Talk:Ezhava/Archive 5

Tobacco and bidi
Bidi(local cigaratte) making can be included as it is was one of the largest employers in the state. the largest bidi company in private sector is still owned by a thiyya family. Keralone (talk) 20:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Look, I am starting to get a little fed up of this. Will you please include citations. If it is uncited then it is probably not going to survive. When it comes to caste articles, everything seems to end up being challenged and so it is easier to ask for a cite right at the outset than let things become messy later. Please stop assuming that everyone knows what you are talking about. Despite what you may think, Wikipedia is not just read by Indian people nor is it just for Indian people. Some of us out here are not mind-readers and have no local knowledge. - Sitush (talk) 20:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Furthermore, everything does not have to go in the lead. The lead is a summary, not a list of jobs. It would help if people saw this article as just that, an article. Not a battleground, not an attempt to "get my view in first in case they don't read to the end" etc. - Sitush (talk) 20:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

This article is getting better now, I didint read the entire thing but the 1st paragraph itself had many Propaganda items in the past, now it seems 'almost' ok.

& I have a suggestion that this 'kerala cast' related articles should be handled by malayalees itself as people from outside doesint know how things works here 1st hand. your ideas all arise from books & vague ideas happened to European writers or propaganda articles from kerala authors. May be thats how wikipedia works, but if malayalees handle this we will have the capacity to know which reference is true or false 1st hand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.216.74 (talk) 07:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, it has been shown time and again that local contributors often do not have such a capacity. Usually because they either do not understand the limitations of Wikipedia or because they are POV pushing for one local group or another. FWIW, I think that you will find that the improvements in the lead which you believe are now there have resulted precisely because of the involvement in the process of non-Malayalees. - Sitush (talk) 07:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Source request
Can anyone obtain for me pages 358-360 of Farmers of India please. - Sitush (talk) 08:14, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

For Keralone
, you have just added a cite for a Kerala History Soc. thing called The Abstention Movement, in relation to conversions to Sikhism. It looks interesting but I can only see in snippet view - can you see the entire thing? Might be of use for other articles I am involved with. - Sitush (talk) 14:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

No, but the Official government version of the movement is here http://www.old.kerala.gov.in/ele_rep/ele_51.htm. unofficial version to know more about politics during that time. http://dspace.vidyanidhi.org.in:8080/dspace/bitstream/2009/5135/9/KER-1989-090-7.pdf Keralone (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks. I'll dig into those. They may even provide a better cite for this article because using snippet view is A Bad Thing. There is no context and, really, it should not be used at all. Unfortunately, this article uses snippet view a lot. - Sitush (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately the full articles are available only through some libraries. I could get them if its on Jstor, but its not.Keralone (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Devi and Chopra as cites for Villavar connection
Both the Devi and Chopra citations used to support the Villavar-Ezhava connection are only available to me in snippet view. I am not happy with either of them because there is some (probably) significant context being lost. I would like to see the full text, if anyone can get it. If not then I would be inclined to remove the cites. Devi, in particular, makes an extremely sweeping statement and, to be honest, given the range of books that she has worked on I am not even sure that she is an authority on this matter. When an academic author has a unreferenced sentence that includes the words "some people say" then we should run for the hills. - Sitush (talk) 21:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Ayurvedic Vaidyars
Notice to Keralaone. Please do not attempt to distort historical information.There is no evidence of  Ezhava members skilled in the  practice of ayurvedic medicine  before the end of medieval period Kerala. Members of Ezhava community could make access to various professional careers by 18th century or later.Most of the Ezhava were illiterate till then. If you disagree, please prove it with reliable sources.

Primary education with letters were acquired by Nairs and other similar caste members, for the purpose of land title preparation , tax collection and local supervision there by to take up the role  as land chief. This was imparted at village schools, where most of the  avarna  (ezhava)and out cates could not attend  till 17th century. After 17th century primary education with malayalam and  sanskrit was filtered to  many avarna castes including Ezhavas. However the eligibility for higher education was vested with Brahmins and other higher castes. The British rule had changed the eduacation system and enabled many aspirants to achieve higher education ,which included Ezhavas as well. Truether (talk) 14:22, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I dont want to waste time arguing here..it is clear that you dont have any access to academic journals.. just google will not get you anywhere. the modern medicine is itself only few hundred years old. It is well known fact that there are two types of ayurveda, one practised by ezhavas and other by namboothiris. Ezhavas vaidyars treated 90% of the kerala population then. Brahmins would become outcaste if they treated others. Ezhava ayurveda is similar to that found in srilanka. Unlike other castes, ezhava population occupied a wide range of profession, and all these groups/subcastes were joined together by saint sreenarayana guru. anyways, at present ezhavas are leading the Hindus in kerala in all fields...so you can write what ever you want for the past as rulers then didnt want to acknowledge others achievement, which lead to their own destruction.. Ezhavas current and future history is unshakable. see the link http://www.jstor.org/pss/312903  and you will see who did modern work on ayurveda from kerala. Keralone (talk) 21:15, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Sources for this? And the same for you, Keralone. Let's get this content dispute knocked on the head. I am happy to take a look at a reasonable number of sources from both parties. I would suggest that you both list, say, your top 10. I'll go through them and comment. How does that sound? - Sitush (talk) 14:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * please acknowledge the Lack of evidence/ No writings, in  contrary to the above mentioned  points. This itself is amenable to the common sense. I could  give sources in support to the comments, if Keralaone comes with sources proving otherwise.

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


 * Well. if neither of you come up with sources then I'll just delete the entire section from the article wherever it is uncited. Your choice. - Sitush (talk) 15:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Response to comments of Keralaone There is no pure reliable academic articles mention about ezhava as ancient ayurvedic physicians. It is sure that you may get few fancy full modern era writings (by ezhava or associted people) with self proclaimation that ezhava members  had practiced  ayurveda  before the period of foreign alienation.Earlier, the occupational castes  only had the right to practice various trades and professions in a society, unfortunately it was not the story with ezhava,these people could  involve only in manual labor, coconut related works and toddy tapping.please do not get allured to that foolish  reports , as sources for making wikipedia article. For readers of any article ,the rational and honest mention of the past and present is essential.

As we all know, in every family some may  have a knowledge to practice the grandmas remedies for any ailment of their kin and kiths.Probably this may be the case of your belief that eahava  had practiced herbal medicine. whatever be the methods adopted for distorting the historical information,the truth will remain crystal clear to all. Just as evidences may pop up from any corner ,how hard the criminals endeavored to hide their act.Kindly use critical faculty before drawing conclusion on unreliable reports

Truether (talk) 12:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Truether, you raise some valid points, but can you mellow the tone a bit? Being a bit snippy is just going to put folks on the defensive, what with metaphors about "criminals" and whatnot. In any case, we should take a glance at the sources Keralaone is wanting to use, and see how applicable they are. This really all comes down to sourcing, so whether they did proper Ayurvedic medicine, practiced traditional herbal medicine (which would definitely be interesting to note if properly sourced), we can decide based on sourcing what is documented. Keralaone, again, as mentioned in Edit Summary I wasn't against the inclusion of your paragraph, so long as the sources check out, but your reverts were removing a bunch of copyediting and cite formatting too. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:58, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Mathew, Truther is from south kerala, he won't change...most probably the changanassery type!Keralone (talk) 01:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

truther you are correct, there were no physicians earlier, I work in healthcare field, you will be surprised to know that surgery was initially performed by barbers!. Basically Ezhavas knew better(hands on) about the plants and trees that existed in Kerala and its medicinal usage. At least that's what Portuguese found out and documented it sometime in 1700 and took it to Europe. read my link or similar ones.

Also all groups(kerala,Andra,karnataka or north india) engaged in preparation of "SOMA" had ayurvedic/medicinal knowledge. You must remember the social status of ezhavas across kerala were not same. Keralone (talk) 01:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Good to see you talking. However, no-one has to remember anything here. That is one of the points of providing sources. It you cannot source it then do not say it. Simple as that. - Sitush (talk) 01:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Keralaone, Intention of this discussion is not to insult someone. The practice of traditional medicine(Ayurveda) in ancient period of history invariably needed knowledge of sanskrit, fortunately or unfortunately this privilege was vested only with Brahmins or associated people.But the practice of herbal medicine or folk medicine was done by various cultural groups and they had been passing their lore to subsequent generation by oral means rather than writing .It has been reported by many writers that, in kerala, the  diverse tribal people ( Mannan,Velan, Kaniyan), were worked as folk healers. The Ezhava had no access to sanskrit learning before the end of medieval period. By the turn of medieval period, many treatise and epics in sanskrit   were translated to Malayalam, which helped common mass to attain the  ancient knowledge passed from vedic period. Even in medieval period ,only few castes( Mannan,Velan, Kaniyan) were assigned  with  different specialties of treatment []. Herbal medicine,sorcery and anti sorcery were also practiced by these groups.So Ezhava were no where in scene of Ayurveda practice, till the end of medieval period of Kerala. Truether (talk) 12:26, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Common, dont be so narrow minded. the history of kerala is over 2000 years old. Namboothiris arrived in 8th century and they peaked their power with the help of nair minority between 13-17th century.(these are well documented in kerala history govt website, dont have a link now will provide when i find it) their decline started with arrival of europeans in 1700's. these are basically regimes that come and go in history. Just because a Sunni minority Saddam ruled Iraq for 25 years and suppressed shites doesnot mean, that shites were eliminated. Bringing up the Namboothiri link is typical of that period. not any more. It is must then Valmiki was also a brahmin!

"from your own link, it is clear that ezhava family traditions which is different from ashta vidyan (Pg 88) and evidence that it was documented by the marcopolo as early as 1300"

Keralone (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

This link was  given deliberately  to convince you of the  unreliability of the reports. please see the reference(Reference no25) they used for evidence of herbal medicine practice  by ezhava- it is nothing but the unpolished wiki article Ezhava ( which we are struggling to make it more refined and useful) .If you go through the word ezhava (which is mentioned thrice in the article). Again it is well understandable from their writing that ezhava community made their foray in to  practice of traditional medicine after only late 1800.

Truether (talk) 16:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I haven't tried digging into the refs yet, and medicince is really not my forte, but before we get into a kerfuffle further on this, can we perhaps try to find the common ground between the two sides. Okay, the Ezhava practised some kind of herbal medicine for a long while, though technically it may not be true esoteric Ayurveda since they lacked access to the Brahminic knowledge-base. But at some point they obtained more formal education and were able to adapt their practices along Ayurvedic lines. Is this somewhat what both sides agree on? Can we find refs to back this up? MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

what Iam trying to convey is that the presence of  ezhava practitioners of  ayurveda were noted only after late medieval period of Kerala. No reports is there, of ezhava attaining even the primary education or formal education before medieval period. For Keralaones kind in formation, you are mistsaken if you believe  government websites are  fool proof informative  sources for historical reports.

Truether (talk) 17:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Exactly, you sound like a pundit in history, may be you should help the helpless govt out!! .History was no doubt manipulated in all ages by the powerful. Probably I can come up with a theory that will be suitable for you to accept. I have heard that some Namboothiri vaidans were ex communicated for treating outcastes. these vaidans assimilated with ezhavas and spread ayurveda among them. This is only way I can convince you. (same as the ST thomas story).


