Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mudaliar-Venki123/Evidence

Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please make a header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.

When placing evidence here, please be considerate of the arbitrators and be concise. Long, rambling, or stream-of-conciousness rants are not helpful.

As such, it is extremely important that you use the prescribed format. Submitted evidence should include a link to the actual page diff; links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Mennonot to the article Anomalous phenomenon adding a link to Hundredth Monkey use this form: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anomalous_phenomenon&diff=5587219&oldid=5584644] [1].

This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.

Be aware that arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to refactor the page, let the arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please cite the evidence and voice your objections within your own section of the page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others. If something is put in the wrong place, please leave it for the arbitrators to move.

Arbitrators may analyze evidence and other assertions at /Workshop. /Workshop provides for comment by parties and others as well as arbitrators. After arriving at proposed principles, findings of fact or remedies, arbitrators vote at /Proposed decision. Only arbitrators may edit /Proposed decision.

Evidence presented by Mudaliar

Personal attacks using profane language and racist comments against me by Venki123

Venki123 (talk · contribs) abuses and threatens me in various ways if I don't share his POV. His usual method of intimidation is by using a mixture of profane words and racist attacks by explicitly referring to my skin color when he absolutely has no idea of my physical traits.

1. [2], ".. this group's ancestors were convinced about the superiority of the brahmins and thought getting white skin was more important.."

2. [3], "..that women of his group were used as concubines by the brahmins in the temples as his ancestors were convinced about the superiority of the brahmins and thought getting white skin was more important than being cuckolded. He also follows the same thought praising the superiority of Brahmins.."

3. [4], "..Reposting for TMSV Propaganda editor User:mudaliar.."

4. Slandering across multiple unrelated articles without any proofs: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26] "..TondaiMandala Saiva Vellala Mudaliar women were concubines of Brahmin priests in the temples and the current TondaiMandala Saiva Vellala Mudaliar men are bastards of Brahmins.."

5. [27]: "..you are worth less than shit you bastard of brahmin.."

6. slanders me without reason when talking to Admin Durova (talk · contribs): [28]: "..Regarding article Mudaliar this rogue editor vandal:Mudaliar.."

7. slanders me while talking to admin Dina (talk · contribs): [29]: "..I personally think he is mentally unstable and suffers from some psychological wounds from his childhood.."

8. once gain makes racial attacks regarding my skin color while talking to Dina (talk · contribs): [30], [31]: "..his ancestors were convinced about the superiority of the brahmins and thought getting white skin was more important than being cuckolded. He also follows the same thought praising the superiority .."

Mudaliar 17:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Attacks against the community/ other editors and intimidation using profane words

1. Venki123 (talk · contribs) intimidates other editors by using a mixture of profane language and starts abusing the community as a whole if other editors share a different POV. [32], "..TMSV Propaganda editors Read this..First of all, everybody in Tamilnadu knows that TMSV Mudaliar had close association with Brahmins and sent their wives as concubines to Brahmins and many of you are possibly bastard children of Brahmins.."

2. Intimidation and racist attacks across articles..[33]

3. Slandering and abusing multiple editors on the talk pages across unrelated articles without any proofs under the false pretext of RFC: [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55] "..TondaiMandala Saiva Vellala Mudaliar women were concubines of Brahmin priests in the temples and the current TondaiMandala Saiva Vellala Mudaliar men are bastards of Brahmins.."

4. Clear proof where Venki123 (talk · contribs) intimidates another editor when the other editor does not seem to share the same POV as Venki123 (talk · contribs). Note the subject line. [56], "..Share your opinion about KKV, TMV and TMSV because I am still willing to consider you as an individual and not just a bastard of brahmin.."

5. racial attack on the community without any proofs in Mudaliar article page: [57], ".. this group's ancestors were convinced about the superiority of the brahmins and thought getting white skin was more important .."

Mudaliar 17:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism and other Disruptive Behavior by Venki123

1. [58]: has blanked entire talk page and posts of other editors and replaced it with a couple of lines of his own.

2. [59]: has been blocked multiple times for constantly edit warring on various articles.

3. [60],[61], [62], blanking and deleting the posts of other editors and research papers, proofs and evidences from talk page.

4.[63],[64] deleting randomly from article page

Academic References to prove that Mudaliar is the surname of Tondaimandala Vellala

Claim: Mudaliar is a title and originally the surname of Tondaimandala Vellalars, a caste/ clan in South India. Its a feudal title like Baron, Count etc., Mudaliyar is synonymous with the land owning gentry and feudal caste of Tondaimandala Vellalas as you will see below. There are ample proofs for this assertion. I have given a few below. Note that the research has been done by authors from the US, UK, India etc. Tondaimandala Vellala includes many subcastes but that is not the issue here.

The Mudaliar article page clearly says that Mudaliar is the title and surname of "Tondaimandala Vellalars" which is exactly what the following references clearly prove.

Venki123 (talk · contribs) is attempting to create a question of ambiguity and divert this discussion by saying that Tondaimandala Vellala exclusively refers to Kondaikatti Vellala which is clearly incorrect as there are a number of subcastes within the caste Tondaimandala Vellalars. But this is not the issue here. Other castes like Kaikolar etc., who are officially classified as a backward caste by Government of India [65], [66] have started using the Mudaliyar surname for the sake of social upliftment in the society. This process in the Indian society is called Sanskritisation. This is analogous to European commoners adding Baron/ Duke/ Viscount etc. to their names and claiming to be of aristocratic birth. The Kaikolar/ Sengunthar have been officially classified as a backward caste for the low status in the Indian society. For example see how this non profit organisation clearly lists the Kaikolar as "Unreached people of South Asia"[67]. I have given ample academic reference below to prove the identity and status of Kaikolar/ Sengunthar group.

