Talk:Nair/Archive 10

Nairs and Namboodiris Share same H and Q Haplotypes

It is interesting to read the division along traditional caste lines with each sub-caste trying to out-erase the other one! I feel it may be more productive if some of the folks here could donate dna to the geneology project. (It does cost $99). http://www.ysearch.org/haplo_pie.asp . As far as I can tell the Nairs and Namboodiris share Q haplotypes. H haplotype is also present in Nairs, but is connected mostly to east europeans/jews, which came as a surprise to me. Interestingly the Christians in Kerala seem to be children of Scottish and Irish fathers (in a search by haplotypes R1a and J2) which likely happened after the British came to India.... So much for the theory of Namboodiri origins of Achayans! Kerala is an interesting state from a genetic perspective... 76.118.35.41 (talk) 05:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Those genes may be present, but its origins are not to be found in Scotland or Ireland or Europe or the Middle East (barring a small stream of genes through immigration). R1a and J2 are to be found throughout India. Parallel mutations are also a likely possibility. The Syrian Christian parallel is interesting because I have seen many Syrian Christians who resemble Australoids and few who resemble Middle-Eastern peoples. Its important to find out the correct origins of these genes rather than stating the furthermost peoples who also have the gene present. We all know humanity is linked by many many genes found all over the world. Trips (talk) 05:52, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

yes, i do agree.. it is more possible that the nairs and syrian christians have a distant common ancestry with east europeans, scots and irish than recent admixture with those groups anyway most upper caste malayalis and christians and muslims are predominantly caucasoid... i do remember an article which used HLA typing and deduced that the nair samples had haplotypes in common with germans and belgians,i even went on to aphysical anthropology website and posted a few famous nairs images to classify... their first response was that nairs appeared to be very diverse looking.. the racial classifications for nairs ranged from- nordindid to europid to gracil indid and veddid plus indo brachid( acc to old nomenclature adopted by german anthropologist von eickstedt).... plus i feel the only keralites who had any sort of admixture with the europeans where the " white" thiyyas of kannur and thallasery..Vivwiki (talk) 08:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Stop User:B Nambiar's vandalism

I simply don’t want to cross 3RR & being pushed me into blocking for 24 hour as I have lots of other crufts to be removed. Nambiar, you are pushing WP:POVPUSH of cast chauvinism and monkeysms into the article. It has been already reverted by many editors and I am afraid that you are editing against consensus. Your so-called reference does not qualified per WP:V .You are editing items that don’t have any proper sources and more or less WP:NOR and WP:CRUFT. Please stop your vandalism and pushing all these rubbish and misleading stuff.
--Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 06:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Can I ask you where the "chauvinism" is? The quote is from a book. How can something be OR if it's cited? --vi5in^[talk] 16:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Phraseology goes beyond source and the source itself has zero info on the ostensible sub-casts. Therefore, it has been reverted by many editors. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 04:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The introduction about Nairs being similar to the Samurai is not required (there are thousands of martial nobilities around the world), and there is no reason why the Samurai identity should be used to describe Nairs. I see that the information that Harjk has taken out is subjective (eg. Nairs being beautiful, etc.) however I think these statements are derived from quotes by Europeans (who thought the top-knot worn by Nairs could be emulated by Europeans). If these statements are being used they must be in purely quote format, not as facts. The section on Nair subcastes is worth keeping, as they do have references.Hijjins (talk) 09:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Nairs and Samurais have so many similarities like "Hirakiri" chaver Nairs also practiced some rituals( eating of "padachoru with out salt etc.) and they sacrificed their life for the honour of their country and "KULAM" same like samurais. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.236.136.18 (talk) 13:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I beg to disagree with user Harjk. The article has really come a long way and I don't find any 'chauvanism'. Most of the contents are very well substantiated with citations. Also it would be better to be specific on the matter when you have differences than making open-ended comments....Keraleeyan —Preceding comment was added at 10:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The reason I put that there is because I recall reading the comparison in a National Geographic article about Kerala. I've been trying very hard since then to find that piece. You can paste comparisons and facts here as long as they are backed up by facts. I don't see why the information on sub-castes has been removed. It's obviously of historical significance, even if it isn't observed today. The quote about the hair-bun being "beautiful" is subjective. True. But it's the entire quote, and is presented as such and not as "fact". Can these editors please explain their changes and their reasons for doing so. Harjk, do you have a copy of the Travancore State Manual? I am assuming the information has been presented verbatim or at least compiled from there. --vi5in^[talk] 16:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Renaming Article

The article should be renamed as "Nayar" which is the correct English translation of നായര. This term was originally used by Europeans in early colonial times however the name later became anglicized to "Nair". According to convention, the Malayalam names are converted to their equivalent (Samudiri for Zamorin, Aluva for Alwaye, Kannur for Cannanore, Nambudiri for Namboothiri, Kochi for Cochin). Although most have "Nair" as their surname and "Nair" is more common (eg. Nair Service Society), "Nayar" is the correct term and should be used for the article (refer to "Madras" being the internationally common term, with institutes such as the University of Madras still in existence , but "Chennai" being used for the Wikipedia Article).Hijjins (talk) 09:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. "Nair" is more common, whereas "Nayar" is rarer. Although the later is the correct transliteration, the article is not based on transliteration, but on common name. --vi5in^[talk] 16:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, maybe we should check the Wikipedia policy in regards to this (Correct term vs Most common term. Judging from precedents, such as the examples above, I would think that the correct term is most appropriate (note that Malayalee has been changed to Malayali) Hijjins (talk) 09:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The earliest word used was "naere" around 50BC to refer to the place/people. As "Nair" is the predominant form of the name in the south I feel it is better to keep the original wiki page and redirect "nayar" or other versions "neir"; "nayyar"; "nayaikar"; etc to the orginal page as it is now. 76.118.35.41 (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Nairi people of Central asia and Armenia may give Nairs the name. The Scythian people who assimilated the Nairi people in 600 BC practised Matriarchy and were fierce warriers who were slave keepers. The Scythian Nairi or Saka People invaded India 200 yrs before christ.The Saka era started by them.While Megasthanes mentions them as Nairis in 300 BC Herodatus calls them Neuri while the ancient Egyptians called Nairis as Naharins indicating that the Nairis are closely related to Indian Nagas or the Parent stock. The word Nairi got Indianised and called Nayyars in Punjab, Nehras who mixed with Jats, Newars in Nepal, and Nairs who mixed with Nagas of Ahichatra and Nepal.The Naga scythian Nairis were called Nayaras in Karnataka prior to 800 AD Barkur inscriptions and Grama paddathi of Tulunad.After the repeated attacks of Rashtrakuta Nairs appeared in Kerala history around 970 ad, possibly during the reign of Rashtrakuta king Krishna 2 whose name is mentioned in Keralolpathi as the emperor who sent a Banapperumal prince as Cheraman Perumal with a Nair army to Kerla. The Tamil-Malayalam equivalent of Nairis is Nayar as it appears on the Thiruvalla shasanam around 1030 ad. Though in Malayalam it is written as Nayar the original name of the tribe is Nairi and is quite appropriate to name the article as Nair. Nativedravidan (talk) 14:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Nairs and Kshatriyas

I am unable to find substantial evidence in support of the Article's claim that the Kshatriya families of Kerala were originally Nairs. Poonjar Palace in Tiruvalla , for example , have traditions that a Rajput clan arrived in Kerala in the early centuries of the Second Milleneum, preceding Cheraman Perumal , perhaps. Similiarly, it's well known that the scions of Pandalam are decendants of the Pandyas of Madurai. Nairs were associated with the palaces throughout history, but the rigid boundaries of caste were transgressed rarely, if at all. Kshatriyas of Kerala form a caste that's different from that of the Nairs. Thankabhasma Kuriyitta Thamburatti (talk) 09:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Nairs are different from the ancient Tamil Kshatriyas of Kerala ( Alvars, Nadalvar, Maran,Ay,Valluvan) but Some Nairs did elevate themselves Kshatriyahood in the 13 to 14 th centuries.Originally the Nairs were Brahmins of Naga Scythian origin and not Tamils.The original Tamil kings of Kerala were Jain/Dravida kings who had Patriarchal descendency. The ancient Tamil kings of Kerala were CherasVillavar and Pandyas, Ays,Valluvans, Ezhimalai kings etc. In the ancient times Cheras and Pandyas were related Dravidian warrior clans.Cheras had principalities in Pandyan kingdom and vice versa. Whole of Kerala south of Kodungalur was ruled by Madurai Pandyan kings when Plini the elder visited Kerala 1900 yrs ago.or Niranam the Pandyan Capital There were many Pandyan principalities in Kerala including Pandalam. After the fall of the Chera kingdom in 1100s many Kshatriyas of Rashtrakuta origin seems to have dominated the Malabar. The Kolathiris were the first kingdom to adopt Matriarchy a non Dravidian custom, possibly because of their Rashtrakuta or Nair origins. After 1300s most of the traditional princes of Tamil origin were replaced by Naga Scythian Nairs and Namboothiris.Pandalam was a Pandyan Kingdom ruled by Dravidian Tamil Nadalvars. But the Namboothiris who occupied Pandalam claim that they descend from Pandyas at the same time claiming to be belonging to Aryan Bhargava Gotra of Namboothiris.The Pandyans were Dravidians not Aryan Namboothiris. The Travancore Royal family (1314) was an offshoot of Chirakkal Royal family. The Thambis did marry from Nairs indicating their Nair connections. Pandyan Nedumchadayan at about 750 Ad married a princess from Malwa Rajput princess whose relatives were stationed at Kudamalai Nadu. This Rajput princess converted the Pandyan ruler to Vaishnavism.Poonjar Raja could be related to the Maluvakon. Thus the Kshatriyas of Rashtrakuta origin along with some Namboothiris and Nairs who elevated themselves to Kshatriyahood between 1100 to 1300 ad period replaced the ancient Tamil Kshatriyas of Kerala completely.But some traces of ancient Tamil titles such as Pandyan,Villavar,Valluvakonathiri survived to 20th Century indicating intermixing with the Tamil aristocracy.