 * So you're okay with Ayurvedic claims which are post-medieval, as your reading is showing that following that point they began practicing Ayurveda? So is the dispute that Keralone wants to say it started earlier, and you want to say it started later, but overall you agree that the Ezhava started practicing ayurveda at some point? This seems not too difficult an issue to resolve. If there are reputable sources arguing both pre- and post- medieval, we can always just include some "though scholars differ as to when this practice became true ayurveda." I just think y'all are closer in opinion than is coming across, and it's just that folks are getting a little testy (happens to the best of us in these situations). MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Keralaone, wikipedia articles are not only for the ardent admirers or followers but also  for the  people of neutral in nature. Iam sorry that at times the discussion  goes off the track, such exercises are done only for the sake of reasoning the points raised  .Regarding government websites, we cannot ignore  the news of corruption, nepotism and misuse of power by  administrative figures  in almost all  democratically elected institutions. The non merit methods of selection of candidates to the sectors of public service and higher education could invariably results in slumbering and irresponsible attitude in the functioning of any government. So we cannot expect all the responses from  public servants as  error free and quality assured. That is all.

Truether (talk) 12:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * No mention of any ezhava in the original latin script of " Hortus  Malabaricus, continens Regni Malabarici apud Indos celeberrimi omnis generis Plantas rariores" . But it speaks its un numbered page that Itty achuthan was  one among the four  traditional Ayurvedic practitioners from malabar who helped to prepare the information. Not even  the translator Manilal could trace the life history of  Itty achuthan  but he vaguely attempted to associate him with a ezhava family (kollad )in Kadakarapally . . Ezhava or any other avarna castes ( few exceptions of course ) had  no access to sanskrit learning ( which was essential for undersatnding Ayurveda, astrology and literature).If at all Itty Achuthan  belonged to ezhava ,he might be a pre ayurvedic herbal medicine healer. He might be a locally famous physician "vaidyar" belonged to some other higher polluting castes (of  traditional herbal healers) having knowledge in sanskrit.   The claims that he belonged to kollad  ezhava family can be well explained from  the fact that ancestors of this family were disciples of Itty Achuthan. From late seventeenth century on wards  some Ezhavas could acquire knwoledge of ayurveda from other avarna caste traditional ayurvedic practioners

Even Narayana guru had acquired his  philosophical knowledge from some other avarna caste teachers( Ayyavu swamikal) The kolezhuthu script  "lipi"  was  in fact derived from vattezhuthu in  the era of  16th and 17th centuries at cochin and malabar region( palm leaf scripts on astrology and ayurveda are available)

Truether (talk) 12:20, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Truether. read the citation in the article. It is clear and detailed on the Ezhava and Itti achuten ayurvedic links. if you have any reliable citation that says otherwise then put it up.Keralone (talk) 21:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

THIYYAS IN NORTH KERALA
According to Sree Muthappan Thottam (song of Muthappan Theyyam, a Thiyya deity), the Thiyyas of North Malabar came from Karumana Nadu, the Thulu region of present Karnataka [Ref: Kaliyaattam, Mr.CMS. Chandera, NBS]. The Baigya (Vaidya) Thiyyas were supposed to be come from Thulu Nadu and the Kodava Thiyyas were supposed to be come from Kodagu Nadu, the nearby area. This distinction had been there until now. But apart from this, in the later times, there was also another assortment of splitting up of the Thiyya groups according to the occupation. The groups that performed Theyyam were known as Vannans or Mannans. Those connected with hair cutting were known as Kaavu Thiyyas, those connected with teaching were known as Ezhuthachchans and those connected with astrology were known as Kaniyas. At present, these groups are treated as entirely different castes. Now, the Thiyyas who are experts in Kalaripayattu are known as Gurukkals, those connected with patient treatments are known as Vaidyas and those connected with coconut climbing are known as Thandans. All the above groups are the components of a vast populace came from the Southern part of Karnataka. According to Mr. T. Damu, a well known journalist, [Lanka Parvam] the ancestors of the present Thiyya community who lived in the Western coast of India including Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat were came from Thiyyan high ranges of Kyrgyz region in Central Asia. A large bulk of people were fled to East due to a massive earthquake in the above region and settled in the Western coast of India around 7000 BC.

The Thiyyas were Buddhists like the Ezhavas of Southern Kerala. This is the only connection between the Thiyyas and Ezhavas. One group came to Kerala from Karumana Nadu (present Karnataka) and the other group from Ezhuvath Nadu (present Sri Lanka). The flow of people from different regions to Kerala might be due to the availability of land since it was a new land carved out from the sea due to a massive earth quake – so it was also called the land of Parasurama.

The Thiyyas settled in and around Vatakara are famous for their typical form of Martial art known as ‘Kalaripayattu’. Unniyarcha was a legendary warrior figure of the Thiyyas, lived in Puthur (New Land) near Vatakara in 12th Century AD. She was the sister of ‘Aromal Chekavar’ and ‘Unnikannan’ and mother of ‘Aromalunny’. The songs and chronicles have kept the legend alive to this day. She was born in ‘Puthooram Veedu’, a famous Thiyya family. Like her brothers Unniyarcha was also trained in the arts of war. She is praised in Puthooram pattu, first in the series of Vadakkan pattu. She is considered as a heroine and symbol of female ability. Her brother Aromal was a reputed man of great chivalry and bravery. (Ref. Pazhassi Raja– Vatakkan Pattukal - Payeri Krishnan). The famous Italian Traveller, Marco Polo, (13th Century AD) portrayed the Thiyyas of Malabar as business men and merchants. The settlements of the Buddhists were known as palli or paadi. By means of the contacts with the Arabs, big chunks of this Buddhist group were later converted to Islam, and their Pallis were converted as Muslim shrines with the same name Palli. The residual groups turned to Hindu mob and divided into different castes as stated earlier. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.251.21 (talk) 05:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Provide some reliable citations and then may be we can include them in the article. Keralone (talk) 11:15, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Conversion to Christianity
I have just cut "In 1921 an extensive effort to reach a thousand Ezhava families living in the coastal areas of Alappuzha and hilly area of Pathanamthitta was initiated by an independent committee, in relation with the CSI church. With Isabel Baker's (CMS Missionary) generous contribution, a school, hospital and a coir factory were established under the title Karappuram Mission in the Shertellai area and as a result, thousands of Ezhava families converted in areas of Alappuzha and Pathanamthitta to Christianity.

Sree Narayana Guru described the conversion since he said that they were made for materialistic or temporary benefits, convenience, or as an escape from discrimination and religious persecution. These principles formed the criteria for his support of conversions and re-conversions."

from the article. I can only see a snippet view of Srivastava here but I searched on:
 * 1921
 * Alappuzha
 * Pathanamthitta
 * CSI
 * Church of South India
 * Isabel
 * Baker
 * Karappuram
 * Shertellai
 * Christianity

Of these searches, the only one that returned a result was "Christianity", and that had just two mentions, the latest being about the 19th century. Something seems a little wrong here. - Sitush (talk) 02:30, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, it is there on the church website, it looks like information is correct. http://www.csimichigan.org/CKD_Chapter2.htm

http://indianchristianity.org/csi.html but I agree we need more reliable links. Keralone (talk) 06:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Ezhava are descendants of Villavar, who were ancient Chera kings
Ezhavas were known as chera kings in the past because

>>there body was so much flexible to climb coconut trees like chera(a poisonless snake in malayalam).

>>when Marco polo visited kerala he noticed this ability of ezhavas and adressed them as "CHERA KINGS". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.215.30.56 (talk) 09:25, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * And your point is? More to the point, your source is? - Sitush (talk) 09:37, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

why u need source..it's already there in the article.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.215.30.56 (talk) 09:44, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Because the statement in the article is marked as dubious and likely to be removed. - Sitush (talk) 09:47, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Please don't remove that.That's the only one positive thing we have in this article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.215.30.56 (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


 * It will go unless you come up with something better. You seem to know your stuff so perhaps you are well-placed to do this. Otherwise, I am not even sure why you bothered making your first contribution to this section of the talk page. - Sitush (talk) 10:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

ok if that's ur wish do it.no probs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.215.113.225 (talk) 10:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Padmanabhaswamy temple was controlled by ezhavas
In earlier years Padmanabhaswamy Temple and its properties were controlled by eight powerful Ezhava feudal lords known as Ettuveetil chekons(Lords of the Eight Houses), under the guidance of the Council of Eight and a Half. Later, King Anizham Thirunal Valiya Marthanda Varma, the founder of Travancore, successfully suppressed the Ettuveetil chekons and his cousins following the discovery of conspiracies the Lords were involved in against the Royal House of Travancore.

SOURCE FOR THIS IS >> EZHAVACHARITHAM MAHAPURANAM written by VALMIKI


 * The Ettuveetil Pillai have an article here. Over at Nair there have been numerous people claiming that Ettuveetils were Nair. You are saying that they were Chekon, not Pillai. We need English language sources, I suspect. - Sitush (talk) 19:12, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Sitush, these are vandals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keralone (talk • contribs) 22:29, 12 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Vandal is a very specific term here on Wikipedia and posting a comment on a talk page doesn't fit that situation. There seems to be a problem somewhere but I do not know if it is on this article or the Ettuveetil Pillai article. Either way, until the person who contributed the comment at the start of this section replies with some reliable sources (or someone else does) there is no reason to take it any further. I might dig around myself in due course but at present am absolutely up to my eyeballs dealing with problems on other caste articles etc. - Sitush (talk) 23:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Is there a book called EZHAVACHARITHAM MAHAPURANAM,written by VALMIKI.Is valmiki the one who wrote RAMAYANA,if that was the case we cud have related the entire 'Raghuvansham' with the Ezhavas.PLS Dont write blunder here.

Actually the Ettuveedans(pillai) controlled the army of erstwhile Travancore.

A.K.GOPALAN (AKG)
A K GOPALAN the first opposition leader in the Parliament is from Nambiar community and his wife Suseela Gopalan from Ezhava communit.consider including his photo in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.131.194 (talk) 12:18, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

E.M.S NAMBOOTHIRIPAD
E.M.S Namboothiripad the first chief minister of kerala is from Brahmin community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.190.215 (talk) 12:42, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Martial traditions & Chekavar
Please check the reference cited (24),since there is no clarity.

The term Chekavar is only a misspelt word (spoonerism) "Chevakar' or "'sevakar''( meaning servants or slaves ) .The real name of  Aromal chekavar  is Aromal Chevakar.[] Though genarally ezhava were considered as servants, often they had to  fight against the  their  master's enemy .Similarly  a tribal group ( Kurichiar) in north Kerala (Vayanadu) also had  the privilege to be assigned  for fencing purpose - especially by Pazhassi Raja. So it does not mean that  the members of those caste were Kshatriya or warriors.

Truether (talk) 16:38, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I have removed the cite and dependent statements, on the grounds that a botanical book is not a reliable source for detail about martial tradition. - Sitush (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Man, how can you sa that a a Botanical book should not talk about anything other than its intent? Thats abscure. See, most of the historical books are are written by upper class will purposefully ignore rich heritage of other caste people. You don't need PhD to understand that.

