Talk:Devadasi/Archive 2

message: "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)
thread_title: Medieval European Christian Monasteries?

message: "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)
thread_title: celibacy??

message: 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)
thread_title:  This article needs a cleanup. 

message: 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)
thread_title:  New introductory paragraph 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Definitions 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Kudos 

message: 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)
thread_title:  tags 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Removed sentence 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Moving of text in the introduction 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Kaikolar stuff 

message: The origin of Devadasis was from Isai Vellalar as seen in this article . 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. . 
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)
thread_title: The origin of Devadasis was from Isai Vellalar

message: 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 
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)
thread_title: Kaikolar word origin

message: 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)
replies: text: 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.  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)
thread_title: Multiple names for a single caste in Tamilnadu

message: 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)
replies: text: OK, so does this information only apply to Southern India in the first place?  The Behnam 04:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Please remain civil and actually try to address my question.  Thanks.  The Behnam 16:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kaikolar Reference articles 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Kaikolar and the regions involved

message: 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  which shows devadasi system existed in [West_bengal].
See this article written in 1999 in a well-known Indian Magazine India Today . 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,  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  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  where it clearly states that Devadasi system existed in a wide area of India.
See the link  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)
thread_title:  Devadasi system throughout India and even in Nepal

message: 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)
thread_title:  Districts of State of Tamilnadu in India

message: See this article from www.webindia123.com  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)
thread_title:  Origin of Devadasis from Brahmins, kings and other castes and Devadasis becoming queens 

message: See this link given by the Government of India  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 
See where IsaiVellalar are classifed as Most-backward-Class  separately from Kaikolar who are classfied as Backward-Class . 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)
thread_title:  Distinction between Isai-Vellalar and Sengunthar from Government of India gazzette publications 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Clearing up the confusion 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: More citations that Devadasis are Kaikolars

message: 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)
replies: text:  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)
thread_title:  Obviously we need mediation or arbitration 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Links to Proofs given above 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Scope of the origin topic 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: Those are all central India not South India. check it out.Mudaliar 22:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope and size of the origin Paragraph

message: 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)
thread_title:  All india Origins 

message: 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)
thread_title: No ambiguity about the name Kaikolar

message: 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)
thread_title: Academic References about identity of Kaikolar

message: 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)
replies: text: I have not deleted check it out. Look closer, they are still in there.  is once again trying to portray me in bad light.Mudaliar 22:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting sections substantiated by proofs about the Yellamma Devadasi cult in Karnataka 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Proof for Kaikola dancers (devadasis) and Kaikolar soldiers are Distinct 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  If a Vellala group calls itself Saiva-Vellala does that make the group Saiva-Vellala? '''No''' 

message: 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.  
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)
thread_title:  Unable to verify any of 15 references logically