Talk:Devadasi/Archive 2

Medieval European Christian Monasteries?

"The sexual rituals that accompany dedication are now considered by many Hindus to be exploitative and not mandatory. Nevertheless this practice continues unabated in many places, just as it used to be in the medieval European Christian monasteries." Is there a reference for this? What sexual rituals occured in medieval Christian monasteries? Was this a widespread practice in medieval Christian monasteries?

-Nathan 11:36, 12 February 2006

It is a well-known fact that in most Christian monasteries even nowadays some nuns come under pressure to have sex with the superior priests. However, just as the widespread homosexual practises in Chiristianity, this practise is considered as wrongful, and is condemned almost as strongly as the paedophile abuses by the Christian priests. Devadasi43 03:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Women who belonged to the Isai Vellavar caste often used to become Devadasis at the age of 3 years old.

"Women who belonged to the Isai Vellavar caste often used to become Devadasis at the age of 3 years old."

I can not find any reference or source for this claim, but that doesn't mean it isn't true, but it would be really helpful if anyone could supply a reference for this assertion. However I have heard of devadasi being dedicated as infants.

"Women who belonged to the Isai Vellavar caste often used to become Devadasis as infants."

I prefer this reading as it avoids the specificality of the previous entry, but I still can't find a reference to support the general claim.

wow...Bharatanatyam what a great rewrite !

Bharatanatyam I love the new entry, so concise, balanced and well written!

I might not agree with some of the prerogative language around the comments regarding the Devadasi and her sexual services but the entry is a great advance over the previous entries including mine.

“The above is a description of the typical religious duties that are supposed to be performed by a devadasi. This is the bright part of her life. The dark side of her life involves her sexual life. Her initiation into prostitution is not a natural sequel of her dedication, though it eventually might lead to the dark alleys of flesh trade. A devadasi gets a Patron after the deflowering ceremony.”

I think the entry should try and avoid the value loaded terms like flesh trade etc... but otherwise I thought the entry was very good.

Kama 12:04, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Of course you do not like "terms like flesh trade" because flesh trade is exactly what you are doing with Kama. With a law degree, you could find a better job in Kingston, couldn't you?

JuliaJ 02:29, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Please adhere to Wikipedia:No personal attacks, and don't insult or mock other users. Doing so will accomplish nothing. Thanks, Sango123 03:05, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Flesh trade

juliaj The reason I don't like the term "flesh trade" is that it is a value laden word and as such it could be considered biased. Furthermore I find your unsubstantiated assumptions to represent poor argument and prejudicial thought. You insist on making such assumptions about me because apparently you want me to fit with a certain world view you have about women who sell sex. However these prejudices have no place in a discourse about the issue at hand.

Even though I find use of the term "flesh trade" problematic I don't rush in and edit the same, because it is obvious Bharatanatyam has put a lot of time and effort into this entry and any edit should equally reflect a similar level of consideration.

The devadasis are today the young girls for committing pedophillia by the high caste middleage men with the sanction sanction of the hindoo religion. Ingenious!!

(Margaret) I think that the author did a good job of describing what may have happened to the Devadasi over time. There is some theory involved in depicting history. I learned alot from this article and I did not find it to be biased.

celibacy??

"Originally, devadasis were celibate all their life."

Dear DanceExpert,

Do you have any references for this whole life celibacy idea, I thought that some Devadasi were celibrate but that also historically the sexualised nature of temple life was such that many Devadasi groups had been sexually active in temple service for a very long time.

Could you give any references that support this grand theory regarding all Devadasi? I have found it mentioned on a number of websites but they all seem to draw from the same unreferenced source.

I don't have a particular problem with the celibacy idea, but when you see the ancient carvings on the South Indian temples it seems pretty obvious that the sexualised aspects of the Devadasi are certainly not a "new" behaviour and somehow the evolved practices need to be considered a legitimate aspect of that period at least.

I tend to believe that the Devadasi have not evolved from a single tradition so it is hard to argue that one possible source is more legitimate than another, but somehow I also believe the evolving tradition is not necessarily a corruption. Although modern repression in the 20c has certainly caused huge problems for the modern Devadasi.

Anyway I would appreciate your ideas on this...

Kama 20:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

This article needs a cleanup.

This article badly needs help in following WP:MOS and WP:NPOV. You have read a lot of information to even find out what a Devadasi is, and even then it's not really clear. It frequently uses POV language, and makes many statements that really need sources (see Wikipedia:Cite sources.)

I'm going to put up both tags and hopefully it will get some more attention and editors contributing. --K. AKA Konrad West TALK 02:53, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

New introductory paragraph

I've started on it, but it needs more work to encompass the various meanings. See:

• http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9030142
• http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Devadasi
• http://skepdic.com/devadasi.html
• http://famous.adoption.com/famous/devadasi.html
• http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Spring02/Chattaraj/index2.html

Granted, some of these sites aren't neutral nor reputable, but they show the variety of meanings and POVs. --K. AKA Konrad West TALK 03:32, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

I think this article does needs some work and as such if we can approach the need to have content properly references and showing a NPOV we should be able to avoid another revert war.

Definitions

The intro paragraph needs to define what a Devadasi is. I tried to add it I know I didn't do a good job. Could someone please put a better definition in the second sentence so people know what the article is about without having to read the entire article. RJFJR 15:35, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

---

Another term which needs defining is "noatch". FFD 21:44, 13 August 2006

---

The reference to the Theosophical Society should start with Rukmini Devi, I think. I looked up references to devadasi in Blavatsky's writings, and they are all but absent (there is precisely one, and it only proves she was aware of them, certainly not that she actively fought to help their lot). I also looked up Olcott's biography by Stephen Prothero and though he mentions a lot of Olcott's projects (he did have many), Indian Dance was not one of them. To be absolutely sure one would have to look up Olcott's 'Old Diary Leaves'. Still, I don't think his work for the Devadasi paid off - he died in 1907, and Rukmini only became active in dance a few decades after that.

kh7 15:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Kudos

It's been quite long time... I find the article has improved a lot and now it's quite bold. Thanks for the steps. For sometime back I was fighting here to include the real facts about the sexual exploitation in the name of religion by the religion inventors, but the descendants have tried the otherwise to cripple it. It's bold now; keep up the good work. --Rrjanbiah 17:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

tags

Okay. This article seems to be kind of abandoned, so I did a substantial cleanup and removed the cleanup tag. I didn't touch the source citations, so that's still a bit messy. I also removed the NPOV tag, because I didn't see any POV in the article. I'm not entirely sure why that tag was put there in the first place. If there's something I missed, please put the tag back and let me know what the disputed stuff is. Natalie 16:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Removed sentence

I have deleted the following sentence: "This type of practice and culture puts justice under the caste system into a question mark.It can be considered as an injustice." as blatant POV. Natalie 17:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Devadasis as sex workers

I have reverted the following change from the introduction: "Then, upper-caste men can have sexual intercourse with them for a price" was changed to "European colonialists associated this function with prostitution. However, notable scholars and feminist groups have largely debunked this assertion", since this is blatant POV. This sentence removed represents the "Revivalist" point of view, which is described at length in the article. I added the (single) reference given to the references section. This reference in any case cannot be used to justify "notable scholars and feminist groups" since it represents the view of a single person and the page referenced cites only a single source which is itself already referenced in this article. It should be noted that a great deal of modern academic work (referenced in this article) has been done by Indians, including Hindus, who are certainly not under the influence of European colonialists which demonstrate that in modern times "upper-caste men have sexual intercourse with [Devadasis] for a price" Lemongoat 12:31, 15 January 2007 (IST)

Wrong, it includes the findings of the National Commission for Women, which is a feminist group and they are reliable in this context.Rumpelstiltskin223 22:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

There are other, equally reliable academics cited in the references to this article who dispute this. That is why representing a single point of view in the introductory paragraph counts as POV under wikipedia guidelines. Furthermore, the article you cite refers to *historical* discussions of devadasi status. *NOBODY debates the fact that in post-independence India Devadasis are basically prostitutes*, which is what the introductory paragraph correctly states. This is a clearly recorded fact, which is why the governments of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu etc. are working to stamp out this practice. It is clear from your editing history that you are a high-caste south Indian. Hence perhaps you feel ashamed about the statement you keep removing. I am British (although I live in India, pay Indian taxes and my partner is Indian). Depsite feeling ashamed about the activities of British people under colonialism, this does not give me the right to remove references to crimes committed by the British under the colonial regime. Please grow up. If you change this again, I will request mediation. Lemongoat 10:51am, 15 January 2007 (IST).