References

1)Dialogue and History: Constructing South India, 1795-1895., By Eugene F. Irschick, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994., direct web reference: [68] Quoted from book: "Mudali is the shortened form of "Mudaliyar", the surname of all Tondaimandala vellalas. "Mudaliyār"—a term that literally meant a person of first rank."

2)Spectres of Agrarian Territory in Southern India By David Ludden, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 39, No. 2-3, 233-257 (2002) [69] (free link)might work: [70]: Quoted from source: "A basic similarity is however symbolized in the specialization of central Tambraparni settlements. Tirunelveli was a temple town, endowed with rich Brahman agraharam communities, and a capital ruled by Pandya Vellala and Tondaimandalam Vellala elites under the Nayakas...Tondaimandalam Vellalas (Mudaliyars) and Brahmans were central figures in wide commercial networks of textile trades, primary product markets, and taxation.": Note the way the article refers to Tondaimandala Vellalas as Mudaliyars and uses the term "Mudaliyar" interchangeably with the Tondaimandala Vellala.

3)Order and Disorder in Colonial South India By Eugene F. Irschick, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 23, No. 3 (1989), pp. 459-492,[71]

4)Castes & Tribes of South India - ET.Thurston, VII 361, [72]. Edgar Thurston was a British Officer in Colonial India and was the curator of the Indian Museum of History, Madras, India for a long time after Indian Independence.

5) Vellalas By by Dr.Kanam Sankara Pillai: [73]: Quoted from article: .."Mudaliars and Reddiars of Thontaimantalam (Chengalpet & North Arcot Dists)....The first layer consists of Saiva Vellalars (Saiva Mudaliars and Pillais). They are vegetarian, literate and sophisticated like Brahmins except priestly duties but also were major landowners, feudal lords and powerful like Rajputs or Thakurs of Northern India.."

6) Lionel Place, 1799 Report, para. 59. “Mudali” is the shortened form of “Mudaliyar,” the surname of all Tondaimandala vellalas. This is quoted from Lionel Place's (an English Officer and Gentleman in the Colonial India) report to the British East India Company This literature is from 1799. Also quoted in:[74]

7)Urban is as Urban Does: The Tirunelveli Kattabomman District c. 1823 By David Ludden, University of Pennsylvania, [75] : Quoted from source:"But migrations in the post‑medie­val period brought Smarta Telugus into the region in political alliance and residential association with immigrant Vellalas --Tondaimandalam Mudaliars"

Mudaliar 17:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Clear proof that there were subcastes in Tondaimandala Vellalars

1. Dialogue and History: Constructing South India, 1795-1895., By Eugene F. Irschick, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994., direct web reference:[76]

Quoted from book:Another essential aspect of the project was the recognition that members of the Tondaimandala vellala subcastes considered themselves to be the original agricultural settlers of the area.

The above quote clearly proves that there were other subcastes within Tondaimandala Vellalars apart from Kondaikatti Vellalars.

2. The author clearly uses both terms Tondaimandala Vellalars and Kondaikatti Vellalar for just this very reason because there were subcastes within Tondaimandala Vellalars and the Kondaikatti Vellalars were just another subcaste of the Tondaimandala Vellalars.

Dialogue and History: Constructing South India, 1795-1895., By Eugene F. Irschick, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994., direct web reference: [77] Quoted from book: "Mudali is the shortened form of "Mudaliyar", the surname of all Tondaimandala vellalas. "Mudaliyār"—a term that literally meant a person of first rank."

Mudaliar 19:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Academic References to prove the Identity of Kaikolars and that Kaikolar Devadasis are an offshoot of the former

The Kaikolars also called as Sengunthar, are a large Tamil and Telugu caste of weavers in the states of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh in southern India. They are originally weavers and were soldiers during the Chola empire. They consider the different parts of the loom to represent various gods and sages. Traditionally, atleast one girl in every family was dedicated to temple service and becomes a Devadasi(meaning female servant of god). In the temple, the girl is considered married to the temple deity but in practice becomes a prostitute, especially to the Brahmans and she learns traditional music and dancing. This is the description of the Kaikolars and has been accepted by various authors and historians after much research. I once again furnish academic references below. This is not defamatory. This is the status of Kaikolar in the past and present.

References

1)Asia in the Making of Europe: A Century of Advance. Book 2, South Asia - Page 1032 by Donald F Lach, Edwin J Van Kley - History - 1998 - 662 pages [78]: Clearly describes the status of Kaikolars.

2)Artisans in Vijayanagar Society, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, 417-444 (1985) [79]: This research article explains the blood relation between the Devadasis and the Kaikolar. Quoted from article:(Devadasis (dancing girls who have very close kinship ties with the Kaikolar))

3) Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982),[80]: Text Quoted from article: At least one woman in every Kaikkola household was, according to age-old tradition dedicated to the temple as a devaradiyar or devadasi. The devaradiyar enjoyed special privileges in the days of the Vijayanagar empire and were the only women permitted a direct audience with the king.

4)Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), [81]: This research article (along with references to an inscription) describes how a devaradiyar or devadasi won special privileges for the Kaikkolas from the king Deva Raya II (A.D 1433)

5)The Erotic Sculptures of India Y. Krishan Artibus Asiae, Vol. 34, No. 4 (1972), pp. 331-343 (proves that kaikolan musicians = devadasis) [82]

6)Some Enquiries into the Condition of Weavers in Medieval South India, Indian Historical Review, Vol. VI, Nos. 1 and 2

7)Contending identities: Sacred prostitution and reform in colonial South India Priyadarshini Vijaisri A1, A1 Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), New Delhi, South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group Issue: Volume 28, Number 3 / December 2005 Pages: 387 - 411[83]. If you cannot access previous link, then just go here [84] and follow one of the links. This research article talks in much detail about how women from the Sengunthar/ Kaikolar caste go into prostitution in temples.

