Talk:Nair/Archive 6

Nair is not a Caste.Its a Tribe
The Nairs along with the Ezhavas,Pulayas and similar communities are "Indigenous Tribes" of Kerala. To call Nair a "Caste" is not apropriate and is nothing sort of distortion of facts. To be more clear, Nairs who were "Nature Worshiping(including Serpants )Dravidans" accepted "Aryan Hinduism" only at a later stage.Caste System was alien to Kerala and introduced by the Namboothiris from the North. This is more true of South Kerala including Alappuzha and Kollam districts where Buddhism was at its peak. The Four Buddhist Statues of Central Travancore are living evidences of the period. The decline of Buddhism was trigered by Sri Adi Shankracharyas Hindu Philosophies of Advaita which won over Buddhist Monks.

The following transition is given below for a review. Conversion of Native Nature Worshipping Dravidans to Jainism ,Buddhism (under the influence of the Maurayas mainly -Chandragupta,Ashoka and later on to Hinduism based on Caste.

Contentions may be many but facts remain. Hence i request those involved in the process of Editing to address the same.

http://www.thrikodithanam.org/intro.htm http://www.hindu.com/2005/07/08/stories/2005070811950300.htm http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/15042001/Art06.htm http://www.ambedkar.org/books/dob10.htm Malabarspices 09:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Please sign your comments. The origins of the Nairs may have been indigenous to Kerala, but that does not make them a tribe. A tribe is a type of community where there is a leader, and there are people assigned to different tasks. The Nairs, just like the Ezhavas and Pulayas, were a part of society before the arrival of Nambuthris. They were not tribes on their own right because they didn't live independently of each other. Kshatriyan 07:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The Ettuveettil Pillai's are classic examples. They controlled and commanded very much like Tribal Overlords. How else does one see Citizens listening to Tribal Leaders defying the order of the Kings. The same "leadership" that you speak of. The families venturing for Chaver as in Mamankam had the same styles.

At the most you can call such a congrgation a "Community".

Ezhavas,Nairs and Pulayas are all "Native Communities" if not Tribes. But not Caste.Never. How on earth can the Dravidan Sangam people have Aryan Caste System ? Its a fact and facts are hard to digest.

http://www.al-islam.org/Womanrights/11.htm "Montesquieu reports that the Arab globe-trotter, Abu Zahir al-Hasan, found this custom in India and China during his visit to these countries in the 9th century and regarded it as a form of debauchery. He also writes: "On the coast of Malabar there lives a tribe called Nair. The male members of this tribe cannot have more than one wife, but the women are allowed to choose several husbands. Probably the reason is that the Nairs belong to a martial race and their profession is fighting and hunting. Just as we discourage the marriage of the soldiers in Europe so that it may not interfere with their profession of fighting, the Malabar tribes have also decided that, as far as possible, the male members of the Nair tribe should be excused from shouldering family responsibilities."

Malabarspices 09:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The Ettuveettil Pillamar incident was more of a conspiracy than "tribal lords defying kings". Nairs do not fit the definition of a tribe. There is no tribal leader, and there never was. They are more like a community/caste. -- vi5in [talk] 16:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Even traditionally speaking the Nairs were always considered a caste...tribes in the traditional sense were not members of the "civilised" society from the brahmin point of view...they lived out of the vcaste system in the hills...nairs were very much a caste coz they formed part of the caste hierarchy of kerala..and the tribe u mention in the above excerpt is in the context of the "Rajput tribe" etc ...in terms of origin...thts all..doesnt mean they were tribals!!Manu

Most of the assumptions made in this article apparently are from a Brahmin perspective. Considering Nairs as a community and as “Sudras” are all part of this. However, this view point is not maintained when it comes to the articles on other castes of kerala. This is really strange and uncalled for. Nairs were a Dravidian tribe. This is very clear from the following facts. 1)	The different classification among the Nairs which ranges from Kings to servants points to the fact they were never a community. A community, on the contrary, have the same occupation though there might be some slight variations. 2)	Community system was prevalent only among the vedic societies and Nairs were never part of the vedic society. 3)	Ezhavas and Pulayas also were tribes like Nairs, and they too have classifications among themselves ranging from warriors to servants. Basically all the Dravidian sects were tribes. User:Keraleeyan


 * U must remember that society which we are talking of rite now was entirely based on what the brahmins thought...and who said pulayas etc were tribes? a tribe is one which goes out side what we call and consider "civilised" society...though the concept of civilisation is subjective...nairs were considerd part of society and in the caste system...they didnot do the same kinda work coz they were further subdivided into sub castes Manu

Hey kido manu, in the medieval times all around the world people were living in small tribes. Take a look at some of the tribes in UK. (Celtic, Nordic, Germanic and so on). http://www.roman-britain.org/maps/british_tribes.htm. So it was no different in India. The nairs as a caste were formed over centuries from numerous such tribes that existed in medieval kerala. So are the other castes, mainly based on occupation and alliances made by their leaders. The concept of civilised and uncivilised does not hold well in a history.

In my opinion nairs are no different than any other Dravidian groups in the south India. You can at the most argue that nairs emerged as a dominant Dravidian group under the namboothiri vedic system (between 1500-1700) by aligning and accepting vedic system of the namboothiris. You can compare this situation to that of vellalas and Reddies in tamil nadu and Andra respectively.

In the 19/20th century the namboothiri vedic dominance started to collapse (mainly due to contacts with outside world and information exchange(french revolution,communism)). So did the advantages enjoyed by nairs. In the 21st century it’s for anyone’s guess, in my opinion groups that can bring in the most votes will dominate the government and they will rule to their advantage. --Keralone 15:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * well for sure everybdoy wasnt living in tribes around the medieval ages...civilised societies existed in europe as early as the 13th century...the parliament was formed around this time...likewise in kerala by the medieval times we find great organisations and groups in society like the Ettuveetil Pillamar..they are said to have existed as a civilised group of people since the 15th century itself...they were not tribals...by the medieval times the Nair caste as such had already been formed though i concur that previously they were indeed a tribe of people...But by the 16th century you find mention of the Nair caste and its subcastes, titles etc etc. That means that by then they had integrated into vedic society as a caste under the Brahmins. Therefore calling the Nairs a tribe would be quite silly. They were by all means a caste. It would be like calling all the Namboodiris a tribe just because they were once members of aryan tribes about a thousand years ago when coming into Kerala. Nairs are a caste and community and by no means a tribe and it is my understanding that it has been like that for quite some time. Manu

Take time and Visit the Wiki on Ezhavas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezhava

Its designated as a Community.Rightly so. It makes lots of sense.Thats what the Dravidans are.