Please! This diatribe clearly belies an anti-Hindu biases. Indeed, those pathetic "Hindu Animals", what savages they are! See what else those Hindus have been up to.Rumpelstiltskin223 05:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This is laughable. Are you accusing the governments of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and a host of Indian Hindu academics of anti-Hindu bias? Devadasis are Hindus too. Are you accusing them of anti-Hindu bias? This is an encyclopedia of facts. You need to provide evidence of your view, not resort to name-calling. Unless you can provide evidence that in post-independence India it is not the case thet "upper-caste men have sexual intercourse with [Devadasis] for a price" then you should restore the statement. I repeat that *nobody* disputes this, and there are numberous references to this practice by Hindu human rights activists and in contemporary Indian newspapers. I have requested mediation for this article.

An interesting series of statements. I am wondering if another sock puppet of User:BhaiSaab is up and about.

The Devdasis were never prostitutes. That is pure colonialist and Christian Missionary propaganda. Just because some Macaulyist Indians say otherwise does not make it fact. It can be stated as an assertion, but to present it as fact where a clear dispute exists clearly demonstrates an anti-Hindu prejudice Rumpelstiltskin223 06:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do me the favour of reading what I say. I am saying, as is the article, that CURRENTLY, POST-INDEPENDENCE, Devadasis are bought for sex. This is well documented and uncontroversial, and is what the sentence you keep removing in the introduction states. If you would like to add the words "Currently, post-independence" then this would be an acceptable expansion of that statement. The SEPARATE question of whether HISTORICALLY Devadasis were prostitutes is the subject of the bulk of this article. Viewpoints for and against this view are presented in the article. Your presentation as one of these viewpoints as fact in the introduction of this article directly controvenes Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Wikipedia is NOT a forum for political debate. It is an encyclopedia. You can't just go removing things you don't like because they don't support your political agenda. Your viewpoint is represented and documented thoroughly in the article. However you can't claim as a fact in the introduction that the viewpoint you support is correct and that the others are wrong. Can I suggest for now we remove both controversial statements from the introduction pending mediation? Lemongoat 12:19am, 15 January 2007 (IST). NB the following returned from a five second search of Google: http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/29/stories/2005042912820300.htm http://www.hindu.com/2006/03/19/stories/2006031905890300.htm http://www.thehindu.com/2006/12/31/stories/2006123113110500.htm

Please don't lie. Both points of view are adequately represented in the lead of the article. Putting a POV statement like yours is a full-scale violation of WP:LEAD. Please learn some wikipedia rules before trotting off on an anti-Hindu rampage, thaa.Rumpelstiltskin223 07:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Point of fact, none of your sources even mention the words "sex" or "prostitute" so I should report you for misrepresenting sources and violating WP:POINT. Rumpelstiltskin223 07:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This is even more hilarious. You have indeed now made some attempt at restoring balance to the introduction of the article, which is good. Please note that I have not added a single thing to this article - I just restored a deletion you made, which I have cited several sources to support. So you cannot accuse me of any kind of POV. If you have any knowledge of Indian culture you know exactly what the sources in the Hindu are referring to, although clearly it's convenient for you to pretend ignorance. For other readers, here's some more articles for Rumpelstiltskin to accuse of "Anti-Hindu bias": http://www.ashanet.org/library/articles/devadasis.199812.html, http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Spring02/Chattaraj/index2.html, even though they are both written by Hindus (not that this is of any relevance). Until you are able to quote factual sources that discuss the Devadasi system in *modern India* which claim it has nothing to do with sex work, please refrain from launching ad hominem attacks on me. Firstly they make you look ignorant, and secondly I really couldn't care less because I am able to back up my position with citations and you are not. Lemongoat 1:47pm, 15 January 2007 (IST)

Your entire post above is a violation of the following wikipedia rules:

1. WP:AGF assume good faith with me
2. No Original Research about "having knowledge of Indian Culture" and the like. Cite specific sources and do not add your vaulted opinions
3. WP:NPOV.Many left-wing academics have anti-Hindu biases, even Indian ones. Please read this article exposing deep-seated prejudices against Hindus in american academia, even from Indians. The articles are obviously not written by Hindus but by Indians, and their polemic and hate-attacks on Hindu culture suggest an anti-Hindu bias already. I will do more research on these authors and see what biases they possess if they can be reliably sourced. Remember that Indian does not make one Hindu. To claim that they are Hindus based on their names instead of religious affiliation (of which neither you nor I have knowledge) makes the baseless allegation that Hindus are some sort of ethnicity, which is inherently racist.
4. WP:NPOV again - One-sided partisan views concerning "degraded Hindu culture of Hindu animals" or whatever those leftist anti-Hindus allege have to be qualified by very credible reports from the National Commission of women to the contrary, which has been done, thaa.
5. Intelelctual dishonesty, concerning that my NCW citation clearly backs up my edit.Rumpelstiltskin223 08:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please note that I have replied to all these points above - but Rumpelstilskin deleted them from this page. Please refer to the history if you are interested. I will note only this: nobody has yet refuted the sources I provide that state that the status of Devadasis in *modern India* is that of sex workers. This is the only point I am trying to make here. Rumpelstiltskin's citation of the NCW is a discussion of the status of Devadasis *historically* - not in modern India. Hence the sentence "upper-caste men can have sexual intercourse with them for a price" or some modification of this which indicates Devadasis' position in contemporary India should be restored unless some citations can be provided which disagree with the five I supplied above. Lemongoat 2:36pm, 15 January 2007 (IST)

None of your references can be attributed to a notable academic. I do not see any peer-reviewed publications here, or even attributions from notable academics. Plz read WP:RS a bit more carefully.Rumpelstiltskin223 09:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

OK I'll be back in a couple of days with some references from the academic literature. Meanwhile, howabout Reuters: http://www.aegis.com/news/re/1997/RE970188.html and the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/2071612.stm ? Lemongoat 3:08pm, 15 January 2007 (IST)

Pah! Don't make me laugh! Reuters talks about a "cult". A cult is hardly the norm, or it wouldn't be a cult. There is a cult of Christians called Mormons who practice polygamy. Are all Christians polygamists? the BBC ref mentions women being exploited by pimps into prostitutes, it mentions nothing about upper-caste Hindus having sex with them for religious purposes. It even talks about the distinction between a concubine and a prostitute in one sentence.Only you draw your bigoted conclusions against Hinduism based on these refs, they do not. Next thing we know you will say that Buddhism preaches prostitution because there are so many prostitutes in Buddhist Thailand. Please! Stop with this anti-Hindu nonsense and contribute in a productive way, or you are not welcome here. We are not here to talk about prostitutes, we are here to talk about Devdasis. Prostitution in India is another article. That is a haven for Indophobic bigots so these edits would be welcomed there.Rumpelstiltskin223 09:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

All I did on this page was revert your deletion of the phrase about "upper-caste men can have sexual intercourse with them for a price", and then added some tags indicating the disputed status of the page. I didn't write the phrase in the first place. As I have repeatedly stated, my only interest is in including some text in this article to the effect that in modern India Devadasis have the status of sex workers. I have no interest in arguments pro and anti Hinduism, and frankly I don't see that this has anything to do with Hinduism at all. If somebody looks up Devadasis in an encyclopedia, they will want to know what the term means so they can understand articles like those I cited in the Hindu above. Calling me an "Indophobic bigot" is quite hilarious given that I live and work in India of my own choice, my partner is Indian, and I studied Hindi and Hindustani sangeet for a masters at London University. Please stop these ad hominem arguments, and agree that we should include something about the modern use of the word "Devadasi" which indicates the status of Devadasis as sex workers in modern India. Lemongoat 3:40pm, 15 January 2007 (IST)