8)Another reference book Donors, Devotees, and Daughters of God. Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu by Leslie C. Orr, [85]

9)South Asia Unreached People Groups: [86]:This is a non-profit world renknown organisation recognised by many countries. The following is the description used - The KAIKOLAR people are a caste of weavers 1.5 million strong in southern India... That daughter is considered married to the temple deity—often the Hindu destroyer god Shiva. In practice, the daughter becomes a temple prostitute.

10)Global India Missions: [87]: The following description is used - The Kaikolan are a large Tamil and Telugu caste of weavers....Traditionally, one girl in every family was set apart to be dedicated to temple service and becomes a Devadasi(meaning female servant of god). In the temple, the girl is considered married to the temple deity but in practice becomes a prostitute, especially to the Brahmans and she learns traditional music and dancing.

11) Book: Of Property and Propriety: The Role of Gender and Class in Imperialism and Nationalism - Page 178 by Bannerji, Himani, Mojab, Shahrzad, Whitehead, Judith [88] Again, the google link provides a limited preview. This books also talks in great length about the Kaikolar Devadasis and the Brahmin men.

12)Madras Gazetteer recognized by the Government of India: providing google link. follow link for full book. [89], [90]

Mudaliar 17:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Karikala Cholan is a socket puppet of Venki123

Venki123 (talk · contribs) keeps claiming that Karikala_Cholan (talk · contribs) is my socket puppet. The latter is not my socket puppet. In fact even the Check user report clearly states that Karikala_Cholan (talk · contribs) comes through an open proxy and it does not say that it is my socket puppet. It is definitely Venki123 trying to portray me in bad light by assuming the role of a new user and similar contributions to mine.

More Proofs: Kaikolar Devadasis are an offshoot of Kaikolar weavers who were soldiers during Chola Empire

The Kaikolars who have dedicated girls as devadasis have been described in the above academic references as weavers who were militarised during the Chola empire and are known as the Kaikolars of "Terinja-Kaikolar-Padai" (meaning: "known soldiers" or personal bodyguards). The name of some of the articles itself clearly say that it is about Weavers and they are described in great detail. So there is no question of ambiguity regarding their identity. Moreover the issue here is how some Kaikolar women were indeed dedicated as Devadasis, that is, the issue is about how Kaikolars Devadasis originated from the Kaikolar/ Sengunthar caste and not about how Devadasis from various castes are collectively known at present. Venki123 (talk · contribs) is once again attempting to confuse the argument at hand. Further, some articles go further to state that some Kaikolar Devadasis also returned and married regular Kaikolars.

Note: I am providing google links to prove that I am not fabricating anything. Follow the google link to the article page.

Proof1: Donors, Devotees, and the Daughters of God: Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu - Page 158 by Leslie C. Orr - 2000 - 305 pages [91]

Quoted from book:Kaikolar girls were dedicated as devadasis, ..and the children of temple women occasionally married Kaikkolars

Proof2: Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), [92]

Google link to show that description "terinja-kaikolar" occurs:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=terinja+was+the+term+bodyguards+kaikkola

Proof3: Some Enquiries into the Condition of Weavers in Medieval South India, Indian Historical Review, Vol. VI, Nos. 1 and 2

Proof4: 3. Book: Of Property and Propriety: The Role of Gender and Class in Imperialism and Nationalism - Page 178 by Bannerji, Himani, Mojab, Shahrzad, Whitehead, Judith

http://books.google.com/books?q=devadasi+dedication+kaikkolar+devadasis

Again, the google link provides a limited preview. This books also talks in great length about the Kaikolar Devadasis and the Brahmin men

Rebuttal of Claims made by Venki123

Clear proof that there were subcastes in Tondaimandala Vellalars

Venki claims that there are no subcastes within Tondaimandala Vellala. The following reference clealry prove that there were subcastes within Tondaimandala Vellala.

1. Dialogue and History: Constructing South India, 1795-1895., By Eugene F. Irschick, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994., direct web reference:[93]

Quoted from book:Another essential aspect of the project was the recognition that members of the Tondaimandala vellala subcastes considered themselves to be the original agricultural settlers of the area.

The above quote clearly proves that there were other subcastes within Tondaimandala Vellalars apart from Kondaikatti Vellalars.

2. The author clearly uses both terms Tondaimandala Vellalars and Kondaikatti Vellalar for just this very reason because there were subcastes within Tondaimandala Vellalars and the Kondaikatti Vellalars were just another subcaste of the Tondaimandala Vellalars.

Dialogue and History: Constructing South India, 1795-1895., By Eugene F. Irschick, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994., direct web reference: [94] Quoted from book: "Mudali is the shortened form of "Mudaliyar", the surname of all Tondaimandala vellalas. "Mudaliyār"—a term that literally meant a person of first rank."

Poor quality of references given by Venki123

References in the form of inscriptions like [95], [96], etc., given by Venki123 (talk · contribs) are poor references.

For example quoted from the very same website[97]:

No. 123 (A.R. No. 94 of 1934-35). Vriddhachalam, Vriddhachalam Taluk, South Arcot District. "On the west wall of the mandapa in front of the central shrine in the Vriddhagirisvara temple. The date of the record, according to the astronomical details given, was either A.D. 1240, Jan. 11, Wednesday, or A.D. 1251, January 11, Wednesday. In both cases the nakshtra was Makha, not Punarpusam as quoted in the inscription. Since the donor is stated to have been a mudali of Alagiyasiyan Kopperujinga, the date of the inscription was probably A.D. 1240."

--The person transcribing the supposed inscription is disputing the date of the inscription and is also claiming that it was a different date based on indian astrology. Moreover in the end the transcriber also goes on to claim that the date of inscription is actually a different by associating it with the name in the inscription. How can you arrive at the date of the inscription using the name ? The transcriber clearly assumes that the name of a person is unique which is clearly wrong. Moreover dating an inscription through an astrology is even ridiculous. I could also carve my name out in the same place with an associated date of 900 AD and claim it's a valid inscription.