Now the this books is written forign national and have more or less symmetric view on any caste. So the book should be considered as a major source for kerala history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.241.58.152 (talk) 12:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Nair-Ezhava Gene Theory
Apparently, this article is looking scruffy now and even the citations are distorted to fulfill someone's vested interest. For e.g. look at the citation which is about the genetic study of Nairs are Ezhavas. Here are the excerpts. "Genetic distance estimates using the gene frequency data indicate that the closest groups are Nayar, Ezhava and the Brahmin and Nayar. The tribal populations are approximately twice as far as from the Nairs as they are from Ezhava." - What does this mean..It just says the gene frequency is closer between Nairs and Ezhavas(and is same between Nairs and Brahmins as well) compared to tribal, that doesn't mean that they are same, it is just a comparison between these different sections (nair,brahmin and ezhava) w.r.t tribal. It also says the frequency of Nairs is twice as that of Ezhavas from the tribal which is a clear indication that both Nairs and Ezhavas have different frequency. Take a look at the second reference. "Ezhava to have a significantly lower frequency of group A and group B than do the Nayar" - This is pretty straight forward; it simply says they are different.

Some editors seem to be mocking and challenging at the perceptive capacity of the readers. A handful of new found 'cloud editors' are apparently 'bulldozing’ the efforts made by certain sincere anthropologists and their research for ages. (User Lambodharan)

where does it say they are same? even first cousins gene frequencies may not be same. it just says that "gene frequencies are closer between nairs and ezhavas".

Definition of GENE FREQUENCY
 * the ratio of the number of a specified allele in a population to the total of all alleles at its genetic locus.

"we are all, regardless of race,caste,religion,country genetically 99.9% the same". Keralone (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * FWIW, I would prefer not to see all of this genetic stuff in any caste-related article as I doubt very much that many of us are capable of ascertaining the relevance, weight and even reliability of the studies. If there was an easily accessed summary that we could use then that would be great, but all the detailed scientific papers really require expert attention if they are to be used directly, and they need "watering down" into a format that does not cause the reader's eyes to glaze over. - Sitush (talk) 15:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Well..if that is the logic why only Nairs, rather we could make a statement that Ezhavas and Anglo-saxons have same genes..it is as absurd as saying that all ezhavas and nairs have 2 hands and 2 legs and hence they are of same genetic stuff..the citation doesn't make any sense. There is no findings or studies whatsoever for a common origin of these two communities. Some editors are making this place dirty by adding their own theories which is totally unacceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lambodharan (talk • contribs) 08:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Looks like there are studies out there. the summary is "The absence of any cluster along with low average GST is suggestive of substantial genetic similarity among the studied populations, in spite of clear geographical, linguistic, and cultural barriers. This similarity indicates either a greater gene flow between these groups or, alternatively, may reflect a recent evolution for them, considering that the Indian caste system evolved only about 3000 years ago."

http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/human_biology/v075/75.2ghosh.pdf http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3659/is_200304/ai_n9235661/ Keralone (talk) 11:00, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * This study seems to be based on some wrong parameters and assumptions by a non-malayalee, who considers Nairs and Muslims as 'endogamous Dravidian' community which by itself is wrong. While Ezhavas can be considered as endogamous Dravidian community the other two cannot be considered so. The Arabic mix in the Malabar Muslim community is well known and Nairs cannot be considered as a pure Dravidian race like Ezhavas or Tamils. If you have to find some ethnic sibling for Ezhavas, then i think we should look at some other pure dravidian races of s.india like ediga,billava, nadar etc. Nairs, Coorgis and Bunts though from s.India, are of different ethnicity. What I don't understand is that why you guys are on this wild goose chase of finding a common origin for Nairs and Ezhavas which is totally misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lambodharan (talk • contribs) 04:51, 21 July 2011 (UTC)


 * here's some reliable study on this which says all the non-tribal communities of Kerala have European and east asian connection..nothing specific between Nairs and Ezhavas..I would say the genetic study section should be removed as it is common across malayalis..#[]

Edit request from Ss19751975, 25 July 2011
Please change the following, in the section, "Position in society" //Although Ezhavas performed the work associated with the Hindu ritual rank (varna) of sudra, they were considered as untouchables or avarnas by the Nambudiri Brahmins who formed the clergy and ritual ruling elite in the region.[1] This was despite their ancestors Villavars belonging to the Shudras Varna.// Please replace it with the next sentence. //Ezhavas were the avarnas or in other words didn't belong to the chaturvarna system either by their own choice or by use of force.// Reliable source is the book of Dr. S N Sadasivan " A Social History of India. In this book as well as countless other records and official documents Ezhavas are known as not belonging to the chaturvarna system of the Hindu society.

Ss19751975 (talk) 19:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


 * What is the page number, please? - Sitush (talk) 19:57, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Marking as answered while waiting on answer. Jnorton7558 (talk) 08:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Recent and scientific evidences of Sri lankan origin
The similarity between of Kalarippayattu (angam)of Ezhava/thiyya coomunity and the martial arts of Sinhalese whose name is also angam is interesting. The 'angam' of Sri lanka is dated back to thousands of years where 'kalarippayattu' in kerala has a recent origin.This is a new evidence recognized recently. 'Vadakkan paattukal" says the ancestors of thiyya warriors came from an Island! The food habits (eg "Puttu" in malayalam, 'pittu' in Sinhalese) old ornamental habits, and surprising similarity between Malayalam and Sinhalese script indicates an past influx to Kerala.

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. Shaanvet (talk) 04:19, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Genetics is beyond me, sorry. Someone else will probably be more clueful. All I can say is that the quote you provide from Thomas et al appears as a standalone quote to be speculative rather than confirmatory, and that I have seen several articles where genetic analyses have swung wildly from one position to another, dependent upon the source. Furthermore, I wonder if the conflation of Thomas with Malavige amounts to synthesis. My gut feeling is that genetic stuff should be left out, not least because the studies seem to rely on the self-identification of caste members & because the technicalities are extremely intricate, but beyond that the detail is lost on me. - Sitush (talk) 07:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Ezhavas and brahmins(Namboothiri ) of kerala
The Namboothiri article in Malayalam wiki says that there many ezhava families were socially converted into namboothiris

http://ml.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B4%A8%E0%B4%AE%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%AA%E0%B5%82%E0%B4%A4%E0%B4%BF%E0%B4%B0%E0%B4%BF

14.96.130.30 (talk) 14:55, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * We cannot use circular references. You would need to provide sources in this article. - Sitush (talk) 10:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I am not sure on his reliability, but S. N. Sadasivan has written about this.


 * A social history of India By S. N. Sadasivan

--Nair (talk) 08:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Interesting. Sadasivan seems to upset some people but I've never seen a concrete, rational reason why it is not a valid source here. However, in this particular instance he is quoting someone from 1935 whom I have not come across before. Do we know anything about that person (Ananthan)? Are there any other modern sources that can support the statement? I am not querying Sadasivan myself, merely trying to head off any possible objections. - Sitush (talk) 12:53, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Kampil Ananthan is another self-styled historian from Ezhava community like Sadasivan (There are many such). I doubt him also of reliability. You can search in google for more info. --Nair (talk) 13:18, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Images in infobox
Can anyone justify the images used in the infobox? Either before or since the additions of today? I know that this discussion has taken place with regard to some other Indian caste articles and suspect that there is little difference between them and this one. To me, they represent cherry-picking and undue weight, as well as having the potential to "flood" the top of the page with visual clutter. - Sitush (talk) 21:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

CHECK THE REASON FOR OMISSION OF HEROES & HEROINES FROM THE PICTURES & DESCRIPTIVE CONTENT
One thing should be analysed with the reasons that, in the articles related with other casts, they deliberately trying to include maximum number of heroes and heroines from their category, even if those persons are not that much noticed in the society; with an aim to expose the artistic and cultural representation from their communities. But in this article about " Ezhavar ", what we can see is people deliberately avoid the heroes and heroines like ...Kavya Madhavan, Samvritha Sunil, Vineeth Sreenivasan..etc. What is the reason behind ???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajisaji (talk • contribs) 05:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Kavya madhavan does not belong to Ezhava community,she belongs to Saliya(chaliyan)community.This caste is a prominent group in north malabar,most of them converted to ezhavas in south travancore-they formed the weaver section of the community in ancient period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.53.160 (talk) 18:29, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Note
This article has been mentioned at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics M W ℳ 03:54, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Etymology
what is the relevance of the first heading as 'etymology' and only one sentence as 'it is uncertain' in it. Its better to avoid that seectionRchampadan (talk) 14:43, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The reasoning was that people kept entering info that was then found to be contentious, so having something there (however innocuous) takes some of the heat out of things. However, if you can find any well-sourced etymologies then feel free to raise them here.. - Sitush (talk) 14:47, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Translation and reliability of a source
The article currently says "According to legend and some Malayalam folk songs, the Ezhavas were the progeny of four slaves that the king of Ceylon sent to Kerala at the request of the Chera king Bhaskara Ravi Varma, in the 1st Century AD. These men were sent, ostensibly, to set up coconut farming in Kerala. Another version of the story says that the Sri Lankan King sent eight martial families to Kerala at the request of a Chera king to quell a civil war that had erupted in Kerala against him."

It cites "EMS Namppothirppadu, Keralam Malayalikalude Mathrubhumi Desbhimany publications, VOl1, 1947 page 27" as the source for this. I would be grateful if someone could provide an English translation of that page and an explanation as to why this is a reliable source. It has been tagged with this request for a couple of months now, although at least one contributor keeps changing "slaves" to "bachelors" without giving any reason for doing so. - Sitush (talk) 16:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Backward class
The Ezhava community comprises many sub-groups. Has anyone got an official recent source that confirms that all Ezhavas are classified as being Backward Class and that this is so throughout India? My experience is that in situations such as this it is often the case that some subgroups are classified as OBC, for example, while others are BC, and also that their classification varies from one region to antoher. - Sitush (talk) 16:18, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Ezhava caste basically has two sub-castes - Ckokon(or Chovon) and Thiyya. Thiyya is found in Malabar and has relatively better social position compared to that of chokon in Travancore-Cochin. But both the community members had similar job profiles and hence categorized as Ezhava in the british period. Ezhava as a whole comes under OBC catagory. -- AshLey  Msg 09:07, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I was asking for sources. - Sitush (talk) 10:07, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Well Thiyya has recorded history before britishers and it is recorded in vakkan pattukal, also beside general classification there has been detailed study of Thiyya community by people like Edgar Thurston, one must also take into account specialist opinion.--Rahulkris999 (talk) 15:15, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Well.. Thiyya is different from Ezhava. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.7.136 (talk) 08:23, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

References to Ezhava in inscriptions
I tagged some citations that needed additional info a few weeks ago. They are:


 * 1) Evolution of an Ethnic Identity in subcontinent, By K. Indrapala. New Age Publishing House, 1995
 * 2) Paper on Words of identity Of People of Srilanka, By Professor Peter Schalk, Uppsala University Publishing, 2001
 * 3) Ezhava-Thiyya Charitra Padanam, Prof K G Narayanan 1983

Unless someone can actually provide the pages in those sources that specifically refer to Ezhava then I am inclined to delete the section which discusses early references found in inscriptions. I am sure that there are other people than me who are aware that these things are often dubious and that those who study inscriptions often speculate rather than say flat out that a given word of 2000 years ago (or whatever) is definitely the same as a modern word. Unfortunately, it is "flat out" that we need, otherwise we are heading into the realms of original research. - Sitush (talk) 07:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thiyyar POV pushing
Nothing here is written in stone, everything can change. Nonetheless, recently there has been yet another attempt to POV fork and otherwise exemplify an alleged distinction between the Ezhava and the Thiyyar titles. The result of that was not merely a lack of consensus but also a salting of one of the primary targets for these campaigns, as per this log entry. As a consequence of these recent events, I have reverted this contribution. As per the deletion discussion, if anyone wishes to continue to develop the notion that there is a distinction between the Ezhava and Thiyyar communities then they are welcome to do so. However, the starting point would be to add content to this article that complies with our policies, the most fundamental of which can be viewed here. Should things develop in a manner that is significant then, yes, it may be possible to open a discussion about forking the article. Until that time, please do not disrupt our articles with poor edits. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 00:45, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Ezhavas and Thiyyas are two different ethnic groups for sure. Even their social standing during pre-independent period was different. Thiyyas of N.Malabar claimed high respect and were eminent warriors. Their rituals and heritage were similar to that of other warrior sectors of Malabar than the Ezhavas of southern kerala. Here are some main points


 * Ezhavas - Had patrilineal family system, toddy tapping was the main occupation though there were others like ayurveda etc, typical dravidian stock.