Nativedravidan (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a cock-and-bull story.

1."After 1300s most of the traditional princes of Tamil origin were replaced by Naga Scythian Nairs and Namboothiris.Pandalam was a Pandyan Kingdom ruled by Dravidian Tamil Nadalvars"- Who says so? Where's the historical evidence?

2."But the Namboothiris who occupied Pandalam claim that they descend from Pandyas at the same time claiming to be belonging to Aryan Bhargava Gotra of Namboothiris"- On the first place the Nambuthiri Brahmins did not ever penetrate south of Chengannur. Apart from that, what's the relevance of this statement here?We are talking of Kshatriyas and Nairs!

3."The Travancore Royal family (1314) was an offshoot of Chirakkal Royal family" How 's it so? The travancore royales trace their origins back to the Ay kings, and thence to Cheraman Perumal , satraps of the Pandyas etc. Princesses of Chiraykal who had sought refuge in Travancore/Attingal thanks to the campaigns of Tipu Sultan in Malabar, were adopted in the 19th century as heiresses; they ruled Travancore as Colonel Munro's stooges. Chirakkal blood is infused thus, quite recently.

4."The Thambis did marry from Nairs indicating their Nair connections." Quite an unconnected statement. Meaningless, too, since Tambis were Nairs per se; the nomenclature distinguishes offsprings born of liason between a Kshatriya Male and his Nair consort. Tambis could n't marry women of Kshatriya stock. Thomas Kutty Thannickal (talk) 09:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not a cock and bull story like the one about St.Thomas visiting Kerala in the first century and baptzing those "early" christians. (The proverbial early birds that caught the worm!) The Zamorins were Nair chieftains to start with, who were accorded suzerainty by the departing Cheraman Perumal ,over territory as far as rhe cock's crow's audible(Kozhi koovunnadatrholam...Kozhikode!) with permission to expand their dominion by death and murder ( chathum konnum adakki vaazhka!)(So, the cock's arrived; the bull has n't; not yet!( Perhaps, there are too many beef eaters around!)The defining moment was the loot and pillage of the Thali Temple, and the murder of the Namboothiri Brahmins (Ooralar). Thali Temple was taken by force and a dynasty of Nairs was founded, to be famous in the history of Kerala as the Zamorins of Calicut.The "Sammothiri" laid claims to Kshatriyahood only in the 18th century.The Samoothiris atoned later for the murder of Brahmins ("Brahmahatya Paapam"), and the "Revathi Pattathanam" was one of the institutions brought in as penanace.Pundamon Punnayurkulam (talk) 12:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The "Kshatriyas" of Kerala like to think that they are completely different from the Nairs. However it is known that the Travancore, Cochin Rajahs had Nair origins and the Zamorin himself was a Nair. I think associating Nairs with the Varmas is much closer than associating them with the North Indian Rajputs.220.238.215.72 (talk) 22:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

This is correct. The Varmas and Nairs have unmistakeable common origins, including the system of matrilineage. Foreign elements have been injected from time to time, but overall it is indeed appropriate to say that the Kerala Varmas are Nairs transformed to Vedic Kshatriya status, possibly in return for the grant of special privileges to tbe Brahmans in Travancore and Cochin. These kshatriyas were initially "figurehead" rulers with most of the political power residing with the Nair militias/warlords/feudal chiefs. The Varma kings of Travancore and Cochin were historically weak in power until the rise of more hegemonic rulers such as Martandavarma. It is an interesting parallel to feudal Japan, which featured a figurehead Emperor and powerful but non-imperial families of Daimyos and Shoguns fielding Samurai militias.69.180.12.214 (talk) 15:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Though the Namboothiri men married nair ladies, Nair men could not marry Namboothiri women.Namboothiris sons out of a Nair women was considered Nair and a Kshatriya not a Brahmin. Neither the Kshatriya offsprings born to Nair ladies, the Thambis could become kings but they had some privileges including they can visit the king anytime they wanted. Nativedravidan (talk) 14:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of Kshatriyas, Pandalam and Poonjar are held to be descendants of the Pandyas though the Pandalam house are descendants of an adoption from "Sarkara Kovilagam of Cranganore". As for Travancore, a previous post said it was only the 19th century that adoption from Chirackal was made. You will find that the first adoption from Chirackal was in the 13th century. This resulted eventually by the 1700s the existence of various branches of the Venad royalty ruling over different regions of that kingdom. The main family at Tvm, Elayadathu Swaroopam at Kottarakara, Peraka Thavazhi at another place, another branch in Kollam. They were also related to the Kayamkulam house because it seems an adoption was made to the original Kayamkulam house. In about 1650 a few men were adopted from Ramanathu Koikkal of Velarapally, Cochin. It was this adoption from a completely different royal house that antagonised the collateral branches of Venad who eventually turned against Marthanda Varma later and were all deposed. Marthanda Varma was the result of an adoption in 1705 from Kolathunad. Dharmarajah came from the 1718 adoption. Balarama Varma from the 1748 adoption. Gowri Lakshmi Bayi till Moolam Thirunal who died in 1924 from the adoption of 1788. In the 1790s a branch of Kolathunad settled in Mavelikara and in 1758 Sethu Lakshmi Bayi and Sethu Parvati Bayi were adopted from here. But by 1901 both of them and all the issue born to them died and hence in 1900 again the modern day Sethu Lakshmi Bayi and Sethu Parvati Bayi were adopted. Then again in 1996 Lekha Parvati Bayi was adopted from Utsavamadom Palace, Mavelikara. Thus adoption from Kolathunad had been happening since the 13th century. Kayamkulam was also a Kshatriya king said to belong originally to the Madathinkoor Swaroopam of Mavelikara. This Swaroopam adopted from Venad in the 17th century and got annexed thus to that kingdom resulting in the commencement of Kayamkulams enimity towards Venad. Thekkumkoor and Vadakkumkoor, i have no clue. Meenachil Karthas aka Mevida Thampans were Rajputs from Mewad.Ambalapuzha was under Brahmins who were descendants of Yadavas (There is an interesting story relating to their descent from Yadavas). Cochin onwards, my knowledge of the Kshatriyas is scarce but Sreedhara Menon briefly describes their histories in his book. About Thampis, the elders in my family tell me that the Royal house consisted of Thampurans and Thampis. Thampurans were the Kshatriyas and issue of the females of the house and held power and the title of succession. Thampis were the descendants of the males and belonged to those Ammaveedus, the last of which was Thanjavur Ammaveedu of 1845 AD, and had a title of nobility. They were the children of Nair ladys known as Ammachis who held the title of Panapillai Amma as well. Manu rocks (talk) 14:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

You are rocking the boat too much, Manu, when you declare that Elayadathu Swaroopam was at Kottarakkara. It's a factual error, since Attingal and not Kottarakkara was known as Elayadathu Swaroopam. The Princess of Attingal was Elayadathu Rani-remember the notorious episode during the reign of Marthanda Varma at the end of which the latter eliminated the Rani through devious means and annexed her belligerent kingdom to Venadu.(The fate of Desinganadu or Kollam was hardly different.)Kottarakkara was the captal of Thekkumkoor while Kottayam and surroundings were ruled by the Vadakkumkoor Principality, and so on.As for maintaining racial purity of Khshatriyas through adoption, I would rather guffaw aloud, than lending credence to such fancy stuff.It 's well known that the Thamburattis or princesses were eminently predisposed to union with the Nair soldiers and henchmen who provided them protection.Perhaps the Nair women suffered a great deal more the cruelties of a hierarchical society than their menfolk, as is vividly brought out in the article elsewhere.(Ref: Plight of those...)TO CUT IT SHORT, WHETHER THE ADOPTION WAS FROM CHIRACKAL OR MAVELIKKARA,THERE WERE WAYS AND MEANS FOR BEAUTIFUL WOMEN WHO WERE IN POWER TO MATE WITH MEN OF THEIR CHOICE AND PROCREATE. The less said about it all, the better.Thanu PillaiThanu Stops (talk) 15:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You will find that you are wrong there. Attingal was never an independent queendom or territory and was merely an estate given to the Ranis of Travancore who were known as Attingal Mutha Thampuran and Attingal Elaya Thampuran (not as Thampurattis). Elayadathu Swaroopam ruled at Kottarakara and was a branch of the Venad house that separated in the 15th century. I would suggest u read Sreedhara Menons book or for that matter any book on Travancore history. What u say about Marthanda Varma annexing Kottarakara of the Elayadathu family is true however, it was quite a sly move. But Kottarakara was not the capital of Thekkumkoor. Thekkumkoor had its capital at Changanassery while Vadakkumkur was at Vaikom, where to this day the Vadakkumkur Kshatriya family lives. I cannot comment on Ranis consorting with Nairs and besides its hardly anybodys business. Also adoption from Chirackal and Mavelikara were inspite of the different locations, adoptions from the same family of the Mushika dynasty. Manu rocks (talk) 09:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Keralolpathy and Karnataka king Mayuravarma

Both Keralolpathy and Karnataka accounts of Kadamba king Mayuravarma say that Bunt of Karnataka and Nairs are the Kshatriyas, who accompanied the Brahmins (Namboothiris,Pottis and Shivalli Brahmins) as slaves from Ahichatra the Naga kingdom. Mayuravarma brought them from Uttarpradesh/Uttarkhand at the Indo Nepalese border in the year 345 ad to Banavasi his capital. Naga Scythians were considered untouchables by the Aryans since atleast 2000 yrs. Nairs though fair are ethnically identical to the North Indian Nagas who form bulk of the Kshatriya population of North India. The Non Dravidian Kshatriya north Indian origins of Nairs should be included in the article.