Kaikolar Devadasis are an offshoot of Kaikolars

The Kaikolar Devadasis clearly are an offshoot of the Kaikolar caste. The issue here is regarding the way some Kaikolars were dedicated as Devadasis. This is clearly proven by the various references I have mentioned above regarding the Kaikolars.

No ambiguity in name Kaikolar

The Kaikolars who have dedicated girls as devadasis have been described in the above academic references as weavers who were militarised during the Chola empire and are known as the Kaikolars of "Terinja-Kaikolar-Padai" (meaning: "known soldiers" or personal bodyguards). The name of some of the articles itself clearly say that it is about Weavers and they are described in great detail. So there is no question of ambiguity regarding their identity. Further, some articles go further to state that some Kaikolar Devadasis also returned and married regular Kaikolars.

Bogus claims by Venki123 regarding two Kaikolar castes

Venki123 (talk · contribs) is totally lying by stating that there were 2 Kaikolar castes. This is absolutely false. Anybody who reads through the following academic reference will realise that this claim by Venki123 (talk · contribs) is false.

1. Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982),[98]: Text Quoted from article: At least one woman in every Kaikkola household was, according to age-old tradition dedicated to the temple as a devaradiyar or devadasi. The devaradiyar enjoyed special privileges in the days of the Vijayanagar empire and were the only women permitted a direct audience with the king.

2)Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), [99]: This research article (along with references to an inscription) describes how a devaradiyar or devadasi won special privileges for the Kaikkolas from the king Deva Raya II (A.D 1433)

Evidence presented by Weldingveerasamy

User:Venky deleted my referenced work on History of Mudaliars in Jaffna and added information on his own whim. [[100]].

It is interesting that he neither cites any reference not gives a reason for deleting my referenced insertion. He further states Vellalar history refers to works written by Western Historians or after the arrival of the Western Powers.[[101]] .

Another anonymous user who could be someone sharing user:venky's view then goes on to make bold claims about Nallur Kandaswamy Temple and the rights of Kaikolar there.[[102]]

He is totally wrong on all counts.

Facts About Nallur Kandaswamy Temple

The present day Nallur Kandaswamy Temple was built by Subba Iyer (a brahmin) and Maapana Mudaliar (a vellalar) in 1749.[[103]] This wikipedia quotes from Dr. Kunarasa of Jaffna University as link below shows.

Here is another link of the Nallur Temple History. [104] .

Other than the traditional role of the Brahmins, the entire administrative resposibility rests with the Hereditary Vellalar family only. [105]. Not surprisingly, there is no mention of any Kaikolar role in the Temple.

The role of the Chief Priest in the Flag Hosting Ceremony is given here. [106]

Usage of Mudali Surname and History of Jaffna

Other than the Mahavamsa and Chulavamsa which are the Buddhist Texts of Sri Lanka, the only published chronicles to study the history of Jaffna are

1)Vaipava Malai 2)Kailaya Malai 3)Para-rasasekaran Ula 4)Raja Murai 5)Vaia-Padal.

This below is a direct quote of Professor HW Tambiah a world reknowned Scholar on the subject of the History of Jaffna

The earliest local Tamil chronicles on Jaffna were composed in the Middle Ages. A prose work entitled Yazhppana Vaipava Malai was compiled by poet Mayilvakana Pulavar in 1736 A.D. This work 'depended on earlier writings such as Kailaya Malai', Vaiya Padal, Pararasasekaran Ula and Raja Mural. These, composed not earlier than the fourteenth Century A. D., contain folklore; legends and myths mixed with historical anecdotes. [107]

My quotation to prove the usage of Mudali by Thondaimandalam Vellalars come directly from the Kailaya Malai which is almost unanimously accepted by Scholars of Jaffna History to be authentic and verified and pre-dates the European Arrival. Here is the direct quote from the Kailaya Malai [108] . The original in Tamil and its English Translation are there. It must be noted that all modern history books on the History of Jaffna have the same above sources.

The Kailaya Malai is generally accepted as a Academic Reference and verified[109] by historians.

Extracts from Mootootambypillay, A., Jaffna History, 3rd edn., Navalar Press, Jaffna, 1933 is reproduced in the Jaffna Kingdom page of Wikipedia. There a list of immigrants is given. [110] (Note: the list of immigrants is not disputed).

The surname Mudali is visible amongst the Chiefs of Thondai Nadu, Kanchi and Seyyur (Areas known as Thondaimandalam).

In short according to published historical works available to us, there is no doubt of the usage of the surname Mudali by Thondaimandalam Vellalars prior to the 13th Century.

The history about the Arya Chakravarthy's and the Jaffna Kingdom refer to the same sources as above. Again, not one BOOK/Reference mentions any connection between Kaikolar and the Kings there. Contrary to User:Venky's beliefs no published or referenced works have established a connection between the Kaikolars and the Kings of Jaffna.

Vaiya-Padal Era

The chronicles that talk about the Chieftains settling down in Jaffna was written down during the reign of the Arya Chakravarthis. Here is another quote regarding the Jaffna Kingdom .. the bottom of the linked Page again names the major chieftains but it is in Tamil. [111]

Vaiyapandal was written by Vaiyapuri Aiyar during the reign of King Segarajeskeran. This book describes events commencing from the first ruler of Jaffna. It also describes the names of the chieftains and social groups and how they came from Tamil Nadu and settled in Jaffna and Vanni. Like other Tamil works Vaiyapandal also does not give the events in chronological order.

The names of the Chieftains are widely agreed upon by all historical texts. Hence, there is no ambiguity as far as the names/surnames and their place of origin go.

