratic caste why do they do agriculture?

Any reference to Velirs from this Vellalar article should be removed

Vellalars are VELLA ALARS (the one who rules the flood) but they are not VELIRS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.19.47 (talk) 20:41, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Velirs are believed to be descendants of Yadu ^[1] - today the descendants of Yadu are called Yadavas (also Ahirs, Konars, Idaiyar, Gowda, Gollas)

Not a single dynasty record(s) according to Travancore Dynasty Records & Kerala District Gazetteers show any linkage between Velirs and Vellalars. According to Travancore Dynasty Records & Kerala District Gazetteers Vel-Ay, Mal-Vel-Ay are Ay Kings belonging to Ayar Community.

According to Pivot Politics: Changing Cultural Identities in Early State Formation Processes Paperback – 1994 by Martin Van Bakel Renee Hagestenijn Pieter Van De Velde, it states that Velirs are segmentary lineages of Yadavas (there is no mention of Vellalars or any linkage to Vellalars).

According to Neolithic Cattle-Keepers of South India: A Study of the Deccan Ashmounds. F. R. Allchin Ayars and Velirs are Cattle-keepers who rose to the level of petty chieftains.

Pattinappalai clearly states that velir King Irunkovel belongs to Shepherd race.

If Velirs = Vellalars, why would someone describe the hierarchical structure Ventar - Velir - Vellalar separately? If Velirs = Vellalars, thenn either the word Vellalar or Velir would have been omitted / because it would be redundant. It is clear from the hierarchy structure VELIRS ARE NOT VELLALARS and vice-versa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.19.47 (talk) 20:42, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

I sincerely hope that those who contribute to Wikipedia research the history of Ay Kings as well as Velirs and provide an undistorted truth about Velirs. It seems that Vellalars want to link Velirs to Vellalar caste which is technically not correct.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.245.16.100 (talk) 18:56, 11 August 2016 (UTC) 

188.155.19.47 (talk) 21:00, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Topher385 (talk) 12:48, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Vellalar's are also Christians from the early 16th century.

Missions and Empire (Oxford History of the British Empire Companion Series) 1st Edition by Norman Etherington. page 112. ISBN-13: 978-0199253487.

Caste, Catholic Christianity, and the Language of Conversion: Social Change ... By S. Jeyaseela Stephen. page 97. isbn=8178356864. --Chronicleof COGRLAHEPETA (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Great, thank you. Now added. - Sitush (talk) 03:06, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

I am at a loss to understand why this removal of sourced material that has been in the article for ages is in fact valid. There may be some subtle changes of phrasing required but do the sources really not support the statements at all? - Sitush (talk) 13:24, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

There is a statement which quotes/cites David Ludden. From a scientific (and non-humanities social "sciences") viewpoint India was a vast country with a relatively "minuscule" population (compared to the land mass size) all along its recorded and pre-history as gathered by archaeological evidence, etc. At the same time, the availability of fertile land for agriculture was enormous. So why would the agricultural settlers chase away the hunter-gatherers ever? Is there archaeological evidence for such large-scale population replacement using violence (skeletons bearing such signature events? The scientific-logical answer to that is a resounding "no." So kindly remove that point or qualify it accordingly at worst, please. Mkv22 (talk) 20:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Ours is not to reason why. Ludden is reliable, as far as I am aware. I think you need to raise this at WP:RSN if you dispute his status etc. - Sitush (talk) 21:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

In the same page Rangaswamy and Araṅkacāmi clearly state that " Therefore the attempt at confusing the velir with vellalar is misleading ".

Rangaswamy and Araṅkacāmi main intention is to state that the vellalar is derived from art of irrigation and cultivation.

Rangaswamy and Araṅkacāmi does not clearly mention about the origins of vellalars.

Also the Madras journal of literature and science, Volume 13 By Madras Literary Society and Auxiliary of the Royal Asiatic Society, p.41 does not state anything about velirs and vellalars link. and it is published in 1844 and is not a reliable source.