Nativedravidan (talk) 14:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The matter of the Quotes

I've brought this up before, and I think I should bring it up again. I am slightly uncomfortable with the presence of the "Quotes" section as it is borderline POV. I don't think it contributes much by way of information to the article. If we remove it, we will be freeing up a lot of space for the article. I think we should transwiki it into wikiquotes. I don't think there are many other articles (about castes/groups of people) that have quotes either. --vi5in^[talk] 23:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Good idea actually. If some of the quotes can punctuate the various sections of the article, they can be added there but the rest can go. Pretty much POV. Manu

I've moved the quotes over to Talk:Nair/Quotes since there has been no opposition to my proposal. We could add it to wikiquote, I guess. --vi5in^[talk] 16:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Confussion

So many arguments... Please some one clarify. Who actually is Nair??? Are they warriors??? or are they some thing else??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.42.2.24 (talk) 10:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The introduction gives an explanation. Nairs were the warrior caste of Kerala, although there were other communities such as Ezhavas who did some fighting. However the main fighting force and ruling people were the Nairs. The Kerala Varmas are Kshatriya, but they never did any fighting (apart from notable exceptions such as Pazhassi Raja)Hijjins (talk) 00:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

yes other than Nairs some section of Ezhavas also practiced "kalaripaysattu" but there was some siginificent difference, chekons were fought for money not for pride. olden time if there was some dispute between two parties they will use "Ankam" to settle it, first it is "kozhiyankam"(cock-fight) then "alankam', chekons are used for ankam. but Nair Warriors like "Thacoli othenan"(Thacholi Manikoth Udayan Kurup) fought for self pride, see the reason for his last "ankam" with Mathiloor Gurukal.

Kshatriya dynasties and Aryan Namboothiris after the fall of Chera kingdom in 1120 with the help of Nair warriors. After 1300s the Kshatriyas of Kerala did have Nair mistresses whose sons had the title Thambi who were considered Nairs, Kshatriyas and not Brahmins. Nairs who were considered Kshatriyas could not marry Sudra ladies or Namboothiri women either (Pratiloma).The assertion that Travancore and Cochin kings were of Nair origins is false should be corrected in the Article. Travancore kings were mixture of Ays and Cheras. Cochin Kings were Cheras by Thavazhy (Mothers side) and Namboothiris by fathers side.

Nativedravidan (talk) 14:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC) Except Three Brahmin Rulers/Naduvazhis ( ambalapuzha nethranarayanan, edappaly Nampiyathiri, Venganadu nampidi) all the rulers/naduvazhis of kerala from nair clans.some of the later elvated their position by donating gold to Bramins and doing " hiraniyagarbha yaga" ( the first one who did this is a Kolathiri raja around 12 th century AD thats why to purify their blood Venadu royals always adopting from kolathiri clans. but bascically all the royals of kerala are Nairs.yes so many groups joined in nair clans in different times including shathavahan rajputhras from Narmada river banks,sithiya even some tamil vellala,marava groups also assimilated to nair clans.the most powerful King of Kerala,one who took the title of an emporer in "mamankam" the zamorinis(samuthiripad)was 100% nair.

Thampis were not the issue of the Kings mistresses. They were the issue of the Maharajah's wife. So far as the Maharajah had given the Pattum Parivattum to the lady she was his lawfully wedded wife as per malabar custom or maryada or mamool. So the statement that they were mistresses is incorrect. Manu rocks (talk) 09:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The early kings of Kerala were of pure Dravidian Tamil Villavar (Cheras and Meenavar Pandya and Ayar (Yadava) and not Naga Nairs who were Non Tamils.Later kings of Kerala after 1314 ad had Namboothiri connection not Nairs. The princes used to be Vellalas in the early period. Valluvanad, Eradis etc. Keralolpathi written as late as 16 th century never mentions any Nair Swaroopams. (It mentions Five Kshatriya, six Vellala and 8 Samantha Kshatriya Swaroopams). Valluvanad kings have the titles Valluvakonathiri and Vellatiri indicating their Vellala and Vallvan origins. The Vellala Swaroopams such as Valluvanad and Samuthiri (Erady) were probably appropriated by the Nairs rather by mixture possibly quite late after the 16th century. The Thekkumkur Kings were probably of pure Nair origin (Mudhu Nivarna Nair)as mentioned in Keralolpathi. Nativedravidan (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

The Maharajahs of Kerala after 1314 did marry Nair ladies in Sambandham (courtship )type of marriage as practised by Nairs which was not as binding as the fixed lifelong bonds of Vivaham Aryan Namboothiris or Kalyanam of ancient Tamils. The children born out of Sambandham with Nair ladies did not become the heir of the king while his nephew became the crown prince. Nativedravidan (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

The Keralolpathi was written not in the 16th century, but at the onset of the 18th century.. it mentions the English settlements which were granted by Umayamma Rani. That is why it is considered the least credible source and all historians are unanimous in agreeing that its quite a lot of stuff and nonsense.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.170.25.249 (talk) 14:03, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Vellala Swaroopams mentioned in Keralolpathy

Keralolpathy mentions 5 Kshatriya Swaroopams 8 Samantha Swaroopams and 6 Vellala Swaroopams and no Nair Swaroopams. It does mention about the Nairs who mixed with the Tamil Vellala Swaroopams.Eradis may descend from the Kunnila Konathiri mentioned in the Keralolpathy and may be more related to Vellalas. Velnadu itself could be a principality of Vellalas though the Royalty could be from mixture of Ai, Chera and Venad kings. Vel=King of Vellala. Valluvanadu kings had Vellatiri and Valluvakon indicating their Valluva and Vellala origins. Nairs becoming the head of Valluvanad could be after the time when Keralolpathy was written in the 17th Century. Nairs thus replaced the Tamil Vellala dynasties with their own.

Nativedravidan (talk) 12:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Panar Aristocrats and Nair Kshatriyas - The reversal of Roles

In the ancient Kerala Panars were aristocrats and warlords under the Chera kings. ost of the poets of Tamil Sangam era including Kapilar of Quilon were Panars. The Chera king Ilamcheral Irumporai in 200 ad claims to have defeated Pandiyan and Chola kings whose wealth he distributed among the Tamil Panar aristocracy of Kerala. After 1300s the Nairs who themselves descend from North Indian Naga scythians,while reducing theDravidian Panars to untouchable status still retained the ancient title of Panas, The Panapillai Amma (the title of the Pana ladies who married the Chera or Ay kings ). After 1314 ad the Nair ladies who married (by Sambandham) the Travancore kings were first adopted into a particular Nair family and was given the title Pana Pillai Amma (The lady from the house of Panas) before marrying the King.

Nativedravidan (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC) Nativedravidan from were you got this stupid ideas...

Cheras and their elite warriors later became Nairs. panars ,Arayars(mukuvas), Parayas,uzhavas etc later became hindu casts like.panar,dhivera mukuvas( a good percentage of Muslims and christans comes from arayas and uzhavas),parayas, ezhavas etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.236.136.18 (talk) 14:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Chera was Tamil Villavar king who was called Villavarkon.Mukkuvars descend from Meenavar ancient Pandiyan people.Uzhavars became Vellalas not Ezhavas(Illavar). Ezhavas are another clan of Villavar people. Nairs are not related to Cheras but a North India NagaScythian (Indo-Scythian)Saka tribe from Ahichatra in Uttarpradesh who appeared in Kerala history only after the Northern (Vaduka) attacks by Rashtrakutas in the late first millenium. But they served the Later Chera kingdom as Generals and warriors in the last hundred years.(Padamala Nairs, Pada Nairs, Eradis etc).

Nativedravidan (talk) 12:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Detailed description of Nair customs.