Mudali as a Title of Thondaimandala Vellala Chiefs Pre-13th Century

(the links are same as above which I have given)

From List of Immigrants to Jaffna (Source Kailaya Malai and Vaiya-Padal)

Mannadukonda Mudali from Kanchi

Thaninayaga Mudali from Seyyur

Manavala Muthali from Kachhoor

Seyarasasekara Muthali from Kanchi

Context of Usage here: Here the Mudali is their clan surname or tribe surname denoting their feudal lineage. Thondaimandalam Vellalars used Mudali as a surname or tribal affliation rather than as officer of state which other castes did. This is a very important point.

Obviously User:Venky is blind when he says there is an absence of Vellalars using Mudali title. I have clearly given evidence.

There is clear proof

Will come up with the right Family tree lineage/history.

Finally now he claimes he never claimed to be Kings. [112] Can he explain this edit.. the bottom page where he deletes my stuff and adds fancy stuff about some King of Nallur.

Context of Usage

After reading the inscriptions, I dont think it can be conclusive as any evidence. As stated below it makes no sense to draw conclusions.

Inscriptions mean nothing

The word ‘Perumalpillai’ is used as a proper name and it should not be split up to mean ‘the son of Perumal.’ If this meaning was really intended we should expect some such phrase as nam-maganar or devar-maganar. Another objection to this view is that Sola-Kon hailed from Arasur, whereas Kopperunjinga belonged to Kudal. Moreover Sola-Kon is nowhere called Alappirandan, Kadava or Pallava, but is, on the other hand, definitely referred to as devar-mudali, i.e., an officer of the chief, and in some cases merely by the term Pillai

This is one of the inscriptions user:venky posted. The same character is reffered to as devar-mudali and pillai. What are we to assume from this. These inscriptions are totally taken out of context by User:Venky simply to confuse the discussion.

Thevar = Lord (also caste name) Mudali = First/Chief (also caste name) Pillai = son (also caste name)

The same individual is covered by the above 3 descriptions. Nothing is proven by these inscriptions. If this is the burden of proof for User:Venky, only fertile minds will end up discussing this.

My Comments

I think the burden of evidence/proof must be maitained. An inscription which uses words of a fertile mind cannot denote or prove anything.

Other than that, I feel there is no more point in me continuing in the this arbitration as User:Venky has clearly stated the comments I objected to were not from him but from another user.

Evidence presented by Bakaman

I have looked at Talk:Devadasi and the problem is that these two are arguing over a pointless caste based issue. The Behnam (talk · contribs) notified me of this situation, I took a look and still do not get the gists of their arguments.Bakaman 02:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Evidence presented by Venki123

Conventions Used

Here I am using the short notation TMSV for Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala.

For Tondai-Mandala-Vellala I am using TMV as shortcut. The Tondai-Mandala-Vellala were also called as Kondai-Katti-Vellala in which case KKV is used.

TMSV is not the same as TMV. They are two distinct groups.

Summary of Evidences

The evidences here are classified to prove the major points of my arguments in the debate.

• Personal attacks by User:Mudaliar

• TMV/KKV is a distinct group from TMSV
• TMV are the original settlers of Tondai-Nadu i.e. Tondai region
• TMSV is never mentioned in any inscription or book given by User:Mudaliar as his proof.

• Modern Kaikolar have nothing to do with the devadasis.
• Isai-Vellala is the group from which some devadasis claim their origin.
• Kaikola musicians and dancing women form a separate caste even though they have similar name to the Kaikola soldiers.

• Mudali title never originated as the title of any particular group. It was used either as headman or officer before various caste groups started using them as hereditary titles.
• Kaikola soldiers were using the Mudali title ten centuries ago, so there is no need to use it for social advancement as part of sanskritization. They were using it only because they were the top soldiers in the chola army. Mudali is a tamil word and denotes respect and high status only in Tamilnadu and not anywhere else in India. Tamilnadu is the root of the dravidian civilization which was against the Aryan/Sanskritic civilization.

• Rebuttal of various claims of the opposite side.

Personal attacks using profane language and racist comments against me by User:Mudaliar and his sockpuppets

User:mudaliar personally attacked me at countless occasions. Here is a list of few of his peronsal attacks.

• He calls me Devadiya - a derogatory term in the modern Tamil language meaning prostitute as shown in this link.

[113]

• He calls me "sleazy piece of shit." as shown here. [114]

• He calls the entire group of Kaikolars as "the scum of south India" as shown in the link.

[115]

• Using his sock puppet Karikala_Cholan he has adopted the role of an uneducated layperson from Tamilnadu and has attacked me and the Kaikolar group in the tamil language of the worst kind. See [116]. This login was blocked by the admins. How an uneducated lay person could login to internet and find wikipedia and all these specific articles and use this kind of profanity is the question and all this with an anoymous website.

• In the name of RFC, he posts to the following talk pages, slanderous statements about Kaikolar. It is the same text again and again in all these talk pages of various Indian castes. Obviously his motive is not scholarly discussion but slandering Kaikolar.

[117] [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] [124] and about 15 other such pages. Please see his contributions on February 9 2007.

Proof that User:Mudaliar himself claimed that Tondai-Mandala-Vellala is a group distinct from Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala

The following link shows that User:Mudaliar himself differentiates between Tondai-Mandala-Vellala as a group distinct from Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala group even though they have very similar names. [125]

The following link also shows that User:Mudaliar differentiates between Tondai-Mandala-Vellala and Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala. Tondai-Mandala-Vellala alias Kondai-Katti-Vellala are Telugus according to him. Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala however are pure Tamilians according to him. [126]

Proof that User:Mudaliar himself claimed how his group TMSV changed their names

According to User:Mudaliar , the TMSV group first added the epithet "saiva" to separate themselves from other vellalas. They then added the epithet "Tondai-Mandala" to separate themselves from other saiva-vellalas. Ofcourse he does not state when they did these changes. It must be noted that for saiva-vellalas the epithet "saiva" is more important than any other epithets. So TMSV could never be confused with TMV which does not use the word "saiva" in their names. See the following link of his edit.

