Talk:Wadiyar dynasty

Ambiguous introduction

The introduction para is ambiguous. So, is the right spelling Odeyar or Wodeyar? The latter is said to denote a potter community. So why is there a gold pottery wheel in the palace? Is this to indicate that the antecedants of the Wodeyar rulers came from pottery? If so, why then is the clarification about the name Odeyar refering to ruler? -- Fgpilot (talk) 16:18, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

In the first place I do not know who created this myth that there is a Gold pottery wheel in the Palace. There was none at any point of time. It must have been mischievous wiki creation. Even the Mysore palace official web page ( hosted by the illegal occupant viz state govt) had such a story till recently. when confronted for a proof they seem to have quietly corrected their story.

Wadiyar, Wodeyar, Udhayar or Odeyar is the surname of many communities in Karnataka state and Tamil Nadu. may be some potter community in tamil nadu has such surname. But to say because of this the Royal house of Wadiyars of mysore belong to potter community would be blasphemous. Rajachandra (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation

could we have a pronunciation, please? Wetman 01:32, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Spelling Changed from Wodeyar to Odeyar

Request revert back to change of spelling. The spelling of a person's name has to be the spelling that the individual has used in their records,

It can't be arbitrarily be changed to Odeyar from Wodeyar/Wodiyar, just because that is the modern transliteration. If the individuals of the past have used or have been documented to have a certain spelling, that should be the spelling that should be used. -- Hgkamath 05:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Original spellings restored after some discussions Hgkamath 03:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Early Rulers from 1399-1799 obviously were not known to have signed in English. Hence one goes by the available English literature and how the name is spelt. Mark Wilks (published in 1817) who was the earliest to write a historical works on their origin uses the spelling WADEYAR. Yet in the revised version edited by Murray Hammick(1930) though adhereing to the above spelling gives this clarification:

"odeyar, Wodeyar, Wadeya is the plural and honorific form of odeya , a kannada word meaning lord, master. Wilks states that it indicated, at the period of which we are writing, the governor of a small district, generally of thirty three villages. We find it it applied , in Tamil form Udaiyar, to the chola kings as far as the eleventh century, and in the kannada form, Wodeyar, to the vijayanagar kings from the beginning of their rule. Vader, a modification of the word , is the title of respect by which Janagama priets are addressed. ( Rice: Mysore gazetter)"

Be that as it may, post 1799 when one can get the official signatures of the Rulers we see a uniform spelling of WADIYAR. At the same time one were to transliterate using the modern rules their own signatures in Kannada it would be oDeyar! No official explanation is available. Must be the result of their early English tutors ! But most of the writers from Hayavadana Rao to Vikarm Samapth etc continue to spell it as WODEYAR!

Rajachandra (talk) 09:29, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Wodeyars

1. Hi. I noticed you were adding links in the middle of this article. Please avoid this. Links should be put in the external links or reference section. I authored this article after lots of research and would like to maintain wiki guidelines.thanks.

Dineshkannambadi 19:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

2. The links you are adding must be in the see also section actually, unless they have already been linked to in the main article.

Dineshkannambadi 19:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

3. Mr DK,

I saw your message. What i inserted was internal links of wiki which was mainly my own work. I saw your comments on JCRW was inadequate, hence the insertion, because i did not want to meddle with your work . I do not know whether you have obtained permission from Dr. Meera Rajaram, as your work is largely inspired from her book.

Rajachandra 19:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

4. Hi. I own a book published by Dr Meera Rajaram Pranesh and any published book can be referenced, so long as the citations prove that the credit for the information goes to the author, in this case Dr. Meera. This is a wiki guideline. I dont need explicit permission from the author, or wikipedia would not exist. Also, being a summary style article, all info on every king is difficult to provide and infact discouraged. I appreciate your individual articles on the respective kings. Better yet, you could link the kings name with Jayachamaraja Wodeyar kind of name link in the main article, if you dont like the "see also" section. The Kingdom of Mysore is a featured article now after a 2 month long research. Hope you enjoy it.thanks

Dineshkannambadi 19:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

5. I have converted your image link to a displayed image in Mummadi Krishnaraja Wodeyar. Please see how it is done (syntactically) so you may use the same syntax in the future.thanks.

Dineshkannambadi 19:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

6. Mr. DK

well my contributions under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wodeyar has been there for few years now. I appreciate your efforts. I was present when the book by Dr. Meera was released !

Rajachandra 19:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

7. I saw that article. I feel the origin theory of Mysore Kings is insufficient. some well know scholars feel that the dynasty originated from the Tonnur Hoysala clan or by persons from the Vijayanagara court. The theory that the Wodeyars were immigrants from Dawarka may well be a myth, considering how royal families concocted dazzling connections to royal families in North India, during medieal times. However, being an encyclopedia, all popular theories need to be furnished.