..an assertion that you have yet to establish reliably. I have lived in India most of my life and this is the first I am hearing of this remarkable claim. Devdasis are not prostitutes and prostitutes are not Devdasis. Also, 95% of all Indophobes live in India only (long story as to why).Rumpelstiltskin223 10:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Good grief, Macaulay lived in colonial times! Your claim that 95% of all Indophobes live in India is quite baseless and calling me one is clearly a breach of WP:AGF which you have been so fast to label me with. How can you call me an Indophobe for citing seven articles, some from reliable sources such as the BBC, Reuters, and The Hindu, which state or at least suggest (in the case of the Hindu articles) that Devadasis are sex workers? I am sitting in an office in Bangalore with 180 other Indians, and the ones I am sitting with have been watching this thread quite amazed that you have never heard about Devadasis being sex workers before. Just because you've never heard this claim before, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I repeat, please refrain from ad hominem attacks and provide *at least* the same level of evidence that I have before you label me an anti-Hindu Indophobe. Lemongoat 3:40pm, 15 January 2007 (IST)

Listen, you need to understand what WP:NOR means. I suggest you bloody read the page by clicking the link. You have drawn a conclusion based on vague inferences and suggestions from disparate sources. That is DISALLOWED on wikipedia and ANY attempt to do so is considered DISRUPTIVE. Do you follow? Also, regarding your "friends", I suggest you look at Wikipedia:Sock puppet and Wikipedia:Sock puppet#Meatpuppets before you get yourself into deeper trouble. Wikipedia is not a hate-propaganda campaign. It is an attempt at a serious and non-partisan encyclopedia. Rumpelstiltskin223 11:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I have read the page. In the section "Reliable sources" it says: "There is no firm definition of 'reliable,' although most of us have a good intuition about the meaning of the word. In general, the most reliable sources are books and journals published by university presses; mainstream newspapers; and magazines and journals published by known publishing houses". Reuters and the BBC count as mainstream news sources. These articles establish quite clearly states that Devadasis are considered by many people as sex workers. The BBC article says, "But a devadasi's principle occupation - in the eyes of many - is the flesh trade". The Reuters article says, "Most of the girls brought into the Devadasi system will return home, but once they reach puberty they will become human cargo in the sex traffic in cities like Bombay". This clearly supports my statement. I honestly and truly don't see how this is either controversial or hate-propoganda. I am not a sock-puppet - you can type my name into google and find my blog, website, even pictures of me and my partner and my "friends". Lemongoat 11:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Lemongoat

Again, none of this backs the specific statement that you hysterically tried to keep (all that upper-caste nonsense)."In the eyes of many". Who the hell is "many"? Communists I'll bet."Most of the girls brought into the Devadasi system will return home, but once they reach puberty they will become human cargo in the sex traffic in cities like Bombay". Fine, how does that prove religious prostitution? It merely suggests that Devdasis leave the religious fold and sometimes turn to normal prostitution. None of these statements support the claim of Hindu prostitution, which is the usual anti-Hindu hysteria.Rumpelstiltskin223 13:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, how about this. Go to http://nhrc.nic.in/Documents/ReportonTrafficking.pdf. This is a report (hosted on the Government of India's website) on human trafficking by IPS officer P. M. Nair from 2004. It is financed by the National Human Rights Commission of India (an Indian governmental body), the Institute of Social Sciences in New Delhi, and UNIFEM (a UN body). Here are some quotes: "There is no denial of the fact that culturally sanctioned practices, such as the devadasi custom, which developed as a purely religious institution, saw a gradual decline when degenerated practices began to be associated with it, especially that of commercial sexual exploitation... For example, Harshad R. Trivedi’s (1976) study entitled, Scheduled Caste Women: Studies in Exploitation, shows how women belonging to the Scheduled Castes are encouraged to undergo initiation ceremony, and accept the devadasi way of life. Later on, such women are allured to take up the profession of prostitution either at local or at city red-light areas." (p199). "According to another estimate, girls dedicated as devadasis to Yellamma, Hanuman and Khandoba temples in the Maharashtra–Karnataka border area number about 2.5 lakhs (Ranjana, 1983:24). After initiation as devadasis, women migrate either to nearby towns or other far-off cities to practise prostitution. The backward areas of Belgaum district such as Saundatti, Kokatnur and Yellamman Gudda are more prone to this cult. These areas thus became the chief source for urban brothels. This fact has been validated in case study No. CS-KR-1." (p200) "Tarachand’s (1991) study entitled, Devadasi Custom – Rural Social Structure and Flesh Markets, once again reiterates that the devadasi system is contributing to the growth of commercial prostitution today and that this relation between the devadasi custom and commercial prostitution is quite ancient and close. Based on the data collected from commercial prostitutes in Gaum city of Karnataka state, his study points out that though it is against tradition, a sizeable percentage of devadasis were commercial prostitutes." (p200). I could go on, but I believe that you now have enough references to academic, peer-reviewed material to substantiate my point. Lemongoat 12:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Lemongoat.

Charming. However, not a single one of these references back what you allege, that upper-caste men pay them to have sex. They are lengthy and often self-contradictory diatribes (one one hand, all Hindus are supposed to be racists who never touch low-caste people, on another hand, we have sex with them all the time, please!). I will cross-check your book references, but, again, none of these back your statement that upper-caste men pay them for their services. In fact, prostitution is more common among the poor than among the wealthy.Plus, before you cite the "academics", their credibility needs to be evaluated by a non-partisan editor (ie not you). Rumpelstiltskin223 13:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

For the last time, I did not allege that "upper-caste men pay them to have sex", although I suspect that upper caste and lower caste men and christians and buddhists and athiests all pay them to have sex. I did not write the statement that "upper-caste men pay them to have sex", as a read of the history of the article will show. As I have repeatedly stated, I simply reverted your deletion of it because I felt that *something* needed to be on record regarding the status of devadasis as sex workers pending a discussion on this page. I did not author that statement. Please no longer accuse me of doing so since it contravenes WP:AGF. I have identified the source of the statement, a report on Human Rights Watch which once had this URL: http://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/india/India994-09.htm#P1821_382003, but is presently dead. I have NO INTEREST IN A DEBATE CONCERNING ITS CREDIBILITY, or indeed in continuing this debate at all. Please can you now leave me alone? Thanks. Lemongoat 13:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Lemongoat

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH!!! You mean the same Human rights watch that is an apology factory for Islamic terrorists [1] [2][3] [4][5][6]and

tries to cover up the Darfur Genocide [7] and is widely known to have anti-Hindu biases as cited by one of your precious academics here? Humen Rights Watch. More like Human Rights Mafia! Please, at least TRY to find a more credible-looking source yaar.Rumpelstiltskin223 14:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

As I said, I have no interest in trying to establish the credibility of Human Rights Watch. I simply identified it as the source of the original comment. Lemongoat 14:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Lemongoat.

Maybe you should both step back for a minute and bring in arbitration. This discussion doesn't seem to be getting anywhere at all. Natalie 18:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

RESEARCH ARTICLES and INSCRIPTIONS: KAIKOLARS = DEVADASIS/ DEVARADIYARS

1. The Erotic Sculptures of India Y. Krishan Artibus Asiae, Vol. 34, No. 4 (1972), pp. 331-343

(proves that kaikolan musicians = devadasis) link 1: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=dasi+kaikolan+musician link 2: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3648(1972)34%3A4%3C331%3ATESOI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2

2. Artisans in Vijayanagar Society, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, 417-444 (1985)

This research article explains the blood relation between the Devadasis and the Kaikolar. ("Devaradiyar (dancing girls who have very close kinship ties with the Kaikkolar

link 1: http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/22/4/417 link 2: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=devaradiyar+who+have+close+kinship Register for free -> http://www.sagepublications.com/sjofreeaccess/

3. Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/19/1/47?ck=nck register here for free->http://www.sagepublications.com/sjofreeaccess/

This research article explains in vivid detail, the way the Kaikkolas used their women to enjoy special privileges in the Vijayanagar empire. (Text Quoted from article: "At least one woman in every Kaikkola household was, according to age-old tradition dedicated to the temple as a devaradiyar or devadasi. The devaradiyar enjoyed special privileges in the days of the Vijayanagar empire and were the only women permitted a direct audience with the king".

link2: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=at+least+one+woman+kaikkoli+household+devaradiyar+devadasi

4. Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/19/1/47?ck=nck, register here for free->http://www.sagepublications.com/sjofreeaccess/

This research article (along with references to an inscription) describes how a devaradiyar or devadasi won special privileges for the Kaikkolas from the king Deva Raya II (A.D 1433)

link2:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=devaradiyar+won+special+privileges+for+the+kaikkolas+deva+raya+II

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

6. This article talks in much detail about how women from the Sengundhar/ Kaikola caste get into the sacred prostitution in temples.