[127]

This is the process of sanskritization which TMSV group has been following. Initially TMSV group was a simple farmer and slowly by copying the sankritic/aryan civilization they positioned themselves as superior, while at the same time accepting that they are inferior to Brahmins.

Now he claims that Sengunthar are using Mudali title for social upliftment.

Proof that User:Mudaliar himself claims that the author Lionel Place was wrong

In the following link, User:Mudaliar himself claims that the author Lionel Place who forms the very foundation of all his arguments and references is wrong.

Lionel Place states that Tondai-Mandala-Vellala alias Kondai-Katti-Vellala are the original settlers of the Tondai-nadu (i.e., Tondai country).

However User:Mudaliar states that "The author is grouping all Vellalas in Tondaimandalam into one group as Tondaimandala Vellalas which is wrong". [128]

So User:Mudaliar agrees that there are two distinct groups called Tondai-Mandala-Vellala and Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala. However when I tried to point out to him that he is using the references of Tondai-Mandala-Vellala, he goes berserk and starts attacking the Kaikolar. Whenver I try to create a new heading for Tondai-Mandala-Vellala he deletes them. This is how the whole issue came into being.

How can a respected author and a government employee of the British Government be correct about everything except the name of the group he is talking about? Is Lionel Place lying so that he can glorify Tondai-Mandala-Vellala?

This is the crux of the whole issue and where it started.

Please also note that Tondai-Mandala-Vellala is also called as Kondai-Katti-Vellala.

Proofs about Tondai-Mandala-Vellalas alias Kondai-Katti-Vellala (TMV/KKV)

Proof that Tondai-Mandala-Vellalas used Mudali the shortened form of Mudaliyar in 1799 AD but without any exclusive rights or claim of first usage

According to the book Dialogue and History, Constructing South India, 1795–1895 by Eugene F. Irschick published in 1994, the author in his reference states,

Place, 1799 Report, para. 59. “Mudali” is the shortened form of “Mudaliyar,” the surname of all Tondaimandala vellalas.

However Place never claims that the title Mudali was first used by the Tondai-Mandala-Vellalas.

Nowhere has Place claimed that Mudali title was first used by KKV. Only that the KKV were using mudali title at his time.

User:WeldingVeerasamy is lying that I accepted that TMV/KKV were the first to use Mudali title. I have seen no proof for the claim that TMV/KKV were the first to use Mudali title.

Proof that Kondai-katti-vellala (KKV) went by the name Tondai-Mandala-Vellalas (TMV) as early as 1799 AD

According to the book Dialogue and History, Constructing South India, 1795–1895 by Eugene F. Irschick published in 1994, the author in the section "Analyzing the "Insurrection"" states that

"... Tondaimandala or Kondaikatti vellala surnames ..." In this the author referring to Place, 1799 Report, clearly shows that TMV and KKV are one and the same group.

Proof that Kondai-katti-vellala (KKV) were agriculturalists as claimed by them in 1786 AD

The following is the exact text from the Eugene Irshick Book.

In 1786, the Board of Revenue was presented with a petition by some “Kondakutty Vellarahs” from Kuvam and Mappedu in what is today the Tiruvallur taluk, saying that “in very old times this country being a wilderness, Tondamon the famous monarch, after whose name this part of the world still goes viz. Tondamandalam, sending for the inhabitants from the kingdom of Sera [ Chola ] promised them that if they would cut down the woods, turn them into fields and cultivate the country each at his disposal, and give him one sixth part of the product, he would let them have the remaining 5 parts and the rights of settling and mortgaging their property of lands and thus they having brought about the business, such rights were accordingly conferred upon them. Many centuries after the days of the said monarch, the different rulers of the country being of cruel disposition curtailed the inhabitants’ shares and put in practice many injustice[s] over them yet none of them ever think of so encroaching upon the usurping the inhabitants with their inheritance.…[The petitioners continued that the Nawab,] tho’ capable of doing any injustice over the inhabitants at his disposal, yet he being bound by the cord of justice, was obliged to take grounds he lately wanted from the inheritors of Chennappa Naicker’s Coopam not by violence but by their general consents and by paying them money for it.” The petition was an attempt to head off the takeover of property by the Company after the war of 1780 in the villages of Kottur, Mappedu, and Kuvum in order to regrant the land to a group of Christians under a Jesuit missionary named Padre Manente, who was part of the Mission du Carnate.

[129]

Proof that TMV/KKV were the original settlers of Tondai Region by King Adontai Chola

According to the book Religion and Public Culture: encounters and identities in modern South India By John Jeya Paul, Keith Edward Yandell refer to the MacKenzie manuscripts a collection of old manuscripts about India.

In this book, on page 240-241, it is said that king Adontai chola settled the KKV over Tondai region and 10 chiefs from KKV ruled over this region.

Here it is easy to see that the chola king Adontai is nothing but the letter 'A' prefixed before the Tondai word, i.e. the Tondai-man king.

[130]

So it is the KKV/TMV who are the feudal lords and not TMSV. KKV/TMV were settled by King Adontai chola and not King Karikala chola.

No occurence of Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala group in the book by Eugene F. Irschick

There is no occurence of Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala group in the book by Eugene F. Irschick. The book talks only about Kondai-katti-vellala (KKV) who also went by the name Tondai-Mandala-Vellalas (TMV).

Proofs about Kaikolar and Devadasi

Proof that Kaikolan musicians and devadasis are separate from Kaikolan soldiers and weavers

The seminal book Castes And Tribes Of Southern India By Edgar Thurston, K. Rangachari which forms the core reference for the many later books connecting Kaikolan and devadasis was published first in 1909.

In this book, the authors Edgar Thurston, K. Rangachari note on Page 39 the following quote from the book Journey through Mysore, Malabar and Canara by Francis Hamilton Buchanan Francis_Hamilton-Buchanan, written in 1807. See Google Books link. [131]

They say,

Writing a century ago (1807) concerning the Kaikolan devadasis, Buchanan says that "these dancing women and their musicians now form a separate kind of caste;..."