Dineshkannambadi 20:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

8. What exactly do you mean when you say: Chamaraja Wodeyar IX was the adopted son of Maharani Lakshmi Ammani Devi ? In the first place Chamaraja Wodeyar IX was born long after the death of Venerable Maharani !! I am sorry by seeing the assertive tone of your messages , i have not corrected your article !!! MAharani LAkshammani adopted Khasa Chamaraja Wodeyar and after his death she was pushed to a miserable hovel along with the rest of the Family. She had negotiated with the British to put Restore the Wodeyars. After the death of Tipu in 1799, She played significant role in the upbringing of the young Mummadi and also played role in the administartion of Mysore.

Rajachandra —Preceding comment was added at 20:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

9. Dear Rajachandra, I did not write that sub-article.

Dineshkannambadi 20:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

10. The question of Wodeyars origin other than what you have stated is at best a biased surmise and is not backed by any historical records. But the most accepted and recorded in all books including Annals of the Royal family and History of Mysore by Hayavadana Rao is the popular version of Dwaraka /Yadu Dynasty connections despite the reservation.

Rajachandra 20:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

11. I hope I did not seem assertive in any way. If I did, sorry about that. If you have valuable published sources that can add value, we should discuss it along with the Karnataka work group here in wiki and make all the additions. After all, an encyclopedia is meant to grow.cheers

Dineshkannambadi 20:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC

12. Regarding the origin theories, its best we dont decide which is reliable and which is not. Origin theroies were always controversial and hence left to the readers view point. This is the best we can do on wikipedia.thanks.

Dineshkannambadi 20:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

13. I see large part of your citations are based on news paper reports !! Again you have stated: The Wodeyars had lost the throne of Mysore to Hyder Ali in the year 1766..

Factually, it may be a de facto situation. But Hyder was serving Immadi Krishna Raja as a Sarvadhikari and with the failed efforts to curtail his ascendancy by his old friend Diwan Khande Rao and his old mentor Karachuri Nanajaraja ( father in law of immadi and virtual ruler of Mysore after the death of Dodda Krishna Raja along with his brother Dalvoy Devaraja), Hyder became the master of the court. But still he publicly continued to accept the King as his master and went on installing successors after immadi's death. It is also alleged he was instrumental in the death of immadi's two sons when they came off age. He was also adopting & instrumental in installing Khas Chamaraja as king . It is only after the death of Hyder and the death of Khasa in 1996 this pretension was given go by by Tipu . Well i can go on and on .

Rajachandra 20:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

14. I have mentioned that Hyder and Tipu were never officially coronated. This is why I use the term de facto. I have also mentioned the names of those kings that Haider served, though he was in control of the administraton. Nowhere have I mentioned that Haider and Tipu were the kings of Mysore. BTW, only 6 out of 135 citations are from a newspapers or a web page. yet you claim most of the citations are from newspapers. Are we looking at the same article?

Dineshkannambadi 21:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

15. I live in India and yesterday it was already too late hence i logged off.

Due to frequent threat of rogue deletions, i have abstained from writing in wiki for quite some time. Yet a wild google search led me to the Mysore Composers thread and seeing some painting appaering along side KRW III, i uploaded a rare picture. Immediately i got a message asking me to react to a threat of speedy deletion. Before i realized i also got in to discussion with you on various aspects and ended up in burning midnight oil and getting up with severe migraine !!

To summarize my view points again:

a. I disagree with you on the copyright issue. As your postings are generously sourced from DR. Meera's book which is based on doctoral thesis by the author, i strongly feel it does violate the copyright act 1957. Existence of wiki has no bearing on it. I do not think even wiki supports such a flagrant violation of coy right.

b. I also do not approve of duplicating of works which has already been in wiki for a long time. You could have built and added on the existing articles. Now to have one King KRW IV and another Maharaja KRW IV is making mockery of the free wiki space available.

c. As for as the origin of Wodeyars, i do not understand the grouse of the so called Historians. If India is marauded by so many infiltrators and Ruled, how can two young men claiming to come from Dwaraka or any other place and saving a damsel in distress and being accepted by the locals and living ever so happily there after and Ruling the small principality 600 years ago be questioned by some doubting thomoses now ! Where is the question of exhibiting some dazzling titles or ancestry figure in here. There is no historical evidence to doubt there story either. yes, theer is nothing to support it either. That is the tragedy of Wodeyars. Because what ever family records which might have been there in their in the fabled Saraswathi Bhandar were consigned to cook horse gram by Tipu after the death of Khasa Chamaraja when the Old Palace itself was destroyed but for a small collection which fell in to hands Britishers. Thanks Mark Wilks the first printed History of Wodeyars was published. All subsequent works seems to owe some amount of credit to his work. Much work in rebuilding the Saraswathi Bhandar by KRW III seems to have again lost in the devastating fire of the old palace in 1896. Much encyclopedic work was done by both Rice & C. Hayavadana Rao and after words no modern original research has been done. Any speculation in this regard without original research only leaves bad taste in the mouth and is case of caste connotations. I attended a Seminar few years back where a very biased speaker said wodeyars were cow herds ! So do not get carried by what you read unless you have a something original to say. Otherwise it is like after another hundred years some one saying Actor Ganesh a Known Nepali ruling the Kannada Silver Screen could not have come from Nepal just because you do not want to accept it.