Thiyyas - Had Matrinllenal inheritance, mainly warriors or traders, Serpent worship, better social status, meditarenian physical traits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.15.16.106 (talk) 10:42, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * And your reliable sources for this are? - Sitush (talk) 10:51, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * In the book "Communism in Kerala:A study in political adaptation" by Thomas Johnson Nossiter on page 30 is a source for this claim. Moreover Thiyya from malabar has its own history like the interaction with the british, they have a different concept for ancestral homes, running their own temples, theyyam the ritual form etc and the current article does not cover this. So there is should be a dedicated page if not as a separate caste but for regional and historical point of view. Moreover if you feel that they are the same caste why is it that under the subtitle subcaste further divided into southern kerala and malabar why not club them together and why has it not been flagged for lack of valid references?? --User:Sandeep130.236.236.49 (talk) 00:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Thiyya - Ezhava issue is much more complicated (much of the dispute between users is arising because of inability to understand each other’s position). Although there are differences between Thiyya – Ezhava, this difference has nothing to do with the Thiyya/Ezhava caste specifically. It has more to do with interaction of geography and caste- North Malabar vs rest of Kerala. Native North Malabar families irrespective of their ethno-religious background within this area have maintained distinct practices and superior  rital-status compared to their southern counterparts, akin to a sacerdotal supremacy. For instance matrilinial Thiyyas, Virilocal-matrilinial Nayars, Matrilinial-Mappilas, Matrilinial Namboothiris of Payyannur etc of North Malabar, have maintained  distinct status and is not unique to Thiyya-Ezhava issue. Multiple historians and anthropologist such Gough, Shneider, Logan, Fawcett, TKG Panicker, Praveen Kodoth etc have all commented on this geographic issue for one or the other castes including Thiyyas and Mappilas. Therefore to portray Thiyyas as distinct from Ezhavas would not be correct per se. Neither would it be correct to see them as one. The “factual-accuracy” lies midway between the two disputing groups of users and hence to come to NPOV – either parties must acknowledge that the other has a point.Hope this helps.

VS Vettakkorumakansnehi (talk) 09:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Subsections moved from the article
I have removed two subsections, viz: "Theories of origin According to historian C. V. Kunjuraman, the two gods of the Buddhist Ezhavas, namely Cittan and Arattan, are in fact Buddhist Sidhan and Arhatan from Buddhism. T. K. Veluppillai, the author of The Travancore State Manual, believes that during Buddhist ascendancy in Kerala, before the arrival of the Tulu Brahmins, "the Ezhavas enjoyed great prosperity and power" (II, 845). However, he also says that it is very unlikely that the Ezhavas came from Sri Lanka and spread all over Kerala; instead they were the mainstream of Munda-Dravidian immigrants who left Tamil Nadu in the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries to avoid persecution at the hands of their political enemies." and "Inscriptions The first reference to the word Ezhava found in Arittapatti inscriptions of 3rd century BC near Madurai, talks about 'Eelava perumal, chief of Nelveli, has caused the carving of this auspicious cave'. Famous Kilavalavu Jain cave inscriptions of 3rd century BC talks about an ezhavan who built Buddhist monastery there. Another inscriptions of BC 2nd century found near Alakarmalai talks about an ezhava textile trader 'ezhathu theevan athan'."

They have both been tagged as requiring more detailed citations for some time now, and I have some doubts regarding the reliability of some of the sources. - Sitush (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

/* Social and religious divergence */
Unlike other places in India the Caste system in Kerala was very complex and rigid. It is mainly divided in to two groups, the caste hindus or Savarna(Nambudiri and Nair) and Avarna. The higher caste hindus (Nambudiri and Nair) and Syrian Christians treated Ezhavas as untouchables. . A Nair had the right to behead polluting lower castes including Ezhavas immediately. .

It will be great if you can read the first reference and page 12 to 14 of the second reference. And I think the matter is very relevant in the context. Dakshinsamudram (talk) 02:19, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

THIYYAR / THIYYA Thiyyar / Thiyya not a subcaste under Ezhava. it has its own identity and it is a caste itself not a subcaste. The culture, tradition even physical appearance, skin colour completely different from Ezhavas. They are Other Backward Communities thats all one thing common among them. Please delete Theyyam, Izhathu mannanar, and also delete the part which referring people from Malabar, they are thiyyas not Ezhavas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.18.3 (talk) 02:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 February 2013
Tiyyas, Thiyyas and Theeyas in Malabar have to be removed from the article. the said community is a unique and different community and have very little connection with ezhavas. article have to remove all the references regarding the thiyya community.

122.174.195.192 (talk) 18:46, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not done.Please provide a reliable source.--2.219.218.79 (talk) 20:01, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Thiyya legal action against state govt
Ezhava refers to a threat by a Thiyya organisation to mount a legal challenge against the state government. The source is very poorly worded but, if I'e read it correctly, it was indeed just a threat. Since that report is from January 2012, I'd expect that there would be an update by now, even allowing for the legendary slowness of the judicial process in India. However, the section was only added a few days ago and if that source is the best that we can do then I think we might be in WP:CRYSTAL territory because there is a distinct possibility that posturing was going on. - Sitush (talk) 22:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Not that i know of. Give more details. Please do not try to publish something here by deceiving wikipedia admins. We have a public consensus here, wait for more people see this discussion and let them say their opinions. Why do you want to come to a conclusion. This debate is on and we have just to wait.Irajeevwiki (talk) 22:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Irajeevwiki, your comment makes little sense, and doesn't at all address the concerns Sitush has raised. Just because some group somewhere made a legal claim, that does not mean that we report it in Wikipedia. If the claim was never filed, or was filed and dismissed, then it simply isn't important enough to include per WP:UNDUE. Please note also that Wikipedia admins don't make any decisions on article content; all editors are "equal" with regards to content, though that equality extends only so far as editors follow policies and guidelines. It seems that this info should probably removed until such time as we can find evidence in reliable sources that verify that this challenge was actually filed and is proceeding. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:02, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * i am not involved in any political organisation or party. I got nothing to do with it. I have leaned indian history and i have my say on this subject with genuine source references. I am not even indian citizen to gain something by working in politics. I can show government issued documents which clearly shows caste differences. Only Sitush says here these castes are same, by manipulating word references from books. Irajeevwiki (talk) 23:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Irajeevwiki, nobody said you were. And you're still not addressing the issue, which I'm guessing is because your English competence is a little low. The question addressed in this section is whether or not the supposed legal challenge info should be included in this article. Myself and Sitush believe it is not, and we also believe that this is supported by Wikipdia policy. You have not addressed this issue at all. This section is not for discussing the broader issue of whether or not these are one or two castes. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry User:Qwyrxian, you dont know the whole story., Sitush giving me a warning on my talk page go and have a look . He just giving me a threat i think. so, nothing to do with my English competency or ability to comprehend by reading english comments Below given link.
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Irajeevwiki#Sanctions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irajeevwiki (talk • contribs) 23:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The warning is completely legitimate, and, again, has nothing to do with this section. Sitush is warning you that this article, and all caste articles, are under sanctions, and that anything other than very high quality behavior can result in topic bans and/or blocks. As long as you abide by Wikipedia policies, you have nothing to worry about. Now, could we please go back to the original question? Is there any justification for including information about this alleged legal challenge? Qwyrxian (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Irajeevwiki, I am asking for more information. I've done my best to reflect what I think the existing source says but I have some doubts regarding whether the content merits inclusion per our policies. I am more than happy to see a section in this article about the dispute and any resolution of it but we do not report every little detail about every little thing. In particular, with regard to caste articles, we have to be aware of the posturing that indubitably does go on. M. N. Srinivas even came up with a name for a broad swathe of this - Sanskritisation - although I'm not sure that it applies in this particular instance. Castes come and go by a process of both fission and fusion, as has been well documented by numerous anthropologists, but here at Wikipedia we have to work off our own policies. Until something concrete happens that is accepted by reliable sources, we have a potential problem. Please note that I have not removed the section but have raised a query here. We work on consensus and I am trying to develop the article based on that. Please also note that consensus is not a vote - read the link that I have just provided. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 23:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Qwyrxian I will be uploading some documents to back up my claims. Also will give reference links, give me couple of days please. Irajeevwiki (talk) 01:49, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Please do not upload copyrighted documents to Wikipedia, as such files will generally be rapidly deleted for legal reasons. Instead, it's actually more efficient to first give the full publication info (i.e., the author, title, publisher, and page number) and a short quote. If we really need it, we can ask you for copies later (and probably do it by email or something similar so it's off WP). This can be faster because a very large number of "sources" that people often site on caste-related articles don't actually meet WP:RS (which, of course, you'll want to read if you haven't done so yet). While there's a lot of subtlety, your goal should be to get relatively recent texts by experts in their field published by academic publishers, along with some newspaper articles; what you want to avoid are texts over about 50-70 years old (especially ignoring any ancient religious texts), documents from random websites, or primary sources like court filings. Looking forward to seeing the documents you can provide. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Why someone is removing my comments without discussing? This is a talk page. Right?Pnranjith (talk) 06:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No one has removed any of your comments. Look at the talk page's history, and you'll see that there hasn't been any deletion or removal. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I removed a personal attack but that was not a comment about the article. See the very first few lines at the top of this page, contained in a coloured box. - Sitush (talk) 07:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi I am pasting a relevant piece of information from Edagr Thurston Book Caste and Tribes of Southern India TIYAN-39

