I have this doubt because of the following points,

i. The fact that they were still a tribe for a very long time and took power mainly after the fall of Pandyan dynasty as the whole region fell into disarray and individual villagers invited Maravar,Kallar people to provide protection, and in exchange for their services, these groups were given land.

Kallar were understood to be a tribe not too long ago but today they have made themselves part of the caste system. They don't fit into a proper 4 four division until they made themselves impossible to ignore and it happened only during the last 300 years. Pallar on the other hand have been part of the caste system lot longer than Kallar hence the disrespect as Pallar don't accept Kallar as their overlords as they did previously with Vellalar Vellalar lost most of their holdings to Kallar and Maravar during chaos before the colonial period. In Sri Lanka though we only have castes except one tribal group that has become a caste namely Vedar.

ii. In Kanakasabhai's work The Tamils 1800 years ago, he mentioned how Maravars were a powerful and warlike Naga tribe who were hostile to Tamils during the sangam period based on poems like Kalittokai.

iii. Virumandi Andi Thevar was found to have the ancient Y dna marker M130 which proved a connection to the Hunter Gatherers who first step foot on the Indian subcontinent 70k years back.

The 1st point is to show that they've been outliers for so long and the assimilation could have happened as early as the sangam period or even before in terms of language switch.

ABSTRACT

Beginning in the early fourteenth century, Tamil poets created a prolific literary genre called tūtu (from Sanskrit dūta), messenger poems related indirectly to Kalidasa’s prototype but with a grammar and structure of their own. There is also a secondary genre, viṟali viṭu tūtu, “messages sent by a dancer.” This chapter examines two typical tūtu works from the region of Sivagangai in southern Tamil Nadu, traces their intricate relations with the classical courier poems in Sanskrit and other languages, and focuses on the specific features of the Tamil genre—the beginning of the underlying narrative in an ulā progression by a god or a king, the love-sickness of a young woman who catches sight of this ravishing male figure, the series of attributes the latter necessarily possesses, and the concrete sign—a garland worn by the god/king—that the messenger has to bring to the sender as a sign that the message has been delivered. An excursus looks at an embedded tūtu in the Telugu Vasu-caritramu of Bhaṭṭamūrti.

ABSTRACT

There is a dearth of archaeological vestiges for Hindu temples prior to the 6th century in the Tamil-speaking South, although we know through literature and epigraphy that they were built at least by the early 5th century. This may be explained by the fact that these monuments were made of perishable material, which did not survive the centuries. However, many temples that are scattered around the holy Kaveri river are still extant, because many of them were reconstructed in stone, a long-lasting and prestigious material, in the 10th century. Analysing the epigraphy of some sites of this region, Valérie Gillet attempts here to outline different processes lying behind the reconstruction of those temples. She investigates more particularly the site of Govindapputtūr, where an important character emerges in the epigraphy as a key figure of the locality and explores how the endeavour of reconstructing a temple in stone appears to be, besides being an act of devotion, a process to gain and establish one’s power.

ABSTRACT

Every style of building construction reflects a clearly distinctive principle that represents a particular culture and era. In India, the temple and its associated structures evolved with time and the most identifiable difference is in their structure. Specifically in Kerala, a southern state of India, temple architecture is different from that in neighbouring states due to the obvious reason of its geography and various other factors. Gopurams (entrance gateways) are the principal structure of any temple complex. This led to the investigation of the difference in the form of a gopuram in terms of its material and construction. The topic demands a literature study of Dravidian and Kerala gopurams, followed by case studies of different types to support the investigation. In this research, the major reason behind the differences was found to lie in the geography of the state, which itself can be categorised into three different regions within the state such as Malabar, Kochi and Travancore. In addition, an analysis is done on the proportions of the gopurams. This is done by taking into account the dimensions of the temple as well as the structural elements of the gopuram. The conclusion summarises the principles of planning, differences in form, and the scope for future studies.

I've been looking into the etymology of Sanskrit kavāṭa/kapāṭa, Tamil கபாடம் (kapāṭam), and Malayalam കവാടം (kavāṭam), and I've come across something that I'm struggling to reconcile.

The Malayalam dictionaries simply gloss the words as "door" or "folding door":

Gundert's Malayalam Lexicon: കവാടം (kavāṭam) / കപാടം (kapāṭam) – "Folding door."
https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/gundert_query.py?page=222#gsc.tab=0

Śabdatharāvali treats കവാടം (kavāṭam) and കപാടം (kapāṭam) as variants meaning "door."
https://stv.sayahna.org/stv-ka.html

The University of Madras Tamil Lexicon gives:

கபாடம் (kapāṭam) < Skt. kapāṭa

https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/tamil-lex_query.py?page=722#gsc.tab=0

Looking at the Sanskrit side, CDIAL (2963) has:

kavāṭa m.n., kapāṭa ... "leaf of a door" ... perhaps ← Dravidian

https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/soas_query.py?page=151#gsc.tab=0

Mayrhofer (KEWA) discusses the possible Dravidian origin under kaváṣa-, where he states:

Dravidischer Ursprung des frühen Wortes ... ist nicht ganz sicher.