Also the same author in the book "The early history of the Vellar Basin, with special reference to the Irukkuvels of Kodumbalur: a study in Vellala origin and early history" states that the vellalar are of mix of various tribes and communities which took agriculture as their main occupation. Hence statements linking vellalar and velir are wrong and so far no proof exists. Page 127 Electron mass (talk) 05:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

https://books.google.co.in/books?redir_esc=y&id=UMBGAAAAMAAJ&dq=vellalar+++origin+++mix+of+castes&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=origin+++mix+of+castes

A handbook of Kerala - Volume 2 - Page 855 T Madhava menon states that "The caste is so widely diffused that several communities have infiltrated into it. As Thurston said, the "Vellala are compared to the brinjal...which will mix palatably with anything"." Clearly mention that Vellalar as such is a mix of various community.Electron mass (talk) 05:15, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hence can we remove the " Rangaswamy and Araṅkacāmi say the Vellālars are probably the descendants of the Vēlir; but the words Veļļālar, Vēļāņmai, Vēļālar, are derived from their art of irrigation and cultivation rather than from their original chieftainship.[9][10]"Electron mass (talk) 04:52, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Vellalar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607212814/http://www.harappa.com/arrow/meluhha_and_agastya_2009.pdf to http://www.harappa.com/arrow/meluhha_and_agastya_2009.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930024359/http://noolaham.net/library/books/02/101/101.htm to http://noolaham.net/library/books/02/101/101.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

vellalars are higher castes still in Tamil nadu...and they are high dignity in the state and many multiple sub castes...here someone purposely try to put the caste of vellars in the list of sudras...check the medival period and harappan culture what said about vellalars..In Tanjavoor many higher caste want to use the caste in the name of vellalars...what is here purposely going on is not been understandable...

I reverted here because the changes were substantial. I realise that there were various tags in place but to lose 4k of probably and actually "accurate" information in a single edit is likely to be confusing - it certainly was for me. I think this needs smaller edits and better explanations. - Sitush (talk) 00:45, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

I see that I shouldn't have made such big edits. I will from now on make smaller edits with better explanations. Xenani (talk) 23:21, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sitush.

I see that you reverted all my edits. I did this time shorter my edit as you previously told, which gives you chance to correct on those edits you disagreed on. However you reverted all my edits, and I don't understand why. I moslty removed content related to the Velir because according to the source of the content is the etymology from Velir to Vellalar highly doubtful. A lot of the rest of the article is based further on this doubtful etymology and talk about the Seven patrons, Velir princess, the Tamil kingdoms, which is pure WP:OR. A article should be neutral, and this article was very biased. Not sure if you really saw through my edits but I added content from reliable sources that were mainly published by Universities, I don't see why you would revert such content. Rather than undoing all my edits should only the parts you were disagreeing with being reverted with explanation of course. I think my edits were more from a neutral aspect with good reliable sources, following the WP:NPOV but I wont undo your revert, I hope we get to an understanding. I hope you can take more time to see through all the edits.

Peace Xenani (talk) 15:23, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Xenani, I think I have worked out your logic now, thanks. There are long-standing issues regarding how we portray velir on Wikipedia because of its various meanings. I'm going to ponder a little longer and I'm hoping that some other people might add comments, too, so that some sort of consensus can be developed. - Sitush (talk) 06:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Inlclude a link to Velir. Gokulna (talk) 12:14, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 16:28, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Harishpranovhk has recently [6] removed sourced content from the Vellalar article page which includes the views of Maraimalai Adigal. Vellalar is only an umbrella term for various castes. Anyone can become a Vellalar. But user Harishpranovhk is of the opinion that the Devendrakula Velalar cannot be included in this page. So can we get some consensus on this? @Kautilya3 and Vanamonde93:, request you to help mediate. Sources as follows,

1. According to Tamil scholar Maraimalai Adigal, the Vellalar identity is a way of life and people of any caste or creed could become a Vellalar.^[1]

2. Vijaya Ramasamy, Professor of History, JNU, echoes point 1 above - "The term extends beyond the notions of caste and seems to be a generic term for farming groups dispersed over space"^[2]

Nittawinoda (talk) 19:21, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with the adition of Devenedrakula Vellalar in this article as part of Vellalar subcaste. The term Devendrakula Velalar is a political term connecting all the Pallar subcastes.^[3] The Pallar's are the traditional farmhands who worked on the land of the Vellalar. They have always been different identities. The term Devendrakula Vellalar is derived from the traditional agrarian deity Devendra and the title Vellalar to give it a higher connotation.^[4][5]However, they are not considered Vellalar for that matter. The same goes for Isai Vellalar.^[6]Xenani (talk) 20:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Anyone can become a Vellalar. A Tamil proverb says "Slowly slowly they all become a Vellalar". -[7],

"To prevent minority Tamils from slowly becoming Vellalars, the high castes have used extralegal social controls to continue the imposition of the sumptuary restrictions on the Nalavars and Pallars"- [8]

"Anybody can become a Vellalar by acquiring the Vellalar attributes"-[9]