Regulations keep the Izhuvans of Cochin and Travancore in a position of marked social inferiority, and in Malabar they are altogether unlettered and uncultured. On the other hand, the Tiyans of Malabar provide Magistrates, Sub- Judges, and other officials to serve His Majesty's Government. It may be noted that, in 1907, a Tiya lady matriculate was entertained as a clerk in the Tellicherry post-office. A divagation must be made, to bring the reader to a comprehension of the custom surrounding mattu, a word signifying change, i.e., change of cloth, which is of sufficient importance to demand explanation. When a man or woman is outcasted, the washerwoman (or man) and the barber of the community (and no other is available) are prohibited from performing their important parts in the ceremonies connected with birth, death, and menstruation. A person who is in a condition of impurity is under the same conditions; he or she is temporarily outcasted. This applies to Nambutiris and Nayars, as well as to the Tiyans. Now the washerwoman is invariably of the Tiyan caste. There are Mannans, whose hereditary occupation is washing clothes for Nambutiris and Nayars, but, for the most part, the washerwoman who washes for the Nayar lady is of the Tiyan caste. A woman is under pollution after giving birth to a child, after the death of a member of her tarvad, and during menstruation. And the pollution must be removed at the end of the prescribed period, or she remains an outcaste a very serious thing for her. The impurity is removed by receiving a clean cloth from the washerwoman, and giving in exchange her own cloth to be washed. This is mattu, and, be it noted, the cloth which gives mattu is one belonging to the washerwoman, not to the person to be purified. The washerwoman TIYAN-40 Gives her own cloth to effect the purification. Theoretically, the Tiyan has the power to give or withhold mattu, and thus keep any one out of caste in a state of impurity ; but it is a privilege which is seldom if ever exercised. Yet it is one which he admittedly holds, and is thus in a position to exercise considerable control over the Nambutiri and Nayar communities. It is odd that it is not a soiled cloth washed and returned to the person which gives purification, but one of the washerwoman's own cloths. So the mattu may have a deeper meaning than lies in mere change of cloth, dressing in a clean one, and giving the soiled one to a person of inferior caste to wash. This mattu is second in importance to no custom. It must be done on the last day of pollution after birth and death ceremonies, and menstruation, or the person concerned remains outcasted. It is note worthy that the Izhuvans know nothing of mattu. An Izhuvan will eat rice cooked by a Tiyan, but a Tiyan will not eat rice cooked by an Izhuvan a circumstance pointing to the inferiority of the Izhuvan. A Nayar, as well as a Tiyan, will partake of almost any form of food or drink, which is prepared even by a Mappilla (Malabar Muhammadan), who is deemed inferior to both. But the line is drawn at rice, which must be prepared by one of equal caste or class, or by a superior. An Izhuvan, partaking of rice at a Tiyan's house, must eat it in a verandah; he cannot do so in the house, as that would be efilement to the Tiyan. Not only must the Izhuvan eat the rice in the verandah, but he must wash the plates, and clean up the place where he has eaten. Again, an Izhuvan could have no objection to drinking from a Tiyan's well. Further, there is practically no mixture in the distribution of Tiyans and Izhuvans. Where there are Izhuvans there TIYAN-41 are no Tiyans, and vice versa. [In a photograph of a group of Izhuvan females of Palghat eating their meal, which was sent to me, they are all in a kneeling posture, with the buttocks supported on the heels. They are said to assume the same attitude when engaged in grinding and winnowing grain, and other occupations, with a resultant thickening of the skin over the knees.] Differences, which might well come under the heading marriage, may be considered here, for the purpose of comparison between the Tiyans and Izhuvans. During the preliminaries to the marriage ceremony among the Tiyans, the date of the marriage having been fixed in the presence of the representatives of the bride and bridegroom, the following formula is repeated by the Tandan or headman of the bride's party. Translated as accurately as possible, it runs thus. " The tara and changati of both sides having met and consulted ; the astrologer having fixed an auspicious day after examining the star and porutham ; permission having been obtained from the tara, the relations, the illam and kulam, the father, uncle, and the brothers, and from the eight and four (twelve illams) and the six and four (ten kiriyams) ; the conji and adayalam ceremonies and the four tazhus having been performed, let me perform the kanjikudi ceremony for the marriage of ... . the son of . . . . with .... daughter of .... in the presence of muperium." This formula, with slight variations here and there, is repeated at every Tiyan mar riage in South Malabar. It is a solemn declaration, giving validity to the union, although, in the way that custom and ritual survive long after their original significance has been forgotten, the meaning of many of the terms used is altogether unknown. What, for instance,

Vineeth (vineethsat@gmail.com) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.13 (talk) 06:11, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've collapsed the Thurston quotation. Firstly, it has nothing to do with the legal action being discussed in this section. Secondly, as I've only recently said on this page, Thurston is not a reliable source, as per numerous discussions across numerous venues on Wikipedia over at least the last couple of years. - Sitush (talk) 06:59, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not understand how you decide what is reliable source. Edger Thurston is a famous British writer who wrote many famous books about Indian history. What is a criteria of selecting a valid source. Is this only one which a particular wiki admin decides? 198.175.68.37 (talk) 07:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

This is the reason why I posted the blog link in my talk page. If an ISBN referenced book which is published decades back is not taken into consideration, what about the genetic studies conducted by Dr. Shyamalan, A very famous physician in the US? Pnranjith (talk) 07:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * IP, this has been explained to you here and at User talk:Irajeevwiki, and not just by me. Put simply, Raj sources are almost never acceptable here for statements of fact and, indeed, you'll struggle to find decent modern academic sources that cite them (the "states series" of The People of India is not a "decent modern academic source" but rather 90% plagiarism). Take a read of Herbert Hope Risley, James Tod and, yes, Edgar Thurston for some background on why these people are so obviously not reliable. Shyalaman has also been brought up in previous discussions about this subject. He commissioned a private study of his own genetic structure that somehow proved he came from Kyrgystan. Or something along those lines - I forget the detail. He was deemed to be a complete aberration on this issue and - yet again- none of this is relevant to the purpose of this section. You've been advised by several experienced contributors regarding what is required. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 07:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * What about the book published by T Damu, A famous writer from North Kerala? Is he also wrong in his studies?Pnranjith (talk) 10:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Does Damu write about the legal action? - Sitush (talk) 20:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Dubious source
As we have a few eyes on this article at the moment, I would welcome comments on the following statements that have been tagged as dubiously sourced since June 2011: "In 1896, a petition with more than 13,000 signatories was submitted to the government asking for the recognition of the right of the Ezhavas to enter government service; the upper caste Hindus of the state prevailed upon the Maharajah not to concede the request. The outcome not looking to be promising, the Ezhava leadership threatened that they would convert from Hinduism en masse, rather than stay as helots of Hindu society. Diwan, Sir C. P. Ramaswamy Iyer, realizing the imminent danger, prompted the Maharajah to issue the Temple Entry Proclamation, which abolished the ban on lower-caste people from entering Hindu temples in the state of Travancore."

Whether reliable or not, the source is difficult to track down because of the incompleteness of the citation. I suspect that the statements might be broadly accurate but surely we can improve on the sourcing? And, if not, then it probably needs to be removed. - Sitush (talk) 01:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This also clearly shows Thiyya are different than ezhavas. Thiyya were in govt Job well before this petition.Pnranjith (talk) 01:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Writer T Damu is not reliable? Why
You are picking up little things like minor typos, by going into irrelevant details by that way you can deviate the attention. Not criticising you but i have noticed that you keep squabbling on things and in the background you are utilising that time to fix article. Same thing happend with “SubCastes” Not ready to accept that you were wrong

Regarding Damu. He is a new writer compare to Nossitor and Edgar & Thurston. You are actually manipulating my words and using against me.

The Hindu article says ''Disputing the general belief that Ezhavas of Travancore and Thiyyas of Malabar in Kerala are the one and the same community, the book claims that they have no hereditary or historical link as they migrated to the State centuries ago from two different geographical regions. Mr. Damu says that Ezhavas, who are predominant in the southern part of Kerala, migrated to the State from Sri Lanka being the descendants of Sinhalese. ``Therefore, there is no link whatsoever between them. They are two different communities''

This is not a review as you mentioned before but it is an article published by The Hindu, most reliable and yes, i would like to know why you can not agree with his views. But you agree with what Nossitor wrote about Ezhava and Thiyya but i would say you are conveniently ignoring the fact that they are two different castes.

You didnt say anything about SSLC Certificates which show different caste names,Irajeevwiki (talk) 02:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thurston's primary means of classification of people into caste and tribal groups was using anthropometric techniques. These techniques are not generally accepted today and I suggest that Thurston be used very carefully. It would be better to do so indirectly, through more modern reliable sources that quote or use Thurston, rather than directly referencing his work. Treat him as a primary source. --regentspark (comment) 19:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * So that's one admin; here's another (and I happen to be an academic as well). RegentsPark is absolutely correct: we generally don't accept the methods of those 19th-century ethnographers anymore. This is so well-established that it's a truism. We also don't accept phrenology anymore, for instance. As for Nossiter, there appears to be a very basic issue here: a scholar writes on politics and he is deemed to be writing non-neutrally (did I see "for political gain"?), in a political fashion? Those books by Nossiter are published by reputable presses, and this apparent confusion suggest there are basic competence issues here. Drmies (talk) 20:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Please Edit this article ASAP
Thiyya, Thiyyar, Tiya, Thiyya are a different caste in Malabar area of Kerala and the only link with Ezhava is they both belong to Other Backward Communities in Kerala. Please do not mention that Thiyya is a sub caste of Ezhava in the Article, None of your citation links say that Thiyya is a subcaste of Ezhava therefore you need to either remove all the references about Thiyya, Thiyyar, Tiya or Thiya from this article or describe Thiyya caste in detail in the article. Ezhathu Mannanars was not Ezhava Dynasti, Wikipedia has got a page for Ezhathu Mannanars and it has got valid reference which says Ezhathu Mannanars a Thiyya Dynasty. Please do not ignore this edit request.Irajeevwiki (talk) 04:08, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * ❌ Please give a reliable source to back up your claim. - Camyoung54   talk  14:53, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * None of your citation reference links showing that Ezhava and Thiyya are same.. They are two different castes thats is why they got two different caste names. You cannot change the history by deceiving wikipedia administrators. Wikipedia articles should be written in a neutral point of view not for political gain or  anything like that.  Look up the talk history page and many people from around the world requesting to amend the article and the author is just reluctant to do that.Irajeevwiki (talk) 05:54, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ref 1, Nossiter p 30, says "The major low caste is the Ezhavas (Iravas, Ilhavas), known as Chokons (Chogons) in central Travancore and as Tiyyas (Thiyas, Theeyas), who claim a higher ritual ranking, in Malabar". -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Please look this link from Specifically referring Thiyya and Ezhava seperately, from the book we can understand Thiyya caste is distinctive, many books referring thiyya and ezhava same, the reason is they belong to Other Backward Communities in india and people from both castes were doing same jobs in the past like toddy tapping etc and also they both very active in martial arts but those books never say that Thiyya and Ezhava same castes. Thiyya people in malabar look very different from Ezhava people and their worship is completely different from Ezhava, Thiyya people go to Kavu where as Ezhava people more engaged in snake worshipping etc.  Wikipedia should explain both castes separately.  There are many books printed in the past explaining differences between Thiyya and Ezhava. Please understand and edit thoughtfully and remove those lines which explains Thiyya is a subcaste of Ezhava. Snapshot on right from book

Irajeevwiki (talk) 09:17, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You really should not upload a scan of a copyrighted book. As far as your contention goes, it is one that has been repeated time and again here. Original research has always been required to make the leap from what a source says (on the rare occasion that one was provided) and what the person citing it claims. You appear to be falling into the same trap, although I'll try to find Kurup online and see if there is anything more to it. I have seen stuff about a campaign outside Wikipedia for Thiyya to be considered as a completely separate community from the Ezhava: that is the way of castes, which come and go depending on the whims of fission and division, politics, economics etc. In a sense, castes seem to be made up and disposed of "on the hoof", although I realise that this trivialises the significance for those who are intimately involved. Until independent reliable academic sources recognise the complete distinction between Ezhava and Thiyya, we have a problem here. Please also note that in the event that such sources are found, we would show both sets of opinions. That is, that some academics consider them to be Ezhava and others consider them to be distinct. - Sitush (talk) 17:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Edgar Thurstons book clearly mentions the difference between Ezhava and Thiyya .. ( vineeth )  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.226.13 (talk) 03:57, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Edgar Thurston would likely not have recognised an Ezhava/Thiyya if he met one. He is a hopelessly unreliable source for this sort of stuff. - Sitush (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