Nairs are no exceptions.

To use the word "Caste" to descibe the Nair community is indeed detrogatory. No doubts on that.

Malabarspices 11:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The Nairs were a caste mainly because they were members of the Chatur Varna as Sudras. Ezhavas etc were considered outside the chaturvarna...as far as i know. So there is no doubt the Nairs were a caste of the Sudra rung and not a "community" or a "tribe" Manu


 * Manu, Your arguments are based on Nambuthiri stories and Travancore manual. Nothing beyond that. For you, being part of Chatur Varna, or being a Sudra is a qualification to be cherished. It's time you think out of the box. User:Panikkar


 * Such comments appear when the point hits home! anyways as vivin said we will end the discussion here. I am not proud to belong to any caste at all. But the fact remains they were part of the Chatur Varna and hence were a caste. thts all. And btw the Travancore manual is a much better source than any of us here who seem to be quoting more of websites than books. And when the entire caste thing was namboodiri created, why shun what they said? Manu


 * Please stop with this damn "caste pride" stuff. It's frankly quite annoying. We don't need any sort of revisionism in this article. We want to report FACTS. So you may argue against the "Sudra" designation, but the fact remains that the Nairs were considered to be Sudra, and beyond that, they considered themselves to be the same. It is true that they were shoehorned into the Varna system, and as a result maintained the Kshatriya-like duties. But they were still considered Sudra. Are there any "Nair stories" that refer to Nairs as Sudras? The only way a Nair could become a Kshatriya is to undergo the Hiranyagarbha ceremony. This is what the royal families did. -- vi5in [talk] 22:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Its not "caste pride". Its pure logic and fact. Not a fiction. The reason and the explainations were to point to the fact that Nairs "have no Caste at all". Dravidan people have no Caste History. Mere 300 years of Keralas History cannot be used to cascade the Age old heritage of people. Aryan Caste System is a foreign creation that was added to eliminate and dilute an existing system.

Its simple a point has two views. The Indian Historians call the 1857 Revolt-The First War of Independence The Bristish Historians call the 1857 Revolt-The Sepoy Mutiny

But at the end it was a Revolt. Similarly Caste was forcibly put into the system backed by biased books and publications.

If a "Tribe" is not acceptable to some as against a "Caste" which too is not acceptable to some, Why not a moderate view of naming it a "Community" which will be Universally acceptable.Malabarspices 09:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Again i state, with whatever feelings the sudra rank may be looked at, the nairs were part of the chatur varna...they were part of the fourfold caste system...they were of the sudra caste which finds mention in every other historic document of kerala...their very savarna status means "of the four varnas"...ezhavas were a community because they were considered outside the caste system. Its as clear as that. But the nairs were indeed a caste. Manu


 * Yes, it has a whole lot to do with "pride". Some people are ashamed that Nairs were Sudras. Who really cares? Does it change what they were? Does it somehow make you less of a person? It's not a "bad label". Historically it is evident that they were named so as part of a political campaign, but still retained their martial profession. -- vi5in [talk] 16:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I reiterate - my logic is very simple.

Its got nothing to do with "pride" or "shame" neither of which an Advaithi like me shall ever have. http://www.nairs.org/home.php?aboutnairs "Read This Loud And Clear" before jumping into conclusion. http://www.nairs.org/home.php?swami I am not an authority on this subject to make foregone conclusions like "nairs were indeed a caste". I have expressed my humble feelings which are reflections of Undoubtedly the Greatest Authority on Nair Community... Shrimad Chattambi Swamy I am not here to argue to prove points for the sake of it.But to express the fact that: The Truth cannot be covered by a Thousand Lies of History"Malabarspices 18:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Depends on what the lies are. The Nairs probably existed once as castless people but that was long ago. For the most part of known history of the "Nairs", they have been a caste. I think others agree with me. I vote for the "caste" title to stay as opposed to "community" or as someone suggested "tribe" Manu

-- I vote that the "Community" tilte comes in place of Caste.Malabarspices 06:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hiranyagarbha?
Hiranyagarbha will do? dont think so, atleast thats what the kins of old time rajahs think. Read this article on their web, some claim their origins are from outside kerala. http://www.varma.net/articles/valluvan1.php http://kshathrajalakam.org/ --Keralone 02:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Hiranyagarbha is sure a weird story. It says on Kshatriya of the Northern Kolathiri family (southern kolathiris were travancore) went to mecca and became a muslim. On his death a female performed his funeral rites and hence that family of Uday Varma was outcast. They approached parasurama who told them to perform the hiranyagarbha and ever since every kshatriya in kerala performs it. DOnt see the logic though y all o them shud start with it Manu

Sexual Life
I can't see why people are removing this fully cited paragraph I inserted. "Samyogasuktha a presecriptive treatise on sex written claimedly by Kunchumakkool Kurupu of Kadathanad (believed to have lived in the second half of the seventeenth and first half of the eighteenth centuries throws much light in to the sexual life of Nair community. (Samyogasuktha, Vinjanamudralayam Press, Kunnamkulam, 1942). Kindred marriage acceptable among Nairs are confined to strictly spelt out patterns. For example a cousin on the maternal side is a suitable groom for a Nair girl while a cousin on the paternal side at one remove is not. The treatise in conformity with Kamasutra differentiates women into four categories, hastini (elephantine woman), samkhini (woman with conch shaped vulva), chitrini (picteresque beauty), pathmini (lotus woman, with reference to genitalia). This division is called Nayikajathi Chathushtayam (four types of heroines).  The book describes the way how to do intercourse with each of these types. While chitrini has to be enjoyed during the first yama of the night samkhini asks for coitus during the third yama of the night. Hastini with broad hips and deep vagina needs to be enjoyed in dhenuka (milching cow position) position for fuller enjoyment. Unlike Kamasutra which is ambiguous on this score, Samyogasuktha explicitly mentions anal sex. Pathmini is the purest and chastest of the four types. She is not sensually given to by nature. It is the male privilege to enjoy her in every conceivable way." It is to be noted that the article deals with puberty rites, marriage customs etc at some length. So, the sexual life is well fitting here. It is usual for an encylopediac article to mention sexual mores when the ethos and customs of a social group are described. I plan to write an article on Samyogasuktha. But I am looking for information on the first edition edited by Pachumoothathu (a famous Malayalam grammarian). I request others to comment on the inappropriate removal of valid content from the article. M.T. Narayanan 16:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I was one of the people who removed that part. Erm, well my reason is that while it may do good as a separate article, i doubt if we need to see how nairs had sex and how their women were classified in this article. Besides i doubt if this relates to the Nairs alone. It could be included if suitable in the Kamasutra article or something rather than in this article. I am not so sure on seeing a part that goes into details on ways of sex and how women were classed and on what basis and the "male privilege to enjoy her in every conceivable way". For one even if u argue its a work by a nair, it doesnt need mention on the nair page. Secondly dont u think its a little too explicit in details. You dont find articles on other castes stating the ways they had sexual intercourse etc. So i vote for removing that part Manu

