Talk:Pandyan Kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dravidian civilizations, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of now-defunct states. If you would like to participate, visit the project page to join.	History Portal Geography Portal Atlas Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
WP Former Countries - Things to do: Wikipedia:WikiProject Dravidian civilizations/To do

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
	This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former Countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of now-defunct states. If you would like to participate, visit the project page to join.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. (FAQ).
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no
WP Former Countries - Things to do: Open tasks for WikiProject Former countries      Edit Correct links: Correct any wikilinks that you find anywhere on Wikipedia where the link is to the wrong version of the state. Some examples of bad links: Referring to the former Free City of Lübeck (an independent entity for 711 years), but the link goes to the modern city of Lübeck. Referring to Napoleon's France, where the link instead goes to modern France. Create redirects: If the article for the correct state does not yet exist, create a redirect to the nearest existing article (if possible) and place {{WPFC|class=Needed}} on the redirect's talk page. Whether or not a redirect has been created, list the wanted article below under "Needed". Article improvement After performing any of these tasks, re-rate the entry via the WPFC banner, and remove the article from the relevant list. Expand: Confederation of the Rhine, Straits Settlements, Belgian Congo, Free City of Lübeck, Kingdom of Ireland, North German Confederation, Spanish East Indies Stubs: Adamawa Emirate, Baranya-Baja Republic, Kingdom of Redonda, Piratini Republic, United States of Colombia Needed: Kingdom of Bavaria Nyasaland Assess: Anjouan, Austrian Empire, German East Africa, Orange Free State Articles requiring particular elements After providing the requested element, please remove the relevant tag from the article's WPFC banner and remove the article from this list. Flag: Alta California, Baranya-Baja Republic, Bishopric of Liège, Duchy of Lucca, Lordship of Ireland, Mexican Empire Coat of Arms: Adamawa Emirate, Anjouan, Baranya-Baja Republic, Confederation of the Equator, New Spain, West Florida Map: Baranya-Baja Republic, California Republic, Republic of Manitoba Venezuela (second republic) Infobox: Anjouan, Baranya-Baja Republic, Belgian Congo, Kingdom of Chile, Orange Free State Quality watch: 11 FA-Class former country articles - 8 GA-Class former country articles.

It seems to me like "Pandiyan" is a better transliteration than "Pandyan". Any thoughts? Absolutely not. Pandyan is the correct term. Pandiyan is (from what I've heard) quite insulting.

NO. Pandiyan means "one from the old"(the ancient) . Pandyan and Pandiyan are both same. The above mentioned "insulting" meaning of the word is prevailing in Kerala, because of an indigenous hatred the people grew with due to overdomination and (?)cruelty of the Later Pandyan kings towards them.

Obviously.Pandyan is old;other examples, Pandaaram=old man, Pandithyam=long-studied, expert

Contents 1 Puhar is Chola! 2 Ridiculous claim of Pandyas going back to 9000 B.C.E.! 3 Rewriting the article - a response to senthilkumaras 4 Tulu Pandyas 5 Pandiyan looks better than Pandyan 6 Nicolaus of Damascus / Strabo 7 Maaravaramban Kulasekara Pandyan I

[edit] Puhar is Chola!

Does anyone know why Puhar is mentioned in this article? It was a Chola port. If ther s no valid reason, I will remove the reference. - Kingsleyj 16:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ridiculous claim of Pandyas going back to 9000 B.C.E.!

It is utterly ridiculous to claim that the Pandyas could be traced back to 9000 B.C.E. Ther is not a single justifying reference for this claim. If we want to keep these pages reliable, this list needs a thorough clean up.

Parthi (Venu62) 05:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Will have a look at that later in the day. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 07:53, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I read the rewrite and find it amazing. Can you replace the current article with the rewrited version? After doing that, we can add mor stuff on Pandyan architecture taking some points from ta:பாண்டியர் காலக் கட்டிடக்கலை. Also, the existing map in the article showing the later extent includes some Indonesian islands. We should check sources with User:Senthilkumaras and incorporate redrawn maps into the article. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Sundar for your award. I will look into extending this article with the social and cultural information from the Pandyan period. I will also look to source an authentic map. - Parthi (Venu62) 09:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rewriting the article - a response to senthilkumaras

User:senthilkumaras wrote:

sir, this page is okay, but Sangam king names have been put aside, and corresponding map also needed. You say it is controversial, but kindly look in all the kingslist of other dynasties, even in the Wikipedia pages, eg, early Pallavas, Satavahanas early list, Sisunaga and Nandas list, in all these only names are known that too from their indigenous literatures only, neither have inscriptions and coins es proof . This even goes to Chinese and Sumerian lists, all from copied down pieces of literatures only . What I say is when we have the names why dont we use them in the list, or else if you want arch evidence and not rely on literat,

kindly delete the lists of Sisunaga, Sumerian, and all others in Wikipedia pages.