@Sitush .. Edgar Thurston was a well recognized gentleman who served as superintendent at Madras Government Muesuem. He has enough experience in India to write about caste and tribes. And do you think you have any credibility to disapprove of him. what is your qualification to question him. "He was assisted in the writing of Castes and Tribes by a colleague from the museum, K. Rangachari, who had also assisted him in a 1906 ethnographic study, Ethnographic Notes in Southern India. Rangachari had supplied most of the forty photographs used in this earlier study.[2] The September 1910 edition of Nature described the work as a monumental record of the varied phases of south Indian tribal life, the traditions, manners and customs of people. Though in some respects it may be corrected or supplemented by future research it will long retain its value as an example of out-door investigation, and will remain a veritable mine of information, which will be of value Thurston was awarded the Kaisar-i-Hind, first class, on 26 June 1902.[5]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.229.241.171 (talk) 07:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

the writer never said that Thiyya is a sub caste of ezhava in the book. Thiyya is a separate caste from Malabar and ezhava is from travancore. On the same page. :Ref 1, Nossiter p 30, second para explains about the differences of both castes. Majority of the Ezhavas were agricultural labours whereas thiyyar were toddy tappers. Irajeevwiki (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I have no idea why so many people (or perhaps one person using umpteen identities) have so much trouble reading sources for this Ezhava/Thiyya stuff. Re-read Nossiter again, please. He says - from the very bit that you mention - "The major low caste is the Ezhava (Iravas, Ilhavas), known as Chokons (Chogons) in central Travancore and as Tiyyas (Thiyas, Theeyas), who claim a higher ritual ranking, in Malabar." Later, on the same page, he says "Marriage customs have varied considerably among the Ezhavas. In northern Malabar, the Tiyyas were matrilineal (but patrilocal) ..." and so on. Nossiter is clearly treating these two groups as being the same, although acknowledging that they have regional differences. Doubtless, it is the regional differences and the possible socio-economic gains to be made that are driving the present-day Thiyya desire to be seen as entirely distinct but until reliable sources say this, there is nothing we can do to change it here. What we need is some decent, neutral stuff discussing any present claims to the difference. ... and I do not mean agitative Thiyya-based sources as I am pretty sure this campaign both on- and off-Wikipedia is driven by some ulterior motive. Find someone like Christophe Jaffrelot who specialises in the politics of caste and is an active academic with no axe to grind. - Sitush (talk) 20:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry ,I repeat my question. . Which reference link says Thiyya is a sub caste of Ezhava. Irajeevwiki (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * None that I can see. But neither does the article. - Sitush (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You have removed my comment telling that I am making personal attack. By your act, this is a community attack. You are attacking an entire community. Its clearly evident that we are separate from ezhavas. ezhavas were once untouchable in our area. I guess you are weak in History. Pnranjith (talk) 18:37, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Sitush Please do not remove any comments left by other wikipedians as we need all the comments posted here to resolve this issue. Dont take it personally. We are just having a discussion here on whether you need to take all Thiyya references off from your article or not. Irajeevwiki (talk) 01:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Provide some reliable sources and we'll deal with it. So far, in a dispute that has gone on for many months across numerous venues, no-one has done so. Neither I nor anyone else here can just take your word for it, and the situation is not helped when people such as Irajeewiki make significant misreadings of what actually is said in this article. If you are still unhappy then you should try dispute resolution. - Sitush (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You have taken whole sub caste section off from the article which is good. You are actually manipulating fact here by claiming some word references from books. Ezhavas always wanted to merge with thiyaas, that's just for political gain. Since Thiyya and ezhava got completely different culture and history, we can't merge them here on the wiki. Also Thiyya caste needs to be explained more in wiki, about culture, worship, wedding etc. better you please write only about Ezhavas. Your article nicely explains ezhava caste. But If somebody wants to know more about Thiyya, there nothing here in wiki. Irajeevwiki (talk) 19:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you read where Sitush said "Provide some reliable sources and we'll deal with it"? Please try to understand that we cannot change the article just on your say-so - you must provide reliable sources (click on that link to learn about what they are) which support what you are saying. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The subcaste section that I removed yesterday was not added by me in the first place (I do not add unsourced info, ever) and is unrelated to the primary focus of this dispute, which is an ongoing campaign by members of the Thiyya community to be recognised as a completely distinct entity from Ezhava. That campsign is taking place on- and off-wiki. I suggest you go win that battle in the "real world" and then we can reflect it here. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for your campaign. - Sitush (talk) 20:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Zebedee|Boing! I think you have not noticed the valid reference link and a snapshot of the page i have included in my previous message here. Please see above, it explains castes are different. Sitush, Please do not personally attack somebody, which is against wikipedia rules. We are trying for a public consensus here by discussion. I am not using wikipedia as a soapbox. If you want more reference links i can produce in couple of days. I have read many books published in the past which explains the difeence between these two castes. Irajeevwiki (talk) 21:18, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Don't bother if all those books show is that there were variations in ritual/culture etc. To succeed with the point of your original edit request here, you need a source that explicitly says that they are a different caste. Nothing else will do. The article already points out that there were variances and, yes, we could expand on those with reliable sources (not Thurston etc) but it will not advance your cause of having a separate article for Thiyya. - Sitush (talk) 22:00, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, now let us know who you make out an ezhava is different from a paniyan? Both looks alike. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnranjith (talk • contribs) 07:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * And, the pair of you, this and this need to stop as well. You are doing yourself no favours. I'm going to drop you a note about the sanctions in place for stuff such as this. - Sitush (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Reliable source links have been provided in the reference section of this article. Hope you have read it. Irajeevwiki (talk) 04:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Ritty A Lukose Book Published by Duke University. Printed in USA (2009)  NOT RELIABLE...... WHY
Please tell me Sitush Why this book not reliable to you. It is published by Duke University USA. Why you believe this book is not reliable.Irajeevwiki (talk) 21:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have not said that it is unreliable. I said that the bit you mention, which is a footnote, is ambiguous. - Sitush (talk) 22:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Far out !!!! When you read somewhere that they are different castes then it is ambiguous. Irajeevwiki (talk) 03:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)


 * No, your logic is skewed. I didn't read that "they are different castes", precisely because I cannot determine what is meant. The text says, "Focusing on Tiyya (the same caste position as Ezhava) writers of the Malabar region of northern Kerala, ..." I cannot for the life of me determine what the writer means by "caste position". It is an unusual choice of words. I can agree that it does not say "same caste" but I still have doubts. Although I did not say it at the time, when compared to the opinions of anthropologists and others who have a good reason to study caste - Keralite politics is caste-based politics, and Kerala has in the past been described as a "lunatic asylum of castes" - yes, this footnote in a book about something completely different is not massively persuasive. You see, reliability can be an issue: a source can be of impeccable academic origin but still lack weight when used in a particular context. But, I stress, that was not and is not my primary problem with it. - Sitush (talk) 03:42, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I can explain to you. Because members from Thiyya and ezhava were doing same jobs in the past like toddy tapping, farming etc they got almost same social status in Kerala. Also they were Other Backward Communities in Kerala. Writer says That they are two different castes with same social status. Hope this helps. Irajeevwiki (talk) 04:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understood that to be your interpretation. But it relies on synthesis and original research. The statement is vague and we cannot read the author's mind. - Sitush (talk) 04:06, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I am inclined to accept use of the Lukose book as possibly implying that they are separate castes. Given the thin-ness of the evidence, perhaps a compromise approach would be to put a note in the lead, that lead to a footnote, that said something like "There is some dispute in Kerala about whether or not Thiyya is a different name for the Ezhava caste or are a separate group. For instance, Lukose described the Ezhava and Thiyya as having the "same caste position". + ref". If more RS were found, we could move the info out of a footnote and into a separate section. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not, given the "thickness" of the evidence to the contrary, the tangential nature of the Lukose source, and the ambiguity that causes us to be discussing a possible implication. Plus, it is not even what Irajeewiki wants: they want a separate article. - Sitush (talk) 04:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, like I said above, I'm not discussing the separate article issue here, as this is the wrong forum. But I know that my approach wrt this way of using sources is a little different than yours. See, my feeling is that there is a fair amount of "evidence" that at least some people think that the two groups are "different", even though most of that evidence does not meet RS. For me, if non-reliable sources do seem to indicate something may be a controversy in the real world, and then we do get one source that's probably reliable (even if, as here, not off topic), I'm sometimes willing to take that one RS and somehow include it in the article. Obviously, I would never do that for cruft, or for contentious BLP info, but here, I don't see those coming into play. I'm kind of hoping that it might help show to those hellbent on inclusion what we really do need if the info is to be expanded. Of course, I'm making a judgment call here, but I guess what I'm saying is that the "Thiyya is separate from Ezhava" viewpoint is probably not WP:FRINGE, and thus probably deserves at least a small mention somewhere in the article, assuming we can hook at least one RS up to that position, and I think that this source does that enough to justify a very small mention. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:07, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hm. Well, myself, Drmies, RegentsPark and (IIRC) some others have not been able to find reliable support, other than this single item, which I saw months ago. Even those favouring the idea have not been able to find reliable support other than this single item in all the years that they have tried here, which means since at least 2007. The situation is a mess, I admit, but I've lost count of the number of potential sources I have looked at with the specific desire to find something that clearly says, for example, that those who believe Tiyya = Ezhava are wrong. It seems that I was wrong to discount the background of Lukose, who does in fact fit the bill, but it is very poor wording and seems practically to be a throw-away remark in a book that consists primarily of individual case studies. I cannot understand why she choose to do this when, surely, she was aware of the issues. I might even email her, just to satisfy my own curiosity, because there are at least 32 references to Ezhava in that book but only a footnote for Tiyya. See pages 10, 16, 30, 32, 34, 41, 47, etc. Even the Tiyya footnote relates to a paragraph about the Ezhava, per pages 179-180. The source whom she is citing there appears to be, which has been republished on several occasions (she says page 292 of the 1997 edition, which oddly enough is not one that I can find at WorldCat although there is a 1997 review). RegentsPark has borrowed a copy of that from a library but is currently travelling, per this message Curiously, Menon's book concerns Malabar and apparently speaks only of Tiyyas, yet I have just begun to create Travancore Labour Association and there are numerous sources in that which say political activists from Malabar got involved with the TLA, which they say was an Ezhava organisation. And others who cite him, eg: this, call them Ezhava even when citing. They are not of use for this article due to synthesis but it exemplifies just how messy this situation is! I could speed things up by buying a copy - £25 or so - but I'm not inclined to spend money just to confirm/deny a single point. - Sitush (talk) 15:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I checked for public libraries near me, but unfortunately, no copies nearby. Is there any chance you have access to any of the Cambridge libraries? It is available in quite a few of them, including online, including online. Possibly another public library? If not, we could see if WP:LIBRARY could help us out. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The Menon book does not mention Ezhava. I picked it up from the library and looked through it and it is definitely not in the index. The edition I have is the 1994 one and I can ask my spouse to take a look at page 292 and see if there is any mention of Ezhavas though the edition is different. (I could also email Ritty Lukose and ask her to verify the specific citation.) --regentspark (comment) 17:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have already emailed Lukose. The fact that Ezhava is not indexed yet another CUP publication cites Menon while referring to Ezhavas is odd. FWIW, that publication is citing p. 107. Sorry, Martijn, but I am several hundred miles away from Cambridge; the GBooks view gives me nothing in this instance. I see no need to bother WP:RX when RegentsPark has a copy of the book. - Sitush (talk) 17:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, I looked through every indexed reference to Tiyyas as well in the Menon book and there was no unindexed mention of Ezhavas. (It happens that I know Ritty Lukose, though not professionally, and would be happy to follow up if you don't get a response.) --regentspark (comment) 17:43, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

