Talk:Ezhava/Archive 4

Ezhavas or Illavar were more related to Villavar Chera kings
The Chera Kingdom of Kerala has recorded history from few centuries before Christ. The history of Chera people could extend to many thousand years in the prehistory. Among the Dravidians two tribes of warlike people dominated the ancient period extending into prehistory. They were Villavars (Bowmen or Archers)and their allies Minavars or meenavars(fishermen)who formed kingdoms from Pakistan to Sri Lanka. Villavars of the Chera Kingdom Kingdom,Illavars,Billava,Bhils (Rajput) all belong to the Villavar tribes.The main title of the Villavars was Azhvar or Alvar. The Villavars or archers had Bow and arrow in their flag. Chera kingdom was a Villavar kingdom while their relatives Illava ruled the Sri Lanka before Sinhalese from Orissa arrived Sri Lanka in 500 BC. In the prehistory Sri Lanka had been ruled by Villavars tribes belonging to Chera and Pandya Kingdoms. Serendib (Cheran Theevu in Tamil) is even now the official name for Sri Lanka. During the early Tamil era Sri Lanka was named Illavam or Ezhavam or Eelam after the Illavar tribe. Sinhalese called it Heladipa. The Villavars were jains with a Dravidian influence but adopted Buddhism too. Elangovadikal the Chera prince in his Epic book Cilappatikaram depicts the story of Jain Chera kingdom and the Kannaki a Dravidian who was deified by the Jains. Kannagis daughter Manimekalai went to Sri Lanka which was called Mani Pallavam, after converting to Theravada Buddhism.Aruhakkadavul (Arhatta) was a Buddhist or Jain god of Villavars. In the laterdays after 500 BC these early Tamil Dravidians were assimilated by the Sinhalese but not the Sri Lankan Tamils of Sri Lanka who migrated in a much laterday in the later Chola period around 1000 Ad. The arrival of northern invaders belonging to Naga Scythians from Ahichatra in the eighth century during the Rashtrakuta invasions,led to the eclipse  Chera Kingdom itself in 1120 ad. Eventually the Villavars of Kerala completely disappeared possibly by the assimilation by the Illavas. In the laterdays illavars were forced to occupy a lower position in the social hierarchy while the Aryans and Nagas dominated the scene. Still the Illavas martial tradition, the Kalari and many of their customs survived. Nelcynda (talk) 14:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Covering upper part of the body
To my understanding all non-brahmin castes were not allowed to cover their upper part. The article gives an impression that only Ezhavas were disallowed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 17:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * There was sumthing known as the Neriatu or mel Mundu which Nayars were allowed to wear. Infact when Nadar women in the mid 19th century wore kuppayams or blouses the Nayars did not object but as soon as the Mel Mundu was worn by Nadars, it was objected to. The Maharajah passed a proclamation allowing Nadars to cover themselves as they wished, but not to imitate the higher castes. However, as an act of obeisance, whenever in the presence of a person of higher status Nayars had to remove the mel mundu. Infact Brahmin women were also not permitted to remain covered before the deity, which is why none of them ever went to even temples. However if you read the old books you will find that covering of the upper body was not considered very important. I happened to see a portrait of a Maharani of Travancore in similar attire. Removing the cloth in the presence of higher status people was the form of salutation. At home all the women went about with bare torsos. Manu rocks (talk) 17:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

To Pulayan Punchapadam
Pls stop vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 04:14, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Itty Achudan Vaidyan.jpg
The image Image:Itty Achudan Vaidyan.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --05:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

New info
If possible the regular editors may include these details in the article:
 * The Ambanattu Panickers were an Ezhava family who assisted the Chempakasseri Devanarayana in regaining his kingdom after Mathur Panicker (Nair) and Thekkedathu Bhattathiri betrayed him.
 * There appears to be some connection between Nair and Ezhava houses at places. Eg the reputed Cheerapanchira Ezhavas of Tannirmukam and the Payangala Nairs of Mannancherry observed Pula or pollution for each other on deaths and births.
 * In Kokkotumangalam near Cherthala there is an Ezhava family called Chengot which had Pula relations with Piravath Illam in Muvattupuzha, of Namboodiris. This is an even more interesting case. Parayil Ezhavas and Edapally Thampurans had Pula connections.
 * Varanapallil Panickers were in the service of the Kayamkulam Thampuran while Akkathayadi Panicker served the Kottarakara Elayadathu Swaroopam. Such was the position of this family that once in 12 years in the olden days the Panicker was taken around in a procession flanked by Nair women. In the event of marriages in the houses of Vanjipuzha Thampuran, the same had to be communicated to the Panicker, to acknowledge his position. Manu rocks (talk) 17:31, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * These are clear indications of Ezhava mixture in nairs and namboothiris. many ezhava soldiers got 'converted' into nair caste. similarly many budhist scholars transformed into namboothiris after accepting the hindu fold after adi shankara defeated budhist scholars.. is there any other explanation to this because 'pula' is observed only on the birth/death of blood relatives.Lambodharan —Preceding undated comment was added at 07:22, 28 December 2008 (UTC).
 * There might be many such instances but difficult to include in this article without references. one information which i have is like this. One of Chengannur king or chieftian (thampuran) was pressurized by his priest, an old brahmin, to get marry his daughter. The kalari trainers of this naduvazhi(his army) was an ezhava panicker from kollam. Days before the marriage, this princess, run away with this kalari panicker with the help this her mother. She also given an idol of their family deity, for protection this couple . They went to a place called Mundakkal in kollam. And later moved to eastern hilly areas of kollam. They got married and their decedents were started known as valiya mundakkal thampikal. During war between Marthanda varma and Ettuveeettil pillaimar, they sided with pillamar. After the defeat of pillamar, King in response of their support to pillaimar, completely destroyed them. Their family temple now become a devi temple under public trust.  Amapnattu panikkar was the leader of chevakar pada under amabalapuzha king. Varanappaly panickers were commanders of kayamkulam king. So with vallabhassey panickers, they were commanders of panthalam king. These information can only available in some websites. But difficult to add in this article, as any day anyone can remove it citing lack of refernces.

Daya Anjali (talk / contribs) 16:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I got the references for all these points. lets add these details to the article http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Be3PCvzf-BYC&pg=PA349&lpg=PA349&dq=Parayil++ezhava&source=bl&ots=9i4nVbpkEj&sig=VpVFOSLOJH9CKkqXSOJe3xFEiy4&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPP1,M1 thanks Daya Anjali (talk / contribs) 16:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I got the info from the same book too. Forgot to mention the name though Manu rocks (talk) 11:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The google has only limted preview of the book. Anyway i ordered it :)

Daya Anjali (talk / contribs) 08:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * this is not reliable stuff to be put in the wikipedia. this contradicts all known theories of origin. if this is to be believed, all known source of our history has to be re-written. this is an ezhava purana....and highly imaginative....poor and malicious substance ..this has to be discarded.Lambodharan  —Preceding undated comment was added at 04:20, 11 January 2009 (UTC).
 * The book is by no means entirely reliable and author has his own theories and ideas. However the examples given are authentic and historical and thus may be included. Manu rocks (talk) 12:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * how can you quote from a distorted, absurd and malicious material, you may, if you have some other source for the same info..the stuff in the above link is highly prejudiced and toxic..stay away from it..quoting kanippayyur (..the vicious namboothiri), keralolpathi (another throw away stuff) and a few missionaries with strong vested interests, he is arriving at his own distorted version of history..with adequate add-ons of imagination and fantasy to gratify his own inferior feelings.. this stuff needs to be put straight into the place where is belongs – Dustbin.Lambodharan —Preceding undated comment was added at 09:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC).
 * Simple Questions.. 1)how do you know the history? 2) how can say you all contents are absurd? Man i purchased the book and for each every comment he has put his references of authentic books from many famous authors(even if exclude Kanippayoor). Last final question is there any rule in Wiki which says that you exclude material from a published book. Is there any benchmark in wiki or anywhere else to say the a book is absurd? If you dont like the truth, or if its against ur thought, say some book is absurd.

Daya Anjali (talk / contribs) 06:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well..publishing a book is not a big deal..just because I published a book with my own theory and version, it doesn’t become the truth..if no one knows history then how you are sure that your version is correct…the tone in which this literature is written itself reveals clearly the intention of the author. I’ve read hundreds of books on the history of kerala and none of them has as nasty intentions as this one..he is not quoting but distorting the observation of other historians in this book..personally I have no problem in you putting this in the wiki at the cost of ezhava page’s genuineness…well, end of the day, who’s going to read Sadanandan’s history book when there are so many other truthful sources of history for an enthusiast. The bottom line of this book is that all communities in kerala except for the scheduled classes are derived from ezhavas, which no other historian has noted. Ethnically ezhavas are different from harijans and savarnas..this is a proven fact..though there are exceptional cases..the two large hindu communities of kerala are Nairs and Ezhavas..they are ethnically different. Probably all effort to unite nairs and ezhavas in kerela miserably failed because of this reason. Sadanandan is citing the similarities in the customes and rituals (or lack of it) of these two communities to prove their common ancestry. However, this is due to the fact that both these castes (including all other castes of kerala) were not part of the hindu fold initially and were later shoehorned into the hindu fold. Hence, most of them have same customs and rituals. Ezhavas and Nairs belong to two different ethnic groups which is spread across india. Ezhavas (Kerala), Billava (Karnataka), ilava (Andhra) and Nadar (Tamil nadu) are one group and Nairs (Kerala), Naidu/Reddy (Andhra), Bunts/Nadava (Karnataka) and Vellala (Tamil nadu) are a different group. Neverthless there had been conversions from ezhava warriors to Nairs and also ezhava budhist scholars to Namboothiris though this is at miniscule level. There is clear proof of the arrival of nairs and namboothiris in the Barkur inscriptions which is dated to 8th century during king Mayura Varma’s period. It also gives details of places from where they had arrived..of course, no one is doubting certain facts in this book like the Ezhava hegemony and rich culture before the coming  of the Aryans. Ezhavas were budhist scholars, experts in the field of medicine, astrology farming etc. They were a peace loving lot..Lambodharan  —Preceding undated comment was added at 07:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC).