You are very much wrong there. If we have to show how Nairs married, how the observed puberty rites, how they had very strange customs etc. we also have to show their sexual mores. I have often read that Wiki is not censored and for this reason it is in the bad books of totalitarian governments. I request those who are more familiar with procedures here to enlighten me on this aspect. Is Manu right to say that the explicit part is out of place? Please note that the book in its upotgatham (introduction) categorically says that Nairs are to observe the teachings in the book. (Nair section was not mixed and contaminated during those times, as you have them today!) Pachumoothathu is a famous linguist. A book presented by him has to be of high standard. The details in the section is not from Kamasutra. The book belongs to another school that follows Kuchimara maharshi whose work Kuchimarathantra is a great treatise on sex. Pachumoothath's intro makes it clear. You can see his intro in 1942 edtion also. Removing verifiable content without engaging in discussion is not right, I think. I reqest intervention of mods here! M.T. Narayananan

M.T.Narayanan- hope you are n't anyway related to M T Vasudevan Nair-do not have fanciful ideas that sex life can be improved by reading this book and that! I would disagree, strongly. In spite of all that Pachu Moothathu and Kunchumakkool Kurupu had written and said,coitus requires a powerful, virile male member. Females swoon at the sight of one. Keep your tool in good condition, and go ga ga! Got it?Masgunan Mananthavaadi 12:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

MTN clarifies (My boy, don't you worry about my tool. Both my sons have two offspring each. I am a retired service man who was part of General Staff. Don't dare abuse me boy. You might be hidden behing some strange names. But that will not embolden you to abuse and insult respectable elders. Take this as a warning. Never dare do it again. MTN)

Nair - A Community
I think it should be a 'community', if it has to be caste then Kartha, Kaimal,nedungadi etc do not belong to Nairs and has to be removed from the article.If you go to the village offices and check the old records they are recorded as different castes. Its a fact that North Malabar Nambiars even today do not marry Nairs,kurups,maniyani or chaliya castes with in North Malabar itself. Same with the other castes I mentioned.With the formation of NSS and for political reasons Nairs have come together as a community for numerical strength. This has resulted in smaller communities like even lower ambalavasis joining Nair bandwagon. However many continue to live with their inherited 'aitham' in minds thanks past Namboothiri tantrams! --Keralone 23:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well Nedungadis are Samanthans while Kartha Kaimal and Nambiar are Nairs. Kiriyathil Nairs, people generally assume all Nambiars are Kiriyathil Nairs which is not true, are distinguished because they donot allow Sambandhams for their womenfolk with Brahmins or Nairs plainly because they consider themselves superior. Anyways, ur right. Subcastes are also mostly (but there are rare cases of intermarriage) endogamous. So yes, although classed as a "caste" the nairs are entirely eligible as a community too. And just to know, what are the lower ambalavasis? i am working on the ambalavasi article...if u could tell me. thanks Manu

There are Nambiars who belong to the Pushpaka Brahmins community in the N.Malabar. They Of course won’t marry Nairs and consider themselves superior to the other Lower pushpakas like Marar, unni etc. So all Nambiars are not Nairs though majority are Nair-Nambiars. NSS doesn’t consider ambalavasis as nairs and they have their Own organizations like Marar Samajam and Pushpaka samajam to cater for them. However, the marriage between these lower Ambalavasis (Marar, Pothuval, Unni etc) and Nairs were common even in the past. The higher caste ambalavasis (Varrior, Nambiar and Nambisan) generally don’t get into nuptial relationship with the Nairs. Karthas, Kaimals and Nedungadi are very much part of the Nair caste and belong to the higher rung. There were Kartha kings (Meenachil karthas) in the central travancore who were defeated and Annihilated by the travancore king (Dharmaraja). User:Keraleeyan


 * Again Nedungadi is a Samanthan caste. Kartha and Kaimals are Nairs. There is a book Rani Mangala Bai about a Kartha queen during the times of Marthanda Varma..again, a common error-Marars are not Ambalavasis..that is a misconception..the Jatinirnayam mentions them as Nairs and they were considered so in the Censuses of the past. And i have heard of Variar men marrying nair ladies as also Nambeesan etc...well its all Sambandham in the end...neways Nambiars are of four types: Nambiar proper (Ambalavasi with poonool), Tiyattu Nambiar (Unnis), Nair Nambiar, and Pushpaka Nambiar (Pushpakans)...Manu

The Community is the Umbrella formation. Its like the Hub and the caste is the Spoke. Have a look at this...