OK. Spouse checked. No mention of Ezhava in index. None on page 107. Book ends on page 209 (though, I guess, Sitush already clarified that). --regentspark (comment) 17:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, well the implication regarding page 107 must then be that Steven I. Wilkinson (Nilekani Professor of India and South Asia and Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at Yale University) considers the two to be the same. He says, citing Menon's 1994 edition, "Even before independence Hindu nationalists found it extremely difficult to gain a foothold in Kerala, and Dilip Menon reports that Ezhavas, who 'continued to see themselves as a community apart, rather than as Hindus', jeered the leader of the Hindu Mahasabha when he came south to address an SNDP meeting in 1930." Alternatively, he has misrepresented Menon. RegentsPark, one should not name-drop, as Her Majesty the Queen said to me only the other day. Feel free to ask Prof Lukose regardless of my email: you'll more likely get a response. - Sitush (talk) 18:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have had a response from Ritty Lukose and have passed it on to RegentsPark and Qwyrxian via email. I am not prepared to post it here without her permission, sorry. I'll let RP and Q determine what to do with it. - Sitush (talk) 02:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm going to summarize what Lukose said in her email to Sitush. Basically, she says that it is pretty well established that the two names refer to the same group. However, she does recognize that the group members held somewhat different social positions in the different areas at some times. As such, she deliberately chose to use a slightly moderating phrase ("caste position" rather than "caste"). As such, I don't think this is sufficient evidence that the two groups are actually separate. I do think that the Lukose can go into the article though. I still think a footnote is the best way, but different than I suggested before. I think that we could put a line after either the first or second sentence that says, "Anthropologist Ritty Lukose describes the Ezhava and Thiyya and having the same "caste position".+ref" Qwyrxian (talk) 10:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * So, she says that group members held different social positions. Its based on the same thing caste system prevailed in India. Can you share her complete mail. You infer something and let me infer something more out of that. As far as I know there was a study done by famous historian Mrs. Abraham. She had sent a reply to my mail clarifying that both are completely different. Let me check with her if it is sharable publicly.Pnranjith (talk) 14:21, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Wait, what? That doesn't make sense to me. If she believed "this is the same caste, but they hold slightly different social status per region and name", then why would she say that they have the same caste position? From your explanation I make out that their social status (which I think is meant with "caste position") only thing they differed in, even if slightly so. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Remove invalid citations
In History section, there is a new section called "Legend". The citation given there is absolutely invalid. EMS Namboothiripadu is a politician. He has never done any study of ezhava. So, this has to be removed.


 * It is not a new section - it has been there for years. There are actually loads of sources that discuss the Ceylon legend, which has or had some currency among historians and linguists. The problem is getting hold of them. For example, if I search on Google Books for "ezhava ceylon" then practically everything is either snippet view or lacks a page before or after the relevant bit, which really is necessary to put it in context. Nonetheless, many of them are clearly discussing the legend. I think you will find that the tag that currently exists against the source in the article was added by me - I was reluctant to remove the information when there seems a reasonable likelihood that sources exist and one is in fact mentioned. Indeed, I have seen a decent source for it but I was unwell at the time and now I can't remember what it was! I need to get my brain into gear (Sadavsivan mentions it, I am sure, but he has proved to be a contentious source at Nair). - Sitush (talk) 17:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)


 * This section is added purely recently on belief. Should be removed soon to reflect facts. There is no proof for such a legend. Even if it is there, it should be merged under something. This doesn't require a detailed section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnranjith (talk • contribs) 17:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * As I said earlier, it has existed for years. If reliable sources refer to legends then we can refer to them also and, again as I said earlier, there seem t be plenty of sources that at least mention the Ceylon idea. It really would be great if you could perhaps try to help build some content here instead of trying to destroy it all. For example, you could expand on the ritual differences found in the various regions. - Sitush (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Problem is, I am blank about ezhava rituals.. So, can't comment on anything related to them. If you ask about Thiyya rituals I have plenty to say. This legend is recently added on Feb 16. Just see the history. It is added by a user from South Kerala. He/She has only contributed to ezhava page. So, obviously it shows they have some vested interest. That is the reason, my request to removeRanjith (talk) 19:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You see, this is my problem with you: you are careless in your reading. There were no edits to the article on 16 Feb 2013 and the content existed at least as far back as June 2011 and indeed much earlier. I have no idea who the user is whom you claim comes from South Kerala but I would be interested to know: it is quite uncommon for people to say where they come from, although some (like me) do so. Regarding the rituals, well, if you are blank about Ezhava rituals then how can you claim that there is a difference? It is the one thing that sources generally acknowledge to be at variance and, indeed, you have claimed that Theyyam is purely a Tiyya thing but cannot possibly know this if you are "blank" about Ezhava - all you know is that the sources you have read mention it in connection with Tiyya, which is perhaps not surprising since they are speaking of Travancore etc. Sometimes you have to read between the lines when analysing a source: what is it looking at and how might that affect the scope of its presentation. - Sitush (talk) 20:45, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, I meant to add above that it is possible that the Legend content has been removed and then reinstated over the years. There has been a lot of warring on this article. But, again, this is why you need to check somewhat more carefully than you appear to have been doing. We all make mistakes, of course, but when it happens frequently then alarm bells begin to ring. - Sitush (talk) 20:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

PLEASE REMOVE ALL REFERENCES ABOUT THIYYA, THIYYAR, THIYA FROM THIS ARTICLE.
This article written for misleading readers, please understand that thiyya is not a sub caste of any caste. Its independent cast and they have their own culture, tradition and history. Its just like Nair, Menon, Nambiar, Ezhava etc. If you look nair wikipedia article, they mention about menon caste that doesnt mean menon is sub caste of Nair, You can mention about thiyya in your article but dont mislead people by making thiyya as subcaste  This article deceiving readers, written for political gain or something,  please remove all above said references immediately.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.178.150.186 (talk) 12:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Pronunciation suggestion
The evolution of the name "Ezhavar" was from the word from the place "EEzham". And they were called in the past as " Ezhavar". But it was by the British, " the Malayalam Illiterate People" who were incapable for normal pronunciation that word, started telling it as "Ezhava" instead of "Ezhavar". But it is a vulgar pronunciation of that word, and it is not the responsibility of Ezhavar to vulgarity of their pronunciation. We can see that, we are not calling the cast "Nayar" as " Naya OR Nayas", and we don't call the cast "Pattar" as "Patta OR Pattas ". Means the word "Ezhavar" also should be pronounced in the same manner as "EZHAVAR"instead of pronouncing "Ezhava". If the Government documents are the inspiring support to tell the word like that, what we should do is to change first the Government Usage - what was created by the Malayalam illiterate British, and blindly following monkeys .And now a days we can see that, So many families started using their name as word " Ezhavar" with their name.And so many started naming their new born babies also as the same using the word "Ezhavar". Like.... Sajeesh Ezhavar, Unnikrishnan Ezhavar, ramnarain Ezhavar..etc. '''In Malayalam, there you can find out a meaning for the word of " Ezhavar". But You can not explain the meaning of the word " Ezhava" / "Ezhavas" using the Malayalam Language.''' {{subst:Unsigned|


 * Per Wikipedia policies, we use the term that is most commonly used in English reliable sources. For example, the native name for Japan is 日本, which is pronounced nihon...but English sources call it Japan, so that's what we call it; the same is true for cities like Moscow (Muscova in Russian) and people like Germans (Duetsche in German). Qwyrxian (talk) 12:55, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

DELETING COMMENTS
Whoever is deleting my comments is not good for him / her. I had posted comment on  26 March 2013‎,  09:55, .. Its been deleted. Can you please stop doing that. Irajeevwiki (talk) 10:41, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You can check these things through the history. It seems this edit by Amal89 is responsible. I'll see if I can restore the damage for you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * All done. Pro-tip: Don't throw a fit if something happens, but check for yourself first. Fixing this really wasn't that hard. Also note that Amal shares your point off view. If something happens it doesn't have to be (actually, it generally isn't) because people are trying to censor you, or repress your point off view. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:53, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The neutrality of this article is disputed
There is a serious issues of balance with in this article there fore i have placed POV Check.

This article is violating wiki policy by creating Thiyya caste a fork of Ezhava, it is bad forking therefore i request the admins to remove forking of Thiyya to this article. Many contributors have been trying to convince the admin of the article to take necessary actions to fix the article's NPOV issues and produced many reputed publishings houses book references and Government Issued certificates but the writer is ignoring those valid and genuine supplied references and reluctant to make any changes to his stand. There are some admins ganged up with this article's admin and refusing to the other contributors request to change articles controversial subject.

Article Ezhava is exclusively for ezhava but intentionally merging Thiyyar caste with Ezhava while Thiyyar caste is completely distinct from ezhava. The writer ganged up with other admins and deceived a senior admin called Bwilkins in 2012 April (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thiyyar) and created Thiyyar Caste as a POV Fork of Ezhava which was a clear bad forking, there fore i humbly request to review the decision of forking of Thiyya Caste. I am requesting other senior admins to view the talk page of ezhava where many times Article writer threatens other contributors with block. A "Thiyyar" search in wikipedia should not redirect to Ezhava.

A POV fork is an attempt to evade the neutrality policy by creating a new article about a subject that is already treated in an article, often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts. POV forks are not permitted in Wikipedia.

Wikipedia policy is as per above mentioned, but a few admins just challenging wiki rules here and we are helpless and desperate here.