Certainly Sadanandans book has a rather vicious flow and intonation attached to it. However leaving the intention and ideas that he wishes to project through the book aside, the examples given may be, so far as they are adequately referenced, mentioned and quoted. However i agree that the theories and "history" stated is something i am reading for the first time and doesnt seem credible because its simply taking statements from other books, out of context, summing them up into a weird hotch potch and chronology, presenting itself as fact. Besides theres a strong anti Savarna flourish to the work. Nevertheless the examples, if amply referenced, may be included in the article. But in my opinion the projection of history in the book is by no means reliable. Manu rocks (talk) 17:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Guys, come up solid proofs that sadasivan's statements lack any references. Take each statement and we can discuss. i have purchased whole book. i have complete set of references in which the books has written. Now-a-days its passion for many communities to claim aryan status. FYI, Aryanisation and aryans are different. There are no major sources references that says even Nammbothiris, as en mass, migrated to kerala.(Keralopathi says 16 Araya families were also converted brahmin status.) Rememebr Konkani who migrated to south india 1000s of years back and settle in bits and pieces still uses their mothertounge. From this basic info u can discard those Migration theories.(still there were small migrations throughout the history and influenced the local population). You know Idigas in Karnataka are called Arya idigas. This doesnt mean they are aryan decedents. They were followers of an aryan religion, buddhism. Same with Ayyappan. Its Arya appan. God of Arya religion, Buddhism. Same with Ayyanar, Aiyar etc. (This can be also derived arhatha). Most of the historians come from Upper class background wanted paint their history with their own colors. nammothiris also did same thing with kereloplpathi. If someone comes with any statements which breaks existing psedotruths, these kind of reactiosn are common. Also its will be also very much intersting for u guys to do some R&D about the origin of Tamil word mappilai.

Daya Anjali (talk / contribs) 15:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * you have the freedom to believe in what you read..but don’t impose the same on others or question other’s rationale to differ from it..i’m not here for an argument on this..because it fetches no fruit..Lambodharan —Preceding undated comment was added at 07:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC).

Chekavar
Hi, I was wondering why no one uses the grand title of "Chekavar" anymore? The Ezhavas had some of the most fiercest warriors in Kerala, and along with the Nairs they practiced the most sophisticated martial art of India. Warriors such as Aromal Chekavar, Chandu, Aromal Unni, were all Chekavar, and it is curious as to why their descendants no longer have this title. Those with a martial heritage (though not all Ezhavas) should be proud of their Chekavar ancestry and incorporate the title into their name.121.214.50.177 (talk) 11:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

In chekavar page under heading LEGENDS people are engaging in self glorification (eg; there are families such as xxxxxxxx whose roots are closely associated with these clans) Let them first understand the meaning of legend first

Another thing there is difference between some one who have just chekavar in name and some one who have blood of chekavan. Chekavars were respected warriors dont try to degrade with irrelevant and degrading writings. Iam deleting irrelevent informations —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.13.230 (talk) 11:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep ur right this people dont know the meaning of chekavan and legend they r just trying to glorify their family names like(xxxxxxxxfamily roots) and chekavers r not people who faught against caste opperission.Go through northern ballads and u will find these people were respected warriers. come to Malabar and these people might able to see some chekavar famaly and aristrocratic thiyya families and their traditions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.119.228 (talk) 07:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Repeat vandalism
In the past two days, two users Menon1000 and Nair1000 have been repeatedly vandalizing this article. Since both the users joined wiki on the same date and so far, most of their edits are identical, I am going to request a sock puppetry investigation. Axxn (talk) 09:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * See the case here - Sockpuppet_investigations/Menon1000 -Axxn (talk) 09:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Surprise.. surprise..... the vandal seems to be an Ezhava himself. The IP used by him (117.254.xxx.xxx) is the one used for the creation of various Ezhava related articles like Kuruppanmar. Axxn (talk) 05:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The vandalism is at it's peak now. I don't know why people have such intolerance towards Ezhavas. Going by the edits I think the user is diguising himself as a Nair and trying to create rift between Ezhavas and Nairs. Can't we take any legal action against this? Certain comments are really hurting the sentiments of community members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.170.205 (talk) 12:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I would have taken care of it, but I got engaged in an edit war and therefore unable to find any free time. But if anyone is willing to act against this vandalism, I can guide him. Someone please go to the Admins's notice board and point out that the IP (117.254.xxx.xxx) is indulging in repeat vandalism for more than 3 months now. (I had already pointed out this on the ANI, but since he is using a dynamic IP, the block was not effective). I pointed out this to User:Keralone, but he seems to be busy elsewhere. Axxn (talk) 12:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Is it a Vandlism
Ezhava dynasty is a big vandalism. How will they make dynasty in Kerala? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.254.138.67 (talk) 02:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Why are you trying to D grade Ezhavas. Remember nothing is impossible man."If there is will, then there is way" After the arrival of British They wipe out every kingdoms power like that the Ezhavas also lost there power after the brahmanization of kerala. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhilashthannikkal (talk • contribs) 12:03, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

==

LIST OF FAMOUS EZHAVAS Spiritual leaders

Sree Narayana Guru Nataraja Guru Guru Nitya Chaitanya Yati (His name in the Purvashrama was Jayachandran Panicker) Guru Muni Narayana Prasad Swami Bodhananda Vagbhatananda Gurudevar Bhikshu Dharmaskandha Karunakara guru (Founder of Santhigiri Ashram) Brahmashri Swami Sashwathikananda Brahmashri Swami Sookshmananda Paravur Sreedharan Thanthrikal

Social reformers - Sree Narayana Guru Mahakavi Kumaran Asan Poet and Social reformer Sahodaran Ayyappan Dr.P.Palpu [1] Muloor S.Padmanabha Panicker Great poet and a prominent social reformer CV.Kunjhiraman Mayyanad T.K.Madhavan Mithavaadi C.Krishnan [2] Arattapuzha Velayudha Panicker Judge Ayyakutty K.Sadanandan Father of the Co-operative Movement in Kerala I.K.Kumaran Freedom Fighter - Mahe Narayana Guru It has been suggested that the section Sri Narayana Guru from the article Ezhava be merged into this article or section. ... N. Kumaran Asan (also known as Mahakavi Kumaran Asan, the name prefix Mahakavi(Awarded by Madras University in the Year 1922) meaning great poet and the suffix Asan meaning scholar or teacher) was a Malayalam poet, philosopher and social reformer. ... Please wikify (format) this article or section as suggested in the Guide to layout and the Manual of Style. ... This article or section does not cite its references or sources. ... Mooloor S. PadmanÄbha Panicker Mooloor S. PadmanÄbha Panicker (a. ... One of the great reformist leadres of modern Kerala, born on September 2, 1885 at Karthikappally, son of Sri. ... Arattupuzha Velayudha Panicker : An Ezhava warrior from the 19th century Arattupuzha velayudha panicker, a warrior lived in the 19th century in Kerala. ...

Political leaders - V.S. Achuthanandan Chief Minister of Kerala R. Sankar Former Chief Minister of Kerala C. Kesavan [3] Former Chief minister of Travancore-Cochin,born in mayyanad. A.P. Udhayabhanu Freedom fighter, Congress leader and ex-MLA and former President of Thiru-kochi Pradesh Congress Committee. Vayalar Ravi [4] Indian National Congress leader and Union Cabinet Minister Vakkom B. Purushothaman [5] FormerFinance Minister of Kerala & Former Lt: Governor of Andaman T.K. Ramakrishnan Former Home Minister and Opposition Leader of Kerala Kallat Krishnan, Trade Union leader and Freedom fighter M. Kanaran, Trade Union Leader, Freedom fighter C.H. Kanaran, Trade union leader, Freedom fighter C.K. Kumara Panikker, Vayalar Stalin Dr.E.K. Madhavan, Congress Leader, Former Minister. K.K. Viswanathan [6] Former Governor of Gujarat & Former President of SNDP Yogam Pinarai Vijayan Politbureau Member of CPM E. Balanandan Politbureau Member of CPM

P. Ravindran Former Minister T.K.Madhavan K. Anirudhan Former MP, Former MLA K. Pankajakshan RSP leader and Former Minister of Kerala Arangil Sreedharan First Ezhava Union Minister Mullapally Ramachandran Former Union Minister K.R. Gowri Amma Founder leader of JSS and Formerly prominent CPI (Marxist) leader [7][8] Former Agriculture minister of Kerala. K.P. Prabhakaran Former Health Minister of Kerala K.P. Rejendran Revenue Minister of Kerala V.M.Sudheeran Former Health Minister of Kerala N. Sreedharan(NS)One of the chief organisers of Communist Party in Central Travanore and Former CPM Secretariat Member Babu Divakaran Former Labour Minister of Kerala Adoor Prakash Former Food Minister of Kerala Susheela Gopalan Former Industry Minister of Kerala Krishnan Kaniyamparampil Former Agriculture Minister of Kerala K.P. Viswanathan Former Forest Minister of Kerala C.V. Padmarajan Former Electricity Minister of Kerala M. Kamalam Former minister M.T. Padma Former Fisheries Minister of Kerala Kadavoor Sivasadan Former Electricity Minister of Kerala V.V.Raghavan Form