"Contending identities: Sacred prostitution and reform in colonial South India Priyadarshini Vijaisri A1, A1 Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), New Delhi" South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group Issue: Volume 28, Number 3 / December 2005 Pages: 387 - 411

To view the complete article just register, its free. Here are the links :

http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk/link.asp?id=jv31l27518262711 If you cannot access it then just go to the following page and follow one of the links

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Contending+identities%3A+Sacred+prostitution+and+reform+in+colonial+South+India

Origin of Devadasis: Sengunthars/ Kaikolars and Devadasis

1. The following is quoted from a legitimate third party website. http://globalindiamissions.org/newsletter/nwsltr0802.htm

The Kaikolan are a large Tamil and Telugu caste of weavers. There are seventy-two subdivisions (nadu or desams). Their name comes from a mythical hero and from the words "kai" (hand) and "koi" (shuttle). They consider the different parts of the loom to represent various gods and sages. They are also known as Sengundar, which means a red dagger, which is traced to the legend of the earth being harassed by demons, which led to the people asking the god Shiva to help them.

Traditionally, one girl in every family was set apart to be dedicated to temple service and becomes a "Devdasi" (meaning female servant of god). In the temple, the girl is considered married to the temple deity but in practice becomes a prostitute, especially to the Brahmans and she learns traditional music and dancing.

2. This is taken from a journal research article with abundant valid references. This is as legitimate as it gets.

This article talks in much detail about how women from the Sengundhar/ Kaikola caste get into the sacred prostitution in temples.

"Contending identities: Sacred prostitution and reform in colonial South India Priyadarshini Vijaisri A1, A1 Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), New Delhi" South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group Issue: Volume 28, Number 3 / December 2005 Pages: 387 - 411

To view the complete article just register, its free.

http://journalsonline.tandf.co.uk/link.asp?id=jv31l27518262711 If you cannot access it then just go to the following page and follow one of the links

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Contending+identities%3A+Sacred+prostitution+and+reform+in+colonial+South+India

3. This is taken from another legitimate webiste http://www.go2southasia.org/l_peoples.html of a world renknown organisation recognised by many countries.

The KAIKOLAR people are a caste of weavers 1.5 million strong in southern India. They are Hindus and view different parts of the loom as representations of various gods and sages. Traditionally, each Kaikolar family sets aside one daughter to serve in a Hindu temple. That daughter is considered married to the temple deity—often the Hindu destroyer god Shiva. In practice, the daughter becomes a temple prostitute.

Moving of text in the introduction

OK I am about to move some text in the introduction. In order to explain this let me make the situation absolutely clear.

There exists dispute about the status of devadasis in ancient up to colonial Indian society. This is discussed in the first paragraph.

There exists NO DISPUTE about the status of devadasis in modern (post-Independence) Indian society, as discussed in the second paragraph. Many of them are sex workers. None of the referenced articles (Crooke, W, Iyer, L.A.K, Leslie C. Orre, or the hinduwebsite.com article) are discussing the status of devadasis in modern Indian society. They are discussing the position of devadasis in ancient up to colonial Indian society. Hence the text from "These views on Devadasis..." up to the end of the paragraph properly belongs to the first paragraph. I am moving it there.Lemongoat 07:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Lemongoat

Origin of Devadasis Discussion and Survey

Devadasis is a system of temple prostitutes practiced all over India. In this how come the single group called Kaikolar who are based only in Tamilnadu become the origin for all the temple prostitutes throughout India across all centuries? Somebody needs to clear this up before claiming that Kaikolar were the source of this system in India. Secondly the group called Isai Vellala themselves accept that they are the people who used the name Kaikolar and involved in this practice. Some vested interests such as User:Mudaliar are involved in denigrating and slandering the group Kaikolar in this article.

Venki 01:59, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been wondering if that stuff is defamatory or POV myself, but I don't know much about the castes. Perhaps he is trying to write the history of devadasis only in that part of Tamilnadu? If that is the case then is should be made clear by receiving its own section somewhere on the page.

From what I have read the devadasis don't come from one caste. If you look on page 11 of the external link article on the bottom there is an explicit statement of this fact, "Devadasi system is not confined to a particular caste." So, if any of this Kaikolar stuff is true, it should be placed in its own section for that region instead of being presented as the general "source" of devadasis. I think this may be the case, as the sources he cited are referring specifically to South India. Unfortunately the sources he uses for the controversial information are mostly inaccessible, but based on their titles this seems to be the case. Hopefully Lemongoat will check this page soon to have his say, since he knows much more about this stuff than I. The Behnam 02:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The references are very much valid research articles. You can access these sites from many institutions the world over. Check the site to see if your public library has access to it. These are valid research articles and books. Just because you don't have access doesn't mean these are trash. Moreover the statements are quoted directly from the articles and they are not meant to be defamatory. The article Devadasi itself is a very volatile topic. Some ppl consider the devadasis as women of the new age who led free lives in a conservative India while others such as Venki123 (talk · contribs) consider them to be prostitutes. Devadasis have in fact given so much to Indian arts and only more recently have they been degraded to a low status by the society. Its such a shame.

Mudaliar 03:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

From Venki 02:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC) :: It is definitely defamatory based only on the arguments going on in the article Mudaliar and articles Sengunthar, Sengundhar, Kaikolar and Kaikolan. User:Mudaliar is doing this only to spite the group Kaikolar. Please see the discussion going on and survey in the above articles. The name of the group is called Isai Vellala who used the name of the Kaikolar group for hiding their origin. However User:Mudaliar refuses to accept that and persists in his slandering. Venki 02:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC).

No, all articles are research articles and are very much genuine. Venki123 (talk · contribs) is just trying to deviate this discussion and portray this as a dispute when in fact the only thing he has been doing is to revert my edits and delete heavily referenced sections.Mudaliar 04:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaikolar stuff

I've moved it to a subsection specifically about South India & the Chola Empire because the information didn't seem to apply universally to the origin of devadasis in India. I don't claim to know a lot about this topic so I welcome and encourage and feedback. Thanks. The Behnam 14:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi "The Behnam",

Most of the information about the devadasis in the article page has been referred from Amrit Srinivasan's publication. If you read the original source you'd notice that he is referring to the devadasis in South India. If you're going to move the kaikolar stuff in the origin to a separate section, then most of the other stuff like the dedication process, the devadasi way of life etc., will all need to be under this section. For example, notice how he mostly describes about Devadasis in TamilNadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. These are 3 south Indian states. So the move really does not make any sense as the rest of the article mostly speaks about the Devadasis in South India. Once again, this information is not meant to be defamatory.