The book A Description of the Coasts of East Africa and Malabar in the Beginning of the sixteenth century by Duarte Barbosa. One of the earlier accounts of Nairs, if anyone can pick up information from this source that is not currently present in the article. [1] Trips (talk) 03:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

exodus of nairs from kerala

hi all....in the recent past there appears to be an exodus of nairs from kerala..at one of the NSS websites.. i read that it is the socio-political situation in kerala( reservations etc.) responsible for this,nairs are found in great numbers in guess where????!1!1'...FIJI of all the places...i remember talking to a fellow nair in hindi during my graduation days coz the chap could not understand malayalam, anyways the title nair, pillai, menon, nambiar etc is still intact....Vivwiki (talk) 05:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Infact it was the Avarnas (Ezhavas and others) who had to move out of Kerala due to the caste driven issues in the past. Even now you can find Nairs dominating in govt offices and devaswom boards etc. Hard working Nairs can easily survive in Kerala or anywhere in India. Don't make an excuse off reservation. It's a basic nature of all mallus to work hard outside Kerala. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 15:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Removed nonsense

I’d removed a bunch of nonsense from the article pushed by Nambiar by the help of Vivin. It has been already reverted by many established editors. Still a more to be fleshed out. If you have a different opinion please share it first. Don’t blindly revert my edits. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 06:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

How about you explain what you mean by "nonsense" (amazing you think that, because the information is cited) instead of saying "reverted by many established editors"? I'm not sure what else we can do, because the information is cited. The onus is on you to tell us exactly why you think the information should be removed. Add fact tags if you want, but don't simply delete. Thanks. --vi5in^[talk] 07:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It is not information, it is useless-nonsense and POV-fork-terrorism. The self published original research of cast chauvinism and mokeysm spoils the enhancement of Wikipedia. It has to be definitely killed by fire. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 11:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Really... original research from the Travancore State Manual? I had no idea that the description of Nair Marriage Ceremonies was also "useless-nonsense" and "POV-fork-terrorism" (whatever that means). Instead of useless rhetoric, how about your actually bring some facts to the table? --vi5in^[talk] 22:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Phraseology goes beyond references. If you want to add all the custom of Nair there may be 100's of incidents from their eating, bathing, washing & all other activities. Since WP is not a cystall ball it shouldnt be added either. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 05:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

From an anthropological perspective, the customs and rituals of a people are perfectly encyclopedic, especially if they are referenced. WP:CRYSTALBALL doesn't apply in the least to this situation. It doesn't mean what you think it does. If you're going to quote Wikipedia policies to me (policies that I'm well aware of, mind you), perhaps you should pick the right ones. WP:CRYSTALBALL relates to unverified speculation about future events. I fail to see what that has to do with the (cited and referenced) information about marriage and rituals. There aren't "100's of incidents"; only the most pertinent and common ones have been described. All the sections have been adequately referenced and there is no reason they should be removed. Perhaps they could be rewritten and condensed, but that's the only change I see. --vi5in^[talk] 15:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Removal

Please dont rely on the 1905 State manual. All the other material needs to be cited. --Relata refero (disp.) 07:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I would say that some material is better than no material at all. Mark whatever you feel needs to be cited with fact tags instead of outright removal. What's the problem with the 1905 manual other than the claim that it is "too old"? There really is nothing else that describes the stratification of Nairs. This may not be valid now, but I believe it serves its purpose in a historical context. I'm not trying to push POV here; I've actually been trying my best to keep this article neutral. Nair marriages happen exactly as they are described. Would you actually need a citation to state that the sky is blue? --vi5in^[talk] 19:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

That its unreliable because of that age. And yes, in caste articles, as in so many other such articles that are open to WP:PEACOCK, I'd like a citation of some things that may appear obvious. About the wedding ritual in particular, if not covered in recent secondary sources, there is probably nothing encyclopaedic about it, and WP is not a collection of ritual. --Relata refero (disp.) 20:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

That information is significant in a historical perspective. I initially wrote the wedding section (it was rather verbose) and it made certain there weren't any peacock terms. I can go through the current section and make sure that there aren't any. A bunch of other editors and I have taken the time and effort to make sure that this article doesn't run afoul of WP:PEACOCK like many others. This is also why I removed the entire quote section. If you want citations, then go ahead and put fact tags on things that require citation instead of simply deleting large sections of text. There is everything encyclopedic about wedding rituals. I'm well aware of what Wikipedia is not, but from an anthropological perspective, wedding rituals are extremely encyclopedic, and the section definitely isn't OR. Like I said, would you require a citation for something that is extremely obvious? I'll have some other editors/admins take a look at this. --vi5in^[talk] 22:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The wedding section is blatantly unencyclopaedic in my opinion. A reliable secondary source would comment on the differences between a traditional Nair ceremony and those of other similar groupings, which, of course, the primary source does not do. I am leaving that in pending an explanation, but removing all the other stuff. --Relata refero (disp.) 22:07, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've got you some references for the Nair ceremony. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "differences between Nair ceremony and those of other similar groupings". The reference that I provided you talks about Nair marriages in particular. Finally, what of the Samurai comparison? What exactly is your problem with it? I believe it talks of comparisons being drawn. It doesn't say that Nairs were Samurai, or even that were exactly like Samurai. The comparison is being made on the basis of a martial nobility. As far as the subcaste information, we can leave an unreferenced template on that. Does that work? As far as the Nair ceremony being "uncyclopedic", it would help if you explained why it was so, instead of just saying that it is. You did clarify it was just your opinion though. --vi5in^[talk] 22:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The Samurai comparison is a throwaway one, possibly misleading, that doesnt belong in the lede. The wedding ceremony details are unnecessarily lengthy, and read like a guide or description rather than an academic analysis. --Relata refero (disp.) 23:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. That's actually a good point. Perhaps we could move that further down in the article? You're correct - the resemblance is simply in that one particular aspect. If you think the wedding details are lengthy now, you should have read it before ;). How about rewriting that entire section then? What format/style would you propose? --vi5in^[talk] 23:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Relata has alreay said that wedding ceremony details are unnecessarily lengthy and User:Vivin is not accepting it. He is misleading & talking about format of writing. There is no other format as the only solution is cutting short of the length. I did it already. If User:Vivin & User:Tripping Nambiar reverts it back, I've no other solution, i.e report it to ANI & suspected sock puppet of those two editors. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 03:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Unnecessarily lengthy doesn't mean it's un-encyclopedic. Cutting the length short doesn't mean deleting it outright. I hope you realize that accusing me and Nambiar of being sockpuppets is rather serious. It's a clear violation of WP:NPA. I've tried many times to engage you in dialogue but you seem to be stubborn and seem completely disinterested in discussion the issue. If you want to take it to WP:ANI, go ahead. --vi5in^[talk] 04:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It is not only unnecessarily lengthy but unreferenced in many parts. It's a clear violation of WP:NPA accusing me & crazyguy. I'd used multile id ubox in my pg doesnt mean that wherever other editors particiates are sock of me. It is a clear violation of the policy. I am taking the issue at ANI. Because you are not listening an dominating the article with your pov nonsense. You are not listening to others. You think you are correct & acting accordingly. --Tomb of the Unknown Warrior tomb 04:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Deindent On the contrary, you're the one who keeps claiming POV without proving why it is so. Lengthy and unreferenced indeed... have you bothered to check out the reference I have listed for it? If you look at it, you'll see a very good description of Nair Weddings. I believe I've asked you numerous time to tag anything you feel is unreferenced, with fact tags instead of blindly reverting. But you haven't done that. You keep crying about "POV nonsense". Don't lecture me aboutWP:NPA. I've WP:AGF a whole lot and been extremely patient. You're the one who constantly accuses me of being a sock, of "misleading people", and doing "POV fork terrorism" (whatever that means). I guess I'll be seeing you at WP:ANI. --vi5in^[talk] 15:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Is it correct to say "You are the one" ?Dr. Samuel Johnson (talk) 05:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

Added NPOV tag, Reason: I had removed some parts from the article. After few days it is noted that the contents are back. Harjk & Relata was reverting, but a lobby is adding it back. A strong reason of lacking npov. --Crazyguy2050 (talk) 15:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above makes no mention of NPOV. Removed tag. --vi5in^[talk] 18:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Reference to Samurai is not necessary (I am a Panicker Nair and not someone from another community who wants to degrade Nairs). The section on marriage must be edited, since the customs change (some considerably) from Travancore to Malabar. Only a general outline is required.58.105.165.66 (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

population of nairs

hi friends, it may be time to change that statistic on the main NAIR page which claims we form 13% of the population, it may be much more actually!... got to look up some old caste based census, also joshua project puts the nair population at a figure way too high, i feelVivwiki (talk) 09:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually the current population of Nairs seems to be 13% or less than that of the total population of Kerala. The percentage of Nairs in the total poulation has been declining since the first census by the British East India Company. For example in Travancore, it decreased from 30.43% in 1854 to 19.08% in 1875. The population loss was accelerated by constant Kudi Paka (Blood Feud) and warfare. Even in 1891, they constituted as low as 16.23%. (including the district of Kanya Kumari and excluding the district of Kasargode). The 1968 Socio-Economic Survey by the Government of Kerala gave the population of the Nair community as 14.41% of the total population of the state. It also showed the Nairs are having only 1.47 children per women, the lowest for any group. (The next lowest figure was for the Syrians, who had 1.55 children per women and now they are saying that they are facing severe population decline). Considering all these , it will be a miracle if Nair population exceeds 13%. See Demography of Nair community. Cheers! Axxn (talk) 16:54, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Kalari reference

Please see reference# 32 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDP/is_2003_Jan_6/ai_96212029 I though CVN Kalari is run by Thiyyas. Could someone clarify please.

This article needs some serious editing!!!!!!!!!!

i m sorry. this is one clumsy article. it requires a lot of chopping and changing. many portions are beyond the scope of this article, i firmly believe. i mean who wants to know what nairs ate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by VINU (talk • contribs) 11:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions? Trips (talk) 03:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Forward caste

I have taken the liberty to remove the mention of nayars as a forward caste in the opening paragraph itself since it smacks of naivty. However, it might be worth being mentioned17:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)vin (talk) under a new or an existing section.

Its actually quite factual, no one would object to Brahmins being called upper castes. Most things in this article is in the historical context anyway.Trips (talk) 02:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

'NAIR ORIGINS' of Kolathiri and T'koor kingdoms.

It is not proven beyond doubt that the aforementioned kingdoms had Nair origins. The reference given in favor of the claim is a faltoo one. It is always better to quote reliable sources when strong statements like the one above are being made.