" Nair (IPA: [naːjar], Malayalam: നായര്‍, and sometimes spelt Nayar) is the name of a Hindu Community from the southern Indian state of Kerala. The Nair Community was a martial nobility, similar to the Samurai of Japan.[1][2][3][4] The Nairs figure prominently in the history of Kerala and were feudal lords and warriors in the Pre-Vedic Period of Kerala. After the arrival of the Namboothiris and Vedic Hinduism, the Nairs along with all natives were classified as Shudras based on Caste System/Varna .Despite the same they retained their ruling and martial professions." Malabarspices 09:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It is interesting that some Nambiars (Nair) consider themselves superior to other Nairs and Namboothiris. It is a fact that many North Malabar Nair subcastes do not tend to marry other Nairs from southern parts, and that Ambalavasis including Nambeesan and Ambalavasi Nambiar were considered lower by the Nair Nambiars, an unsigned user commented that Kodoth family did not allow Namboothiri Sambandams. Of course this has little bearing today. Nair is not one community, but made up of several communities some of whom don't intermarry, under definition of caste, all members of a caste should be able to intermarry. This problem has come about because several communities have been generalised under one title, just as Thiyyas and Ezhavas, though different, have been considered as the same. The problem with applying the "Sudra" title comes as several communities which are considered as "Samanta Kshatriya" are also Nairs (eg. Adiyodi, Nayanar, Unnithiri, etc.) but of course the Namboothiris considered other community as "Sudra" (servants/helpers). The fact is that describing what the Namboothiris defined Nairs, and other communities, as does little to actually show what they were. Should it be mentioned on the Namboothiri page that "some North Malabar communities defined Namboothiris as being lower than them on the social ladder"? Before the situation gets complicated, it would be better if "Nair" community/caste was strictly defined as "martial, ruling and aristocratic" but also ensure mix up not involved with some of the wealthy mercantile Ezhavas.Kshatriyan 11:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Samanthans have nothing that actually makes them eligible to be known as non nairs...but again being minor chiefs who probably couldnt afford hiranyagarbha or it was too late to do it (say around the 16th and 17th century) got that title....anyhow the way the namboodiris justify the sudra title is: brahmins are the priests and kshatriyas the rulers...those who served them were the nairs- the sudras....it doesnt matter what kind of service (military, religious, domestic) etc..since they serve them, they are sudras...so thts how it goes...weird things these...Manu

This is poor perception of facts. Just because Nairs served someone they cannot be termed as ‘Servants”. In which case, the namboothiris and especially the ‘elayath’ Brahmins were doing many services to the nairs including pithrupooja, sradham etc. Does it mean that they are also ‘Sudras’. Many Nair families had ‘kuladaivam’ and temples in their tharavad and there were many Brahmin families who were dependants of such Nair families. Sudras as per the ‘varna’ are petty servants who are born out of the leg of Brahma. The word ‘Nair’ was synonym to ‘Soldier’ in Kerala. Hence, the classification of Nairs as ‘Sudra’ is not doing justice to this article on Nairs.

Unlike other castes of kerala, Nairs cannot be categorized as a pure gene or pure lineage caste. Nairs are a mixed up lot. Apart from the Namboothiri mix up, there were Also many others who were conferred ‘Nairship’ for their bravery and war skills. In the book “Kerala charithratile Iruladanja adhayangal”, the famous historian Sreedhara Menon narrates a story like this “ A group of Nair soldiers of Kochi raja, returning tired and wounded after losing a war, gets Into a brawl with a group of local laborers in a paddy field. These laborers give a stiff fight and the Nair soldiers had to retreat from the place. The king came to know about this incident and promoted all those laborers who defeated the Nair soldiers as Nairs. They were originally “Pulayas” and today they all are pure Nairs settled in the southern part of Kochi”.

Even today, I personally know at least a dozen ex-patriate “vellalas” and ezhavas who claim as Nairs and their Next generation are married to Nairs abroad and outside kerala. Any ‘Malayalee” tea stall in Tamil Nadu is known as a “Nair tea stall” and slowly these folks also get Into the Nair fold. So unlike the Namoothiris or Ezhavas or Pulayas, Nairs cannot claim a pure lineage. Probably the Kodoth Nambiars are an exception for this and hence they don’t want to mix up with other Nairs or Namboothiris.User:Keraleeyan


 * It is true that many people became Nairs over time, however the "original" Nairs did not marry with them, and even today there are several Nair families which do not marry other Nairs. In fact like the Kodoth Nambiars, there are other Nambiars who did not mix with other Nairs for this reason.Kshatriyan 10:41, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thats very true...infact recently i learnt some surprising info...apparently after seven generations of consecutive sambandhams with brahmins, the eight generation that is born are members of the Brahmin caste. The rulers of Ambalapuzha, Chempakasseri were apparently born like this while being previously Yadavas or Edasseri Nairs. Manu


 * That is surprising since Namboothiri Brahmins do not allow anyone to enter into their community, not even other Brahmins. The Nair "communities" are diverse and so it should be mentioned that this is the case. Hence rituals and customs such as Theyyam which is very important for North Malabar Nambiars, Kurups, Menons do not apply for South Nairs. Even the Varmas and major Naduvazhis (Nayanars) are extentions of the Nair (Nayanmar) community. A title such as Sudra is hard to apply to Nayars as a whole. Part of the reason was because Namboothiris were puritan and thought that all other communities were Sudra (servants) to them. In North India, you will find Jatts, Marathas, Khatris, Lohanas, etc. who were classed as Kshatriyas, but also undertook merchant trading (the work of Vaishyas, unlike the Nairs) but were at some point in history referred to as Sudra by Brahmins. Kshatriyan 23:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Well in my opinion and what I have heard from elders is that common nairs were basically farmers, servants at namboothiri or royal house holds or care takers of large estates owned by landlords. Marars at least in the Malabar were placed higher than common nairs and being associated with temples had Namboothiri patronage and followed some form vegetarianism. However with the new economic order and social changes that happened in the last century has made them very poor. Being as small group and knowing their future is bleak, they have slowly assimilated into nairs. For example you have K.Karunakuran, as Marar from kannur appearing in both Nair and Marar list. Btw common nairs do not include Nambiars.--Keralone 23:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * By "common" Nair do you mean Illathu Nair? If that is the case then you are right. However in Malabar, the Illathu Nairs, although being included in the Nair category, are treated as almost an entirely different caste by the Kiriyath Nairs (Nambiar, Kurup, Menon). In which case Marar would form the Illathu Nair category along with some other Ambalavasi communities (since they were involved heavily in the Namboothiri households). In the Malabar the Marars were not placed higher than the Nayars, as far as I know. Nambiar and Kurup males may have undertook Sambandham with them, but certainly the Nayar females had Sambandams with other Nambiars and Kurups, Namboothiris or Nayanars. Kshatriyan 23:58, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

i meant Marars and other ambalavasis were placed higher than 'common nairs'. And these common nairs form the vast majority.--Keralone 00:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Well even i have heard about the majority of Nairs being poor by the 19th century...i have read of villages with hundreds of nair families but all the land being concentrated in the hands of less than 25...so naturally the rest, after the british came and banned kalaripayattu formally, most of them became servants and attenders....i had once assumed that the poorer among the nairs were the veluthedans, asthikurichis, edasseris etc...but i am told that they were much lesser than Illathu Nairs numerically and it was most of these Illathu nair families which were poor...Again, Marars position varies...my mother comes from a Marar family but they use the title of "Panicker" because in Travancore while technically above Illam and below Kiriyam, practically most of them were poor temple dependants..so most of the landed Illathu families around my moms tharavad were always irked by the fact that there was a marar tharavad that was so much superior to their own houses in terms of landed property, private temple etc...Marars are not Ambalavasis, though considered so in Malabar and Cochin...Also people assume Kiriyathil Nairs are nambiars, menons etc...but Kiriyathil Nairs are those nairs who donot permit Sambandhams with Brahmins or Kshatriyas...they are a proud endogamous group...i know cases of branches of Kiriyath families becoming Illathu due to a Namboodiri Sambandham..