As for Venki123 (talk · contribs), this person has been constantly vandalising articles and deleting heavily referenced sections. On the other hand he refuses to do anything constructive and simply insists on killing the spirit of Wikipedia. How can you reject these academic references which have been written by historians and researchers ? Moreover these sources have been verified by well known conferences and have been accepted as valid sources by the Govt. of India. Moreover disregard me: Are you telling me that every author and researcher of the various articles are out to get Venki123 (talk · contribs) and their sole purpose is to slander the Kaikolars? C'mon give me break. Venki123 (talk · contribs) is just doing this out of spite in order to butt heads with me and is clearly attempting to divert this. I furnish below all the references pertaining to this discussion once again:

Citations from research papers and books that prove the origin of Devadasis and their relation to Sengunthar, Kaikolars

a)The Erotic Sculptures of India Y. Krishan Artibus Asiae, Vol. 34, No. 4 (1972), pp. 331-343

(proves that kaikolan musicians = devadasis) http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3648(1972)34%3A4%3C331%3ATESOI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2

b)Artisans in Vijayanagar Society, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, 417-444 (1985)

This research article explains the blood relation between the Devadasis and the Kaikolar. ("Devaradiyar (dancing girls who have very close kinship ties with the Kaikkolar link 1: http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/22/4/417 link 2:

c) Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/19/1/47?ck=nck

Text Quoted from article: "At least one woman in every Kaikkola household was, according to age-old tradition dedicated to the temple as a devaradiyar or devadasi. The devaradiyar enjoyed special privileges in the days of the Vijayanagar empire and were the only women permitted a direct audience with the king".

d) Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/19/1/47?ck=nck

This research article (along with references to an inscription) describes how a devaradiyar or devadasi won special privileges for the Kaikkolas from the king Deva Raya II (A.D 1433)

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

f) This article talks in much detail about how women from the Sengundhar/ Kaikola caste get into the sacred prostitution in temples.

"Contending identities: Sacred prostitution and reform in colonial South India Priyadarshini Vijaisri A1, A1 Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), New Delhi" South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group Issue: Volume 28, Number 3 / December 2005 Pages: 387 - 411

g)Another reference book Donors, Devotees, and Daughters of God. Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu by Leslie C. Orr, http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-0279(200210%2F12)122%3A4%3C919%3ADDADOG%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T

Please read through atleast a few of the above articles. Mudaliar 03:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaikolar confusion and clarification

The devadasi system has been abolished for over 60 years. Even 100 years ago, the caste for devadasis was recognized as Isai Vellalar. Please see the websites below.

The origin of Devadasis was from Isai Vellalar

The origin of Devadasis was from Isai Vellalar as seen in this article [8]. Narthaki is a well known website of the patrons of the dance form Bharathanatyam. The article is by a renowned author.

See this newspaper page from a renowned national newspaper Deccan herald. [9].

All the reference journal articles given by User:mudaliar cannot be referred to any more. So either we should fix their links or remove them.

So even though one would like to think that user:mudaliar made a genuine mistake, I dont think so. His editing started only after the revert wars in the article Mudaliar. Please see the history and time stamp.

He has made these edits because of the prejudice he has against the group kaikolar as can be seen from the edits and reverts he made in the articles kaikolar kaikolan Sengunthar Sengundhar. Please see the history and time stamp.

Venki 21:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaikolar word origin

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

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

[10]

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

In the case of Sengunthar they go by the name Kaikolar (kai=hand kol=spear or sceptre) as they were warriors during ancient Chola period. Similarly it is used by isai (isai=music in tamil) Vellala (meant farmer or producer; in this case producer of music) to mean (kai=hand kol=lute string). Venki 21:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Multiple names for a single caste in Tamilnadu

It is customary for a caste to have more than one name in Tamilnadu. Other castes such as Tondai-Mandala-Vellala use the name Kondai-katti-Vellala; Nattu-Kottai-Chetti go by the name Nagarathar. Nadars go by the name Chanar.

User:Mudaliar has maliciously used this two name system to slander the Sengunthar. In modern times i.e, from 1900 onwards Isai-Vellalar have stopped using the name Kaikolar and it is exclusively used by Sengunthar.

So I suggest we remove all references to Kaikolar or Sengunthar in this article. However to prevent any future confusion, it is better we add the caveat that they Isai-Vellalar used Kaikolar as their alternate name along with the proper etymology. So all reference materials prior to the period 1900 such as literature and inscriptions are referring to Isai-Vellalar and not the Sengunthar.

Hope this clarifies the issue for one and all.

Venki 21:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Venki 02:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Venki123 (talk · contribs) has been constantly vandalising and harassing all the editors (just go through his contributions and you will realise the way he uses digusting words to intimidate and slander). His lame attempt at proving that the kaikolars are not devadasis does not hold water against all these academic references which clearly prove otherwise: that the devadasi community in South India was clearly an offshoot of the Kaikolar/ Sengunthar community. The Kaikolars are clearly described as the Kaikolars of the terinja-Kaikolar Padai. Hence there is no room for any ambiguity in this issue. Venki123 (talk · contribs) is clealry attempting to divert this issue as a dispute as he is unable to compete with the academic references and research papers and books. Mudaliar 02:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaikolar Reference articles

I have given two easily accesible references of independent websites. One is Narthaki a website which promotes the dance art of Devadasis as Bharathanatyam. The second is a well known newspaper. If any of the articles cited as reference by User:Mudaliar are accesible, I'll be glad to read them. If they are not accesible then please remove them. Again what matters is the exact proper name of the group that dedicated girls to Devadasi system. The reference articles given by me clearly state they are called Isai Vellalar as indicated by other editors before the vandalizing by User:Mudaliar. I don't think a world renowned newspaper such as Deccan Herald would have a vested interest in hiding the true name of the caste which contributed girls to this devadasi system. See the first few paras of this Talk:Devadasi page and the history of this article Devadasi. Only User:Mudaliar insists on using the Kaikolar name which is no longer being used by the Isai-Vellalar group of people. This is because User:Mudaliar himself belongs to a sub branch of Vellalar similar to Isai-Vellalar and hence is ashamed and has a vested interest in denigrating Sengunthar. Venki 03:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, so does this information only apply to Southern India in the first place? The Behnam 04:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

This is asolutely ridiculous. These are valid academic references and have been published and accepted in conferences after much research. They should not be removed. Moreover, if you cannot access them then go to a library from where you can access JSTOR, sage etc. and read those articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mudaliar (talk • contribs) 04:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

Please remain civil and actually try to address my question. Thanks. The Behnam 16:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaikolar and the regions involved

The regions where the User:Mudaliar is concerned about, involves only about 10 districts (districts are equivalent to counties in USA )in Tamilnadu state which has over 30 districts. Tamilnadu itself in one state out of 30 states in India. These 10 districts were under the rule of Chola kingdom. The remaining districts of Tamilnadu were under other kingdoms such as Pallalva, Chera and Pandya.

So we are talking about only 30% of 3% of India i.e. about 0.9% of the Indian country as a whole. The scope is so narrow and we must mention that in the article. Plus we must add information about all the remaining states of India such as Bihar, Andhra, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, etc where devadasi system was practiced more widely than in Tamilnadu.

How come we are not discussing about the castes involved in those states and only about Kaikolar? What is the motive and vested interest to discuss about Kaikolar and confuse everybody who is reading this article? Why instead of using the proper name of the caste Isai-Vellalar like all the articles in newspapers and prominent websites an archaic name is used which is the alternate name for Sengunthar?

In olden days (100 years ago) nobody would be confused about Isai-Vellalar or Sengunthar. Isai-Vellalar use the surname Pillai and Sengunthar use surname Mudaliar. But now in the modern world especially in Wikipedia which can be accessed by everyone around the world, this name play can lead to confusion. Reading this article, people would naturally get confused.

I believe my questions are reasonable. And I have been trying to edit this for about 4 months now, only to end up in revert wars with User:Mudaliar. See his recent contributions where he is fighting with another user and an admin User:Durova regarding the article Mudaliar. User:Mudaliar in order to slander the caste Sengunthar has edited this article. It is against the principles of Wikipedia.

Venki 16:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Venki123 (talk · contribs) is lying profusely. He is unable to provide any valid academic references but he continues to just point fingers at me. The dispute is regarding the origin of Devadasis which have been clearly verified by the research articles: the Devadasis came only from the Kaikolars. He is now trying to distort based upon states and districts in India and is now trying to create an illusion of "narrowing of scope" which is clearly not true. First of all where did he get the numbers for the districts, I'm talking about. He is just throwing numbers all over the place and skewing facts to his favor. Please go trhough the article, South India to familiarize yourself, with the demographics:

NASA satellite photo of South India, January 31, 2003.