No one can take it away from Nairs that they had played the cardinal role in shaping the history of kerala, irrespective of whether they originated kingdoms or not.

Put egotism aside and strive to better the article, which, i am afraid, is not of the highest quality. --vin (talk) 07:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hence the article says, "The Kingdoms are thought to have Nair origins". The origins of the Nairs and the Varmas are murky and indistinguishable, especially until the 17th century when some Rajahs decided to wear the holy thread.220.238.214.140 (talk) 03:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

??????????????????????????????????--vin (talk) 09:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Acccording to Keralolpathi Kolathiri kings descend from a Banapperumal from Karnataka who was send by Krishna Rayar, possibly the Rashtrakuta king Krishna 11(950 AD) who was elevated to the position of Cheraman Perumal. This Cheraman Perumal was send by Krishna Rayar on request from the Namboothiris of Perunchellur.(This Cheraman Perumal should not be confused with the Tamil Chera dynasty including Kulasekhara dynasty which ended in 1102 AD). The descendent of the Banapperumal and an Arya Kshatriya female assumed the titles Ezhi Bhoobaan and Cheraman Vadakkan Perumal and were made the kings of Ezhimala (Kolathu Nadu) who assumed the title Kolathiri.Thus Kolathiris are not Nairs. Keralaolpathi also says that the Cheraman Perumal(Banapperumal) made a Mudu Nivarna (Straight backed) Nair as Thekkumkur king.

Nativedravidan (talk) 14:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Are Nairs Brahmins?

We have to more concretely define the term upper caste. Nairs like other prominent castes came up during the British rule. Examples are Rajputs, Thakurs etc. According to the varna system they belong to the highest rung, and economically they have very much advanced during the past 100 years. We have to take into account this fact and redefine the upper caste status.

Nairs are Kshatriyas, but in Kerala the jati system is different in application to the rest of India. In Kerala the divide between upper and lower caste is the savarna-avarna divide, as avarna castes are untouchable to savarnas historically. Trips (talk) 03:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes Nairs are Kshatriyas but upper caste. They did not advance after colonisation. They were upper caste even before that. The Aaruveetil Madampimar, Ettuveetil Pillamar etc were powerful people who existed long bfr the british. If anyone wants, they may redefine upper caste, but PLEASE lets not get back into "were the nairs Brahmins" debate! Manu rocks (talk) 09:41, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Nairs were upper caste and will always be considered upper caste just as Brahmins will always be considered upper caste, especially as long as Government Reservation policies exist. 220.238.214.140 (talk) 06:04, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Yup, Most of the indo-scythian clans (Sakas) including Nairs were considered as ‘Kshatriyas’ for two reasons. Due to their non-Vedic, foreign origins and the other being Budhists. Indo-scythians clans, by and large practiced Budhism, probably because Budha himself was a Saka king.Keraleeyan —Preceding undated comment was added at 12:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Is there any evidence at all to show that Nairs were Buddhist? As a general rule, the Namboothiris considered all others as Non-Brahmin. This included the so-called "Malayala Kshatriya", that is why they were known as "Samanta Kshatriya" (Kshatriya in name). Also Kerala Rajahs were required to perform Hiranyagarba to become "reborn" as Brahmins, since they were considered Kshatriya. Also note that several upper-caste communities around India were labelled as Sudra by Brahmins: Jatts, Marathas, Bunts, Reddys, Kayastha, etc 58.105.8.242 (talk) 05:33, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Marathas and Kayasthas are Sudras by any definition. Nairs were not Buddhists in any period of the communities known history. Trips (talk) 06:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Shivaji the Maratha had to undergo Hiranyagarbha to become Kshatriya. They do not traditionally wear the Sacred Thread. In relation to Kayastha refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kayastha&oldid=159132737. Those belonging to actual Kshatriya varna is rare, even Rajputs are thought to have become "Kshatriya".58.104.80.111 (talk) 11:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, thats news, the relevant articles must be updated to remove the Kshatriya status in that case. Yes, concerning the Rajputs Britannica states them as of varied and indeterminate origin, ie some tribals and migrants being assimilated and adopting Rajputra status is possible, as the Hindu caste system was very mobile in the earlier days. Trips (talk) 12:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Nagas were initially powerful rulers in the North India but were reduced to Kshatriya status by Aryans even in the prehistory. Most of the previous untouchables were Buddhists and had Naga origins.Still powerful Naga kingdoms existed in Central India and the present day Orissa (Kalinga) whom the ancient Tamils/ Dravidians considered enemies. Vaduga is the name of Naga raiders in Sangha literature. Nairs with their Naga and Scythian origins might have been Buddhists as well. Kathakali might be the Hinduised version of Tibetan masked dance. In Kerala in the aftermath of the Turkish Invasions in 1309 AD under Malik Kafir and after the destruction of the Dravidian dynasties Nagas became dominant in Kerala while reversing their position dramatically.

Nativedravidan (talk) 14:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Generally beef was not eaten by Nairs. Killing of the cow was resented

Why do you have to shy away from this? All my Nair friends eat beaf. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

This article is describing the food of Nairs in bygone times. Today even Brahmins eat meat, yet it will not be shown on the Brahmin page. 58.104.80.111 (talk) 11:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The article is about "Nairs" and not about "Nairs in the past". You are trying to save face from the other Hindu communities outside Kerala. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 23:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The Nairs nowadays eat beef etc. But traditionally only fish was permitted. Fowl became a food stuff only in the 19th century. Beef was not eaten at all. None of the caste Hindus ate beef in the olden days. The references are mentioned. Manu rocks (talk) 11:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The point is, there is no food restriction for Nairs and there is no need for such a section "Food and Drink". If you still feel it's important, you will need to rephrase it to accomodate past and present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 14:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I took the liberty to edit as follows.. They also eat beaf which was barred traditionally for Hindu communities. Killing of the cow was resented in the past. Sounds okay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.103.220 (talk) 14:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

That is false. None of my ancestors ate beef and many that I know do not. Traditionally it was banned for the Nair. That must be mentioned. The fact that some eat beef now can be included if the relevant references can be found (i.e. not based on your personal knowledge)220.238.178.77 (talk) 12:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Something interesting. http://www.chowk.com/ilogs/65586/48030 The profanity of the sacred Before 'discovering' the medicinal values of cow-urine and dung, the brahmins, during the vedic and immediate post-vedic period, ate the meat of all kinds of animals (see Indian Food by KT Achaya, 1998). As evident from brahminic texts such as the Satpathatha Brahmana and the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, beef was in fact a favourite food in vedic times.

Image Gallery

It would be good to have an image gallery at the bottom of the article of about 10-20 pictures (as is seen in other articles). This will also allow the main collage at the start to not get too many images (there is already a bit too many). 220.238.178.77 (talk) 10:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. We also need pictures of notable female Nairs and notable Nairs involved in fields other than politics. Trips (talk) 15:08, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

ARAKKAL KINGS- Factual Error

It's written in the introductory part of the article that Arakkal Dynasty of North Malabar has Nair origins.It's untrue. Arakkal traces its lineage from the Chirakkal Rajahs of Kannur.The legend goes that a Mohammedan youth saved a princess from drowning, and in doing so, the princess accepted the man's Uthariya or upper garment to clothe herself.The Rajahs expelled the girl that the Muslim had touched and interpreted the two acts viz. holding the princess's hand (panigrahanam)and offering her a piece of cloth (pudavakoda)as part of matrimonial rites.In other words, the Mohammedan was to take her as his wife. The Rajah was lavish with his daughter as he bestowed on her a part of his kingdom. The Muslim Royal family of Arakkal began thus.It 's significant that the Arakkal Bibis were very powerful.Kundannur Kunhi Moplah (talk) 10:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that is the popular myth behind the origin, however most sources cite the Arakkal family to be descended from a Nair general under the kingdom rather than the Kolathiri kingdom itself. Trips (talk) 13:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Both of you are right because Arakkal has its origin from chirakkal kovilakam (Kolathiri) but Kolathiris (though the oldest and first to become Kshatriya in Kerala) themselves had became Kshatriyas only in the 17th century with the help of migrant Tulu Brahmins who took up Namboothiri customs later (embranthiris) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.99.165.172 (talk) 14:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

There's a story that Arayankulangara Nair, minister of the Chiraykal Rajahs, converted to Islam, and it was this Muslim gent who dared to rescue the princess from drowning.(According to one version, there were two of them, and the other princess swam to safety.) The Royal family did not resent this rescue operation and the princess was not banished. But, it was the princess who suggested that the gentleman that took her hand and offered her a "Mundu" or waist cloth should marry her since the basic formalities were completed. Obviously, the princess had fallen in love, and wanted to live with her rescuer.(The whole thing could have been stage-managed by the wily woman and her paramour!)That was how the Arakkal dynasty came into being.(Ref: "Europeans in Kerala History" by Malayankeezhu Gopalakrishnan)Tom Peters Menon (talk) 17:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

ARAyankulangara Nair(Muslim)+chiraKKAL Thamburatti = ARAKKAL Beevi!!! Eureka! I got it now.Phalgunan Finland (talk) 10:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Article is tooo long- Badly needs an edit

I think the article is unnecessarily dragged too much and needs some editing..here are some suggestions.

Introduction - too long - reference of kalaripayattu, matrilineal, mamankam etc not required there.

Theories of origin - should be summarized.

Decline of Nair dominance - absolutely not required.

Surname - only the surnames are enough..why a big write-up about it in the beginning.