 * My mom comes from an Orunul Marar family and surprisingly none of the Orunul families have anything to do with the drumming in temples...while they are descendants of a Bhrasthu Kiriyath Nair Unnithan lady, a Kunjamma, there is another orunul family who were Ooranmas of a temple and not its drummers...another family called Kadaikadu were Kurups because they were the protectors of their temple and had a Kalari..a Kizhaket family possessed a Kalari and protected the temple of Kannamangalam...so again Orunul Marar families are of some distinctive nature which places them above other Marars..i am told that in my mothers tharavad, marars who visited, as a sign of their degradation had to wash the plates they ate in themselves etc...these families use the title of Panicker mostly or in rare cases, Kurup...drummer marars used Pillai, Nair etc...so its very difficult to actually distinguish between marars and nairs in travancore because they all use the same surnamesmanu

The assumption of majority of Nairs were farmers and servants in the past is wrong. Most of the Nairs were indeed soldiers. What you would have come to know from elders could be the situation only -at the maximum- one century back. In Malabar manual, William Logan talks about how the nairs are getting transformed into a ‘farmer’ community. This could be due to the extinction of ‘naduvazhi’ rule and beginning of the democratic process. Most of the nairs during the end of 19th century had to look for other vocations.

Also the onslaught of Tipu sultan had a very bad reprehension for Nairs. Many Malabar kiriyath families took asylum in travancore region during this period and being refugees had to settle with whatever work they could do.

I have seen many ‘naduvazhi’ families starting ‘Tea stalls’ and farming as a vocation in the last few decades. That doesn’t mean that most of the Nairs were farmers and servants from the beginning.

However, there had been a considerable amount of depreciation in the ferociousness of this community over the last 2 centuries which is also mentioned in many books on Nairs. This could be due to their mix up with the Namboothiris. Most of the Nairs today are half Namoothiris and inherit the namboothiri’s strong ‘Brahmin Cowardice’ than the Nair valor of yester years. I think this is one of the reasons for the bad shape of Nairs today. User:Keraleeyan


 * This proves how diverse the Nair communities is. The types of Nairs, their occupations and social ranking varied from each region Travancore, Cochin, Malabar. It is impossible to make specific definitions and statements which covers all the different categories. Kshatriyan 06:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * That wasnt what i implied...even nagam aiya in the travancore state manual mentions how the haughty people who never left their house without a sword had now (by 1906) changed into a peaceful class of citizens mostly engaged in agriculture Manu

Well Keraleeyan, in my opinion Sambandan was the worst moral crime committed by the namboothiri's and other royals on nairs on whom they had full control over. I would call it genocide. Imagine your boss wanting sexual favours from your sisters and mothers so that you can stay on job and support your family. Imagine the Absence of Father and its effects on children's development and family functioning. Imagine having brothers who do not have common father. Kids brought up under such circumstances are not going to be natural leaders. Similar situation had happened to Native Americans after they were conquered by the Europeans. Luckily one of the first things that NSS did after its formation was to put an end to this and bring nairs into main stream.--Keralone 16:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * My two-cents on this. Encyclopedia Britannica calls Nairs a caste. We have a convention on English Wikipedia where we use the most widespread and common term to describe a topic. So on Malayalam Wikipedia it might be pertinent to describe Nairs as a community (samudayam). But on English Wikipedia, I think we should use caste. -- vi5in [talk] 16:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

... I don't think you are right there. It is not Britannica that is reliable on the issue. It is Kerala government documents that is reliable. Nair is clearly not a homogeneous caste. Some sections of Nair belong to Other Backward Castes. That itself shows that community is the right name. M.T.N.

I made correction. I wanted to say it is not Britannica. Also, if you rely on Britannica (Nair article in it is at least 75 years old) you have to use Nāyar instead of Nair. That was how Nair was written during British Raj. People here fail t see that the society is in flux. They think the concept never undergo changes. Personally, I belong to a Mooppil Nair family. But we also consider the Nair sections coming under OBC criteria as Nairs not outcastes. thank you. M.T,N.


 * Keralone, with whatever feelings Sambandham may be looked at now, those feelings didnt exist way back then..people were moulded that way..so they had no problem wid divorce and in some cases, which i am told was more prevalent in Malabar, multiple sambandhams...again, the absence of the father..i doubt if it had any effect on the children because the same affection and love was given by their uncles...i remember saying this before..we sitting here in todays world will find so many things wrong but at the time they were practised it was normal completely...im not justifying the thing but merely stating that this negative view of sambandham arose only abt a hundred years ago, before which it was perfectly normal...as for the caste/community issue, i still support caste in favor of community...as vivin said, in malayalam it may be refered to as a community..but since almost all english authorities on the subject have called it a caste, i would vote for thatManu

I don’t think that was the case with sambandhams. Though there had been a few who suffered due to Sambhandham, many nair families took it as a pride to Get into such a relation. Also it was mostly the elite Nair families and Kshatriyas who could ‘afford’ such relations. Since the community was matrilineal a biological father doesn’t matter anyway. Everyone belongs to the tharavad and the ‘karanavar’ drives the Show and this had been the case even if the father is a Nair. There will be simmering if the karanavar is insensitive. As a child, my father used to advise me not to spoil pencils, which according to him, was such an unaffordable prized thing, to acquire from his rich ‘ammavans’ though my grand father was a displaced Nair king who used to get an India government pension. User:Keraleeyan


 * Keraleeyan is right. In the past Sambandams were common amongst Nairs, not only with Namboothiris, but with Varmas and other Nairs. That was the Nair form of marriage, a Nair man would also practice Sambandam with a Nair woman, how was this a disadvantage for Nairs? The society was matrilinear, which placed women in a position of importance, and there are several famous Nair female warriors in history. Of course there were some Nair families who thought of the Namboothiris as a lower caste and either did not practice Sambandam with them or did so out of economic necessity. Kshatriyan 09:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Well Sambandhams were important for the namboodiris too...they got alliances with some of the best families while the nairs had their status raised with a Brahmin connection...there are instances of Nair tharavads calling some Brahmin houses as their "achanveedu"s because many sambandhams came from thos families..so well...Manu