Nittawinoda (talk) 21:09, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

@Harishpranovhk and Xenani: while you're here please also give your opinion about Virakodi Vellala or Panisaivan [10] Are they considered as Vellalar? Nittawinoda (talk) 17:48, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

@xenani To correct your statement ---Devendrakula Velalar are not traditionally farmworkers for the Vellalars as vellalar didn't exist since tamil sangam! And they is difference btw Velalar and vellalar! Velalar relates to land and agriculture, while vellalars are not as each of them have different traditional jobs Kongu vellalar- cow herder & tumeric farmers Mudaliyar- cotton looming Etc

Mamallarnarashimavarman (talk) 18:34, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Veera kodi vellalar is a one of the sub caste of vellalar Harishpranovhk (talk) 13:22, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: Please make sure that the info box tells that sub divisions is based only on Mudaliar, Gounder and Pillai title. Originally they are many other titles also used by Vellalar. Tirukodimadachengunrur (talk) 06:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: whether Mudaliar, Pillai, Gounder is sub division? Tirukodimadachengunrur (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I have tried and tried to work out Vellalar related stuff in the past but it is a nightmare - a lot of the subgroups are vague associations with a multitute of conflicting names, titles and spellings. It might be easier just to omit that information from the box. - Sitush (talk) 11:45, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Sitush: Ok Vellalar using more then 10 titles So please remove the Mudaliar, Pillai, Gounder titles as sub division. Tirukodimadachengunrur (talk) 12:02, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

change "Some of the communities that identify themselves as a Vellalar are the numerically strong Arunattu Vellalar, Chozhia Vellalar, Karkarthar Vellalar, Kongu Vellalar, Thuluva Vellalar and Sri Lankan Vellalar." to "Some of the communities that identify themselves as a Vellalar are the numerically strong Devendrakula Vellalar, Arunattu Vellalar, Chozhia Vellalar, Karkarthar Vellalar, Kongu Vellalar, Thuluva Vellalar and Sri Lankan Vellalar." Passion.dinesh (talk) 11:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Devendrakula Vellalar community is the origin for all other vellalars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Passion.dinesh (talk • contribs) 11:58, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Could you point to sources? – Thjarkur (talk) 14:28, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

@TheBrokenTusk:

Third Opinion has been provided here for dispute resolution. Let’s do what Japtokal has suggested. You take care of the pro Vaishya arguments, I’ll do the anti. Cyberanthropologist (talk) 02:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

@TheBrokenTusk: Clean up the references for the Vaishya staus, 90% of your sources are basically reiterations of Edgar Thurston’s classification. Most state ‘Edgar Thurston classified....”. Edgar Thurston isn’t reliable according to WP:RS.[11] You deleted my sources stating because they were of the colonial era here. [12]. So uphold the same level of quality for the pro vaishya section.Cyberanthropologist (talk) 07:53, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

User:Beatrix_Kiddo2004 is a sock puppet of User:TheBrokenTusk, and he’s POV pushing by reverting all my edits, he simply undid 35 of them at once.[13] This simply undoes all the effort and hard work that goes into editing process. 3rd opinion was given by a senior editor after dispute resolution appeal[14], but the user is ignoring all that and is adamantly misrepresenting and POV pushing. Cyberanthropologist (talk) 11:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

tagging @Sitush: With these edits [15], User:Beatrix_Kiddo2004 who is a sock puppet of User:TheBrokenTusk, is trying to suppress my complaints to the Admins regarding his sockpuppetry, vandalism and POV pushing. He is undoing my discussion on the Talk Page to prevent me from exposing him Cyberanthropologist (talk) 13:10, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

@Cyberanthropologist do not involve me in your personal disputes with other accounts by making false accusations on me like sock puppetry. Read WP:Bully TheBrokenTusk (talk) 13:26, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

The user @cyberanthropologist is making baseless claims against my account, consistent with wikipedia's policy of Bullying. Tag WP:BULLY He has also vandalised the wikipedia page by removing relevant academic sources cited in a chronological order. Restoring to last best version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beatrix Kiddo2004 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

With these edits [16], User:TheBrokenTusk and User:Beatrix_Kiddo2004 are again deleting Talk Page evidence of their sock puppetry. Cyberanthropologist (talk) 13:36, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

@Cyberanthropologist: First, don't create three admin help templates when one is more than enough. Second, if you believe that Beatrix is a sock, file a report at WP:SPI. Otherwise, keep a lid on it.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