Sub castes - confusing and not cited well.For eg. In many books on nair history, the classification varies.

Marriage section is too long.

Current Ceremonies and Customs - Too long and doesn't make much sense as for most of the non-brahmin malayalee community it is same..Keraleeyan —Preceding undated comment was added at 09:57, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

All this information is relevant for Wikipedia. Introduction is at its maximum length and is equivalent to other major caste pages such as Brahmin, Jatt, Kshatriya, etc. Sections on marriage, history of Nairs and origins can be transferred to another page (similar to Origin of Rajputs, History of Rajputs pages) with only a brief summary being in the actual Nair page. Various theories about the origin of Nairs exist, and the history of Nairs is worth keeping on Wikipedia.220.238.172.15 (talk) 08:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree, that the article is too long. Please go ahead and edit and remove excessive or irrelevant information, expecially information that is not specific to the Nair caste. Trips (talk) 07:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I think we should shorten the large sections and make them articles in their own right. For example, the sections on Nair customs and marriages can be shortened a lot. --vi5in^[talk] 17:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

nairs and pallavas

dear friends,

recently i purchased  a book-" south indian  coins" by t desikachari,there is an interesting passage which  i will quote-And Ugrasena of palghaut,( that is the way the author spells palghat) who was of moment enough  to attract the notice of the the Empire  builder Samudragupta,, who dreamed himself fit  to engrave his sanguinary exploits on the same stone as whwere on the great Asoka had cut out his message of love to all things living:'''who was this ugrasena of malabar? are the virile and handsome nairs the representatives  of the Parthivas and their old-world marriage customs  foreign to Bharatavarsha?

ugrasena is a pallava chief, and although it is confusing about who wanted to carve out whose name on stone, the author indirectly hints to a connection between nairs and pallavas( parthivas), but this connection may be restrictecd only to the valluvanad area.Vivwiki (talk) 06:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:VK Krishna Menon 1948.jpg

The image Image:VK Krishna Menon 1948.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC) We want to have a list of famous nairs and if possible a photo collection. I had added more photos, but someone else deleted them all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpvipin (talk • contribs) 23:50, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

MG Ramachandran

Is it appropriate to include MGR in the intro picture. His mother was an Ezhava lady (Satyabhama) who married the infamous Gopala Menon excommunicated in the Thathri Smaarthavicharam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.89.252 (talk) 14:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Sathyabhama was not "an Ezhava lady". She was a Mannadaiar. It 's a well known fact. May be the name "Satyabhama" like "Sathyasheelan", "Sathyavrathan","Sahadevan", "Sadanandan", "Santhosh" "Pushkaran", "Pushpangadan", "Mruthyunjayan" etc is typical among names used by Ezhava community. There's a predominance towards the use of names,-especially not so well known names-, in Sanskrit, from the Puranas. (Perhaps, the poor things are re-asserting their belonging to the Hindu Fold and their distinct place above the not so literate backward groups.). Any way, MGR was 100% Nair, and therefore it's quite appropriate to include his picture.Kuttappan Nair (talk) 09:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Melakath govinda menon was not excommunicated not in Thatri smarthavicharam.The 'brshtu' of menon was in 1903,whereas thatri incident took place in 1906.

New Year Greetings

Wishing all Nairs a prosperous year ahead. Global Economic Recession looms large, thwarting the ambitions of aspiring youngsters -many of vthem IT professionals with a sizeable Nair populatioon among them. IT, indeed brought prosperity to the Nair community, despirited as it was with the parochial policies of the Goverments at the Centre and in Kerala State.These policies are aimed at development of Ezhava,Pulaya,Paraya, SC/ST/OBC.Nairs advanced economically over the IT years. Let's hope it will continue. Let's hope Nairs shall survive despite the Govts and theIR policies of job reservation. Let the New Year bring light and prosperity to Nair homes the world over. Happy New YearKuttappan Nair (talk) 10:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

MCC MEANS.....?

a very happy to all nairs and non nairs,
    could not resist sharing something which i saw on the internet... there is actually a kent MCC(malayalee cricket club)!!!!...so kudos to the legendary KEVIN CURREN aka karunakaran!...we mallus are simply great, is it not, giving competition to the marylebone cricket club with our own MCC..!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivwiki (talk • contribs) 05:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC) 

Attire

Some one is removing the image of attire of 19th century, because they are shy to accept facts' also deleting the related text quoted from Malabar Manual by William Logan. You can't deny historical facts. Historical facts should be truly presented, not glorified according to vested interests. Don't be shy of past. There are more topics which are presented inaccurate, with facts hidden or untouched. These also require edits, for example Sambandam. This was a kind of prostitution. But here it is glorified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uditmehra (talk • contribs) 16:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

hmm,!.... agreed about the attire, but sambandam should not be just passed way as prostitution... why in tehri gahrwal , i heard it is practised?.. udit , hinduism in kerala is very different from what you see in north india!...good to see a guy with a surname mehra showing some interest in nair customs!Vivwiki (talk) 11:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

No..Vivi..i think it is yet another turbid and vicious mallu community member possessing tones of animosity towards Nairs. Otherwise why should he show up here..it is a well known fact that Sambandham was not just Nairs’ affair, it was practiced by so many other communities as well. It was also practiced by many other warrior tribes all over the world (even in Mahabharath, what Kunthi and the likes practiced is the same). Even in the case of attire it was same for most of the communities in Kerala…then it should be added to all mallu community (hindu) pages..people like ‘mehra’ are so jealous of the nair psyche..nevertheless, whatever they do through this page, nothing is going to change and the awareness is getting thicker and thicker..nairs are so proud to be nairs and we have so many inspirers right from velu thampi dalawa to today’s Sandeep unnikrishnan.....Keraleeyan —Preceding undated comment was added at 06:04, 5 February 2009 (UTC).

yes keraleeyan,i fully agree with you... mehra ka chehra dekhne laayak hoga! after this post!... i was also wondering later why a punjabi khatri should be so bothered about us nairs, my khatri friends and there are plenty of em around have never questioned nairs past present or future!... yes the latest hero is sandeep unnikrishnan, the ndtv program with dhoni in jai jawan was an eye opener...he was reputed to be great motivator among his group!... by the way please visit lk advani's message on global nair sammelanam... finally a national leader who has acknowledged our contribution... just type lk advani global nair sammelanam on google search and you will get it!... contrast this with leaders back in kerala who heap scorn on nairs call nair organisations fascist!... it is well known that the product of nair-other castes intermarriages like to be known as nairs only...!!!if nairs were such debauched characters , would this be the case!???.. by the way is saji mohan infamous IPS officer caught in the doping scandal. , a nair?Vivwiki (talk) 06:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

If Sambandham were prostitution, then the entire subcontinent might have originated from prostitutes- granted the term 'prostitute' essentially implies a woman's sexual union with multiple partners, forced or otherwise. This is especially true of the North Western Provinces, i.e the Greater Punjab and beyond,since all the invading armies- those of Alexander, Huns, Scythians, Persians, Afghans of Ghazni & Ghori, Timurlane,Babur,Nadir Shah,Ahmedshah Abdali..., the list goes on-marched through the terrains, down the Hindukush, crossing the mighty Indus River. What happens to the women of the conquered people is not something difficult to imagine, and the genome of the offsprings, possibly, are updated at regular intervals! What sort of customs prevailed in such an environment? Remember there was at least a semblance of order in 'Sambandham', and when a Punjabi 'Khatri' comments upon 'Sambandham', something seems to be amiss somewhere! Kuttappan Nair (talk) 20:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The photo is interesting, since no woman in Kerala (or much of India) wore a blouse until the British introduced it (next time you see a picture/statue of an Indian woman in ancient times, you will see no blouse, eg. see Choli galleries). However both men and women would wear a veshti (upper garment towel) when out in public, and the women would wrap the veshti around their torso diagonally (in a sari manner) to resemble the Mundum neriyathum (the only difference being that there was no blouse). The image uploaded to the Nair page seems to be of a Nair couple told to remove their veshti or a photo in the privacy of their own home. Either way it is unusual for the woman and the man not to have a veshti, in the presence of a stranger photographer. The ornaments of the couple are also absent, which is also unusual.

As for Sambandham, it was not prostitution since the man did not pay the woman at all (in fact the woman had to accomodate the man in her home at the family expense). Also the practice was done between Nair men and Nair women as well as with Nambudiri men. As far as I know a woman only had one husband at a time (except for certain regions), and divorce and remarriage was allowed. If you ask me, Matrilinial system gave more emphasis on the women giving them more rights and liberties without the cruelties of young widow girls being abandoned by society, Sati and female infanticide as seen in other parts of India.PanditaP (talk) 19:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Census of India

Census of India is not done on caste lines, except for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes. So the number of Nairs in India cannot be given authentically. <som123>

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nair#Demographics Axxn (talk) 18:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Photographs

Photographs in the Info Area clutter the page as more and more portraits are added. A separate Photograph gallery may be added and linked to this page. <som123>

Nagavamshi origin

From Ram Swarup Joon: History of the Jats, Rohtak, India (1938, 1967) (Available in Google Book Search): " Castes which claim Kshatriya status as descendents of the Nāga or the "serpent dynasty" are called Nagavanshi. Clans of Nair and Jat caste are of Nagavanshi descent."

