Talk:Kallar (caste)

Picture

I have removed the picture as it is inaccurate; the uploader of the image has grouped people from different communities as belonging to the Kallar caste. In particular, Raja Raja Chola is not from this caste. Provide proof. Personal views and opinions are discouraged. ShivNarayanan (talk) 04:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, leaving the factual inaccuracies aside, I doubt if the uploader owned the copyright for the picture. Modifying copyrighted images using Photoshop and uploading them online does not make the uploader, the copyright owner.-The Enforcer_{Office of the secret service} 20:15, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cholas and Pallavas

The author of this article had added his personal view that the Cholas are Kallars. The reasoning provided was that some people from this community also use the same names as Cholas. This is a weak argument. The author also goes on to relate the Pallavas with the Cholas via Athondai. This is also not true. Please provide some sources to prove these claims. For starters the argument that the Pallavas were descendents of Ilandiraiyan is flawed for the following reason; Various sources suggest that Ilandiraiyan was a direct descendant of Karikala Chola. But recall that Pallavas already existed during the rule of Karikala, most popular among them being Trinetra Pallava. So Athondai definitely did not spawn the Pallava dynasty. Feel free to discuss. Cheers ShivNarayanan (talk) 04:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neduman Anji

Require proof that Neduman Anji was a Kallar. ShivNarayanan (talk) 04:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lacking Sources

Please provide references that araiyars, Cholas, Pandyas, Pallavas are Kallars. Many individuals have been named after peronalities like Gandhi, Subhash Chandra Bose etc. Some person having the name Alexander does not prove that he belongs to the same clan as Alexander of Macedonia. Similarly, popular Indian actors like Shahrukh Khan, Salman Khan and many others have the same last name as Genghis Khan. But they do not belong to the same clan as the Mongol. "Khan" is just a common Islamic surname. ShivNarayanan (talk) 23:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Provide correct sources for content

The user Tamilvendan (talk · contribs) has added irrelevant sources as none of the sources prove that the Cholas are actually Kallars.

1. In his version [1], under the section "During sangam", he has added the subsections "Thondaiman", "Adigaman" and "Malayaman". But even after repeated requests he has provided no sources to prove that the people from these communities belonged to the Kallar clan.

2. Again, in [2], under the subsection "Thondaiman", he has claimed that the Pallavas are an offshoot of the Cholas. He reasons that the word Pallava means "offshoot" and goes on to claim that Pallavas are an offshoot of Cholas. But where is the connection between Pallavas and Cholas and where is the citation that tells that "Pallavas are offshoot of Cholas"? This is a wrong claim as already explained by me the talk page(see my post "Cholas and Pallavas" above).

3. Again from his version in [3], under the subsections "Malayaman" and "Adigaman", he does not provide any source to prove that these people were Kallar. He argues that these people were Kallar as "Malayaman" and "Adigaman" are used as kallar surnames. This argument is flawed as shown by my explanation above (see "Lacking Sources" in talk page).

4. Once again in [4] under the section "Chola" and "Pallavas", he argues that these dynasties were Kallar because the members of the Kallar community use the same names. When a person is named after a famous personality it does not mean that the latter belongs to the former's community.

Finally to explain my concerns, I have reverted the edits of Tamilvendan (talk · contribs) as he primarily argues that the various kings and dynasties must be Kallar since some people from the Kallar community use the same names as the famous personalities. For example in [[5]] under section "Chola", he says (direct quote from his version) "Chera, chola and pandian are commonly called as Thevar to mean they are descendents of Lord Indra. But specially cholas were called by many Surnames all these surnames (Mel kondar, Chozangar, Thevar etc.) are now used by Kallars only shows that Cholas are from the Royal Kallar community". Basically he argues that since the Kallars now use the same names of the historical personalities, then it must mean that the historical personality belonged to the Kallar community. Sorry to say but this does not prove anything.

I can keep giving examples that show how his theory is flawed. For example, two popular Indian personalities, Feroze Gandhi and Mohandas Gandhi have the same surname but they are definitely not from the same community. Feroze Gandhi belonged to the Parsi community while Mohandas Gandhi belonged to the Modh community. Again, if some person at present has the name Feroze Gandhi, does that mean that he belongs to the Parsi community. Not necessarily.

ShivNarayanan (talk) 04:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tamilvendan

I have never talked about athondai I have clearly mentioned pallavas are desendends of thondaiman Illandarayan he was one of the king ruling during sangam (300 BCE) but Karikala chola ruled during 100 BCE. I have not mentioned Illandirayan is a son of karikala but Divided him from Chola for that I have provided all reference please see references

You are clearly confused with name and surname. Name we can give to our self but surnames are given to someone by someone else to state the place they ruled, their bravery etc. and their descendents will be using the same surname for ever.

And as a Reply to your talk regarding Surnames you yourself agreed Khan is just a common Islamic surname. Hindus are not using it Right.

Gandhi title may be used by many clans but (Mel kondar, Chozangar, Palhuvetaraiyar, malayaman, malavarayar are used by kallar only why others don’t have these surnames?.

And not with a single surname I am arguing, there are plenty of kallar surnames you can see in copper plate inscriptions.

You need not to guess Kallars started using Historical surnames if you insist provide reference for that.

I think I have answered for all your questions still you have any doubt please ask specifically what is your doubt but please don’t delete anything.