Great, great, Mannathu Padmanabhan the founder of NSS whose biological father was itself a Namboothiri was one of the main people who were instrumental in stopping this so called good Sambandan. Why would he do such a bad thing?? Why was he so poor that he even couldn’t continue his education, even after having such high status biological father? Guys the get over it.--Keralone 13:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I was under the impression Mannathu Padmanabhan was a teacher before he became a lawyer...i think ur talking abt Chatampi Swamikal who worked in some factory or something...anyways at the same time, i know the case of a Dr. Govindan Nayar who was in the Health Department of Travancore who was educated abroad. His mother was the maid servant of an aristocratic Nair lady who was married to a Brahmin...im not specifying ne more names...so this lady married the brahmin and went to stay at his house...she stayed for two years till the marriage was annuled due to some reason...the brahmin married that servant lady after his wife left him and at his expense..or to put it more appropriately at the expense of the Illam, the servant's son was educated in England...so the affection towards children and how much sambandham was like a marriage varies i guess ...guys we arent even talking abt what this topic is abt...so does the caste tag stay or community? we need votes..Manu

I would add one more thing, it’s like some Indians saying that colonisation of India by British was good. It gave us great monuments, railways, judicial system and English language. I am of the type who disagrees with this. I feel because of this, Indian psyche is effected and will take many generations to get over it. --Keralone 15:52, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

User: Keralaone, It is not just Namboothiri Sambandham which the NSS tried to put an end to, but it is the Sambandham and the matrilineal system itself. Mannathu Padmanabhan would have been poor even if he was born to a Nair father due to the flaw in the marriage system prevailed during that age. The youngsters used to suffer if the ‘karanavars’ were not kind enough. And it is not just Nairs, most of the Indian population except for a few feudal lords were poor those days.

On a different note, this also negates your earlier argument that the children born out of the sambandhams cannot be natural leaders. Many of the stalwarts who strived for uplifting the browbeaten and enslaved masses (not just Nairs) during those dark ages of Kerala were from this community like Kelappan, AKG, P.Krishna Pillai, Mannam and Chattambi Swamy, just to name a few. I am not the sort of person who goes gaga over caste pride, but this much just to bring to your notice certain facts. It is good to learn your past and history but you cannot live in history, anyone who boast of his past is like a tapioca, the best part buried under, leaving the present a mere fragile stump and leaves. User:Keraleeyan


 * Keraleeyan is right. The past is finished. But Sambandhams were the custom of Nairs, not only with Namboothiri men but also with Nair men, because our system was matrilineal. Even today Namboothiri men wed Nair ladies although less frequently, and the children are still part of their mother's family. These marriages are not considered intercaste as such and they are arranged marriages. Getting back to the topic, Nair is a generalised caste of warriors, administrators and aristocracy. Other Nairs such as Chaliya Nairs, though having taken up the Nair title, are not strictly part of the community since they do not marry with the original Nairs. The Nairs are made up of several communities ranging from Malabar to Travancore, which in turn do not intermarry. Kshatriyan 01:29, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I dont understand the antipathy expressed above to Sambandham. If it was part of the Nair culture (references exist as early as 200 BC of Sambandaham and Matrilineal system, even before Nambudiris arrived in Kearala.), it seems illogical to apply judeo-christian paterneralistic values to the institution and feel ashamed of it. I guess british suceeded in making the Nair heritage by 1900s very ashamed of their own culture, that lead to the eventual dismantlement of the system. I see the same confusion reflected in some comments above. Thampran 01:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Nair is not a caste. Caste was started by Namboodiri's in AD 900-1200. Nair Community existed from BC200s.
I modified the "caste" reference in the top of the page to "community" to better reflect that Nair's pre-dated the Caste system. Please discuss this further before reverting to caste. Thanks. Thampran 02:07, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well irrespective of the fact that they existed before the Brahmins came, all the recent history of the Nairs is as a caste. If we go as early as the BCs then so many other castes will have to be termed otherwise. Manu
 * Nair is a caste made up of several subcaste communities and perhaps different origins. Nair (in the true sense of the word) describes the warrior and ruling people of Kerala. I am not sure if genetic background of Nair/Nair communities has been undertaken, but "Nair caste" are generally made up of Malabar and Cochin Nayanmar and the Nairs of Travancore, just as Thiyyas of Malabar and Ezhavas of Travancore make up the "Ezhava" caste. The history and origin of the communities may be different, but it was their occupation which defined their caste.Kshatriyan 05:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Also "caste" word is from the Portuguese language, first used by the Portuguese to describe inherited class status in their own European society. I vote for changing these references to community. 1555, "a race of men," from L. casto "chaste," from castus "pure, cut off, separated," pp. of carere "to be cut off from" (and related to castrate), from PIE base *kes- "to cut."Application to Hindu social groups picked up in India 17c. from Port. Casta "breed, race, caste," earlier casta raca "unmixed race," from the same L. word. ( http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=caste).
 * People from outside India have a lot more difficulty understanding the word caste, as they equate it to race, and there fore consider the entire article racist. I guess the idea is to provide an unbiased summary without local prejudices. 66.30.237.12 01:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that "caste" should remain, since Nair is defined as a caste in official documents. But it should be mentioned that it was made up of several subcastes and communities ranging from Varma (Naduvazhi Nair) to Illathu Nair and that the various communities may have different backgrounds and origins.Kshatriyan 05:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Caste is a racist term and it is best not to use it. Thanks. UP

Pictures
Cant we add some more pictures to the article? The article will look all the more impressive with pictures..Manu