So we can see that even in 1807 A.D, Kaikolan devadasis formed a separate kind of caste from the Kaikolan soldiers and weavers. This is a clear proof that Buchanan a foreigner to the Indian nation, has observed that Kaikolan devadasis form a separate caste as early as 1807 even though they have the similar sounding name.

Proof about Kaikolar word origin and meaning - etymology

To study the etymology of the word Kaikolar, kai meant hand and Kol simply meant stick in Tamil.

Defintion from university of chicago website - http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/fabricius/ via link

[132]

kol (p. 315) [ kōl ] , s. a rod or stick in general, tati; 2. sceptre, government, cengkol; 3. a pencil used for blackening the eyelids; 4. a measuring rod or pole, alavukol; 5. a staff to lean upon, unyukol; 6. balance scales, tulakkol, Libra of the Zodiac; 7. a horse whip, cavukku; 8. a branch of a tree, kompu; 9. an arrow, ampu; 10. a spear, itti; 11. roundness, tiratci; 12. ploughshare, kozu; 13. lute string, yaznarampu.

In the case of Sengunthar they go by the name Kaikolar (kai=hand kol=spear or sceptre) as they were warriors during ancient Chola period. Similarly it is used by isai (isai=music in tamil) Vellala (meant farmer or producer; in this case producer of music) to mean (kai=hand kol=lute string).

So the word Kaikolar has two separete meanings, one as soldiers and the other as musicians.

Proof that the origin of Devadasis was from Isai Vellalar

The origin of Devadasis was from Isai Vellalar as seen in this article [133]. Narthaki is a well known website of the patrons of the dance form Bharathanatyam. The article is by a renowned author.

See this newspaper page from a renowned national newspaper Deccan herald. [134].

No modern article refers to any connection between Devadasis and Kaikolar. Articles referring to Kaikolar and Devadasis are referring only to the historical data when Isai-Vellala went by the name of Kaikolar as holders of musical instrument.

Proof that the Isai Vellalar used the title Pillai and not Mudali

In ancient times, the surname was used to differentiate different castes. The following article clearly shows that Isai Vellalar used the title Pillai and not Mudali.

According to this article [135],

Nadaswaram geniuses (Karukkurichi Arunachalam, Tiruvaduturai Rajaratnam Pillai and others) and all Nattuvanar legends Kittappa Pillai, Ramaiya Pillai, Meenakshisundaram Pillai were Isai Vellaalars. But Nattuvangam and Nadaswaram were exclusive domains of Isai Vellaalars.

Clearly Isai Vellaalars used the title Pillai only.

Proof that Isai-Vellalar and Sengunthar are distinct from Government of India gazzette publications

See this link given by the Government of India [136] where Number:75 Isai-Vellalar (spelled as Isai-Vallalar) are also called as Melakkarar (meaning Drummer in Tamil). See on the same page Number:88 Sengunthar are called as Kaikolar (4 variations).

Look at Number 67 where there are 3 names for the caste Nadar. Similarly see numbers 95 and 97. Multiple names for the same caste is quite common in Tamilnadu. No caste is trying to hide anything by using multiple names.

See the same for Tamilnadu [137]

See where IsaiVellalar are classifed as Most-backward-Class [138] separately from Kaikolar who are classfied as Backward-Class [139]. These are classifications done by the Government of India for providing reservation in jobs. This is similar to affirmative action in USA.

As you can see Isai-Vellalar is never confused with Kaikolar in any government publication. The modern name Kaikolar only refers to Sengunthar and never to the Isai-Vellalar. It is the Isai-Vellalar who are the source of devadasi tradition even though they went by the name of Kaikolar in ancient times.

Need to merge 4 articles - Proof that the modern usage for Kaikolar and Sengunthar are same from Government of India gazzette publications

From the Government of India gazzette publications, it is clear that Kaikolar and Sengunthar are same and there is no need for four articles Kaikolar, Sengunthar, Kaikolan and Sengundhar. These could be merged into one article and no new variations of the spellings are needed.

The proofs are [140]; [141]; [142].

Proofs about the usage of the word Mudali and its usage by Kaikolar

Usage of the word Mudali as officer ten centuries ago

The word Mudali has been used to mean either headman or officer during the Chola and Pallava rule, ten centuries ago. Here are the proofs which show the inscription made on the temples built by these Kings ten centuries ago. These are the online version of the Archealogical Survey of India papers translated about 75 years ago by respected historians.

• No.251: The present inscription states that the pillar (tirunilaikal) on which it is engraved was the gift of Perumalpillai alias Solakonar, an officer (mudali) of Avanialappirandan Kopperunjinga, on behalf of his master.

• No. 254.(A. R. No. 543 of 1920).Kattumannarkoyil, Chidambaram Taluk, South Arcot District.

On the north wall of the central shrine in the Viranarayanasvamin temple. This damaged inscription registers the kadaiyidu granted by the officer (mudaliyar) Iladattaraiyar under the following circumstances:

[143]

• Note 74: Sola-Kon is nowhere called Alappirandan, Kadava or Pallava, but is, on the other hand, definitely referred to as devar-mudali, i.e., an officer of the chief.

[144]

Usage of the word Mudali as hereditary surname

The word Mudali has been used as surname of various groups. Based on clear evidence, both inscriptions and literary, Kaikkolar were using Mudali as hereditary surname during Chola and Pallava rule ten centuries ago.

The article Mudaliar states that it was used by Tondai-Mandala-Vellalas only and that other groups started using them for sanskritization.

So far there are no proofs that TMSV used Mudali title. There are clear proofs for KKV/TMV using Mudali title.