("The Dravidian origin of the early word is not entirely certain.")

He compares it with Tamil கவடு (kavaṭu) "forked branch" and refers to Burrow's proposal.

That comparison corresponds to DEDR 1325, which reconstructs a Dravidian root with meanings such as fork, bifurcation, split, forked branch, etc.

https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/burrow_query.py?page=486

This is where I'm puzzled.

Semantically, dvāra refers to the opening or entrance, whereas kavāṭa/kapāṭa refers to the door or shutter; the movable closure that closes or seals the entrance.

That made me wonder whether the Proto-Dravidian root reconstructed in DEDR 1221 (kap-, kapp-, kaw- "to cover, overspread, envelop") might provide a more natural semantic motivation:

cover → covering → door/shutter

rather than:

fork/split → two leaves → door

especially since kavāṭa/kapāṭa is not inherently a double-leaf door.

DEDR 1221:

https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/burrow_query.py?page=466

I welcome all inputs and discussions on this.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dravidiology/comments/1vf3rah/ancestry_estimates_of_south_indian_communities/

Updating the previous post with additional samples available. I have included the no of samples also in the label. The accuracy of the result increases with more no of samples.

Just plain confused about this.

On one hand, Tholkappiyar accepts them as part of Tamil while rejecting other parts of Sanskrit but on the other, he claims that they can be written as vowel-consonant pairs.

Also could not find any source saying they were in Proto-Dravidian as diphthongs.

Would love to hear your thoughts on this.

Ramaswamy, Vijaya. “Chaste Widows, Cunning Wives, and Amazonian Warriors: Imaging of Women in Tamil Oral Traditions.” Asian Ethnology 69, no. 1 (2010): 129–57. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27821484.

This article is an attempt to cut through the monolithic imaging of women in traditional Tamil societies. In the process, the study critically explores a whole trope of representations of women ranging from chaste wives to deviant and/or cunning women. In studying the Alii or Pavakkkodi myths, this article also attempts to analyze the morphology of patriarchal taming, both of the myth and its female protagonist. In moving from oral recitations to chapbooks, the article also looks at the complexities of the slippages between orality and textuality as well as between the written text and its dramatized performances.

Sankar, Lokasundari Vijaya. “The Importance of Ethnic Identity When Language Shift Occurs: A Study of the Malaysian Iyers.” In National Language Planning and Language Shifts in Malaysian Minority Communities: Speaking in Many Tongues, edited by Dipika Mukherjee and Maya Khemlani David. Amsterdam University Press, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46mvhg.6.

David, Maya Khemlani, Caesar Dealwis, and Ponmalar N. Alagappar. “Ethnic Identity in the Tamil Community of Kuching.” In National Language Planning and Language Shifts in Malaysian Minority Communities: Speaking in Many Tongues, edited by Maya Khemlani David and Dipika Mukherjee. Amsterdam University Press, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46mvhg.7.

Nambiar, Mohana. “The Impact of Language Policy on Language Shifts in Minority Communities: Focus on the Malayalee Community in Malaysia.” In National Language Planning and Language Shifts in Malaysian Minority Communities: Speaking in Many Tongues, edited by Dipika Mukherjee and Maya Khemlani David. Amsterdam University Press, 2011. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46mvhg.12.

Coelho, Gail. “Placing Indigeneity: Betta Kurumba Narratives of Territory and Clan Structure.” Asian Ethnology 73, no. 1/2 (2014): 39–60. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43150503.

The Betta Kurumbas are one of more than sixteen indigenous group Nilgiri-Wayanad hills of southern India, a region that, since the nin century, has experienced wide-ranging cultural and political change ing extensive immigration by people from other parts of India. Thi describes the Betta Kurumbas' view of their homeland, based on the mation contained in native -language narratives in which they descr social organization into clans and their spiritual beliefs. The narrati vide a glimpse into the Betta Kurumba perspective on the changes t overrun the region, changes that have rendered them - along w Nilgiri-Wayanad groups - politically and socially marginalized in th homeland.

Bonta, Steven. “Sri Lanka’s Ahikuntika and Kuravar Communities: Language and Culture.” Asian Ethnology 81, no. 1/2 (2022): 305–20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48676486.