Caste, Tribe or class??
Kerala is a region populated with numerous waves of migrants through out the history. and most of the migration came through three routes, along the northern and southern coastal routes and the palakkad gap. For the same reason, Its very clear from the culture and even sometimes physical features of the people from different regions of the kerala. Its obvious that people from the same caste doesn't belong to same group of migrants or ethnic groups. Nairs from southern kerala and central kerala and north kerala belongs to different migratory groups and later referred to a same category or caste name of class name, which is "Nair" according to the socio-political status attained by them in course of history. This categorization may happened at after the formation of the Chera country as a political entity and class formation associated within the empair. Most probably Nair groups from the northern kerala is remnants of the migratory groups came along the west coast from north. Nairs from the southern kerala may have migrated along the southern gateway from tamil country. This may be the reason of the practices like famous "kora puzha vilakku", which forbid the north kerala Nair women from crossing the "kora puzha" to south. For these reasons we can speculate that, nairs are a class more than a caste or tribe. It have its tribal or ethnic identity (if it make any sense) only when u come down to the sub caste category. Most probably Kiriyathil Nairs are the groups which aggressively kept their tribal identity to a certain extend during the course of time. As far I know, at least in northern kerala the marriages or 'sambandhams' were strictly with in the "kiriaams" or "kulams" of same status. It was not permitted to marry from the same kulams as they all belongs to same related in a brother-sister way. Last 50 years the sub caste identities are completely vanish with the collapse of "marumakathayam". "Sambandham" with the namboothris were in principal absent among Kiriyathil nairs. If you look things in a very broad sense, none of this classifications make much sense as its known that a vast majority of Indians are of  M* haplogroup  mtDNA (passes down along female line) lineage, only very few percentage of the sub continent population have some other mtDNA lineage, which is mostly in pakistan and north western india. On the other hand Y DNA of different types are observed throughout the subcontinent. As Nair caste is not a homogenous group, a DNA test is the only way to find  the frequency of different Haplogroups among Nairs. If some one is interested please visit https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/journey.html http://www.familytreedna.com/public/nair/

(Crayoz 15:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC))

Nair article/Shudra title in the introduction
While it is important to class Nairs as either a "caste" or "community", I think that more attention is needed for the article. More information regarding the known origin of Nairs, the mythological origins or Nairs (which may not be true but needs to be shown) and a more detailed history of Nairs, especially regarding their martial history (Kalaripayattu, involvements in wars, etc). Also I have transferred the line regarding Nambuthri definition of Nairs to a more relevant section of the page which is about their status. The introduction already gives the Nair status as warriors and administrators, and it is not necessary to have what the Nambuthris thought of the Nairs (in the introduction), not to mention that the line is not valid completely (Varmas were "Malayala Kshatriya" but basically Nair). On pages like Maratha, Jat, etc. it isn't mentioned that "Brahmins thought of them as Sudra" in the introduction, although it may somewhere else in the article. Especially in Kerala, where no caste properly fits into the Chaturvarna system (except for the Nambuthris), the line is not wholly true.Kshatriyan 23:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree whole heartedly with the statements above. Technically speaking Marathas, Jats, Nairs, Reddys, are all Shudra since none of these groups wore the sacred thread that Dvijas (twice borns) wear. But only on the Nair page do we see people writing within the introduction that the Brahmins considered Nairs as Shudras, none of these other communities write that since even though religiously they are Shudra, sociologically they are all warrior clans producing kings and lords and majority of people within the communities did not do shudra Dharma. If a person is going to write that the Nairs are Shudra within the introduction they should also explain the following facts over the whole "Shudra" classification.

1. Kerala was a completely casteless society before The Namboothiris arrived. the Brahmins of kerala (Namboothiris) were puritans and the most Orthodox Brahmins in India they followed kaliyuga wherein which only Brahmins and Shudras existed. The Namboothiris classified everyone in Kerala as Shudra apart from a few Nair lords/chiefs/rulers that they gave kshatriya status to via Hiranyagarbha (a ceremony into kshatriyahood) after which they were known as Varmas. The Namboothiris even claimed that they could be polluted by the touch of other Pardesi Brahmins too.

2. The army of Kerala was known as the "Nair Pattalam/Nair Brigade" (Army of Nairs) In the beginning only Nairs could be inducted into this army. This was the sole army of the kings of Kerala. Since only Nairs were allowed to join this army it is evident Nairs were always a warrior clan, why else would it be called "Nair Pattalam" because in the beginning the word "Nair" was a synonym for warrior. It should also be Noted that under the leadership of Marthanda Varma, the Nair Pattalam is the only Army in Asia to have defeated a major European power during the Battle of colachel where the Army played a pivotal and crucial role in defeating the Dutch.

3. in Varna Shastra of Hinduism it states that "Shudra" does not mean a servant or labourer. It merely means one who works for another. The Namboothiris being very orthodox they believed that anyone who worked for another be it as a soldier or a minister they still worked for someone else thus they were "shudras". The Namboothiris only considered Royals as "kshatriya" or eligible to sit with them. So its very obvious that the caste system in North India was completely different to the caste system that the Namboothiris upheld. Since in North India warriors were considered "Kshatriya" too.

4. If you want to talk about caste, we should understand what the real caste system really was in Hinduism instead of following the corrupted form of it. The real caste system in Hinduism states that the caste of a soul is determined by their Dharma their actions and is not determined by their birth. If you want to read about that read this article http://www.stephen-knapp.com/casteism.htm.

So after all these points its clearly evident that the "shudra" title given to Nairs was just Brahmin Propaganda imprinted onto the Nairs. What another community thought of Nairs should not be written about in the introduction It's rather unencyclopedic. It should definitely be written of somewhere else in the Nair article. For someone who has studied Hinduism they would never see "shudra" as something offensive and indeed there is nothing wrong in that, however all i'm saying is the facts should be mentioned along side the shudra tag. I see no other communities on Wikipedia mentioning themselves as Shudra yet the Nair article mentions it in the introduction.Veracious-sojourner 23:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

The list of notable/famous Nairs has been deleted (Also information on so called "casteism")
Just to let everyone know the list of " Famous Nairs " has now been deleted. Voted for for deletion by some insecure lower castes who are so ridden by inferiority complexes that they think merely to write of the accomplishments of a certain community is now " casteism ". These insecure individuals exhibit their nefarious pusillanimous hypocrisy when they don't realise that what they are doing is infact the most casteist thing, since its a prime example of " reverse casteism " since a so called upper caste can no longer write their accomplishments on wikipedia if they do it gets deleted. But whatever the self proclaimed lower castes do is promulgated to the world. The paradox is the list of famous Nairs is now deleted whilst 1000's of other lists remain on Wikipedia including the list of Ezhavas.

So i think it would be wise to amalgamate the whole list into this article. I have a back up of the entire list since me and the user ivygohnair were the main contributors to the list. If anyone is interested i could send them the list or write it here or actually put it into this article. However i'm new to Wikipedia so a little guidance would be a requisite.