Literary figures - Sree Narayana Guru Mahakavi Kumaran Asan C.V. Kunjuraman Founder of Kerala Kaumudi.He had been on the editorial board of Malayala Rajyam, Navajeevan, Navasakthi, Malayala Manorama, Bhashaposhini, Kathamalika, Vivekodayam and Yuktivadi. He had also been a lawyer and a member of Sree Moolam Prajasabha. Link[11] Muloor S.Padmanabha Panicker Perunnelli Krishnan Vaidyar Velutheri Kesavan Vaidyar Pallathu Raman Moorkoth Kumaran. Disciple of Narayana guru from Malabar. Written biography of guru when guru was alive. Initiated to install first statue of Narayana guru in kerala. Moorkoth Kunhappa was associate editor of Malayala Manorama, Written many books on Sree Narayan Guru including Sree Narayan Guru - biography. Moorkoth Ramunni IAS (Retd).Disciple of Narayana guru. First pilot from Kerala of the Royal Air Force(Later Indian Air Force) and (Having converted subsequently to the IAS) an administrator.The First Head Of Training Team of The Indian National Defence Academy .The oldest living Retd IAS officer. S. K. Pottakkat Jnanpith Award winner for Oru Desathinte Katha M.P.Appan Dr.K.Prasannarajan Noted critic, Kerala Sahitya Academy Award winner Sukumar Azhikode Mayyanad K Damodharan BA Dr. A. Aiyappan Eminent anthropologist, former Vice Chancellor of Kerala University K.Sukumaran(Malabar) Potheri Kunhambu Vakkeel the first chairman of Kannur Municipality Prof.M.K.Sanoo M.Mukundan O.V.Vijayan Dr.Vellayani Arjunan Dr.R.Gopimony (Former Professor & Head,Dept. of Plant Breeding & Genetics,Kerala Agriculture University) Perumbadvam Sreedharan Noted novelist C.V.Sreeraman Noted Short story writer M.R.Chandrasekharan Noted critic P.K.Balakrishnan Writer of famous Ini Gjaan Urangatte Kovilan Noted writer and Kendra sahithya akadami award winner P.Valsala, well-known Malayalam short-story writer K.P. Sudheera, novelist K.C.Padmanabhan, novelist UKKumaran, novelist. Vice-president, Kerala Sahithya Academy A.P.Udayabhanu Ponkunnam Damodaran K.B Vasanthakumar Noted Poet & Lyricist Kollam K.P.Appan Noted critic Kandachira Babu Noted poet B.Rajeevan Noted critic K.Surendran Noted novelist G.Vivekanandan Noted novelist Dr. T.Bhaskaran M.C.SwarupRadio Jockey E.Vasu G.N.Panicker Velayudhan Panickasseri Noted historian Manjula Padmanbhan Rathna Singh Noted Jurist,DG Prosecutions and Advocate General of Kerala T. N. Prakash Noted short story writer. Dr.V.Samabasivan The Kathaprasangam Supremo Haridas Valamangalam

Famous lawyers --- C.P.SudhakaraPrasad Advocate General of Kerala P. Vijayaraghavan Famous criminal lawyer of Kollam V. Sugathan Special Prosecutor in Kalluvathukkal hooch case Panakkal Velayudhan (Late) Famous lawyer and social reformer of Kozhikode K. Sadanandan Famous lawyer and social reformer M.Ratna Singh Former Advocate General of Kerala[12] V.Ayyappan Former Advocate General of Kerala S.Sudhakaran Former Advocate General of Kerala Kallada Sukumaran Former Director General of Prosecutions LateT.V.Prabhakaran Eminent criminal Lawyer K.P.Dantapani Eminent High Court Lawyer Dr. G. Mohan Gopal former Director (Vice Chancellor), National Law School of India, Bangalore; former Chief Legal Counsel of the World Bank, Washington, DC; former Adj. Professor, Georgetown University Law Center, now Director of the National Judicial Academy of India, Bhopal A.Sudhi vasudevan eminient lawyer in kerala High court and grandson of Rao Sahib Atiyolil Appu. Adv.K.Babyson PSC Board Member. , For the district with the same name, see Kollam District. ... The prosecutor is the chief legal representative of the prosecution in countries adopting the common law adversarial system or the civil law inquisitorial system. ..., For the district with the same name, see Kozhikode District. ...

Artists directors and actors - Ramu Kariat Film director, directed president's gold medal-winning film Chemmeen Manoj Night Shyamalan Famous Hollywood writer director of movies like The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, Signs and The Village S L Puram Sadanandan Great drama director Thilakan Famous Film actor O.MadhavanGreat drama director Mukesh Film actor Srinivasan Actor, writer and director Vineeth Srinivasan Top Play back Singer I.V. Sasi Film director Sathyan Anthikkad Film director JoshyTop-Ranking Action Film director Shaji N. Karun Famous cinematographer director of many award-winning films Shammi Thilakan Film actor Samvrita Sunil Film actres Raveendran Famous music director M.K.Arjunan Famous music director Chippi Film and TV actress Gayathri Play back singer V.K. Sriraman Film actor Ratheesh Film actor K.R.VijayaFilm actress Kunhandi Film actor Kaviyoor Revamma Kuthiravattom Pappu Film actor Jayan and Vijayan JayaVijaya, musicians Sonu Sisupal Film Director Vidhu Prathap [13] Play back singer Indrans Actor Manoj K Jayan Actor

S Gopalakrishnan Actor Pavithran Film director Kalakkal Kumaran Noted actor Parur Bharathan Noted actor Harisree Ashokan Noted comedian Salim Kumar Noted comedian. Rajeev Anchal Film maker and famous sculpturer Devan Noted actor and politician Vijayasree Film actress of 1970s (her mother belonged to the Ezhava community) Late RaniChandra Raghavan Malayalam actor JishnuFilm Actor K.K.Rajeev Serial Director K.S.Sethumadhavan Film Director M.N.Thampi Film Director (Padaswaram) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarathraj99 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 18:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Ezhava Dalit → Ezhava — Ezhava are not known as Dalit. Axxn (talk) 04:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Support - Repeated vandalism in unprotected page. Should be reverted to original title. There is no community with the name "Ezhava Dalit".Axxn (talk) 04:35, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Edit request from 117.206.17.19, 6 May 2010
The last word under Subcastes paragraph has been misspelled. Please make the correction.

117.206.17.19 (talk) 18:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Not done: Welcome. The entire sentence had poor grammar and was an unsourced claim, so I removed it instead. If you would like to provide a source and reasonable text, just start a new edit request. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 19:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Religions in infobox
In the article, it is mentioned about Buddhist, Sikh and Christian conversions by Ezhava. Are these significant enough to be mentioned in the infobox? Munci (talk) 13:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Adding Articles for deletion/NominationName —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.254.126.170 (talk) 11:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Adding Articles for deletion/NominationName —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veenanair (talk • contribs) 12:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC) Adding Articles for deletion/Ezhava —Preceding unsigned comment added by Veenanair (talk • contribs) 12:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

EESWARA CHEKAVA EZHAVAR ( Summons everybody regarding tackling with Nair Vandals and also about SURNAMES of "Ezhavar" )
Good. Let us not look too much into the past where the history is not well documented. Look at the present/future and I am sure this community will have a significant role there. We also need to work and live with our nair friends as we have other things to worry about now!Keralone (talk) 00:28, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Dear sir, I am not that much skilled to edit wikipedia. But now onwards I also want to start editing when I also found out something important around me after reading your announcement here. When I checked here with the old people in my village and family friends, they guided me to many small Ezhava "Kalaries" ( Kalari with "Thara" and "Vilakku"/ Lamp ) in our village. It was astonishing, when they showed the burried places of weapons ( which our ancestors practiced in the earlier times) when the arrival of "Tippu Sultan" wrongly believing that these too many small small " Kalaries" are a part of an intellectually co-ordinated silent practice & preparation against his Army. These old men remember that their ancestors had told them so many arms / weapons they had put in the wells also to hide these temporaraly. But here in so many houses the "Kalarithara & Lamp" is there even in a very small part of our village. My grand father told, in our family also there was a big " Kalarithara & Lamps" before shifting our house to a new place. And he brought me there to show that place. It is near to our new place. But the new people doing nothing there. As your words the other old people from lower castes call my grand father as "Chekavanar". But if I don't share these knowledges, nobody is going to notice. And I don't know how to add these things to wikipedia. One more thing, when we check, we can see so many "Ezhava Kalaries" all over Kerala. It was your letter here that inspired me to take a search regading this around my place. Now I feel more enthusiastic. We want to take the contributions from other people also about these things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudhilal & Nitheesh (talk • contribs) 11:36, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