@Bbb23:, sorry about the multiple admin calls, my talk page discussion was deleted once on purpose (it was not an accident as Beatrix Kiddo2004 didn’t just undo it, but reverted it precisely to an older version of another user japotalk here[17]). So I thought that the previous admin call would be useless and redid it again, then the same thing happened a second time, when Beatrix Kiddo2004 deleted evidence on the pretense or reverting his earlier ‘mistake’. Sorry for bothering you Cyberanthropologist (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

2409:4072:E88:18AE:8944:E514:EFC1:AF2A (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:18, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Please include Nanjil Nadu for Pillai Rakeshthanuu (talk) 17:08, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:15, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Paste "varna classification" section into the main from the talk page. Anthrodox (talk) 08:08, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Move or paste the "Varna classification" section into the main page from talk page. Impartiality is important to the section. (talk) 05:32, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

It was already done. You may see @Jpatokal suggestion about varna classification. Anthrodox (talk) 05:58, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Disagree - Varna, a Hindu classification should not be added as the content purports to show or group all Vellalar into a single varna like Vaishya. The Vellalar come from diverse backgrounds (separate endogamous communities) just like doctors or engineers. We cannot say that all doctors have the same qualities. Along the same lines, classifying all Vellalar as Vaishya or Shudra does not make sense as the different Vellalar have performed/still perform different functions. Some have been rulers, some have been priests, some have been merchants etc. The varna classification also applies only to Hindus but there are Vellalar who practise Jainism and Christianity. So for these reasons I am against adding the varna classification section in the article page. Nittawinoda (talk) 07:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Sure, Remove the varna classification section on the main page or add your suggestion with the valid refs and sources to the existing page. The section is already been there. Anthrodox (talk) 02:26, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Have removed the section. As I said before, there is no use adding more detail to it as the section does not apply to all Vellalar. So better not to have it at all. Nittawinoda (talk) 04:47, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

You're right. Vellalar has their own hierarchy system like nair and newar caste system. Anthrodox (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

The following section at the beginning of the article has been flagged for neutrality and I intend to remove it if no one objects.

"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 practise state-level political authority after winning the support and legitimisation of Brahmins and other higher-ranked communities with grants of land and honours."

If someone feels this statement should not be removed then discuss here and state your reasons. Nittawinoda (talk) 06:26, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Vel-l-alar is just a term used for large landowners. Vel means mann - land. Alar means owner or lord. Within vellalar (landlords), there were 2 groups known as Vellalar (lords of floods) and kaaralar (lords of clouds). Present day scholars changed the real meaning of vellalar. Since 2017, they were using the Vellalar term for agriculturists and farmer.

According to earlier copper plates and inscriptions, vellalar gifted their lands for most of the temples of Tamilnadu. They were involved in donations and land grants too.

As another etymology, "vel" means a ruler and "alar" means a one who does that or belongs to.

Also, this page should mention "Vellalars were practicing the rite of upanayana" as mentions of karma mandala satakam. A photo of 1837, they were wearing sacred thread and edgar thurston mentioned they do wear sacred threads in marriages and some functions. In present days marriages of vellalars, The priest who commences and conducts the marriage ties a yellow thread that is known as the Kanganam around the wrists of the to-be-w. This is supposed to be a sacred thread and is then tied on the wrist of the bride right before the wedding ceremony commences.

Some groups of vellalars have similar culture of vokkaliga. Vokkaliga mentions "As community of warriors and landlords" in the page.

The current summary of vellalar page should be modified. Anthrodox (talk) 01:26, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

The famous archaeologist, henry heras written about vellalars and kaaralars in The velalas in mohanjo daro. Anthrodox (talk) 03:27, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

The disputed section suggests that the Vellalar were a relatively lowly group and because of that their chieftains supposedly won the support of Brahmins by making donations. Why are the Vellalar a lowly group? What does this statement even mean? Were they lowly because they were poor or were they lowly because of their profession? Some of them were employed as officers in the Chola government because of their own abilities and not because they donated lands and made grants to Brahmins. The Vellalar donated lands and made grants to the Tamil temples of their own free will and not to appease Tamil Smartha, the so called Brahmins. The word Brahmin used to define Tamil Smartha is such a misnomer but that is an argument for another day. Have the Vellalar donated or done anything to appease Tam-Brahms in the last century? The relation between Tam-Brahms and Vellalar was the same back then as it is today. The disputed paragraph is a nice joke. Nittawinoda (talk) 10:00, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nittawinoda: If you want to make a change like this, then you need WP:RS doing it, not your personal opinions. I noticed that, you added WP:POV tag in the lead without a prior discussion. This could be disruptive. Additionally, you deleted the varna section without a good justification, which I have since reinstated. Content on Wikipedia should not be removed just because you disagree with it or because you think it's wrong, unless the claim is not verifiable. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 17:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dr.Pinsky: The disputed content in the lead is not supported by the cited source. The source talks about Superior and Inferior Vellalar and that some chieftains who belonged to the low Vellalar group made grants to brahmins. But the editor has twisted the content to mean that all the Vellalar were of low status. The last statement is not supported by source. Nittawinoda (talk) 09:11, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nittawinoda Varna section should be neutralized if you add varna classification into the main page. Many sources were claiming they were vaishyas and some sources were marking them as sat-shudras. According to edgar and Hiltebeitel, aryan varna system inapplicable to dravidians due to their non-vedic practices. There were 3 fold varnas only.