"The clans such as Nair, Kiriyathil Nair, Takshak, Bachak, Karkotaka, Nambiar & Kaliramna are having Nagavanshi origin". Axxn (talk) 06:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Some people are putting funny arguments and saying that Nairs are not Kshatriyas. The reason they are giving is that a section of the Nambuthiris refused to recognize the Kshatriya status. It is true that Nambuthiris refused to recognize the Kshatriya status and ordered Hiranyagarbha for Nair kings before the coronation. So what? 0.1% of the population of Kerala decide which caste is in which order? These people are not having any knowledge of history. Nambuthiris refused to recognize any other caste's Brahmin or Kshatriya status. They considered Tamil Brahmins as well as Ambalavasis and Samanthan Nairs as Vrata Kshatryas. So all these castes become Non-orthodox automatically? (Untill about 17th Cen. AD they were considering Nairs as Kshatriya). In Karnataka, the Nairs (known as Bunt are recognized as Kshatriya by Kannada Brahmins. And in Tamil Nadu, Kongu Vellala Gounder and other Vellalar subcastes who are equivalent to Nairs are considered Kshatriya by Tamil Brahmins. If the incidence of Hiranyagarbha is taken in to account, then not only Nairs, but also Marathas, Jats and some Rajput subcastes will be Non orthodox. Next is the case of intermarriage. Nairs were Nagavamshi Kshatriya (and therefore Vratya Kshatriya), but were lower to Brahmin Nambuthiris and Chandravamshi Vermas. So Nair males were not able to marry women from these castes. Stating the truth is one thing... and adding blasphemous remarks is another. It is true that Nairs opressed the lower castes like Thiyyas and Pulayas when they ruled. But that gives no right to any one from those communities to distort the Wiki article. Cheers... Sooraj Menon (talk) 02:38, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Bunts Nairs connection views

This section was created out of order in this edit. I restored into sequence for archiving. —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 13:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I strongly believes Bunts are not Nairs or anyway related to us. Bunt Sanghas are purposefully manipulates the sources to claim the same as Nairs of Kerala. In caste system,Tulunad Bunts, Shettys are considered much inferior to Nairs. It is the same as comparing Namboodiri with Embrandiri(Tulu brahmin). Someone please keep the source and remove Bunts from related community in the Original Article.thanks. Unnikrishna Menon 59.93.10.249 (talk) 13:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Replies : Dear pro-Bunt-Nair guy,Please note :Panicker is an Indian title or surname used by members of various communities in the state of Kerala. Members of the Hindu Nair and Ezhava castes have this last name, as do some Christians from the Syrian Catholic, Syrian Orthodox and Mar Thoma Church communities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panicker Also ,please don't abuse expecting it as a racial slur.please learn about kerala's caste system before making refutes here.personally ,I agree with the thread starter.Nairs are not related to bunts.both are different communities,may be with a similar martial history.bunts should get their self-esteem high and get to reject claims to nair identity.bunts are from tulunad,which may be similar in culture with current kerala state ,but tulunad has its own identity.people of tulunad should try to get their own state from kasaragode talukas northern parts till kuntapur.good luck. regards ,teamveevee —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.93.21.92 (talk) 08:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

hey panicker u are a ezhnava,nairs definately do not use the title.secondly hegde title is used by havyaka brahmins and bunts not g.s.b's they use surnames like kudva ,pai,shenoy. secondly there are no shetty bunts in travancore.though there are a few tulu brahmins called erabrandiri.also what do you say about the use of nayara surname among bunts.there is nayara bettu palace in kowdoor near udupi.and u give no explanation about the nagavansham thing.

Nice try.please you note it Sir(s):"krishna raja","srinivasa" etc are madrassi names and Nairs don't have such names.may be krishna chandran but not "krishna Raja" whatever.but dude ,panickers,menons,kaimal,mannadiars(somewhat) are Nairs.these are martial names inside the community(just like hegde,shenoy,kini,prabhu etc among konkani GSB's).I have nothing against bunts dear.If you are proud of being bunta,so be it.but ,Puhleese ,True History cannot be changed .nairs are having namboodiri blood due to sambhandha system earlier and their blood haplogroups tests are different from other communities in south.Nairs really cannot be connected with bunts,reddys,vellala,mudaliars etc.Once again ,I don't have anything against bunts.they are a prosperous community in tulunad region.Heck ,they are much better than Nairs financially as well as influential,affluent people they are.but see ,our histories are different.in many parts of travancore,shettys were also included in the military many many centuries back itself.they are now malayalees.I have personally met a grand old man(shetty who is fair unlike the ones I saw in kudla region) who explained the earlier system ,where due to some enemity or other reasons, shivalli(kota) brahmins or Pottys/Embrans are brought into trivandrum by the king.while bunts(shettys) were brought into many palaces for protection against enemy clans(nairs).you can research in travancore areas as well as north paravur,aluva region for these shettys.they(shivalli brahmins and buntaru) are still flourishing in travancore ,although completely cut out from their tulunad origin unlike GSB's.I got respect for Tulunad.So,dear "krishna raj" ,Don't play enemity.please note relate with nairs genetically.thats it. Pramod Panikkar 59.93.33.11 (talk) 13:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Mr.Pramod panicker's intentions are very clear here. He doesn't deserve a reply as all his comments are nothing but a high dose of rubbish. He belongs to one of those groups who have so much of grudge on this community (menon and panicker are probably one and the same as their ip addresses denote). So he wants to create confusion in the pretext of being a 'Nair'.

Nambuthiris are less than 1% of the population while Nairs are around 15% which goes to show that only a small % of Nairs did mix with nambuthiris. There is no 'bunt' presence in Travancore at all. The bunts there are Nairs. The fact that these communities doesn't exist together itself is testimony that both are same but known in different names in different region/language. Unlike the vellalas, who still co-exist in many places, which prove that both are different communities though they have mixed each other.

I think any further discussion on this topic is totally unwarranted.Keraleeyan

Hey isn't Pramod Panicker a Illava or Ezhnava or whatever they are called .why is he so interested in Nairs or who they are connected to, when Nairs historically have depised or atleast mocked these people. Also Bunts have surnames like Varma and Raja like the samantha kshatriyas,and also they are among the comeliest people in south india, Aishwarya Rai a bunt is an example. This shows they are genetically more pure and haven't mixed with other clans like Samantha Kshatriya who are Nair cousins. Also i have a Bunt friend named Umaraman Shetty here in dubai and by his looks he looks more greek than an indian which shows their Scythian Naga origins. Also in the puranas it it written that Naga women were extremely beautiful. As far as I know we Nair also calim to be of Nagavansham if i am not wrong and so do the bunts. Krishnaraja Nair,U.A.E Princeofdark07 (talk • contribs) 06:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi,Mr Unnikrishnan Menon,when you say bunts are lower castes in Tulunadu it is extremley incorrect, Bunts are the ruling caste of Tulu nadu region and are perhaps more affluent than the Nairs today. Also Bunts controlled an empire the vijaynagara empire when the Tuluva dynasty was in power,unlike the nairs who controlled small feudatories. It is proven fact that Krishnadevaraya the greatest vijaynagara emperor spoke Tulu and was a Bunt. And also Bunt customs are almost the same as Nair customs. Also Bunts haven't really mixed with local population like some Nair clans. Bunts and Nairs share common ancestry there is no doubt about it. Nirs haven't fallen straight from heaven into kerala. They came from somewhere else. They are not indigenous to kerala. Srinivasan Nair,Bangalore

Welcome to the latest Vandalist.. Nair page seems to be the most favorite for vandalisms. As rightly mentioned in the article, no one is ‘claiming’ or ‘disclaiming’ anything here. It’s all based on FACTS. Nairs and Bunts are one and the same. Tulunad was part of Malabar and is clearly mentioned even in ballads of ‘vadakkan pattu’. There is even a distinct ‘tunlunadan’ style of ‘kalaripayattu’. There are no Nairs in Tulunadu. The presence of Nairs in kasargode and towards tulunadu is less than 2%. So where are all the Nairs in this area gone. They are none other than Bunts of that land. Ethnically Nairs, Bunts and Samantha kshatriyas are same. A small % of Nairs are ethnically related to Namburis and other castes like Vellala on the eastern side. Even Newar connection is mostly based on lot of assumptions.Keraleeyan —Preceding undated comment added 07:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC).

evidently, mr menon has not come across many bunts.... i have a bunt friend in mangalore( surname rai) who has genealogical evidence to show his family( forefathers) had contracted matrimonial alliances with a nair family( of one ambu nair) of kannur....reciprocal alliances... they are definitely the same status as nairs, if at all there is a difference it is in the amount of brahmin admixture nairs have, even bunts have some minor mixing of blood with tulu brahmins through a custom known as " mithamagalu"... but it is very minute, compared to nairs...Vivwiki (talk) 06:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

pramod panicker ,the thiyya community got a similar community called "billava" in tulunad region.they adheres to sri narayana guru.they use this to form their community more stronger.59.93.35.1 (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Dear "srinivasan" nair from bangalore :I doubt whether you are a nair to claim the same.I have nothing against Bunts or Nadavas or whatever they are called.Nairs may be immigrant Community.You may not be aware of erstwhile Kerala system of "Ayitham".According to the system: 1)Namboodiris who felt as "super brahmins" .tulu,tamil iyers are only allowed in kitchen of Namboodiri Mana's. 2)Nairs who are Kshatriyas. Still are the 2nd class in Hindu system.

