Talk:Jadhav

i want to see 96 kuli surname Topale. is this 96 kuli maratha

Jadhav.net website offers personalised emails and cool resources for Jadhav's --Nileshyj (talk) 03:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC) Nilesh

Yadav - Jadhav – Jadhavrao
I have tried to clean up the text in this section to make it more readable. However, not knowing much on this subject, I may not have maintained all the correct information for this section.

The whole article needs more help to correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. --BwB (talk) 20:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I am Jyotiba Jadhav From my Village is Devkurali I am 96th kuli maratha —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.118.213.209 (talk) 05:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

all jadhavs are not khsatriyas
Jadhav, S (1994): Myths about Untouchability in India. Man: Journal of The Royal Anthropological Institute. September 1994, 29, No 3.

Jadhav, S (1994): Myths about Untouchability in India. Man: Journal of The Royal Anthropological Institute. September 1994, 29, No 3.

The myths of origin of the Indian untouchables In his article on the origin myths of Indian untouchables, Robert Deliege (Man (N.S.) 27, 533-50) suggests that these have some antiquity and are unlikely to be elaborated in the modern period. Based on personal family knowledge, I would like to mention another myth that suggests a relatively recent development. It concerns the caste origins of a family of cobblers in Kundal village, Maharashtra. The family have no written records of their history, but refer to frequently visiting troubadours (shahirs) who keep the myth alive through their oral tradition by singing out the story with accompanying drums and role play. There were three brothers of the Maratha (warrior) caste who lived on 	the other side of the river Hubli [i.e in Karnataka under the present state boundaries] and served in the durbar of Shivaji [the famous Maratha chieftain described in popular culture as a brave king who resisted the Mughals]. The brothers took part in the famous "national 	mutiny" against the British Raj. As the mutiny was unsuccessful, they fled to escape being caught by British soldiers. They crossed the river, leaving behind their possessions and land, and arrived with their wives at this village (Kundal). Penniless and persecuted, they had to `camouflage' their identity. So they picked up the most readily available occupation and have been cobblers (chamars) ever since Following his death, the eldest brother was cremated in the vicinity of their hut; a shrine was built upon his grave which has been worshipped ever since by the family. There are several issues of interest here. This relatively recent myth refers to the colonial context (and to a continuing political resistance) to legitimize the cobblers' inferior status. Their present position is perceived to be due to pragmatic `force of circumstances', rather than to the sort of misunderstanding' that characterizes the myths reported by Deliege. This myth transforms the identity of this family (analogous to Moffatt's code switch) into `freedom fighters' who follow the tradition of Shivaji, and also simultaneously helps to deny the family's low caste origins; ascribing its misfortune to the `British' in contrast to other myths that blame Brahmins or gods for inventing the caste system. From a psychological perspective, such a projective mechanism might well help to ease inter-caste tensions, whilst at the same time identifying a common external `aggressor'. Ritual purity is not a central theme that defines the family's position in the caste hierarchy but one which is invoked whenever convenient. The shrine in the vicinity of the family's residence creates and offers a powerful alternative sacred space, a key locus of current resistance to discrimination (being denied access to the village temple and school). Beef remains forbidden and the cow is considered sacred in keeping with the general Hindu tradition. The principle of karma is still embraced, despite the family identifying themselves as `low caste'. These apparent contradictions do not exist for them and may perhaps be in keeping with any culture of pluralism where multiple contradictory worlds co-exist as central features of everyday life. Deliege's claim that such myths are popular because they legitimize an inferior status is consistent with this myth, although the association of Kundal village with political resistance against British rule and its reputation as a haven for freedom fighters, particularly for the Jana Sangh, suggest additional reasons for the shaping, reification and survival of certain cultural memories. SUSHRUT JADHAV82.28.219.226 (talk) 23:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC) Centre for Medical Anthropology University College London

Jadhavs were ahirs.
Jadhavs were ahirs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.21.182.12 (talk) 07:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 2.^ http://books.google.com/books?id=FoT6gPrbTp8C&pg=PA59&dq=The+tribes+and+castes+of+Bombay,+Volume+1&ei=wSxHS-_UDYiGlQSI8fz5DQ&cd=1#v=onepage&q=gauli&f=false —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.21.182.12 (talk) 07:25, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Difference between Ahir Yadav and Jadhavrao/Seuna
Hi, recently my additions were reverted. Can I know why ? Werent my citations reliable ? I can provide over 6-7 reliable sources if you want ! You need to understand that Jadhav is just a misnomer of Yadava. And about having a seperate article 'Yadav' dedicated to Ahir community, Yadu or Yadava terminology isn't their copyright ! Modern Ahir community and Seuna Yadavas are different for God's Sake ! KobraPeshwa (talk) 13:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Admin Sitush, please reply and give a valid reason for reverting my edits. KobraPeshwa (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

This is pure vandalism !!! KobraPeshwa (talk) 13:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)