The above portion consists of the states, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, Kerala. These are the areas that pertain to this discussion. This is definitely not 3% of India. You can see how Venki123 (talk · contribs) is grossly distorting the figures to push his point. As for my recent discussion with Durova (talk · contribs), you could contact her and verify if I'm really fighting with her.Mudaliar 16:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, so this is about Devadasis in South India? I've been trying to find the answer to this question for awhile now. The Behnam 17:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Everything in the article about Devadasis is referring only to Devadasis in South India and is taken from their life. So it just doesn't make sense to move their origin to a new section.Mudaliar 17:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. That seems to contradict sources that describe the existence of the Devadasi problem throughout India, not just in the South. Are you sure your sources are describing Devadasis universally? The Behnam 17:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Please just read through the Devadasi article and notice the locations specified. For example: just read the intro (just before origin), it just talks abt devadasis in Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu which are the South Indian states. Next the Ancient and medieval history talks about the locations of Tanjore(a city in Tamil Nadu which was the capital of Chola empire. Next read the Revivalists section. The place Chennai(a city) is the current capital of Tamil Nadu(a state in South India). Next read the Devadasi Practices. Amrit Srinivasan explicitly states that this is confined to the Southern State of Tamil Nadu. Next consider the section Reasons for dedication in modern times, Asha Ramesh's study was in the South Indian state of Karnataka. So it really does not make sense to create a new section when the whole article is only talking about South India. The very first line in the article starts of by describing how the Devadasis practice Bharatanatyam a dance form exclusively practised in South India during ancient times. Mudaliar 17:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Devadasi system throughout India and even in Nepal

The following links give proof for the fact that Devadasi system existed from Bengal in the east to Rajasthan in the west; from Uttar Pradesh in the north to Kerala in the south. It also existed in Nepal.

The very first paragraph of this article states that in 6th century AD Devadasis were in Ujjain Mahakal temple. Ujjain as far as I know is not in Tamilnadu or even in Southern India. It is in Madhya Pradesh.

See this article from artindia.net [11] which shows devadasi system existed in [West_bengal].

See this article written in 1999 in a well-known Indian Magazine India Today [12]. It clearly states that Odissi an art form from the state of Orissa which is in East India was derived from Devadasis of the Puri temple.

See this article written in 2004, [13] where Devadasi system existed in Bihar, the pilgrimage centre at Baidyanath Dham; Mangeshkar temple at Goa and even in Nepal a country adjoining India in the northern side.

See this article [14] from Ministry of Women and Child Development of india wcn.nic.in where steps to abolish the system in Madhya Pradesh is being taken.

See this article [15] where it clearly states that Devadasi system existed in a wide area of India.

See the link [16] about a report of NGO in India on who are currently involved in this despicable system. They are members of the dalits the lowest rung in the Indian economy.

I hope these proofs are enough to show that Devadasi system existed throughout India and even in Nepal and where it is present now and who are involved.

Venki 19:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Districts of State of Tamilnadu in India

In India there are about 28 states and 7 union territories. The state of Tamilnadu has 30 districts. Both are given in Wikipedia itself.

Venki 19:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Origin of Devadasis from Brahmins, kings and other castes and Devadasis becoming queens

See this article from www.webindia123.com [17] where it is mentioned that Kulasekhara Perumal, the ruler of Kerala in the 9th century A.D dedicated his own daughter to the Srirangam temple. So it was not uncommon for maidens from royal or even Brahmin families to become Devadasis. Kerala history has many examples of beautiful and attractive ladies of Devadasi sect being accepted as consorts by kings. It is said that Devadasis, Kandiyiu Teviticci Unni, Cherukarakkuttatti and others had been queens. Uttara Chandrika, the heroine of the 'Manipravala Kavyam' of that name belonged to the Chirava royal family.

So Isai-Vellalar themselves form a very miniscule proportion of the Devadasi system only in about 10 districts of Tamilnadu. That accounts to only 0.9% of the entire Indian nation. This does not include Nepal.

Venki 19:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Distinction between Isai-Vellalar and Sengunthar from Government of India gazzette publications

See this link given by the Government of India [18] where Number:75 Isai-Vellalar (spelled as Isai-Vallalar) are also called as Melakkarar (meaning Drummer in Tamil). See on the same page Number:88 Sengunthar are called as Kaikolar (4 variations).

Is the Government of India trying to mislead people? This is as authentic a source that one can get.

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

See the same for Tamilnadu [19]

See where IsaiVellalar are classifed as Most-backward-Class [20] separately from Kaikolar who are classfied as Backward-Class [21]. These are classifications done by the Government of India for providing reservation in jobs. This is similar to affirmative action in USA.

As you can see Isai-Vellalar is never confused with Kaikolar in any government publication.

So it is quite clear that the modern name of Kaikolar does not refer to Isai-Vellalar. However [User:Mudaliar] is intent on causing confusion to denigrate the modern Kaikolar because of the edit wars going on in the article [Mudaliar].

Now you must also consider how far the Isai-Vellalar themselves have come in Tamilnadu. The current Chief Minister of Tamilnadu Karunanidhi is from Isai-Vellalar. So they have risen to the very top of the power structure in Tamilnadu.

Venki 19:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Clearing up the confusion

Now I hope this clears the confusion and if you agree, let me remove all sections about Kaikolar irrelevant to Devadasis from this article.

But I believe we must add the caveat so that future editors are not repeating the same mistake either genuinely or maliciously.

Venki 19:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely not. These are valid academic references and are very much related to this article. They should not be removed. This is blatant vandalism and totally unacceptable.Mudaliar 19:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

More citations that Devadasis are Kaikolars

Please see for yourself some more references from books. I have submitted numerous articles to prove my point. They are all academic references or books published and accepted by Govt of India. In fact just look at the amount of references within each book. I have provided the google search just to show that I'm not manufacturing anything.

1. http://books.google.com/books?q=kaikolar+devadasi 2. http://books.google.com/books?vid=030r8wCzi070dfHyMo&id=TTQKoe4eXzgC&q=kaikolar+devadasi&dq=kaikolar+devadasi&pgis=1

This is the Madras District Gazetteer recognized by the Government of India.

Quoted from the book: ..every Kaikolar family was formerly expected to set apart one girl to be dedicated as Devadasi to a temple..

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

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

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

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

Again here is a snapshot of the exact same page which clearly describes the Kaikkolars as devadasis. (zoom in, scroll below and read last paragraph):

http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0195099621&id=F___xKcP8lMC&pg=PA158&lpg=PA158&ots=iRVvawANeW&dq=kaikkolar+girls+were+dedicated+children&sig=nl7IgHyaWcaZ414wAd9jOGTYDCc#PPA158,M1

Again quoted from book:

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

These are all valid sources and prove once again that the devadasis originated from kaikolars. Mudaliar 20:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Valid sources they are, but they do not support the claim that Devadasis in general originated from Kaikolars, but rather only that some Kaikolars became Devadasis. The Behnam 21:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Devadasis in South India are an offshoot of Kaikolars. So when the whole article is just speaking about devadasis in south india, doesn't it make more sense to put it in the origin?Mudaliar 21:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Obviously we need mediation or arbitration

Now everybody can understand why there is a need for mediation and arbitration. All these proofs are using the archaic name of Isai-Vellalar whose etymology has been described above. The current officially recognized name is Isai-Vellalar as recognized by the Government of India. So let us not confuse any future readers and editors about this.

Venki 20:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Venki123 (talk · contribs) is once again trying to divert this argument. The argument is about the origin of Devadasis and it is clearly told in the citations that they are an offshoot of Kaikolars.Mudaliar 21:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Summary of proofs

The false arguments of User:Mudaliar have been proven incorrect.