what mr.menon said is true.I have had my study in erstwhile Udupi law college(Vaikunta Baaliga college of law).So ,knows something about tulunad,bunts etc. may be some nairs or bunts are not aware of this.but the truth is ,bunts,kota brahmins etc are recent arrivals from other areas.While Nairs are Very much here before them.Nairs were in what is called as tulunad regions of kerala and karnataka(kasaragode to kundapura).Bunts are claiming that they are Nairs for a long time.heck ,I have seen online sources,who want to equate bunts,reddys,vellalas to Nairs which is ABSOLUTELY *Wrong*.I am not a racist.but I am proud of My Community. Bunts can claim some other community to claim their descendence.we ,most of the nairs,rejects this claim that bunts are the same as nairs.WRONG! PS:I have seen some other caste in tulunad area who adheres to sri narayana guru(SNDP wala) and claims they are the same as ezhava/thiyya and tamil nadar.I think they are jains even.they got "ballal" surname as well. regards and truthfully , pramod panicker 59.93.26.160 (talk) 13:53, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Panicker title awarded by the rulers of Tamil Pandyan Dynasty and Chera dynasty (to those who are well versed in Martial arts, Medicine or astronomy.It is not a Naga title. After the fall of Chera kingdom some of these Panickers might have joined the Nairs and Ezhavas while others joined the Syrian Christian ranks.(Kundara and Vallikada Panickers). Tamil Villavars founded the Chera kingdom when the different Villavar tribes such as Velliar Purayars and Pazhuvettaraiyars (still used as sirnames by Tamil tribes). [Billava]] people of Karnataka are a subcaste of Villavars and basically Dravidians.Equivalent caste of Ezhavas in Karnataka are Edigas or Ezhiyas who too have Sri Lankan origins. Nairs are basically a subcaste of Bunts who might be of Naga origin and not Dravidian.Like Nairs Bunts also descend from the migrants from Ahichatram in Uttarpradesh at 345 ad. (Aryans Nagas and Dravidians are three basic Hindu races). Ballal is a title of Hoysala Empire who are basically Dravidians.Hoysala kings, Cheras and Pandyas practiced Hinduism as well as Jainism.Alupas kingdom of of Tulunadu was a branch of Pandyan kingdom.Bunts served Alupas kingdom as warriors.The descendents of Alupas kingdom use Ballal and Aluva (Tamil Alwar)titles. Nadavas could be original aristocrats from Alupas Pandyan kingdom but now intergrated with the Naga Bunt community. In the Second millenium the original Dravidian dynasties of Kerala and Tulunadu were destroyed and the ethnically different Nagas the Bunts/Nairs beame dominant. Nativedravidan (talk) 14:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

That's nice set of info nativedravidan saar!.Vallikada Paanicker- they were not married and they were Hindus as well.chances are less for them to be nadars.they were said to have came from tuticorin.and what else I heard is arakuzha Unniyadiri(Local kingdom) were assimilated into syrian christianity while it is not so with vallikada paanikers. 59.93.10.5 (talk) 09:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Nair ceremonies and customs

Nair ceremonies and customs - I am creating a new article as the subsection is just too long to edit comfortably. Axxn (talk) 04:34, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Nairs are Brahmins

I belong to Pulaya community, our people consider Nairs as Gods and Lords. But, I think they are not Brahmins , after all it is us who made all this varna classification therefore without our consent Nairs cant become gods... Kishore209 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Kindly DON'T (!!!) start this entire Brahmin or Kshatriya debate. We have had enough of that topic several times in the past. Manu rocks (talk) 05:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Kishore, is it true that your people are considered as Dalits? 24.34.107.20 (talk) 03:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Reply Manu rocks

Ok Manu. I don't want to upset you telling the Brahmin status of Nairs. What conclusion you made about Nairs position in Varna system? If you continue claiming that Nairs are not Brahmins, then sorry I have to again say Nairs were considered that. I don't see a single reference to Robin Jaffrey's book 'Decline of nair dominance', which is considered as the best scientific study about nairs. go and read therer you will find how respectfully Nairs were treated by Malayala Sudras till mid 19th century. Kishore209 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I am not "upset" and neither do I contest that they were untouchables. I am merely stating that let us not get into that debate again. Manu rocks (talk) 05:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Newar Story – Highly ambigous and imaginary..

The nair-newar connection is a cooked-up story and totally absurd. There is absolutely no citation for such an argument. The story comes out with most irrational statements to drive this point sans citations or any sort of documental credence.

The similarity between the temple structures of Nepal and Kerala doesn’t prove anything, here there is no evidence that the Temples of Kerala were indeed constructed by Nairs or whether they were prevalent during the pre-nair era. Many of the temples like the kodungallur were constructed thousands of years back. One could see many gothic, French architected palaces in Travancore and Cochin, does it mean that the kings are French or Greek ? The scrawny physical structure of a Nepali cannot be matched with that of brawny Nair soldiers (the physical measurements required to get qualified into the Travancore army are recorded and were much higher than that of Indian army today).The mangloid features of Nairs is another stupid finding. It is same as for any other malayali community. Serpent worship, marumakkathayam etc were practiced by many other communities in Kerala as well and cannot be cited as common only between Nairs and Newars. In the process, he is also confusing between Tibetan dance and newars. Newars are not Tibetans and hence no way connected to Tibetan dance. None of the history books, manuals ever has any reference to this theory whatsoever.

Hence, please remove the Newar section and references from the main article.Keraleeyan —Preceding undated comment added 06:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC).

You will find the nair-newar theory mentioned in the Travancore State Manual in the introduction to the Nairs. That is a sufficient citation coming from an official agent of the Travancore Govt in a Govt publication. Also the 1871 Census reports mention the same. Manu rocks (talk) 05:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I do agree, that the nair- newar connection has cropped up in the imagination of many "historians" not based on any evidence or anthropolgical study but based on suppositions that could be purely coincidential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.99.165.172 (talk) 12:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Nevertheless the word of those "historians" is far more credible than conclusions reached upon on this discussion page. The theory is referenced and hence should stay. Manu rocks (talk) 11:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily..different historians have different versions and obviously all versions can't be true. The 'word' of some of the historians are definitely wrong and some of them may be right.. So it is for the people in the forum to discuss and figure out the ones which have larger pinch of salt and discard it from the page. Otherwise it would look to be a vague collection of origins. There is nothing wrong in reaching a consensus through discussion for the most realistic and logistic ones. Of course, including all versions of origin doesn't make any sense...Keraleeyan —Preceding undated comment added 05:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC).

The talk page is not a forum to discuss historical possibilities. Coming back to the origin of the Nairs, you will find that there is no consensus other than that they were not Aryans. The origin question is very ambiguous and vague. Again as I had said earlier, so far as the theories have a reference from a credible source they can be mentioned in the article. Manu rocks (talk) 10:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Indo-Scythian

Newars are just as related to Nairs as Indo-Sythians are. There are also credible references for an Indo-Scythian origin of Nairs. Basically this should be put into the article as well, as well as the theory of migration from Ahichatra. However, these are not mainstream views, since the mainstream view is that the origin of both Nairs and Nambudiris in Kerala is unclear. There is not absolute proof of migration by Nambudiris or Nairs into Kerala. This should be emphasised, and the other theories should be described as other views.124.180.116.51 (talk) 12:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Nair page in Wikipedia ; Distrortion of History

Some (?) Nairs done a great work here , trying to whitewash their awful history as Kings and Emporers. Nair men once upon a time were enjoying the right of primae noctis. They enjoyed a large number of lower caste women. Again Nairs are considered as Dwijas. But, according to Brahminical belief Varmas are also among the kshatriyas of Kerala (with few sub divisions )Any way its go ahead respected Nair moderator, I am at your service and will be keeping a distance of 72 feet away from you, as I will pollute you. 121.245.223.165 (talk) 23:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Nairs are Dvijas and are Kshatriyas. But since in the Kali Yuga there are no true Kshatriyas, and indeed many so-called "Kshatriyas" such as Rajput became "Kshatriya" over the centuries, and communities such as Jatts, Marathas, Gurkhas, who boast of a martial history fall under the category: "Shudra". Having said that, the Nairs were the primary Kshatriya caste of Kerala, along with a few Samanta clans. Several Nair families of the Vadukkan Veeragatha ranked higher than most Samanta families on the social scale, despite their Jaathi being so-called equal. This is similar to several Nair clans that had near royal status second only to the Samanta Kshatriyas, and this placed them in a more powerful position than the landless Ambalavasis, Pushpaka Brahmins and Tamil Brahmins, etc, although the Nairs were of a upper caste.121.214.0.253 (talk) 11:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Nairs even at their peak glory were not considered Brahmins but Kshatriyas. Nairs might have joined the original Vellala Swaroopam mentioned in the Keralolpathi. Samantha Kshatriyas or Malayala Kshatriyas are different from Nairs.Though some minor princes were non-nairs most of the KIngdoms of Kerala were ruled by Nairs who had adopted Kshatriahood. The Namboothiri rulers were called Nambiadiri, Nambidi and Nambis and possibly Nedungadis. These Namboothiri rulers were called Val Nambis in Keralolpathi. These Namboothiri rulers often mixed with Samanthas but not Nairs.

Keralas original Tamil dynasties were replaced by Naga and Namboothiris dynasties after the invasion of Malik Kafur in 1309. Samudhiris predecessors were called Kunnalakonathiris and might have Vellala origins.Similarly the Valluvakonathiri moopil Nair the ruler of Valluvanadu was called Vellatiri and might have Vellala and Valluvan origins. The Namboothiris the mentors of the Samantha Kshatriyas did not hold them in high esteem. Namboothiris refused to crown the Samantha rulers as Kshatriyas. Nairs were not considered equal to Kshatriyas until recently. Nativedravidan (talk) 15:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)