To the so called LLM Kung fu master who wrote that giant diatribe of verbal diarhea which lacks any veracity or authentic proof of any kind other than his own maladjusted ego. In cognitive psychology they say people who are the most insecure feel the quintessential urge to talk about their accomplishments or family background to validate themselves since their self worth is lacking. This is the internet, a 12 year old with a keyboard can claim to be a doctorate in medical science. I am not Nair or Ezhava but I am Hindu and I have done extensive research on both communities, your denigrating insults on Nairs prove what an immature extremist you really are. So a couple of jingoistic Nairs vandalised this article, that automatically means all Nairs hate Ezhavas? How do you even know they were Nair? In sociology they say every community is divided into social classes, upper class, middle class, lower class etc. The lowest classes of Nairs perhaps worked as servants for brahmins and higher Nairs so you assume all Nairs are descendants of poor servants? The lowest of the ezhavas were toddy tappers, servants, slaves, does that mean all ezhavas are descendants of slaves? If you had a normal comprehension level capable of understanding things properly you would understand both ezhava and nair have contributed a lot to Kerala and the majority are good friends and live well together. When a person is secure within and has found peace within he does not look to compose himself as superior to another caste or man but he looks to find the oneness in humanity and brotherhood only the weak try and compensate for their weakness by trying desperate to appear " superior " to another. This goes for Nairs and Ezhavas. As for Sambandham, it was not a " cheap " act, it gave the woman freedom to do as she pleased and many other ancient warrior tribes practiced polyandry, examples: Sassanid tribes, Javanese, Sumatran etc. Almost every foreign historian to Kerala from British to Portuguese to Alexander the great's ambassadors speaks very highly of Nairs, go read the quotes on Nairs and you will realise yourself, they all unanimously agree Nairs were the dignified noble class before and during nambooothiri arrival. Whose opinion do you think is more credible famous historians or you, a jingoistic Ezhava hell bent on destroying harmony between two communities. If some repugnant Nair insults your community, have the maturity to insult him as an individual not 30 million people in his community. I respect Ezhavas for all their contributions to Kerala, same with Nairs, it is time all Hindus unite for the sake of our future in a state like Kerala where Christians will soon rule everything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.193.60 (talk) 18:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Wrong information in wiki pages
It is sad that many topics in wikipedia related to Religion/caste/community/state etc filled with wrong references or personal feelings or motives. Please keep wiki free from it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pachan (talk • contribs) 00:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Images of persons need to be reviewed
I think not all the images placed in the overview box deserve place there. At least shymalan is not an icon of ezhava Nikhilkrgvr (talk) 17:47, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Sunames of Ezhava
it include Chon,Thandan,Vadukan,Mannan etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nair1234567890 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Why this article omitted 'Thandan' a subsector of Ezhava
Thndan also climb on coconut tree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nair1234567890 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Ezhavas And Thiyyas
Thiyyas may be a sub caste of Ezhava like Billavas but they are still known by respective sub caste name so please show the sub caste name of the royal dynasties like Izhathu Mannanar or chekavar famaly like puthooran vedu or chekavar name like aromal chekavar etc who are thiyyas While showing in the main article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malayale (talk • contribs) 11:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

i dnt think ezhavas and thiyyas are same it can be understood from their complexion and rituals.in malabar thiyyas are very prominent and doesnt consider themselves as ezhavas.it had happened due to sreenarayanaguru who had made them to it.ther is no similrity in both these groups.completely different ethinic groups. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.96.137 (talk) 23:07, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

http://www.hindu.com/2004/09/03/stories/2004090310670500.htm.. i strongly recommend the author to remove the thiyya from ezhava since they are different people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sithin (talk • contribs) 16:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Big Vandalism
This article is a big VANDALISM in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.254.114.30 (talk) 17:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Do not delete below
Toddy Tapping:The traditional job of Ezhava are "toddy tapping".(Please visit "Indianetzone").Some people of Ezhava do arrack brewing and its selling (it is illegal in India).They think these jobs are higher than any other jobs.Past days women of Ezhava who worked in 'toddy shop'.Women in Ezhava mainly also do coir productions and reated jobs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nair1234567890 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Jobs of Ezhava include:

What is the relation between Ezhava and Rakshasa
Are Ezhava descendants of Kaikasi,mother of Rakshasa king Ravana? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.254.118.229 (talk) 14:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Ezhava is one of the Tree Climbers in India
Ezhava who climb on coconut tree for 'toddy' and coconut.Ezhava also cutting the trees. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.254.115.160 (talk) 03:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Ezhava - a tree climbing coomunity in India  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naircolonel (talk • contribs) 03:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

==Ezhava is a Tree Climbing Community in India.

edit request from anonymous
The article says that the Nadars are ethnically related to the Ezhavas. But I see no refs appended to the claim. Please look into this issue and remove Nadar from the 'ethnically related to category'. Thank you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.112.22 (talk) 03:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

here is your answer Mr.anonymous http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3069080580760511681# Keralone (talk) 21:18, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Ezhava are always against Singhala
Why Ezhava are always against Singhala? Ezhava of Sri Lanka always fought against Singhala.So, so, it may be Ezhava in Kerala always against Singhla. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.246.67.78 (talk) 08:59, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Order of origin theories
The beginning paragraph should project Sri Lankan origin theory. There are a lot of evidences for Sinhala origin as listed below.
 * 1) Most credible genetic and molecular biology proofs.
 * 2) Buddist tredition.
 * 3) Astonishing Similarity between kalari payattu and Sri lankan martial art 'Angam' (Has a history of 1000 years)' reinforce the relation ship.
 * 4) Similarity in some common words and god names used among ezhavas and snhalese.
 * 5) Similarity between ancient ornaments used among this community.
 * 6) Vadakkan pattu stories indicating island origin.
 * 7) Similar story among srilankan myths depicting the warriors sent to Kerala during Chera era.
 * 8) Facial and morphological similarity.
 * 9) Similarity in practice of vishavaidyam & herbal medicine

[User: shaanvet May 5, 2011] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.80.122.119 (talk) 03:24, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Does anyone have a preference on what seems to be the dominant origin theory? The origin lead section is a mess. From what I recall, the Sri Lankan connection was supposedly the dominant theory. The language otherwise is difficult to decipher (and is completely badly sourced as well). Also, the Shaivite Roots section seem to be more about the origin of the religious beliefs, rather than the origin of the people. Those are two separate items which should be organized as such. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

What Srilankan connection? Srilankan’s themselves believe that they are out of India. In my mind there is no doubt the 'mokuvas' and 'ezhavas' are the original sons of the soil. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/perera/wheel100.html. --Keralone (talk) 09:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The actual 'sons of the soil' of Kerala are the tribals and dalits and not Ezhavas. Ezhavas probably came to Kerala during the 3rd Century BC from Sri Lanka. Of course, most of the Sri Lankans migrated from Bihar. All historical records point to this theory. The only exception being that by Velu Pillai which claims that they indeed migrated from Pandya kingdom. The budhist roots and physical aspects of Ezhavas give more credence to the ‘Srilankan’ theory of origin that anything else.--Lambodharan —Preceding comment was added at 08:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Generaly it's very difficult to differenciate between an Ezhava and a Nair by physical appearance, except for those Nairs who had genetic relation to Nambuthiri Brahmins. A genetically pure Nair and an Ezhava looks similar physically. Also Ezhava is a group of subgroups who can claim different origins and migrations. A large mass of people moving from Srilanka is something not very probable. Even existence of a caste or a group by name Ezhava in the early centuries (before 10C AD) is disputed. It would have evolved gradually during the Vedic transformation of the Kerala society. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 15:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

All Nairs, Ezhavas and Brahmins are varied in appearance, its ridiculous to assume that you can tell one apart by looks. Nambudiris are not distinct in appearance, they are equally varied. It's fair to say that the tribals and non-Ezhava Dalits of Kerala are distinct in appearance though, and that Ezhavas are less varied in appearance than Nairs and Brahmins, and overall more closely resemble the Dalit communities of Kerala. The Sri Lankan theory is fringe and old and improbable, it should not be given much coverage. Trips (talk) 05:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Ezhavas and Nairs look very distinct and if they were not, then the entire Malayalee populace

would have looked the same. Ezhavas,panars,arayar(mukkuvar) and cherumar do existed in Kerala much before the arrival of Nairs/Namboothiris and they very much resemble each other. They all belong to the dravidan race. In fact, Ezhavas resemble christians especially in the central travancore region than any other caste due to the conversions. However, dark people are part of any group in kerala including the cochin jews, which could be attributed to the equitorial climate prevailing in that area. Also the srilankan connection of Ezhavas is an absurd theory. Nairs doesn't belong to the dravidan race and are Nagas who are of indo-scythian origin who came to Kerala along with the Namoothiris in the 9th AD from UP-Nepal border.The dark population in Nairs could be due to the Nair status bestowed by local rulers and there by acquiring a new gene element in the process which could include other dravidian races as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.146.185 (talk) 13:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

No. Among todays' Hindu caste groups, the Nairs are believed to be the first Dravidian invaders of Kerala,while the Brahmins (Namboothiris) are the most recent immigrants to Kerala. Also the theory of Srilankan connection of Ezhavas is only as absurd as as Nair-Nepali theory,origin of Christian theory etc. All non-tribal communities of Kerala(Ezhavas, Nairs, Namboothiris, Syrian Christians, Muslims) have the existing local tribal population as the centroid of evolution. Genetic studies indicate that the Pulaya and Kurichia are the mothership of all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.129.81 (talk) 12:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Ezhavas (Billavas, villavar) and Meenavar (arayas) and Panars were rulers of the chera kingdom. At this point of time, the entire south was Dravidian and the language was Tamil. Hence Ezhavas, Panars, Arayas along with other tribal sects were the earliest settlers of Kerala. Then came the invasion of Namboothiris accompanied by Nairs. Namboothiris with the help of Nairs toppled all the Dravidian chera forces (initially they helped them in their war against Cholas and other Dravidian kingdoms and eventually took over the control). There are many instances to prove this theory. The Sanskrit, prakrit mixture of Malayalam language, the different architecture prevailing in Kerala, the aryanization and popularity of Aryan gods like Vishnu, Lakshmi are good examples. Even the ethnically different looks of Malayalee and Tamilian are good reasons to prove this point. In the case of Nairs, they are a heterogeneous group and many good warriors from the Dravidian clans were also awarded ‘nair’ status by local kings though major chunk of Nairs were also part of Aryan bandwagon that followed the Aryan Namboothiris. Matriarchy was never practiced by Dravidians and was a feature of Indo-scythian clans who invaded India from 300 BC to 600 AD. Christians are a mix of Dravidian people (predominantly ezhavas) and Syrian Christians who migrated to Kerala at different point of time in history. Muslims again are a mixture of dalits, arayas and Arab traders who settled in Kerala from time immemorial. Thus all the non-dravidian ethnic sets of Kerala are in one way or other are related to central and west asia. Hence, people from all the different religions in Kerala have a common look. However, Ezhavas, Arayas, panars and dalits by and large maintained their ethnic purity and are of pure Dravidian ancestry like any other Tamil ethnic group.