Proof that Kaikolar used the Mudali title ten centuries ago during Chola dynasty rule

The following shows the proof for Kaikkola-Mudali during Chola rule during 1163-1178 AD. In, Ranganathasvamy Temple, Srirangam on the IV Prakara, opposite the udaiyavar-sannidhi, the following inscriptions exist. See the inscription via this reference. [145]

Records an oath of fealty taken by Nayan alias Alagiya Manavala Maryan, a Kaikkola-Mudali of Tiruvarangam, to serve unto death, as a velaikkaran of Virrirundan Seman alias Akalanka Nadalvan. This Virrirundan Seman is a chief of the chola army during the reign of RajadhiRaja Chola II.

Proof that Kaikolar used the Mudali title nine centuries ago during Pallava dynasty rule

In Tiruvennainallur, Tirukkoyilur Taluk, South Arcot District, on the East wall of the mandapa in the front of the central shrine in the Vaikuntha-Perumal temple exists the following inscription. See the inscription via this reference. [146]

In this inscription, dated in the 8th year, Kopperujingadeva is given the surname Alagiyasiyan. It records a gift of 5 cows by Tirumalaiy-Alagiyan alias Vira[gal*] virap-Pallavaraiyan[26], a Kaikkola-mudali of Tiruvennainallur for supplying daily milk by the measure ‘Arumolideva-nali’ to the god Vaikunda (Vaikuntha) [p-Perumal]. This donor figures in A.D. 1237[27] and his death is referred to in No. 189 below. From the title Alagiyasiyan given to the chief, he may be identified with the elder Kopperunjinga.

Proof of the various regiments of Kaikolar in the chola army

Kaikolar formed over 20 different regiments during the Chola rule. Some of the regiments are as follows:

Singalantaka-terinda-Kaikkolar (a regiment named after Singalantaka i.e. Parntaka I)

Virasola-terinja-Kaikkolar

Kodandarama-terinja-Kaikkolar

Danatonga-terinja-Kaikkolar

Parantaka-terinia-Kaikkolar

Muttavalperra-Kaikkolar - (meaning the "recipient of the pearl ornamented sword" in Tamil)

Samarakesarit-terinja-Kaikkolar

Vikramasingat-terinja-Kaikkolar

Adityapanma-terinda-Kaikkolar

Karikala-Chola-terinja-Kaikkolar

Arumolideva-terinja Kaikkolar

Parttivasekarat-terinja-Kaikkolar

Gangadaditta-terinja-Kaikkola

Madurantaka-terinja-Kaikkolar

Pirantaka-terinja-Kaikkolar

www.whatisindia.com[[147]]

Proof of various historical types of Mudalis based on inscriptions only

Various castes using the "Mudaliar" title in historic times obtained only from inscriptions These are the list of mudalis which were prevalent during the royal times of tamilnadu before the arrival of Muslim and British invaders. Mudali means officer in a temple or leader in general. There were generic mudalis who could be of any caste even Brahmins. All these occurences happen 10 centuries ago.

Kaikola-mudali

agambadik-kottu-mudali

samanta-mudali

agambadittana-mudali

Kelvi-mudali

agambadi-mudali

Of these agambadi-mudali, agambadittana-mudali and agambadik-kottu-mudali have merged into a single group Agamudayar as shown in the article Mudaliar after ten centuries.

As can be seen there is not a single occurence of a vellala-mudali of any kind.

www.whatisindia.com[[148]]

Rebuttal of various claims by the opposite side

No claims were made by me Venki123 about Kaikolar being Kings or related to Buddha

I never made any claims Kaikolar being Kings either in India or Sri Lanka. Similarly I'm not claiming Buddha was related to Kaikolar. That is a different user based on his IP address as the admins must know. I am not even arguing about that.

I am from the state of Tamilnadu in India. I have no clue about Kaikolars in Sri Lanka. The edit User:WeldingVeerasamy refers to was done by me when I reverted to an earlier version of the article which had those changes along with mine.

Here is edit when it was added the first time [149] by IP address 203.101.45.171.

User:WeldingVeerasamy should stop jumping to conclusions and blaming me for everything.

Multiple groups of Tondai-Mandala-Vellala - List and Proof needed

If there are multiple groups of Tondai-Mandala-Vellala, can we get a list of all of them? And if there are multiple groups and the opposite side is knowledgable about them why not add them to the article Mudaliar. After all according to them, all groups of Tondai-Mandala-Vellala use Mudaliar title and so must be listed in the same article.

Here is the edit reversion made by User:Mudaliar after I added the KKV group to the Mudaliar article. [150] Ofcourse he has done this kind of reversion countless times during these four months.

There are only two groups as far as I know.

• Tondai-Mandala-Vellala alias Kondai-Katti-Vellala

• Tondai-Mandala-Saiva-Vellala

Absense of Vellala Mudali in any inscription - Occam's Razor

If there are no inscriptions mentioning Vellala and Mudali together, by Occam's Razor logic, the simplest explanation is that there were no Vellalas using Mudali title. If there are no inscriptions connecting Queen Elizabeth and Mudali title, then obviously Queen Elizabeth never used Mudali title.

Evidence presented by Durova

Both sides of this dispute reproach each other with bitter recriminations where self-examination would be more appropriate. They posted several appeals for assistance to my user talk page. I have no comment on the merits of the content dispute, but the debate has descended to childish levels:

• Mudaliar (30 March 2007): looks like somebody's crying, hehe.[151]
• Venki (30 March 2007): Simple truth - No proofs no edits - Liar Liar Pants on Fire.[152]

On March 31 I semiprotected the article talk page[153] and asked the participants to refactor inappropriate comments and participate in the page's formal mediation request, cautioning them that arbitration and topic banning were feasible consequences if problems continued.[154] A new edit war promptly broke out over the placement of threads on the talk page, during which my advice was not only ignored but deleted. I reposted the next day (not that it did any good).[155]

In my opinion neither editor is capable of encyclopedic collaboration at this article. Durova^Charge! 21:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)