The latest reference link I have provided is valid and genuine reference from a book published by Duke University and Author is Professor Ritty A Lukose. The book says on page 235 Last Paragraph that Thiyya is a same caste position as Ezhava. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=R5gNOdw9E_0C&pg=PT269&lpg=PT269&dq=The+blindness+of+insight:+Essays+on+caste+in+modern+India+(Chennai:+Navayana,+2006)&source=bl&ots=B2pj6tuyzg&sig=8Nk9Rgn0gzUktwXJb8_ci4qyF50&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lf9DUc3CMeuaiQe87ICAAQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tiyya&f=false

Below mentioned Section is wrong. Its been cited with very old and non reliable book. I have provided valid reference book above, please refer the book and correct the article. Also the article's Theyyam section is wrong. Theyyam doesn't relate to Ezhava so kindly remove or edit it. The Ezhavas are a community with origins in the region of India presently known as Kerala. They are also known as Ilhava, Irava, Izhava and Erava in the south of the region; as Chovas, Chokons and Chogons in Central Travancore; and as Tiyyas, Thiyyas and Theeyas in Malabar.[1][2] The Malabar Tiyya group have claimed a higher ranking in the Hindu caste system than do the others, although from the perspective of the colonial and subsequent administrations they were treated as being of similar rank.[1][3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irajeevwiki (talk • contribs) 10:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Three things, first: 1) please strike out your personal attacks above (do this by putting before and after the offensive cmoments No one is trying to deceive anyone here, and if you do not retract such comments you may be blocked. 2) You're using some terms wrong. A "fork" is when a second article is created that covers the same basic topic as an article already in existence. In this case, if there were a separate article on Thiyya, that article would be a fork. As to whether or not it would be an acceptable fork is one we're still talking about. 3) There is no "admin" for this page. All editors work together, as long as they follow policies and guidelines.
 * Okay, on to the details of your complaint. You have asserted, over and over again, that these two castes are different. However, you've never addressed the fact that this article has several reliable sources that state that they are, in fact, the same. You've introduced some "evidence", but it either hasn't been clear, or hasn't been in reliable sources. So while I do sympathize and think that there should probably be some more info added about subtle differences between the two terms, you haven't yet provided sources that meet WP:RS that clearly state the two groups are different.
 * The other two points you raise are just a repeat of what was listed above, so it will be easier to discuss them there.
 * I don't object to your addition of the POV check tag. It's fine for the moment, but unless you can produce sources that start to verify your claims soon, we're going to have to remove it eventually. Qwyrxian (talk) 10:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No way. You have never shown any proof which specifically says both are same. Which is the citation which says both Thiyya and Ezhava are same!!! I assume Qwyrxian is another account used by Sitush to justify his claims.122.172.210.22 (talk) 14:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Put up or shut up. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:59, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * To answer the query: the first two citations in the article, for starters. - Sitush (talk) 15:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * My reply to above comment. I have provided two book references before. 1. T.Damu (Lankaparvam) 2. Prof. Ritty Lukose, Duke University. Both books are new compare to authors citation books  in the article. Above mentioned books say castes are different. The article title is Ezhava but it mixes two castes here which is wrong.. As I said above please refer supplied new book references and take necessary steps to end this dispute

There are many reasons to put a POV Checkbtag, the article says something that other people would want to disagree with, As per wiki rule. An editor should not remove the tag merely because he or she feels the article does comply with NPOV: The tag should be removed only when there is a consensus that the disputes have indeed been resolved.. Irajeevwiki (talk) 18:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I am about to lose my temper. Have you ever heard a broken record, endlessly and irritatingly repeating itself? - Sitush (talk) 19:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * However, 2 people just ranting that the article is POV without any sources or policy backed complaints doesn't mean that consensus hasn't been met. Unless you can produce a legitimate reason to show that the article is POV in the next 3 days, I'm taking the tag down. I don't mind a little conversation, but you aren't raising any points that have legitimacy within our rules. Basically, you're claiming it's POV because it doesn't match your personal beliefs, but that holds no weight. As I explained above, the Lukose article doesn't mean they are separate castes. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:24, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

A research report published by Farooq College of Calicut University by prof. T. Muhammadali.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/54685053/Colonial-Knowledge-Nationalism-and-Representations-Readings-from-Malabar

Page no. 4 Beginning of the page. Colonizers in Malabar recognised the different existence of Nayars and Tiyyas as Jatis. (Jati means Caste)

Page no. 4 End of first para.

"Tiyyas primarily concerned about acquiring education beyond everything else. The beginning of twentieth century witnessed mounting proclivity towards reform among Ezhavas though it was mainly concentrated in Travancore"

Also. Read CASTE, NATIONALISM AND COMMUNISM IN SOUTH INDIA: MALABAR 1900-1948. By Dilip M. Menon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 199 which tells you the difference of Ezhava and Tiyya.

I have bought another book from Amazon hope i will receive in couple of days. I can upload pages to my server and provide link for you. Please do not remove tag from article. Irajeevwiki (talk) 10:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)


 * All that Asst. Prof. Muhammedali really confirms - in this self-published, non-peer-reviewed internal workpaper - is that there was a community known as Tiyya in 19th-century Malabar and one known as Ezhava in Travancore. We already know that the community had different names in different places, as is quite common among castes, and he neither says that the Ezhava/Tiyya are the same group nor that they are different groups. Given the extent of academic reference to this point of alleged equality, not clarifying that one way or another when mentioning both is quite a striking omission. I'll have to wait for you or RegentsPark to provide the info given on page 199 of Menon. RegentsPark was under the impression that Ezhavas were not referred to at all in that book. What is the book that you have bought from Amazon? - Sitush (talk) 18:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Does this mean that Sitush supports only those books and publications which goes inline with his/her thoughts? Basically all the points claimed by the other party seems contradicted by Sitush by claiming that all the sources as invalid or unacceptable!!!Pnranjith (talk) 14:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it means that SItush understands Wikipedia policies and guidelines, while you apparently do not (or you choose not to attempt to follow them), and also that Sitush is better at analyzing what texts say than you are. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:34, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Completely agree with Pnranjith. Another book which says " Thiyyas consider themselves as a caste superior to Ezhavas" Link below http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Pd8aAAAAMAAJ&q=tiyya++and+ezhava&dq=tiyya++and+ezhava&hl=en&sa=X&ei=T4pOUbSlLsTRkwXskIFI&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBg Author Dr. CJ Roy, " The Thiyya Dilect" Madurai Kamaraj University.Irajeevwiki (talk) 05:16, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think anyone disputes that there are people within the Tiyya community who consider themselves to be superior to the Ezhava and, indeed, our article already says that. We could and probably should elaborate the point but it is difficult to do so unless we have the complete source(s) available and they too elaborate it. Can you see that source in full or are you using the "snippet view"? I can only see snippets, which is why I will not use it to support the legendary/traditional Ceylon/Sri Lanka origins that Pnranjith disputes (see page iii). You should perhaps note that, for example, many castes consider themselves to be kshatriya and to be descended from various mythological dynasties: we mention these things in the relevant articles but we do so with circumspection. - Sitush (talk) 07:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, by the way, I have a long list of academic works that equate the two groups. One example, published by Cornell University Press, says, Beedi workers were mostly drawn from the ranks of a lower caste, the Tiyyas (Kannan 1988: 196). Tiyyas - or Ezhavas as they were known in southern Kerala - were an intermediate caste below the Brahmins and Nairs, the upper castes. (Page 25). A lot of these seem to refer to Kannan, which is a source that I am still trying to track down. - Sitush (talk) 07:36, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And Robin Jeffrey's oft-cited classic from 1976, The Decline of Nayar Dominance: Politics and Society in Travancore 1847 - 1908, a copy of which I bought last week & am presently reading, says on p. 332 that IRAVA. Ilavan. One of the names given to the Malayalam- speaking caste, traditionally concerned with the cultivation of the coconut palm. Also known as Chogans in north Travancore and Cochin, and as Tiyyas in British Malabar. The Nayars, of course, are the other numerically significant community of Kerala. - Sitush (talk) 07:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Robin Jeffrey's book is not at all trusty. He says that Nayars are like samurai. Thats completely invalid. Also he says that Nayar are only matrilineal caste of Kerala. That is also invalid. There are many similar wrong claims in this book. So we can never consider that book as authentic.Pnranjith (talk) 11:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Robin Jeffrey. I'd rate him somewhat more authoritative than you, sorry, but if you want to debate him then provide some page numbers etc. - Sitush (talk) 14:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You rate him as somewhat more authoritative than me. But sorry to say, I rate you as completely an idiot about this topic.Pnranjith (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What I meant was that, despite WP:AGF, I am not just going to take your word against his. Tell me where you are getting your information from, both in terms of his book and the alternate opinion that you give. You can't just write something here that contradicts a professor of the academic standing that Jeffrey enjoys and expect people here to accept your version as being correct. - Sitush (talk) 17:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Open page 36, last paragraph. He says that, Nayars are the only matrilineal caste in Kerala. Its absolutely bullish. Thiyyar followed matrilineal system.see:http://books.google.com/books?id=7Hue54bWk6IC&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=Thiyya+matrilineal&source=bl&ots=XJifXKZdQI&sig=m86sC9W9gKfjDbWigawum7KkIhk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rVlPUfHlOo3ligK2tYC4Bg&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Thiyya%20matrilineal&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pnranjith (talk • contribs) 19:54, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Also see this if you cant trust Murkoth Ramunni http://books.google.com/books?id=HHev0U1GfpEC&pg=PA51&dq=Thiyya+matrilineal&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TlpPUd2aH8mWiQLgvIDgBA&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Thiyya%20matrilineal&f=false Ranjith (talk) 19:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Sigh. Ramunny is an odd source. It is practically a souvenir guide (80-odd pages) introducing the area where a new naval academy was to be situated. There are no sources apparent, the Northern Book Centre is not an academic publishing house, and Ramunny says in the preface that "A work of this size can have no pretensions of being exhaustive, and as regards accuracy I have done my best with the material available to me" - it is almost an apology. And who is/was Ramunny? That aside, yes, it passes rapidly over the subject of matrilineal practises and includes Tiyya among them (no need for it to mention Ezhava because it concentrates on Northern Kerala). However, what Jeffrey says is far more subtle than you make out and indeed matrilineality is a central theme to his work. For example, on p. 21 he notes that the Ilava (Ezhava) of Southern Quilon followed a mixed system of inheritance; he also notes that around 56% of the Kerala population were matrilineal (ca. 1900, the Nairs were a substantial minority of around 15% - 20%, while Ezhavas were 40% or thereabouts and were the largest Hindu community - his figures). The Nairs certainly are viewed by anthropologists as the pre-eminent example of the matrilineality practised in Kerala but neither Jeffrey nor anyone else I have read says that they are the only practitioners. Take a read of Nair, for example, where you will find numerous anthropological sources. Jeffrey is fond of quoting A. Aiyappan - an anthropologist of the late Raj period and himself a Tiyya., IIRC - who said that aspirational low-status groups practised matriliny - "not the genuine one of the Nayars, but an imitation". It is a subtle distinction that you will not pick up from reading one paragraph of a book: you need to take it as a whole, in context. - Sitush (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Jeffrey's book, by the way, was a published version of his DPhil thesis. The thesis was completed in 1973, the book was published in 1978. In between, he wrote wherein he says in his overview that Two features of traditional [Travancore] society had struck European visitors since the sixteenth century. The first was the matrilineal system of family and inheritance followed by most caste-Hindus, particularly the Nairs .... As with his 1978 book, I have cited that article elsewhere and never had a complaint regarding veracity. If there is a problem with Jeffrey then it is that which Joan Menscher noted in her review of his book, ie the lack of comparison with the situation of Nayars in the rest of Kerala, ie: he concentrates on the Travancore region. - Sitush (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Another book written by Eric J Miller, Cambridge England. On page 411, second paragraph, says "almost two thirds of hindus are members of the polluting castes. High among these are larger than any other hindu caste (about thirty five percent of the total) are the matrilineal Tiyyans of North Malabar and the Patrilineal Tiyyans and Iravans of South Malabar and Cochin"  Miller specifically says Castes to differentiate them. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1525/aa.1954.56.3.02a00100/asset/aa.1954.56.3.02a00100.pdf;jsessionid=E5D47C12399B6BEC50B7537436AE0AE8.d04t04?v=1&t=hesbn2i2&s=0605f14d5db6fd5bd624c37e17ee4c802d39ee24 Irajeevwiki (talk) 10:12, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Iraheevwiki, I can't follow that link; I think it's tied to the session. Doe you have an ISBN, or the title off the book? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Martijn. Please see google link here bit.ly/XKpMF8  Irajeevwiki (talk) 22:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)