"Devadasi system was only in Southern India" has been proved incorrect - It is present all over India and even in Nepal. See [22]

"Only Isai-Vellalar contributed to this system" has been proved incorrect - Even Kings and Brahmins and Dalits contributed to this system in various states of India. See [23]

"Current Isai-Vellalar is same as current Sengunthar" has been proved incorrect - Government of India publication provided. See [24]

Explanation for Kaikolar based on etymology of the word provided based on University of Chicago Tamil dictionary. See [25]

Relevance of this origin to this article. While there are multiple groups which contributed to this system why pick on a single caste Isai-Vellalar and use their archaic name Kaikolar to denigrate the proper users of the name Sengunthar? See [26]

What is the relevance of describing in detail about a single caste Isai-Vellalar among all the hundreds of caste that contributed to this? Even if there is an interest provide the clear proper name and not the incorrect name. What is the true motive?

Venki 21:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

While I'll ask you to provide a source for each of those claims, it does seem clear that Mudaliar is misinterpreting the sources he is using. His sources are saying that in Tamilnadu, Kaikolars set aside girls to be Devadasis. This in no way means that Kaikolars are the origin of all Devadasis, just that some Devadasis in Tamilnadu come from Kaikolar families. Correct me if I am wrong. As of now, I think moving it to a "South India" subsection is at least on the right track than to present the Kaikolar situation as the origin for all of India. The Behnam 21:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Devadasis in South India are exclusively an offshoot of Kaikolars which is clearly described in the academic references from JSTOR, sage etc.,. So when the whole article is just speaking about devadasis in south india, doesn't it make more sense to put it in the origin?

Links to Proofs given above

Links to Proofs are given above from various magazine and newspaper articles and books and government of India publications. Please see my contribitions on this page above. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Venki123 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

Disagree. These articles are not valid research articles and do not cite any references. It's as good as me opening a blog about Devadasis and then quoting it as a reference.Mudaliar 21:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Scope of the origin topic

Tamilnadu state of India would be a better choice as south India can refer to more than 5 states. We must definitely qualify the assertion with the name confusion. If we are adding about Isai-Vellalar then it is proper that we add the origin of Devadasis of other states throught India and Nepal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Venki123 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

Scope of origin topic is Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh which is South India. 90% of the Devadasi article itself talks solely about the Devadasis and their way of life from these states. Considering this, it is appropriate to define the scope of origin as South India.Mudaliar 21:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Scope and size of the origin Paragraph

Tamilnadu state of India would be a better choice as south India can refer to more than 5 states. Nowhere it is mentioned that Isai-Vellalar were contributing outside Tamilnadu. We must definitely qualify the assertion with the name confusion. If we are adding about Isai-Vellalar then it is proper that we add the origin of Devadasis of other states throught India and Nepal.

The size of the origin paragraph is too big. After all it is about one among 100 castes which contributed to Devadasi system. Anyway it talks a lot about Sengunthar and not Isai-vellalar which is the main point of the dispute.

Venki 21:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

South India is comprised of 4 states Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and 1 Union Territory-Pondicherry which was a part of Tamil Nadu until independence. Moreover its about the origin of Isai-Vellalar which is Kaikolar. So it is very much pertinent to this section. Mudaliar 21:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Goa is also another state in India adjoining Karnataka. Let us not leave out Orissa or Maharashtra or Madhya Pradesh where Devadasis existed and which border the states Andhra and Karnataka. Venki 22:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Those are all central India not South India. check it out.Mudaliar 22:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

It is best to have a separate section for South Indian origins. Even if it is true that the article is currently focused on South India, the fact that they have been found throughout the rest of India merits an expansion in the 'all-India' direction. The Behnam 01:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

All india Origins

The origin section has been modified to clarify the confusion between Sengunthar and Isai-Vellalar. Further the article should definitely be expanded to describe the origins of all regions of India. Venki 02:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

No ambiguity about the name Kaikolar

Venki123 (talk · contribs) is just vandalising the section South India and the Chola empire which is heavily referenced and clearly states that some of the Kaikolars were indeed dedicated as Devadasis. On the the other hand he is just messing up the section by replacing Kaikolars with Isai-Vellalars which is not correct. This particular section talks about the Kaikolars and how some of them were dedicated as Devadasis. So Isai-Vellalars have no place here as it is clearly a name to denote all Devadasis. Moreover, he is attempting to portray that the Kaikolars mentioned are different from the Kaikolars which is not true and is proven by numerous academic citations which clearly define them as the Kaikolar of the terinja-Kaikolar Padai of the Chola empire who are indeed the Kaikolars he is referring.Mudaliar 04:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Academic References about identity of Kaikolar

The Kaikolars who have dedicated girls as devadasis have been described as weavers who were militarised during the Chola empire and are known as the Kaikolars of "Terinja-Kaikolar-Padai" (meaning: "known soldiers" or personal bodyguards).

Proof1: Donors, Devotees, and the Daughters of God: Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu - Page 158 by Leslie C. Orr - 2000 - 305 pages http://books.google.com/books?q=kaikkolar+devadasi&as_brr=0

Proof2: Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/19/1/47?ck=nck

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

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

So don't manipulate this description which has been stated after much research. Mudaliar 14:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Deleting sections substantiated by proofs about the Yellamma Devadasi cult in Karnataka

User:Mudaliar is deleting heavily referenced sections about the Yellamma Devadasi cult in Karnataka. This is a clear example of vandalism.

Venki 22:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I have not deleted check it out. Look closer, they are still in there. Venki123 (talk · contribs) is once again trying to portray me in bad light.Mudaliar 22:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Proof for Kaikola dancers (devadasis) and Kaikolar soldiers are Distinct

Kaikolar name used by a caste of soldiers and a caste of musicians in olden days.

According to A Journey from Madras through the Countries of Mysore, Canara, and Malabar. Volume 3 (First published 1807 AD) By Francis Hamilton Buchanan, the Kaikolan dancing women and musicians formed a separate caste from the martial-caste Kaikolans even though they had similar sounding caste names. The musicians and dancing girls who called themselves Kaikolan to mean holders of lute musical instrument. This should not be confused with the group Sengunthar who use the name Kaikolar which meant holders of spears.

According to the same book, Donors, Devotees, and the Daughters of God: Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu By Leslie C. Orr In inscriptions during Chola period Kaikkolars were soldiers. At thirteenth century important adminstrative functions are assigned to Kaikolar.

Connection between temple women and Kaikolar are described because Kaikolar have substantial political power during that time. Devadasis also enjoyed great power during 13th century.

The whole point of the confusion is that two separate castes are using the same name. This clearly stated in the following 1807 book. According to A Journey from Madras through the Countries of Mysore, Canara, and Malabar. Volume 3 (First published 1807 AD) By Francis Hamilton Buchanan, the Kaikolan dancing women and musicians formed a separate caste from the martial-caste Kaikolans even though they had similar sounding caste names.

Venki 19:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

No. The kaikolar devadasis also identify themselves with the "Terinja Kaikolar Padai" of the Chola empire and with the Kaikolar weavers in South India. So there is no ambiguity.

The following references and all others that I have quoted above in the talk page clearly state that the Kaikolars and the Kaikolar Devadasis are one and the same, i.e., the Kaikolar Devadasis were dedicated as Devadasis by the Kaikolars and they are an offshoot of the Kaikolar caste. Moreover some of the references also go further to mention clearly that some of the Kaikolar Devadasis went back to being Kaikolars by marrying into the Kaikolar caste. Hence there is absolutely no room for ambiguity.

Proof1: Donors, Devotees, and the Daughters of God: Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu - Page 158 by Leslie C. Orr - 2000 - 305 pages http://books.google.com/books?q=kaikkolar+devadasi&as_brr=0

Proof2: Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), http://ier.sagepub.com/cgi/content/citation/19/1/47?ck=nck

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

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

So don't manipulate this description which has been stated after much research. Mudaliar 21:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

If a Vellala group calls itself Saiva-Vellala does that make the group Saiva-Vellala? No

If a Vellala group calls itself Saiva-Vellala after giving up meat does that make the group Saiva-Vellala. Definitely not. The other Saiva-Vellala groups should accept that.

The same goes for Kaikolar musicians who claim they are same as Sengunthar. Clearly in 1807 itself Buchanan has stated they there are two castes. The same is repeated and quoted by Thurston and Rangachari in their seminal book Castes and Tribes of South India in 1902.