1. Brahmin 2. Non-brahmin 3. Dalit

Present days scholars are being copied by edgar thurston sources. According to wikipedia's policy, It is not a valid reference. In velir varalaru, Ragav iyengar (Tamil aryan brahmin) wrote "Velir or vellalars are kshatriyas in aryan varna system". Hence, aryan varna system is inapplicable to dravidian region.

Many sources were marking vellalars were kshatriyas, vaishyas and sat-sudras. To prevent edit wars and biased vandalism, All sources should be included into the main page if you add varna classification. Anthrodox (talk) 12:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Reliable source to support that the Vellalar were high ranked

• Indira Viswanathan Peterson (2014). Poems to Siva The Hymns of the Tamil Saints. Princeton University Press.

• What the source states about Vellalar (Page 54)?

"From the Chola period on membership in the Tamil Saiva cult stabilized, being composed predominantly of prosperous nonbrahmin peasant castes who ranked high in the regional caste hierarchy. The non-brahmin Vellalas had always played an important part in the cult's leadership."

• What it states about donation and land grants (Page 54)?

"As prosperous landowners and farmers, Tamil Saivas have always given economic support to the major Siva temples in the Tamil country-side and have been able to shape and influence the administration and the ritual system of these temples."

• What it states about Smartha? (Page 54-55)

"In the last two centuries especially in the Kaveri Delta, where both Brahmin and Vellalas have traditionally been powerful, Smarta Brahmins have vied with Tamil Saivas for ideological influence in the temple. As early as the age of the Nayanars and certainly by the age of the Siddhanta philosophy, a large number of Tamil Brahmins had adopted the sychretistic philosophy and pratice known as Smarta traditionalism. Moving away from sectarian polarities, they not only adopted the worship of all the major deities of Hinduism but combined their strongly Sanskritic religious orientation with aspects of Tamil Saiva and Vaishnava devotiionalism and the ascetic philosphy of Sankaracharya. Apart from this eclecticism, the Tamil Smartas identify themselves as Saivas and worship in Siva temples".

• What it states about the status of Vellalar vis-a-vis the Smartha Brahmins? (Page 45)

"However, in the Tamil region (Vellala) Mutaliyar, Pillai and certain other non-brahmin caste groups have enjoyed rank and prestige equal to that of Brahmins. In some social and ritual contexts, the Vellalas have greater power, authority and status than the Brahmins".

Nittawinoda (talk) 09:11, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nittawinoda: Wikipedia is not for caste promotion. Wikipedia is supposed to be a neutral source of information, neither good nor bad, simply reflecting what reliable sources say about the subject without editorial bias. Further, I'm not convinced of Peterson's authority on South Asian social groups. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Vel (Sacrifices or Petty ruling) + lalar (A word that refers to someone who does or belong to a job) = Ruler or Sacrificer.

Ancient kings were had surname as "vel"

1. Ilangi vel 2. Iruku vel 3. Vel pari

See velir.

Disclosure: All Paarpans well played with dravidian history. Most of them are keep portrating as dravidiyan ruling classes and moovendhar kings are sudras. From Tolkapiyam to current scholars. Indian history congress head is a brahmin and most of the historians of south india are brahmins. Reddy, naidu, nayaka, nair and many non-brahmin upper castes were framed as sat-sudras deliberately. If all of them were sat sudras, then who were kshatriyas and vaishyas in south India's ancient times? None of the dravidian castes belong to aryans.

They were insisting their varna system into south india hardly. So, please don't consider any brahmanical records to verify your caste origin.

Add your references and non-brahmin sources here to enhance the vellalar page. 223.187.119.213 (talk) 17:45, 14 July 2022 (UTC)