Below is what i originally wrote on the talk pages of the list of Nairs in reply to a lot of users claiming the "list of famous Nairs" was Casteism. However funnily enough no one replied to it addressing the actual content i wrote. Probably because they knew it was all right and could say nothing in return to it. So i decided to paste it all here so that it may at least liberate a few more minds.

There seems to be a few repugnant people here who are of the contorted and antagonistic view that a list of famous people from an upper caste community or to write about the history of an upper caste community is CASTEISM! What is the world coming to when to merely write the accomplishments of a certain community is now regarded as Casteism. When infact this is a prime example of reverse casteism, a few plebians who wish to squander and hide the accomplishments of a community by attempting to delete the whole list and also deleting names in the list in a clandestine manner without even discussing it, THIS IS REVERSE CASTEISM. For those insecure trolls who regard this page as casteism i suggest you also delete every other list on wikipedia there is a list of famous Rajputs, famous Jats, famous Iyers, Famous Reddys also a list of famous Ezhavas...How come no one has tried to delete the Ezhava list? When a so called forward caste attains something he or she cannot be proud of it because its now considered casteism. But when a scheduled caste person attains something they are happy to promulgate it and scream it to the world and no one has any objections. To be proud of your community IS NOT CASTEISM! For those people who patrol this page and other pages trying their best to denigrate and undermine a community just because in the past they were regarded as " upper caste " to these people i say, attempting to make others look bad does not make you look better it only lowers us all and relegates us to platitudinous ponderosity, and never lets us progress... This in turn is not at all productive for society. So instead of procrastinating and trying to make others look bad, use that time to make your own community better. If we want our nation or state to progress we must all give up this " crab mentality " of trying to drag others down and this applies to everyone of every community Nairs, Ezhavas, Jats, Marathas Brahmins, everyone. Can someone also tell me why the people who bring up "castes" the most are infact the lower castes? Lower castes love to talk about how badly they were treated in the past by upper castes, even after in todays India lower castes are given 100 times more privileges than upper castes reservation is just one example. How many times will people continue to open up the same wounds? How can a wound heal if people tear it open again and again? Why do some people love to talk about how badly upper castes treated lower castes but refuse to talk of the good upper castes did for lower castes. One example would be the majority of freedom fighters in Kerala and India who got India independence were upper caste. In kerala alone the majority of the warriors and armies who defended lower castes and the land were Nairs one example would be "Nair Pattalam" Nair Brigade The army of the king of Kerala which was 99 percent Nair, why else would it be called " Nair Pattalam " translated as army of Nairs.

When i visit India or Kerala and stay there i am happy to give our servant my bed and i sleep on the floor, I believe all humans are equal, and i have personally worked in village hospitals for months without any pay to help the poor in Kerala, Delhi, Rajasthan. Are these the actions of a person who is casteist? Regardless of caste or colour we write our own destinies...This is exactly why we should be proud of the Indians who accomplish a lot in life regardless of their caste or community and not delete their accomplishments by deleting the list of famous people from that community. It is sad that some people on Wikipedia are still the slaves of the British through their mentalities. Because it was the British that propounded differences between caste and community it was they who divided Indians. Those Indians who continue to divide Indians, unfortunately they continue to be the slaves of the British. Try and emancipate half baked knowledge from your minds, and stop your ignorant divisions and if you wish to know what the real caste system in Hinduism is, read the following article instead of proliferating farces and lies. Fact: Hinduism specifically says Caste is not determined by Birth it is determined by Dharma (your actions), read from an unbiased source http://www.stephen-knapp.com/casteism.htm. Veracious-sojourner 07:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Adding a list of famous personalities of a community, no way amounts to CASTEISM. As long as caste remains a FACT OF LIFE, there is nothing wrong in it. However, before slinging more mud on the ‘lower castes’, we need to substantiate(I could even see the same happened to the Ezhava page as well and their list is added as a part of the main article now). It could even be the nefarious handwork of some other resentful malayalee community.

Anyways it needs to be listed back in the main article. Also, the main article needs a make over with more pictures (at least with the leaders of the community like Mannam, Kelappan And Chattambi Swamikal)User:Keraleeyan

The Ezhava list has been deleted too, so we have determined it was the act of some other resentment community. So my apologies for misunderstanding the situation. However i didn't mean to sling mud on anyone it's just i've seen a great deal of people accusing others of " casteism " on certain wikipedia pages to the point of ad nauseum, for something as little as a list of famous people from a certain community. So i'll leave up this post of mine, in regards to "casteism" hope it enlightens a few more souls who don't even understand what caste truly was in Sanatan Dharma ( Hinduism ). I have now incorporated the List of Famous Nairs, into this page. Veracious-sojourner 22:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That information will needlessly make the article big. It was also an unverifiable list, which was why it was deleted. -- vi5in [talk] 23:12, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Vi5in, 95 percent of the list was verifiable it had citations and the majority of people on the list had articles on them via other wiki pages. The names which did not have wiki articles written on them had 1 or more references/citations next to their names, so its not really fair to say " it was an unverifiable list ". Secondly Since this is an article on Nairs it should include Prominent members from the Nair community. The Ezhava wikipedia page has done the same and included a list of notable Ezhavas. Secondly the user Keraleeyan also believes this article is too short and a list should be incorporated. I think people should take a vote on it or something, which would be a democratic solution. Instead of one person just removing it from the article because he hasn't bothered to actually check the citations provided and thus he calls it " unverifiable ". However vi5in does have a point about it making the article too long but others should also voice their opinions whether a list should be added or not, that would be the fair resolution. At this point i'm neutral. Veracious-sojourner 16:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you could use very notable people, like the first Defense Minister of India (Krishna Menon), or Mohanlal; people like that. But even then you would have issues about "how notable" someone really is. We can't have a huge list in this page because it would make the page rather big. You can work on a new "List of Notable Nairs" page. Put the 95% that you have (with citations) in there. As long as an article is adequately cited and notable, there is no reason it shouldn't exist on wikipedia. -- vi5in [talk] 17:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, the question apparently is on the reliability of free content/open source encyclopedia. How come someone take unilateral decision on what needs to be displayed and not to be displayed. This shows how susceptible this article is??

We use wiki pages very extensively for our projects (software) and nothing gets changed without having a debate among the stake holders. I think the existing list was fair enough and very much VERIFIABLE .Also it was not very lengthy compared to the other caste lists in Wiki. I would vote for putting the same list back in the main article.User:Keraleeyan