All the later articles written after devadasi system was abolished are only referring to Thurston and Rangachari for all their conclusions.

Don't jump to conclusions because of your prejudices and desperation.

Venki 18:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

All the references clearly say that the Kaikola Devadasis are were dedicated by Kaikola weavers who were militarised during the Chola empire into the "terinja-Kaikola-padai" of the Chola empire and hence this description should not be removed. I have given about 15 references to prove this. In fact the 50% of all the articles just describes the identity of Kaikolar soldiers and as to why they dedicated their women as devadasis. The Kaikolars are explained very well so don't remove my citations or try to manipulate the references.

Google link to prove: http://www.google.com/search?q=samarakesari+terinja+kaikkolar+padai+devadasi+privileges&hl=en

Academic reference: Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982) Mudaliar 20:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Unable to verify any of 15 references logically

It is very clear that the book written in 1982 can only refer to older sources such as Thurston and Rangachari since devadasi system was fully abolished by early 1900's.

There were over 20 different regiments of Kaikolars during 11th century itself. If according to the claims that one girl had to be dedicated from every kaikolar home, approximately there were 255 million Indians in 1800 AD. [27]

Assuming that 10% of them lived in Tamilnadu then it means that 25.5 million Tamils. Of these let's assume that Kaikolars are only 10%, then there would be 2.55 million Kaikolars in 1800. If for example there were 4 people on an average per family then there would be 637500 families of Kaikolar. If we were to dedicate one girl per family as devadasi, then there would be 637500 devadasis in Tamilnadu alone in 1800 from Kaikolar caste alone. What about all the other Vellala castes which also contributed to devadasis?

Assuming that only 5% of them lived in Tamilnadu then it means that 12.75 million Tamils. Of these let's assume that Kaikolars are only 10%, then there would be 1.275 million Kaikolars in 1800. If for example there were 4 people on an average per family then there would be 318750 families of Kaikolar. If we were to dedicate one girl per family as devadasi, then there would be 318750 devadasis in Tamilnadu alone in 1800 from Kaikolar caste alone. What about all the other Vellala castes which also contributed to devadasis?

So obviously all the claims about dedicating one girl per family are false by a simple numerical calculation.

If still not convinced see you all in arbitration.

Venki 04:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

"10% of Tamil Nadu are not Kaikolars": Are you kidding me. See you in arbitration. Current population of Kaikolar: 1.5 million. This data is according to Indian census in 2001. Proof1: http://www.go2southasia.org/l_peoples.html Proof2: http://globalindiamissions.org/newsletter/nwsltr0802.htm

It is easy to compute what your population might have been in 1800. Moreover this 1.5 million Kaikolars are spread over the 3 South Indian states of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

These figures are from 2001 census. Check Wiki itself. The total population of 3 states 2001 (census) = 75,727,000Andhra Pradesh + 55,868,200Karnataka +62,405,679 Tamil Nadu = 194,000,879

1.5miliion out of 194million people is not 10%!!

Its easy to see the % of Kaikolar and even back track the Kaikolar population in 1800. So keep your pathetic numerical computations and inferences to yourself.Mudaliar 14:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Lets All kaikolas not to worry what mudaliar says he himself knows devadasis are from vellala girls .Kaikolars who were soldiers and protectors of vella devadasis formed isai vellala,and kondaikatti vellala.The isai vellala people still having the same tradition and having vellala,pillai title not a kaikola,sengunthar or mudaliar title,I think User: Mudaliar(thonadamandala saive vellala worried and he wants to hide his vellala family traditions)The fucker doesn't know where the thondai mandala saiva vellala came the vellalas are converted in to brahminism and stopped eating nonveg,because they were klans of brahmins after the kaikola domination in chola dynasty,the meaning of kaikol (kai-hand,kol-silambam-stick-spear)thats why sengunthars called themselves kaikolar,the vellalars also called themselves kaikolar because they use thavil(the drum which used by the in south india marriages)and the stick which is used to make music is also called kol. so the way they using kai(hand) and the kol the sick to produce music they called themselves kaikola musicians not kaikola warriors in chola dynasty,There is no kaikola warrior regement in krishnadevaraya dynasty only isai vellalas so called kaikola musicians only reffered by the authors which user mudaliar is showing to everybody to slander kaikola and sengunthars.The mudaliar title was predominantly used by agamudya mudali or ponamalli mudaliyars or arcot thuluva vellala mudaliars(its a mixture off agamudayar and vellala) and senguntha mudali or kaikolar or conjeevaram mudalirs,not by any other vellalas like thondai or pundai vellalas because they are having pillai,gounder,etc titles,because according to place they will change their titles.

If Kaikolas having the kinship with devadasis the clan ship is defenetly Vellalas

There is tamil saying from kaikola warriors or sengunthars onnu sandil savanum illa vellala pundaiyil savanum

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

Traditionally, atleast one girl in every family was dedicated to temple service and becomes a Devadasi(meaning female servant of god). In the temple, the girl is considered married to the temple deity but in practice becomes a prostitute, especially to the Brahmans and she learns traditional music and dancing. This is the description of the Kaikolars and has been accepted by various authors and historians after much research. I once again furnish academic references below. This is not defamatory. This is the status of Kaikolar in the past and present.

References

1)Asia in the Making of Europe: A Century of Advance. Book 2, South Asia - Page 1032 by Donald F Lach, Edwin J Van Kley - History - 1998 - 662 pages [28]: Clearly describes the status of Kaikolars.

2)Artisans in Vijayanagar Society, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 22, No. 4, 417-444 (1985) [29]: This research article explains the blood relation between the Devadasis and the Kaikolar. Quoted from article:(Devadasis (dancing girls who have very close kinship ties with the Kaikolar))

3) Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982),[30]: Text Quoted from article: At least one woman in every Kaikkola household was, according to age-old tradition dedicated to the temple as a devaradiyar or devadasi. The devaradiyar enjoyed special privileges in the days of the Vijayanagar empire and were the only women permitted a direct audience with the king.

4)Weaver Folk Traditions as a Source of History, Vijaya Ramaswamy, Indian Economic & Social History Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, 47-62 (1982), [31]: This research article (along with references to an inscription) describes how a devaradiyar or devadasi won special privileges for the Kaikkolas from the king Deva Raya II (A.D 1433)

5)The Erotic Sculptures of India Y. Krishan Artibus Asiae, Vol. 34, No. 4 (1972), pp. 331-343 (proves that kaikolan musicians = devadasis) [32]

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

7)Contending identities: Sacred prostitution and reform in colonial South India Priyadarshini Vijaisri A1, A1 Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), New Delhi, South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group Issue: Volume 28, Number 3 / December 2005 Pages: 387 - 411[33]. If you cannot access previous link, then just go here [34] and follow one of the links. This research article talks in much detail about how women from the Sengunthar/ Kaikolar caste go into prostitution in temples.

8)Another reference book Donors, Devotees, and Daughters of God. Temple Women in Medieval Tamilnadu by Leslie C. Orr, [35]

9)South Asia Unreached People Groups: [36]:This is a non-profit world renknown organisation recognised by many countries. The following is the description used - The KAIKOLAR people are a caste of weavers 1.5 million strong in southern India... That daughter is considered married to the temple deity—often the Hindu destroyer god Shiva. In practice, the daughter becomes a temple prostitute.

10)Global India Missions: [37]: The following description is used - The Kaikolan are a large Tamil and Telugu caste of weavers....Traditionally, one girl in every family was set apart to be dedicated to temple service and becomes a Devadasi(meaning female servant of god). In the temple, the girl is considered married to the temple deity but in practice becomes a prostitute, especially to the Brahmans and she learns traditional music and dancing.

11) Book: Of Property and Propriety: The Role of Gender and Class in Imperialism and Nationalism - Page 178 by Bannerji, Himani, Mojab, Shahrzad, Whitehead, Judith [38] Again, the google link provides a limited preview. This books also talks in great length about the Kaikolar Devadasis and the Brahmin men.

12)Madras Gazetteer recognized by the Government of India: providing google link. follow link for full book. [39], [40]