Lambodharan —Preceding undated comment was added at 11:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

You are mistaken, Lamboo.In either case the Sri Lankan ancestry of Ezhavas implies they had non-dravidian blood. Remember Srilanka was colonised by the Buddhists from Ashoka's Magadha ( with capital at Pataliputram or modern day Patna.) Whom do you think these people were? They were from the eastern fringes of Aryavarta, the migrant Dasyus and Aryans and a mixture of the two. They were not Dravidians in either case. Well, these Biharis too were forefathers of the Sinhalese who brought in Buddhism to the coast of Kerala.Our Ezhavas claim they are descendants of these Sinhalese adventurers.So, how do you say they have "pure Dravidian ancestry"? Pulayan Punchapadam (talk) 08:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I never did mention that Ezhavas came from Srilanka. In fact there is nothing to substantiate that theory. Ezhavas were Budhists, so was the entire populace of India, nobody had to bring Budhism to India from Srilanka rather it spread the other way round. Ezhavas were budhist scholars and were at helm of affairs during the pre-aryan era. This is so clear from the fact that Ezhavas even without having any connection with the Namboothiris were experts in Ayurveda, sanskrit etc. This they gained during their Budhist past. Ezhavas never had any admixture with any other community and are of pure gene.Lambodharan

There are no X'tian Ezhavas. Should some choose to convert, they would not be classified as Ezhavas. Just as there are no Nair X'tians or Namboothiti X'tians, there are no Ezhava X'tians either. vin (talk) 07:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Modern genetic studies reinforce Srilankan origin :- Modern studies using molecular biology techniques are also supporting Sri Lankan origin of Ezhavas. A genetic study conducted in Rajiv Gandhi Center for Biotechnology, Kerala (A crypto-Dravidian origin for the nontribal communities of South India based on human leukocyte antigen class I diversity R. Thomas et al Tissue Antigens ISSN 0001-2815 2006) states that "A strong East Eurasian (populations east of India and central Asia) element is noticed in the allelic distribution of the Ezhavas and its proximity to the Mongol populations in the bi-dimensional plot. This signifies a strong influence of the Mongoloid communities.This is also supported by the probable existence of a Buddhist past among the Ezhava who migrated from Sri Lanka in the ninth century". Since Sinhalese share similar East Eurasian ancestry, Sri Lankan origin hypothesis becomes more credible (HLA analysis of Sri Lankan Sinhalese predicts North Indian origin. G. N. Malavige et al, International Journal of Immunogenetics Volume 34, Issue 5, pages 313–315, October 2007). [User: shaanvet JANUARY 15 2011]

There is no reason to believe that the term Ilava or Ezhava derived from  Villavar. Because the first consonant "V" in Villavar ,is not a difficult one to  pronounce and retain in Malayalam. But the term Ila  indisputably referred  to coconut. coconut and toddy related work is still aknowledged as the  chief occupation of ezhava.So ilavar means toddy drawers. It appeared in inscriptions from the 9th century AD for example in the Velurpalaiyam plates in Sanskrit and Tamil from the time of the Pallava King Nandivarman III (846-869). They are referred to as Ilavar in the sense of toddy-drawers whose work of climbing coconut trees was regulated.

Truether (talk) 12:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

If ezhava word sound ezhinar or Eyinar It is more probable that they were old naga tribes of south India. Eyinar was actually a hunting tribe in Tamil sangham age , whose function were robbery and plundering. They had worked as archers of old tribal kingdoms. For more information please see the  book The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago By V. Kanakasabhai

But No one could ignore the real possibility of word origin Iia from coconut relation, which was the major traditional occupation of Ezhava.

Izhava origin from Villavar is not at all sensible even to laity.

Truether (talk) 11:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

They a aboriginal tribe of south india with good physical skills.(just like Maravar ) Probably Eyinar, who  helped fencing of Villavar tribes(chera). No indication of Budhism or Jainism influencing  these tribes till late 15th century. Chances of families of Budhist lineage mingling(living in hide) with them during feudal and (Tippu sultans invasion) Mugal era are not unlikely. Occupational division of castes became more prevalent since Aryan Brahmin invasion.

The claim of  ezhava were converted from budhism is  not at all  acceptable. because the budhists and its descendents have certain deeply ingrained patterns of behaviours which includes law abiding, humbleness  and  cleanlinnes which are unheard  of or not observed of among ezhava people.

It is clear that due to the changed social set up, they proggessively attained  literacy  there by many begun to think  of various methods for attaining the ultimate goal of social recognition. It is very interesting to note that recent generations of ezhava people  have names of  all  higher and other caste hindus of  India ( Ghosh, jain, singh, trivedi,) , muslims, xians etc  to an extent of un recognizablity of their religion or class by name alone.

Truether (talk) 17:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if the nature of my arguments hurting someone.My attempt is to enrich this article with  more NPV. my appeal is that the Historical information should not be distorted to someones convenience and fancy. Many reports available today are conjectures of authors.Of history notes,what is reliable is something recorded by authors with direct  observation on contemporary practices and prevailed evidences. A reliable historical notes must have substantiated, well linked and chronicled data of  reporting object. It must support the concerned informative material on cross references.Otherwise it is just like fictions.

Truether (talk) 21:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Spelling
Isn't "Ezhava" a bit of a counter-intuitive spelling? An English speaker reading it would think that the "e" was something like the "e" in "bed". I'll add the formal (National Library at Kolkata) romanization "Īḻava" next to the name in Malayalam script for clarity, but there needs to be a better informal transliteration as well - Izhava? Kannan91 (talk) 10:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Occupation
Chief occupation of ezhava people was Manual Labor (agricultural,toddy tapping, brewing, coir making etc) , all other functions such as weaving,fishing,fencing, trading were learnt and practiced from other  occupational castes(Chaliyans, Mukkuvans,Kalari panicker, chetties) .By 17th century or later only, some Ezhava people could learn and practice the scholarly and intellectual professions such as Ayurveda, Astrology and Teaching ( which requires knowledge of letters and Sanskrit).These Brahmanical lore  might have acquired from some  pseudo Brahmin castes (Ganaka).It is highly Probabile that  acquisition of the  fencing skills was also from some other castes ( It was well known that the  traditional perceptors of martial arts for Young Nair warriors were Kaniyar Panicker/ Kalari Panicker  people).No authentic and reliable  data is  available about ezhava as Kottaram(palace)vaidyans.

The rulers had usually preferred young people, for the purpose of fencing service ,especially from castes having large population and physically competent individuals( manual labors)(Nairs and Ezhava).

Truether (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * And your citation for these comments is where? - Sitush (talk) 14:51, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

A load of articles mention that cultivation, manual labor and toddy tapping   as the  past occupation of ezhava people.(For ezhava female- the cocunut husk processing and coir making).This group was not considered as a major occupational caste.Later they realized that the Sanskritization  and taking up of various  trades  and occupation of other castes is the only way to achieve  higher social status or hegemony. Reliable and authentic citations are  accessible from libraries or even from web. But wary of articles from Ezhava writers, as most of the books ( written in and after 20th century- Kerala social reformation period)  freely available on the web are written by the same caste people, who distorts some facts.

15:25, 30 May 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truether (talk • contribs)


 * That is an utterly useless response, sorry. The citations need to be in the article, not left for the reader to find. - Sitush (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

2 citations, but not in order of significance

1.Communism in kerala: study of political adaptation By Thomas Johnson Jossitor page30 []

2.Kaleidoscopic ethnicity: international migration and the reconstruction of community identities in India Prema A kurian Page57 []

Truether (talk) 16:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Excellent sources. I see no reason why they should not be in the article. Anything that helps to remove Iyer, Thurston, Logan etc is always welcome. - Sitush (talk) 16:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

My cut from the article
I have just cut "The most widely accepted theory is that the customs and beliefs of Ezhavas and Thiyas are very primitive and their origin go back to the dim past to those ancient pre-Tamil Sangam days. Their Tamil background gave them the God Muruga (Subramanya) and the Goddess Kali, and host of other village gods like Chathan, Chithan and Arathan. Though there are not enough evidence to justify that Ezhavas are from the northern Srilanka, the theory about their existence in Srilanka (Ezham/Elam) during the first centuries of BC cannot be ignored." from the article.

It may be correct but it is at present hopelessly POV. Feel free to add it back but only with citations. Those citations must support, among other things, the assertion that it is the "most widely accepted theory". - Sitush (talk) 20:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Is Ezhava a mix of different avarna castes?
A report of a not so long past incidence, indicates the possibility of mix of members from other castes in Ezhava. The conversion of few families of another caste (Pichanaattu Kurup) in to Ezhava by Sree Narayana Guru ).

see the link []

Pichanaattu Kuruppanmar http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/6251248 http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2000/1/2000-1-16.shtml

Truether (talk) 15:31, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

There is no doubt about it. Saint sreenarayana guru was trying to create a casteless society. today ezhava consists ezhavas, chovans, thiyyas, thandans, billawas, shanars, moopans,  In malabar kaniyans,mannans and some chaliyans are also known to have thiyya orgins. Their occupation ranges from toddy tappers,soldiers,mercenaries,priests(for kavus,badrakali temples,chattan,muttapan temples),wood cutters, farmers,traders,textile weavers, coconut product manufacturers (coconut sugar,coir,mats,housing roof,vessels,mattress etc),vaidyars,beedi/tabacco makers,labourers, circus acrobats,karali teachers etcKeralone (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC).

Members of other castes(especially avarna) whom were frustrated, estranged from families, out casted  and defiled by ezhava, may have joined under the fold  of ezhava rank. All the acquired skills other than physical (for manual work)  of ezhava  proper caste  was associated with this phenomena.Most of them  attempted to imitate higher castes customs and practice. By taking up various vocations of other castes by skilled members and large population numeric enabled them attain the modern privileges.