Anyway I think the list I gave was justifiable from at least 500 B.C.E. If from Puram and other Sangam works one cannot understand the genealogy (it's there so open, only people who can read , write Tamil and understand Old Tamil can derive the list ) that's not the fault of Sangam authors either . And much earlier kings are known from Nakkeerar's Iraiyanaar agapporul which also gives duration, number of authjors, poets, kings,presiding poets of each Sangam .

In your new work, after Caenthan some four middle Pandyan names are missing. kindly see my middle Pandya list . Picture of Madurai temple can be included, I think . Thankyou . Senthilkumaras 08:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

You seem to be getting confused with ‘mythological’ king lists and real historical ones. Neither Sumerian nor the Chinese lists claim the ancient genealogy historically accurate. The articles Three August Ones and Five Emperors and Xia Dynasty clearly display the admission that the lists are mythical and not to be considered as authentic. In fact, Xia Dynasty says : This article is about the extremely ancient Chinese dynasty whose existence has yet to be thoroughly confirmed by archaeology. Shang Dynasty is the first one to be clearly verified by archaeological evidence.

There is no dispute that the Sangam Literature mentions a number of kings from all three main dynasties. But does it also give you the years in which they ruled. How did you come up with the year 9800 BCE? How do you support your claims of all the other dates for the pre-Sangam kings? Is it in code only which only a select few can understand? Is that the reason, none of the thousands of books written about South India haven’t claimed the ancient king lists of Pandyas and Cholas to go back 12000 years?

You also seem to think that the Sangam poems are beyond question and had to be taken literally without any need for supporting independent evidence. If this is so, then your concept of historical documentation is flawed. In most of your articles such as on Kariakala and others, you seem to be depending solely on works written almost 1200 years after the event without any authentic contemporary evidence. To give an example, it is like claiming that there was a real person by the name Nadhini, who was involved in the murder of Aditya Chola, solely based on Kalki’s Ponniyin Selvan.

Parthi (Venu62) 02:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I am sorry here. In your new work, after Caenthan some four middle Pandyan names are missing.(Arikesari Maaravaramban aka NindraSeer NeduMaaran 640 - 674. Kochchadaiyan Iranatheeran ThennaVaanavan675 - 710 .Arikesari Parangusa Maaravaramban aka Rasasingan I 710 - 765. Neduncadaiyan Paraanthakan 765 - 790 Rasasingan II 790 - 800 .Varagunan II 800 - 830 . Seermaaran SriVallabhan Paracakra Kolaakalan.) kindly see my middle Pandya list . Picture of Madurai temple can be included, I think . Thankyou . I think Jatavarman( do not again say that NASastri wrote so, if anybody made a mistake , it does not mean one should follow the same or should not correct, it. Even copying and reproducng should be sensible enough.) is Sadaiya varman, as seen before as Koccadaiyan and Neduncadaiyan . Senthilkumaras 08:10, 22 March 2006

(UTC)

[edit] Tulu Pandyas

In the Tulu traditions of Tuluvanadu, there are important local kings with Pandya as a title. In the Tamil tradition this link is completely not noted either because it was a coincidence or they are not aware of it. But similarity in names of early Tulu kings with a segment of Tamils is intriguing the very least. This needs to be properly brought into this article.

User:RaveenS 16:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

See List_of_rulers_of_Sri_Lanka for Sinhalese kings with Pandya as title. So we have some early Tulu kings and some later Sinhalese kings claiming Pandya royal ancestry.RaveenS 20:44, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pandiyan looks better than Pandyan

Hello all,

Pandiyan is the correct spelling,remember the State Transport Buses in Madurai was Pandiyan Roadways.The current Pnadyan looks ridiculous.It also matched the exact Tamil pronounciation.If no one objects then may be I may shift it to Pandiyan and re-direct the current content over there.

--Southernstar 15:18, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nicolaus of Damascus / Strabo

The article currently says:

Pandyas also had trade contacts with Ptolemaic Egypt and, through Egypt, with Rome by the first century, and with China by the 3rd century. The 1st century Greek historian Nicolaus of Damascus met, at Damascus, the ambassador sent by an Indian King "named Pandion or, according to others, Porus" to Caesar Augustus around 13 CE.

I can't find the relevant quote in Nicolaus of Damascus. Strabo says exactly the same thing in section 15.1.4, but I can't find any indication that he got it from Nicolaus. Can anyone provide more information on this, or should I change it to reflect the Strabo passage instead? --Iustinus 05:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Iustinus. I am not sure if the account by Nicolaus of Damascus still exists, but Strabo does mention that he obtained the story from him (see Nicolaus of Damascus article, Strabo, xv, 1-73). PHG 05:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Aha! I'll look for that bit then. Thanks as always! --Iustinus 09:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Maaravaramban Kulasekara Pandyan I

How can Maaravaramban Kulasekara Pandyan I die in 1308 and rule until 1311?

"# Maaravaramban Kulasekara Pandyan I (1268 - 1311)" "On the death of Maaravaramban Kulasekara Pandyan I in 1308, a conflict..."

I have gone ahead and changed the final year of his rule as 1308. Please do leave a message if that's inaccurate. --Madhu 13:19, 16 March 2007 (UTC)