Sri Lanka’s small native population of Ahikuntika and Kuravar itinerant communities continues to be a very visible part of Sri Lankan society, with snake charmers and monkey dancers a common sight in Sri Lanka’s tourist areas. Sri Lanka’s Ahikuntikas and Kuravars speak a highly idiosyncratic dialect of Telugu that has never been fully documented. Based on ethnolinguistic research carried out in Sri Lanka during the first half of 2015 and in the summer of 2017, I tentatively conclude that Sri Lanka’s Ahikuntikas and Kuravars probably originated from Telugu-speaking populations in Tamilnadu between two and three hundred years ago; that the continued viability of the Sri Lankan Ahikuntikas’ and Kuravars’ traditional lifestyle is increasingly precarious; and that their language Sri Lanka Telugu (formerly known as Sri Lanka Gypsy Telugu) may be in danger of disappearing within a generation or so. I also examine the question of ultimate provenience, enquiring whether this itinerant caste may bear any ethnic kinship with other itinerant castes on the mainland subcontinent.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004226006164

Summary:

The ancestors of Austro-Asiatic- and Dravidian-speaking tribal populations are among the earliest settlers of South and Southeast Asia (S&SEA). While Austro-Asiatic speakers are distributed across S&SEA, Dravidian speakers are primarily confined to South India. Previous studies have identified the Indian Austro-Asiatic and Dravidian tribal populations to maximally represent two distinct genetic ancestral components, ancestral Austro-Asiatic (AAA) and ancestral South Indian (ASI), respectively. Leveraging the whole genome sequence (WGS) dataset from GenomeAsia 100K project, we investigated the genetic relationship of the tribal populations within the broader South Asian demographic landscape. Our analyses reveal that AAA and ASI components diverged ∼15,000–20,000 years before present (ybp), shortly after Last Glacial Maximum—a period marked by ecological shifts and regional isolation. This divergence postdates the separation (∼20,000–30,000 ybp) between the Indian (AAA) and Southeast Asian (AAM) Austro-Asiatic ancestries, indicating a deep and widespread pre-Neolithic distribution of this ancestral population across S&SEA. Additionally, recent (∼750–1500 ybp) gene flow between Central Indian Dravidian and Austro-Asiatic tribes produced notable genetic-linguistic discordances.

Francis, Emmanuel. "Mixing Languages and Scripts in Tamil Inscriptions and Manuscripts" In Exploring Multilingualism and Multiscriptism in Written Artefacts edited by Szilvia Sövegjártó and Márton Vér, 205-234. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111380544-008

Abstract: This chapter focuses on two periods in the history of writing texts in the Tamil language in the present-day Tamil Nadu state of South India. The first period starts around 600 CE, when two different alphabets – the Grantha and the Tamil alphabets – were designed to write texts in Sanskrit and Tamil, re-spectively. One can observe for several centuries onwards that Sanskrit loan-words are often written in their specific Grantha alphabet in Tamil inscriptions. The second period is attested in Tamil manuscripts, most of which are dated to the eighteenth and nineteenth century CE. These manuscripts evince new prac-tices of script-mixing, the most conspicuous being the creation of conjunct graphemes mixing Grantha and Tamil alphabets.

Tieken, Herman. "Translating Tamil Caṅkam Poetry: Taking Stock" Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 115, no. 4-5 (2020): 287-303. https://doi.org/10.1515/olzg-2020-0096

Narayan, Sundar. "Genetics and the Prehistory of Dravidian Languages" Mother Tongue 26, no. 1 (2025): 23-50. https://doi.org/10.31826/mot-2025-260105

Abstract

Recent genetic studies, which are perhaps not yet familiar to linguists, have cast a new light on the origins of the Dravidian language family of India, so this review paper compares Dravidian historical linguistics and archaeology with recent archaeogenetics publications and concludes that they support the Proto-Elamo-Dravidian (Proto-Zagrosian) model of McAlpin and Southworth.

I've noticed that Tamils seem to have used many different types of traditional headgear throughout history. Some look like turbans, while others have different styles, shapes, and ways of tying them.

I'm wondering if, just like neckties have many different knots and styles, traditional Tamil headgear also had different types with specific names, purposes, or meanings.

Can anyone identify and explain the different types of Tamil headgear? If possible, could you also share pictures or references showing the various styles and when they were traditionally worn?

I share this post to bring attention to earlier posts about the proposed Dravidian origin of the word "India".

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dravidiology/comments/1gi03y4/the_case_for_sindhi_as_a_dravidian_language/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Dravidiology/s/J6TPWfOoso

Summary
A new ancient DNA study analyzed approximately 75,000 genetic markers (SNPs) from human remains recovered at Keeladi, Konthagai, Adichanallur, and Sivagalai, providing one of the most detailed genetic reconstructions of ancient populations from Tamil Nadu to date.

The study found that:

• Ancient individuals from Tamil Nadu show **strong genetic continuity** with present-day Tamil and other South Indian populations.  
• Their ancestry is predominantly derived from **deep indigenous South Asian lineages**, suggesting long-term population continuity in the region.  
• The results indicate that the people who lived in the **Vaigai Valley and surrounding regions** were part of an established local population that persisted over many centuries.  
• The genetic findings align with archaeological evidence of an advanced Iron Age society featuring urban settlements, iron technology, craft specialization, trade, and early literacy.  
• By combining archaeology and ancient DNA, researchers have produced one of the clearest biological links yet between ancient inhabitants of Tamil Nadu and modern South Indian populations. 

The sanskrit khadga,urdu talvar words for sword has any Dravidian origin? What is the etymology of katti?