This is my kind request

Tamilvendan(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Baseless Theory and POV

I stand my ground that your surname theory is wrong. I'm not bothered about your personal opinion. The Chola and Pallava names and surnames are not exclusively used by Kallar caste. Provide a reference for every one of your claims especially that "Pallavas are Kallars", "Pallavas are offshoot of Cholas" and "Cholas are Kallars". Adding content about the various dynasties without providing any reference that the various dynasties belonged to the Kallar clan and claiming that you have added reference is very shady. First let us get past the main dispute, that is give reference that the groups belonged to Kallar. The surname theory is not a proof for anything. So give source that quotes "Pallavas are Kallars", "Cholas are Kallars" and "Pallavas are offshoot of Cholas" here before reverting. You need to provide proofs that the various groups are Kallar before adding content and other sources about the groups themselves which you have refused to do until now. I'm beginning to think that you really don't have any. ShivNarayanan (talk) 16:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First see the references clearly before asking question

As a reference to state Pallva’s are Kallar, I have added references. See reference no 2 and 11.

As a reference to state Pallva’s are offshoot of chola’s, I have added a reference. See reference no 11.

As a reference to state about Thondaiman ilandarayan there are many reference in Tamil Literature see Purananuru.

As a reference to state chola’s are kallar, I have added many reference from south Indian inscription and also many books (Rajarajan Meikirthigal, Kallar Marabinarin Pattapeyargal oru Varalarru parvai).

But I need not to prove various Groups are kallar you are keep on asking unnecessary questions finally you will ask me to prove kallar exist in tamilnadu. Don’t ask silly questions like prove maravar, Agamudaiyar, Vellala, Vanniar and Iyers are in Tamilnadu. it is known to everyone.

But anyway hence you asked me to prove various groups are Kallar I just want to inform you that, that reference was also provided earlier itself. see Reference No – 2

Not even a single line was written on my personal opinion everything was taken from books, Wikipedia, and the sites I have mentioned.

I don’t know what else you want, I have also seen many things you have added in Mudaliar page without any reference. you have contributed a lot in Mudaliar Page why you have not deleted the theory of athondai and offshoot theories of chola? if you are not bias first delete it and ask me question.

Tamilvendan (talk) 21:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources do not say what User:Tamilvendan claims

Reference 2 does not say that the Pallavas are Kallar. Source 11 is not even a reference. It is a short fictional story by novelist Venkatasamy Nattar. None of the inscriptions say that the chola and Pallava kings are Kallar and the books are fictional. Tamilvendan is adding wrong content and sources and trying to convince that the sources claim what he says when they actually do not. Reference 2 does not prove that that all groups are Kallar. It just a proof for Kallars using same names which does not prove that the dynasties were Kallar.ShivNarayanan (talk) 22:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Previously ShivNarayanan. Kallars and other Mukkulothars make a sizeable %age of Tamil population and have political influence TODAY due to DMK. Hence they have been rewritting/vandalizing history by claiming every ruling clan as theirs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.75.56.206 (talk) 18:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rajendranwiki

Ms.Charubala Thondaiman, She is an MP, Maharani of Pudhukkottai, but not a Reformer. All the personalities I have mentioned here are officially taken from RajaRajan Kalvi Panbattu kallagam, an official Organisation for Kallar’s . To portray these personalities their Statues are installed in the main office in Chennai. If you want to add her name please add notable personalities. I have not added it because it is very difficult for me to segregate Kallar from Mukkulathor, and we don’t have any Official List for that in our organization. If you have any you are welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamilvendan (talk • contribs) 05:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kallars of Pakistan

I am a Pakistani from Jehlum region of north punjab,Pakistan. There are kallars present all over Punjab and are muslims. They are the peasants of punjab(not an insult) and work as mostly farmers and tenants. They are the socially opressed people and are considered low-caste or low-class by the rulling classes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.154.8.153 (talk) 09:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wtf lol

Kallars are not "Kshatriyas". There are no Kshatriyas in South India except for Reddys and Nayaks of Andhra. Kallars have never been Kshatriyas.

And don't try and make yourselves look like as if Nayaks were in favour of you. Nayaks used Kallars asgrass root level guards. Because instead of wasting their time, effort and ammo to pawn you guys and then having to get some puny guards from their community. They decided lest save us all of trouble, by subjugating Mukkulothars as "Polygars" and use them to control their onceheld domain.

While they maintained their status as the Overlords. They pawned Kallars in Madurai and Thanjavur hence Madurai and Thanjavur Nayaks.

Naickers are tamilized Nayaks and have absolutely nothing to do with "mukkulothars".

Veerapandy was a Naicker. Kallars and other mukkulothars were the first to switch sides to the British out of fear and for lavish luxuries. Do you think? for once you can call ourselves as Kshatriyas?! LOL

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.75.56.206 (talk) 18:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kshatriyas/Brahmins castes are usually associated with Aryans. To be a Kshatriya, the ethnic group should have some indigenous Kshatriya origin (Suryavanshi, Chandravanshi, Agnivanshi or Nagavanshi) and also must have a martial / aristocratic / ruling history in which Brahmins did the coronation function. I have never heard of a brahmin coronation ceremony giving a Kallar Kshatriya status, let alone descend from Kshatriyas.

Even the Reddys and Nayaks of Andhra are not kshatriyas. Nayaks, Naickers, Naiks, etc is a very common surname throughout India and hard to distinguish. Therefore calling them kshatriyas is misleading. The Reddys are a rich Vaishya caste who ruled small areas of Andra for a very brief period and have lost their ruling power long ago. Among the authentic Kshatriya castes of South India are the Marathas, the Bunts of Tulu Nadu and the Nairs of Kerala (Malayala Kshatriyas division). There may be more, but this is out of topic.--115.134.83.48 (talk) 16:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of the word Kallar

Etymology of the word Kallar : Thief, One who Robs. Is this so hard to accept? Why is there nonsense such as "Brave People"? If you are too embarrassed to put the real meaning, then dont put it in. But please do not lie about the meaning of the word!--115.134.83.48 (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]