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.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to
ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles
This article is written in
Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
Do you describe the Mer Community as a caste or a tribe? 2011 Census of India has the community under other backward classes but nowhere does it include the community under the list of tribes.
[1]In light of this, I propose the name should be changed to Mer (caste).Thoughts? Thanks.
Jonathansammy (
talk)
19:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Jonathansammy: I think you are right. I have written 'tribe' since it seems to be the best translation for
Jati, however I think Jati would be the better alternative in this case. The problem with caste in my opinion is that it is very broad and categorises Jatis into Varnas. On the other hand other Jati pages like
Barot use the word caste so I am not completely sure.
TSAray (
talk)
15:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Heba Aisha: I read the relevant section of the book that you have mentioned here. Mers are a jati that not only called themselves kshatriya but were considered as such by the other jatis who lived with them - this is something Harshad Trivedi has alluded to in his books (I implore you to read from page 39 onwards Trivedi 1961). As such I am reverting back to the original text. Please let me know if you have any concerns.
TSAray (
talk)
14:13, 16 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Chariotrider555: I have looked into the sources you have provided. I think you may have confused the Maharashtra based
Mahar tribe which is considered to be a dalit community, with the Saurashtra based Mer (sometimes spelled Maher) community. Despite the apparent similarity in the name there is no historical connection between the two or at least this is not reflected in any academic research or in practice in the present. The reference to "Maher" in [4] includes a reference to
Phule who was involved the Mahar community, similarly the snippet I could find for [5] also did not have the specific context of the Mers of Saurashtra (I have been unable to find any information about [6] online.) [7] Please read through this source (incl. chapter 2) and the others already provided in the article to see where the claim of kshatriya comes from. This isn't a case of Puffery, which is defined as "the puffing of a subject or the addition of praise-filled adjectives and claims" because the label of kshatriya here simply designates an aspect of the historical understanding of this tribe rather than any kind of false praise or exaggeration. Similarly, Sankritization seems to imply the adoption of various cultural practises including teetotalism and the prohibition of widow remarriage - neither has been the case for the Mer tribe.
TSAray (
talk)
14:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)reply
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
I am requesting a revert back to the last update before the persistent vandalism, that is from the current edition to the the following revision - [
at 14:25, 21 March 2022]. Please let me know if there are any objections to this.
TSAray (
talk)
17:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
@
ScottishFinnishRadish: How does creating consensus work in this case as it is semi-protected. Can I make edits and wait until they are accepted or challenged? Or does one have to suggest everything in here first?
TSAray (
talk)
21:21, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
While there is protection you'll need to discuss edits here, and explain why they would be an improvement. Keep in mind that many people reviewing them may not be well versed in the topic area.
ScottishFinnishRadish (
talk)
21:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Thanks for clarifying.
One of the main additions I would like to request is the following to the History section. Although a few British-era sources have been referenced the content or claims of these are not controversial but rather relate to economic systems, otherwise, they have been substantiated with an additional source. Briefly, what is given is the mention of Mers in an inscription, information about how one of the Mer lineages came to be, the place in society - occupation (farming, warefare); priveleges bestowed by the local rulers; interaction with the state; economic background.
{{An inscription from 1328 describes the construction of a stepwell by Kuntaraja on the behest of Mehar ruled Thepak who was a tributatary of the
Chudasama Dynasty.[8][9] The Sīsodiyā branch of Mers was formed when the
Sisodia Hati Rajputs came from
Mewar in
Rajasthan to Saurashtra as mercenary warriors and settled at Malia Hatina (Malia of the Hatis) and intermarried with the local Ahirs and Mers.[10]
Mers were the dominant agricultural jati in the Jethwa-ruled kingdom around Barda.[11] Mers did not pay rent on their land, only paying a
hearth tax and if they cultivated, a plough tax in addition to sukhḍi (
quit rent) on villages assigned to them.[12] They would coronate the Jethwa ruler by placing a tilak upon his head.[13][14]Resultantly, Mers along with
Kathis and
Rajputs were considered to be '
Darbars'.[11] Historically, highland Mers, also known as Bhōmiyā (landed) held more political power than lowland Mers with the latter being restricted from buying land from Bhōmiyās between 1884 and 1947.[15]
The kin of those slain in action were paid 100 rupees (£10) by the Rana during the late 1800s.[12]}}
^Diskalkar, D.B (1938–1941). Inscriptions of Kathiawad (No. 27). Pune.{{
cite book}}: CS1 maint: date format (
link) CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link)
^Sheikh, Samira (2008). "Alliance, Genealogy and Political Power". The Medieval History Journal. 11 (1): 36 – via SAGE.
^Shah, A. M.; Desai, I. P. (1988). Division and hierarchy : an overview of caste in Gujarat. South Asia Books. p. 60.
ISBN978-8170750086.
^
abTambs-Lyche, Harald (1997). Power, Profit and Poetry Traditional Society in Kathiawar, Western India. New Delhi: Manohar. pp. 160–161.
ISBN81-7304-176-8.
^
abCampbell 1881, p. 138. sfn error: no target: CITEREFCampbell1881 (
help)
^Cousens, Henry (1998). Somanatha and Other Mediaeval Temples in Kathiawad. Archaeological Survey of India. p. 3.