Truether (talk) 11:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Correct,with the occupation of Kerala by Europeans and the with the new economic and social orders, in the 18th century, ezhavas took a giant leaps in all areas of life. Similar to the Irish story in the America. This gave confidence to other weaker groups to join Ezhava fold,under guidance of Saint Sreenarayana guru. Guru organized the first ever movement/orgn in india, earlier that the Indian congress movement. I suggest we include this in the article.Keralone (talk) 21:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Extollment is not a wikipedia polcy, please.

Truether (talk) 13:03, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Conversion to Christianity
I have tried to search for every proper noun used in the referenced source for the Ezhava section. None were found, not even those which would suffer no issues from transliteration, eg: "Gundert". Can anyone get hold of a copy of page 167 of the source, please?

Alternatively, can anyone provide alternative sources for the statements made? - Sitush (talk) 01:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Etymology and early references
This section of the article is absurd by reason of unreliable source.Reference source used in this section (theory of origin of term )of article is not a reliable one.(Reference No.9), where the author(Gustuv) has applied a concrete level of thinking (narrow vision) in describing the permutation of word Billavar to Ilavar by forgetting the chief occupation of these group as toddy drawers.

There is no reason to believe that the term Ilava or Ezhava derived from  Villavar or Billavar. Because the first consonant "V" or B in Villavar ,is not a difficult one to  pronounce and retain in Malayalam. But the term Ila  indisputably referred  to coconut. coconut and toddy related work is still aknowledged as the  chief occupation of ezhava.So ilavar means toddy drawers. It appeared in inscriptions from the 9th century AD for example in the Velurpalaiyam plates in Sanskrit and Tamil from the time of the Pallava King Nandivarman III (846-869). They are referred to as Ilavar in the sense of toddy-drawers whose work of climbing coconut trees was regulated.

Truether (talk) 13:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * There is a lot of "pseudo-science" in this article. I use the phrase because the theories being propounded are either being inserted by contributors who do not appreciate that this is supposed to be readable by the layman or it really could be a breach of WP:FRINGE. I am hoping to dig deeper into it over the next few weeks. I am no scientist but, put simply, I am pretty intelligent and if I cannot make sense of it then it will be boldly cut from the article & pasted to this talk page. People can object here if they want to do so. - Sitush (talk) 23:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Dr.peter schalk ( professor of Theology Uppsala university) has made an attempt to study the origin of term Ilam and ezhavar. His conclusion of existence of ilam before the presence of simhalees in south India seems to concurred to the Kunjan pillais comment(Where the author appears to have lost logical connection from beginning to end of his statements in the article).

Again about the villavar origin of ezhava .Kunjan pilla had not/could not access the information that  villavar tribe  were helped by ezhinar or eyinar tribe for fencing. there by the eyinar tribe became warriors of villavar kingdom.later this eyinar transformed to ezhava section of  chevakar.

Truether (talk) 19:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thurston's "Caste & Tribes of South India"
Please can someone tell me the volume I am supposed to be looking at in Edgar Thurston's "Castes and Tribes of South India" for this caste. I've tried a few variations on the spelling - and I know that he will have recorded the Ezhavas - but I cannot spot it. As as I recall, there are at least 5 volumes. Thurston is not a good source for anything in particular, but he is better than nothing at all if the purpose is fairly bland. - Sitush (talk) 00:01, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

social and religious diversion
The reference No 19, has dubious reliability .It appears that authors (smith and Bardwell) had not applied any sense of reason to avoid irrationality of perspective.They have done only a re asserting of presumptions made by some ezhava writers of late 20th and 21st century.

It may be verified Smith, Bardwell L. (1976). Religion and Social Conflict in South Asia. International studies in sociology and social anthropology. 22. BRILL. ISBN 9789004045101. Retrieved 2011-06-09 Truether (talk) 10:22, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * That is one heck of an accusation to make of a fairly modern source that is chock-full of citations. What is irrational about what Pullapilly says? You need to be more specific. - Sitush (talk) 10:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

please go through the article (page 24 and 25 ) and see how he arrived in his belief.It is through interviewing ezhava people (R.Sankar.Achuthan velayudhan, etc). Cyriac A pullapilly 's notes (The Izhavas of Kerala and their Historic Struggle for Acceptance in the Hindu Society Journal of Asian and African studies, Volume 11)are more worthy of  noting for  the recent trends of ezhava people. Of course he has mentioned the legandary beliefs quoted by Logan etc as well. Journal of Asian and African studies, Volume 11‎ - Page 24 XI, 1—2 Truether (talk) 11:07, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry if I am misunderstanding you - I have trouble making sense of some of the things you say. I am not blaming you for this, but I find it awkward and am trying to do my best.


 * I have read the entire book (got it from my local library, via a reservation scheme). I do not see that it is "irrational". There is nothing wrong in recording interviews; there is nothing wrong with noting what people used to think. They give context. I was not aware that Logan was an Ezhava, btw. I thought he was a Brit. - Sitush (talk) 11:22, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

It is not to confront your arguments.I assent with few of you remarks. But see for good scientific practice (even in history) the assimilation of information a must be least biased(by various means ) interviews for historical information from person with highly possible bias (subjective and objecive) is least appreciable .Definitely for current information (objective) collection from contemporary persons of any bias (subjective) is acceptable,  provided the data must be verifiable with other neutral sources.

Here( in the article) the interviewees are none other than ardent ezhava leaders .Logan is acceptable as a neutral viewer in this matter but needs verification  (except for legendary material) of his source whether was it from unbiased person.

Truether (talk) 11:45, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Please do not try to teach me about historiography etc. I've got a PhD in that. It is irrelevant to Wikipedia policies/guidelines. You keep meandering off on these pseudo-philosophical arguments about methodology etc and often they bear little relevance to this article. If we take your position to its extreme then Wikipedia will not exist because, as you know, there is no such thing as truth.


 * If the content is verifiable using a reliable source then that is all which is required here. Peer-reviewed academic works are reliable, by definition. Even if they choose to use oral histories and older, less reliable works as part of their content. - Sitush (talk) 11:55, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Personal attack or accusation is not a policy of Wikipedia. it is good, if we keep emotional restrain while making arguments. Acquisition of certificates of qualification in thesis making  is more easier than  achieving in depth knowledge of research methodology. I don't consider every thing which I object or could not understand as "pseudo" ,rather I would prefer to learn more about it.

Sorry for using word the Psuedo repeatedly (indicates grandiose- emotional un stability)

If wikipedia follow the policy of taken for granted ,some one can incorporate any rubbish of his choice to the article.so sense of reasoning must be applied while editing and using articles asverifiable and reliable source

You do as you like, but will be corrected by some one in later stage if not conforming to  WP. Truether (talk) 12:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I am not inclined to continue this discussion, primarily because I really cannot be sure what you are trying to say a lot of the time & wonder if perhaps we are misunderstanding each other. Not your fault, just the way it is. Perhaps someone else can resolve this.


 * Just tell me, without fancy words, why the source fails WP:V and WP:RS. This is all that matters for conformity. - Sitush (talk) 12:32, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

No need of clash or misunderstanding.It is simple, verify the reliability of sources ( please come up with your points for verification of reliability of a source -then every thing will be resolved). Both of us raise the same point but small variation in the method of applicatioion of reliability principle.

Truether (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I have already done so. It is a peer-reviewed academic work, published by a known publisher and of fairly recent origin. What more do you need? If you think that it is controversial then provide another RS to counter it. There is nothing wrong with having two opinions in an article. - Sitush (talk) 12:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Iam not dissenting with your points that, it is peer-reviwed academic workpublised by known publisher and of recent origin. Iam not taking any inflexible extreme stand. But my humble request is that we should not repetat the mistakes made  by the people of past (historiographers). Why I objected the source because the author plainly used remarks of  fan of ezhava (evident from the foot notes in the book- which itself is a caveat to the readers)(page 24). It may be used but with suitable comments. So it is fair to mention clearly the conflict of satatement in the article.

Truether (talk) 14:42, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

yes I agree and refrain from adding tag. Is Pulleppally a divine person ? if he is an un mistakable genius, please do adore him rather than attesting his stupidity.

Truether (talk) 19:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Article- Needs reorganisation?
It is confusing to the laity readers. No distinction is possible about the past and present traditional vocations avocations and other ventures of ezhava and  their phases of social ascendany  etc

Truether (talk) 12:48, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * So do it. - Sitush (talk) 12:51, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

villar tribe reference to ezhava. http://books.google.com/books?id=pXpuAAAAMAAJ&q=villavar&dq=villavar&hl=en&ei=Ztf0TfnjA4unrAf85t3DBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAjgK Keralone (talk) 15:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

http://books.google.com/books?id=-cFcH2ZHWLcC&q=villavar&dq=villavar&hl=en&ei=Ztf0TfnjA4unrAf85t3DBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAzgK Keralone (talk) 15:20, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

http://books.google.com/books?id=b9a1AAAAIAAJ&q=villavar&dq=villavar&hl=en&ei=bdn0TZf8Cc_nrAehy_3QCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAzgU Keralone (talk) 15:22, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

http://books.google.com/books?id=kspe3IK6l50C&q=villavar&dq=villavar&hl=en&ei=T9r0TeWvIcPHrQf3qcG-Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CE8Q6AEwCTg8   Keralone (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Drawing conclusions from sources, without applying mind is an utter uselessness, as it is a big cheating on readers.

see this statement as Ex: " There are different kind of water bodies such as ponds, lakes, river etc. a Man dipped his clothes in to a pond of dirty liquid."

[ What would be the dirty liquid ?. How we will react, if some one responds that there is no chance of any thing other than water as dirty liquid.]

Truether (talk) 17:37, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * We are not allowed to use our mind, in the sense that I think you mean. That would be original research and/or synthesis. If you do not approve of Wikipedia's system then you can always contribute somewhere else. - Sitush (talk) 18:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * And what do those links have to do with reorganising the article? This is absolutely chaotic. - Sitush (talk) 18:32, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Iam afraid that people not getting at my points. Sorry, the response reflects a deviated interpretation of my arguments. It is very simple that when a source is used to support a statement in the article, it must be verifiable and reliable.(which itself is self explanatory). Unfortunately the most of the available sources are indirectly contaminated by POV of contributors.If collective judgement seems it right to put them as sources,it is an act of deliberate betrayal .That is all.

The mention of synthesis and original research are never warranted in this connection. Use of common sense is enough. More over my arguments are not to inflame or humiliate someones ego. If we disagree on points, let us keep silent or respond gracefully. My appeal is 'please refrain from repeating the same history of mistakes made by some historians'.

Truether (talk) 22:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah, I think that I understand now. However, your point is probably not relevant in this specific instance. Everybody has a POV, including academics. There are even extreme examples in that world, eg: David Irving, the alleged holocaust denier. Some people are more likely to be towards the edges of the bell curve than others, eg: contributors here who have a conflict of interest and people who, while not having COI, are close to the subject matter. I am a Brit with no historical connections to India, nor have I ever visited the place, nor do I know any members of the Ezhava diaspora (well, I do not think so but it probably would not be a major feature of conversation even if I did). In that sense, I am probably as near to neutral as can be possible for the subject of this article.


 * When someone gets to the very edges of the curve then, certainly, WP:FRINGE probably comes into play. However, the purpose of the Wikipedia policies etc regarding POV in situations such as this need to be considered in relation to the undue weight also. Since the source we are debating mentions more than one possible theory for various things & is copiously footnoted, it is safe to assume that the writer is at least attempting to consider all angles. This brings us pretty much back to what I said about alternate sources. It is fine to have two alternate views depicted in an article. So, all you have to do is find the alternate view. Since the source was published 35 years ago, if there were any serious doubts about the credibility of the author then I would expect that you could find them by now - the intervening period has been a hotbed of debate between ethnologists etc, far more so than it was in, say, the days of Edgar Thurston . Does this make sense to you? Or have I misunderstood you? - Sitush (talk) 23:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Iavar Kali
kammalar or artizan group of people were the original performers of this art form (Iavar  kali) See how this information is distorted added to this POV artclie.

Truether (talk) 04:56, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Yet again, where is your proof? You are not getting the hang of this at all, are you? Making random assertions here and tagging on some criticism of the status quo will only serve to irritate people. Is that your intention? Try, please, to be constructive. - Sitush (talk) 08:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry folks, that you are not capable of taking in to account with due seriousness of  my comments.

for short details of Aivar kali see this link []

[]

Read full text article []

Truether (talk) 15:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Recent edit by Keralone
Keralone recently added to the lead that Ezhavas were "highly competent" practitioners of ayurvedic medicine. He provided three cites.

I moved the cites into a section and toned down the sentence in the lead, since I could see nothing to suggest the level of competency in the sources provided. Leads are intended to summarise an article. While sometimes it is unavoidable to insert a citation in the lead, it is usually the case that citations can be better utilised in the body of the article as support for a full exposition rather than at the head of it. This is particularly clear cut in this example, because three citations is overkill for one statement made in any lead.

Keralone reverted me; I reverted him and asked that the matter be discussed here. - Sitush (talk) 02:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

For the past 2 centuries, the Ayurveda practice has not been confined to any caste or class. So some ezhava people also learned and practiced ayurveda. But before that era in kerala, only members of selected castes had  traditionally practiced Ayurveda ( They enjoyed this  privilege by way of having knowledge in sanskrit, which was essential for understanding the scripts ). Now it is common that people of any caste can learn Ayurveda, especially newer formal basic course such as BAMS or Mixed medicine (Ayurveda with few elements of basics of modern medicine)

Truether (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Totally, utterly irrelevant. The comment is about a historical practice, hence it says "were". The cited source agrees with this. Aside from the fact that you have provided no support for your statement above, it simply does not matter. - Sitush (talk) 16:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The above comments reflects a pure emotional response without any substantial cognitive exercise. Here I put the arguments which are only meant for sorting out the irrelevancy of being adamant on certain unproved information.Personal attack or blame is not the policy.

A best draft of this article with major changes is about to come ( certainly with widely acceptable references ),till then, let folks continue their editing. Truether (talk) 17:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

There are enough material out there that suggests Kerala was under the influence of Buddhism. The knowledge of Ayurveda and sanskrit was passed on during these ages, earlier to Brahmanism. reference to support my statement http://books.google.com/books?id=8XJ2HHZcM6oC&pg=PA83&dq=buddhism+ezhava+kerala+ayurveda&hl=en&ei=jPz-TYigMY6zrAet9d3CDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=buddhism%20ezhava%20kerala%20ayurveda&f=falseKeralone (talk) 00:33, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Villavar Theory
I strongly suspect the reliability of the citation provided. It is a book titled "History of Kerala" written by R. Leela Devi and published by Vidyarthi Publications. Vidyarthi Publications is primarily a publishing house of school guides. So I think it does not fit for Wikipedia:Reliable sources Even if we take the book into account, it says only this:

No reference given to the above statement in the book, nor it says who are these "some". Hence we are forced to consider it as either Original Research or weasel words.

I will be tempted to delete the above sentence along with all other mentions of Villavar from the article, if someone could not come up with a reliable reference to support the connection between Ezhavas and Villavar (or at least claims of it). --The Tiger&#39;s Tail Caught By The Dog (talk) 07:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Devi herself seems to be a respected author; several academic books of hers appear on gBooks, she's mentioned/cited in other works, listed in some reference materials of Indian authors/academics, etc. Not that such is a 100% mark of credibility, just that it verifies she isn't some random hack. Given the vagueness of the quote you provide (and I haven't looked too deeply into that portion of the article), the cite does seem a bit underpowered, so I too would like to see a bit more evidence for what is apparently a controversial claim. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I am the person who toned it down form Keralone's "They are descended from ..." Since the article's position is now pretty weak on the assertion, I see no harm in leaving it there for a while and seeing what turns up. BTW, my toning down was based on reading Devi, per the quote boxes above. - Sitush (talk) 11:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

available information indicates that villavar (Bow men) were ancient Tribals of India ( In tamil and malayalam the term Villu means Bow). they formed the Dravidian kingdoms in south India The hill tribes   Eyinar (most law breaking hunter tribals - semi barberous people who were  engaged in robbery and plundering) had been recruited for fencing by villavar tribal kingdom. But, in later course more civilized nagar tribals conquered them established their supremacy. In this circumstances the probability of transformation of eyinar people to ezhavar, cannot be afford to ignore.

if interested please see these  links  which gives short descriptions on Eyinar, villavar  and Nagar tribes

Archaeology and language, Volume 35 By Roger Blench pages 168 -173

[]

The classical age of the Tamils By Arokyaswami pages 45-46

[]

The Tamils Eighteen Hundred Years Ago By V. Kanakasabhai chapter IV (Tamil races and tribes)

[]

Ritual and mythological sources of the early Tamil poetry Aleksandr Mikhaĭlovich Dubi͡a͡nskiĭ page 13 (irrelevent?)

[]

The smile of Murugan on Tamil literature of South India By Kamil Zvelebil page 99 (irrelevent)

[]

The anklet storyIḷaṅkōvaṭikaḷ, Kantāṭai Nārāyaṇasvāmi Cupramaṇyam page 71-74 (not so relevent)

[]

and finally an ezhava writer's perspective and comment on these tribes

A social history of India By S. N. Sadasivan page 328

[]

Truether (talk) 17:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Sigh. It is a claim. It may not be true. Then again, it may be true. Who knows? As far as Wikipedia is concerned, indeed, who cares? If it is cited to a reliable source then it simply does not matter. If you can find another reliable source that says the opposite then that is fine, or if you can make a decent case for Devi not being reliable then that, too, is fine.


 * However, it looks like you may be involved in WP:SYNTHESIS. You cannot pull together information from numerous sources to form a "proof". I am not wading through that long list but is there anything in there that says either (a) what the Ezhavas were or (b) that they were not Villavar? - Sitush (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Think twice before you leap.It is the best example for snap conclusion on what one hears and sees. I feel sorry, the response appears to be without making any sense of the comments provided. Emotional lability is not a solution for any problems. Listen and understand well before making any contra response. Truether (talk) 17:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I am merely telling you what WP policy and guidelines say. You can come up with as big a reading list as you like (I have read some of these in the past) but it makes no difference. What would make a difference is if you could provide some info as I note in my response at 17:20 above. - Sitush (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I have added another citation to the villavar theoryKeralone (talk) 23:44, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Illam And kiriyams
The term Illam had nothing to do with ezhava. Illam refers to house only.( origin from Telugu word illu-probaly popularized during the flourishing period  of  Chola kingdom in 4th century AD) .Houses and families of people  irrespective of classes were earlier referred as illams and Kiriyams  Since  medieval period, Namputiris of Kerala had preferred to use the terms ( Illam and Mana )for denoting their houses or dwelling. But the term Ilam (means land of toddy)exclusively referred to Ezhava dwelling places.

Truether (talk) 16:44, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Illam and Bari is still in use by the billava-thiyyas in the kasargod(mainly)/kannur (northern districts on kerala. It is not applicable to southern ezhavas or other parts of kerala. Probably Namputiris picked up this word as they moved from north to other parts of keralaKeralone (talk) 23:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Inscriptions
There are three cited sources for the Inscriptions section. Two of them appear not to exist under the titles named, and the third (Evolution of ethnic identity) appears possibly to be a very controversial work (per an "editor's review" on Amazon, for the 2005 edition). In all three cases, there are no page numbers etc listed.

I am a little concerned by this because there are some etymological leaps going on from the ancient incribed names to the modern name of Ezhava. Unless the sources (or other sources) can confirm a connection between the old and the modern names, this would be synthesis and/or original research. We know from recent deletions that someone has been playing a bit with similar leaps of imagination and pseudo-connections.

Can anyone track down these sources, preferably with page numbers also.? - Sitush (talk) 18:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Just weighing in to support this being a widespread WP concern: I've noted extreme cases of the same with conflation of the ancient Yadava and the modern Yadav cowherds, as well as the ancient Abhira and the modern pastoral Ahir (both Deccan castes). I likewise support a very strict standard for associating ancient and modern castes of quasi-similar names. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:33, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Largest group
Keralone recently added a 35 year old book, which itself uses older sources, to substantiate that the Ezhava community is the largest Hindu community in Kerala. This was clearly inadequate, so I reverted and explained on their talk page that the source would need to be a census or some sort of equivalent. Keralone replied on my talk page that this cannot be done as there has been no caste census since independence. Consequently, I have amended the opening sentence to avoid all mention both of "Hindu" and "largest". The Hindu bit was removed because it is incredibly unlikely that all Ezhava people are Hindus in this modern age, although if suitable figures had been available then it could have been dealt with in another way rather than completely removing it. - Sitush (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Today Ezhavas are mainly Hindu. Although there are many atheist among them. There are also some Christians who call themselves Ezhava Christians especially in the Trivandrum area. I am sure there are some Ezhava Muslims and Ezhava Buddhists also out there. So I support keeping this community thing open.Keralone (talk) 17:40, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Suggestion: I would submit that the results of the last caste census are still interesting enough to include, so long as we can avoid giving the impression that those relect current numbers. Maybe we could include something about "In 19XY, the last year in which a caste-based census was conducted, the Ezhava were..." ? MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, but not in the lead. And do bear in mind that the censuses (censii?) were hopelessly unreliable for caste details, in part precisely because of the social aspiration traits. - Sitush (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

The Malabar group claim a higher ranking in the Hindu caste system than do the others.[1]
The Malabar group claim a higher ranking in the Hindu caste system than do the others.[1]. How can it comes? Please remove this section. Or at least move it bottom. Because there is no valid proof for this claim. Rather the central-southern ezhavas are much more organized or lived/living more developed. Most of them were either warriors or Ayurvedic vaidyars. For e.g. "Alummootil Meda", southern ezhava aristocracy from history or Cheerappanchira is a famous ezhava tharavadu renowned for its Kalari in Muhamma, Alappuzha, Pokkanchery families in Thrissur ,Itty Achudan Vaidyan,Arattupuzha Velayudha Panicker, Kumaran Asan and last Sree Narayana Guru. These ezhavas from south contributed more than any others from Malabar.This is a real evidence that shows the ezhavas from central-southern kerala is lived much better than Malabar.

So I request to remove the line "The Malabar group claim a higher ranking in the Hindu caste system than do the others". Its a shame for those who talked against cast system.


 * No valid proof? Did you note that the [1] indicates a footnote which specifically proves this claim? The footnote is "Nossiter (1982) p. 30", and it appears to be a clickable link where you can check the source. I suggest you do so, and in any case it is certainly completely inaccruate that "there is no valid proof for this claim". If you disagree with the proof itself, please find a reliable, contradicting reference and explain it here. Saying "Nossiter is wrong" is not a convincing argument, you need to find clear citations disputing the issue. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

"Nossiter" books is just one reference. Come and study Kerala history before talking such biased or invalid arguments. You can get many bokos from India. Or just look at the whole article about Ezhava. There is only a few famous Ezhavas from Malabar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.137.117 (talk) 18:24, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


 * "Evidence" implies you have some source verifying not only the logic chain you lay out, but that came to the same conclusion. Stating "A is true, and B is true, so therefore we can assume C" is WP:Original research and not submittable on Wikipedia. And that's setting aside the fact that you have no provided any sources to verify that A and B are true, much less that a credible academic has stated C. It may well be the case, but you need to bring evidence; suggest you try searching GoogleBooks for a good cite. Cited material is not going to be removed based on an anonymous opinion, but if you can provide some solid academic critique of the assertion, or counter-statements, that would be most helpful. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:25, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Great, you have found one book saying that "The Malabar group claim a higher ranking in the Hindu caste system than do the others". This is why the Reliability of Wikipedia is questioned. Can you add more references? Try to get some books from India author rather than trusting a foreign author, who may knows little about the country/state.The book is not accurate. The Indian Government is stating that both thiyyas from Malabar Or ezhavas from southern side is equal. This article is questioning the governments reservation system based on the caste level. Based on National Commission for Backward Classes, India. Both Ezhavas and Thiyyas are listed on same group. India Government stated both of these groups as backward class because of the living status they had on before and after british rule. This list is prepared based on the studies conducted by India Government to  ensure that the OBC [ Other backwared classes] is getting reservations. Here is the central list of OBC  from site .See kerala OBC list. Sree Narayan Guru [ Narayana Guru] is the man/hero/legend pull out from social injustices.He made them them walk in-front of the Top Class at those ages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.137.117 (talk) 19:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The statement is not "the Malabar group is higher", the statement is that they claim to be higher. So far as questioning a source, "he's a foreigner" is not a valid argument. If anything, being an outsider may give him better perspective on Indian issues since he is less subject to certain biases. I'll take a look at that quote later and see if its prominence is WP:UNDUE and needs to be moved further down the article, but I don't see any reason to remove it entirely. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Since its a claim, why its so relevant? And its put on the top rather than telling about the subject. If some other groups says they are higher any others in earth and its published in university press,Do you agree?  Will you publish in Wikipedia? There is no point in putting a claim inside a article. I don't know how many books published there in university press referring ezhavas, but  I am sure that you are wrong.I won't be able to  show you a reference from your holy university press.Since I  don't have an access now.But what I shared you are links from a site under Governmental body, which says correct.You have to check it thoroughly also please


 * As I recall, the reason why I inserted the statement there was because it was the only place in the article where the various regional groups were already being discussed (in connection with the various names that they go under). I don't care where it goes in the article provided that it makes some sort of sense/is not a total non sequitor. As far as removing it goes (as the IP editor seems to wish), well, it is a book published by a university press and this fact alone justifies its inclusion.
 * Finally, OBC etc is totally irrelevant in this context. The point being made has no bearing on positive discrimination for the purposes of education and employment, which is what the various caste schemes are intended for & which are relatively recent in origin. As MV rightly points out, this is said to be something which the Malabar group claim &, as with Nairs, there were several subdivisions of Ezhavas who tried to distinguish themselves from each other in a point scoring exercise, or a "racial" version of the snakes-and-ladders game if you prefer an analogy. - Sitush (talk) 20:27, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


 * OBC is just an example to show you how Indian government listed castes based on social status. These lists are updated list but not created on year shown in link. These lists are older than Nossiter's book printed in 1982."which are relatively recent in origin" - you are wrong and knows nothing about it. Please read these two articles Other_Backward_Class and this Kalelkar_Commission
 * "As MV rightly points out, this is said to be something which the Malabar group claim &, as with Nairs"


 * => Here is very clear that its mentioning that Thiyyas [Ezhavas from Northen/Malabar area] claiming higer ranking than Ezhavas from Southern part [Travencore area].Its already well known in India/World that Nairs had a superior social status than any Ezhavas. - you are wrong and knows nothing about it.


 * "a "racial" version of the snakes-and-ladders game if you prefer an analogy."


 * => Try to understand about those lists rather than talk childish.
 * And just one question. Is this wikipedia.org is just based on university press?

Do you people don't agree with a any other constitutional / Government body's list? Its is so pity. The links I showed you is a reference to the list of castes who considered equivalent in terms of their social status in India. It is listed by Governmental body, but not by university spokes person or author of other countries. Indian Government had appointed many commissions to study about this.So Indian Government knows them more than others.


 * Reply unsigned post above:


 * Sigh. They claim a higher status. It doesn't matter what the BC lists say. Asking me to read other Wikipedia articles is pointless as that would be a circular reference - who knows if they can be trusted? - Sitush (talk) 17:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't read. The whole wikipedia is  circular reference . You saying that the whole wikipedia is meaningless.:

IP, you don't appear to be reading our replies fully: there is zero conflict between "the Indian government classified X caste as OBC" and "X caste claims to be higher". Nobody is discounting official Indian .gov OBC lists, we're noting an unrelated issue of a group's claim, which is attested in academic reporting. You say you don't have access to "university press"; just do what we do, go to GoogleBooks and type in your keywords, and if you find good information from a reputable book, present it here. Until that point, we have a piece of information from a published scholar, and you (presenting no outside proof) want us to remove it because an anonymous person tells us so. Who do you expect us to believe, an anonymous person on the internet, or a published scholar? MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:26, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I am done and leaving. You please carry on with your university press site. I was trying to correct a wrong information. But you people are not trying to understand what I mean. I don't have time to correct you dump/dud people. Because you only knows university books. But I know these people belongs to this case directly, since I am living along with them. Keep your dump articles going on Mr. MV All the best . One day you will be forced to remove this.

I support removing this particular piece of information from the article. Malabar group is no longer claiming higher ranking. It was to some extend true in the past as the situation in North Malabar was different than that of South Kerala. Thiyyas there were better positioned in the society and still are.Especially with arrival of Europeans when many were inducted in the government service. But today there are no such differences and intermarriages between ezhavas and thiyyas have become common to some extend.

Here is how William Logon described thiyyas in his Malabar manual in 1887."Both men and women of the north malabar caste are remarkably neat in appearance" http://books.google.com/books?id=9mR2QXrVEJIC&pg=PA142&dq=Ilavar&hl=en&ei=XdX_TZr8MMfhrAeluKyFDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBTge#v=onepage&q=Ilavar&f=false Keralone (talk) 16:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)