d. I have not read your articles as i did not have the time and occasion to read in its entirety as already narrated. I just got sucked in to a post- repost marathon ! Yet when i completed reading just the first para on KRW III , i had pointed out how many errors there were( whether done by you or otherwise). I quote specific lines and my comments were purely based on thoes specific references. Take again the example of notes: # ^ a b Rajakaryaprasakta Rao Bahadur (1936), p265. It is either some one has not read the book first hand or does not even know that Rajakaryaprasakta Rao Bahadur is just then title of the Author. C.Hayavadana Rao ( Editor of Mysore Gazetteer ). Actually copies in my possession does not even mention these titles. It must have been what some one else has quoted in some other works. Also These Gazetteer are not single Volume works. So mention of page number mentioned does not make sense.

e. I strongly feel these comments should actually appear in the discussion pages of the relevant article instead of in our personal pages for the benefit of others.

f. I neither have the time and energy to get in to a dialog with you in this regard. What i have expressed is my sincere views as you claimed you authored this article after lots of research. Good luck to you !

Rajachandra 18:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

16. :Rajachandra/Dinesh - Can one of you move this discussion to an article space talk page? So that other editors can involve in this discussion? Probably Talk:Wodeyar or Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Karnataka would be better place to discuss. Thanks - KNM ^Talk 19:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

17. thanks

Dineshkannambadi 19:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

18. ::Dinesh, thanks for moving the thread. Could one of you specify what are the issues that need to be resolved here? As the discussions have happened in multiple talk pages, it seems difficult to follow. For example, what is that copyright issue that Rajachandra is disagreeing? Which works have been duplicated here? Probably one section for each issue would be better, and each of those sections will act as discussion thread for that topic. Thanks -

KNM ^Talk 20:29, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

DK response

Issues that Rajachandra has,

copyright issues w.r.t the book by Dr. Meera Pranesh. But the article's contents are well paraphrased and not verbatim copied. I have ensured this. Therefore, no copyright issues should exist. As such, the author Dr. Meera Pranesh has been extensively quoted to give credit to her work.

The background of the founders of the kingdom, Yaduraya and his brother, as described by some scholars whom I have cited. Rajachandra believes, that they were from Dwaraka is the only opinion that should be written. He says other opinions by scholars is biased, such as their connection to the Hoysalas or the Vijyanagara court.

Position of Tipu/Haider Ali in the kingdom. I have assured him that no where have I called them Kings of Mysore. On the contrary, I have used to term De facto rulers.

article on Krishnaraja Wodeyar III. Firstly with the contents and secondly with the existence of multiple articles in that Kings name, neither of which I wrote, but simply linked to.

I hope we can sort out these issues quickly.thanksDineshkannambadi 21:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks Dinesh. I have created subsections below, for each of these issues. Discussions on individual issues can be continued their, in separate threads. - KNM ^Talk 22:23, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

i have rearranged the thread in real time to put the matter in better perspective and understand what prompted some of my comments. As regards the "issues to be resolved" as epitomized by DK, i will post my comments soon. Thanks

Rajachandra (talk) 08:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Issues to be resolved

Book by Dr.Meera Pranesh

Copyright issues w.r.t the book by Dr. Meera Pranesh. But the article's contents are well paraphrased and not verbatim copied. I have ensured this. Therefore, no copyright issues should exist. As such, the author Dr. Meera Pranesh has been extensively quoted to give credit to her work.Dineshkannambadi 22:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The general rule is that copyright lasts for 60 years. In the case of original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works the 60-year period is counted from the year following the death of the author.

Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright. The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright, namely – (a)a fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work for the purposes of (i) research or private study; (ii) criticism or review, whether of that work or

In the instant case it is debatable if there is a fair dealing! It is subjective.But the fact that it has been referred to almost around 60 times and almost it is like the first page of 6.0, 7.0, 8.0 and 9.0 of the book listing the composers of the particular era has been reproduced makes it difficult to say the work is original. Any way it is not my concern as i am not the author but it is only a honest view point. Rajachandra 18:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply Sir, I am quite confident that my citations from Dr. Meera's book will hold, per the regulations of wikipedia.Dineshkannambadi 03:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Dear Rajachandra, the way in which Dinesh has used the book is completely in line with Wikipedia and legal requirements. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yaduraya and his brother: Background

The background of the founders of the kingdom, Yaduraya and his brother, as described by some scholars whom I have cited. Rajachandra believes, that they were from Dwaraka is the only opinion that should be written. He says other opinions by scholars is biased, such as their connection to the Hoysalas or the Vijyanagara court.Dineshkannambadi 22:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry this has taken long in desideratum! I thought some of our esteemed wikipedians will react on the issues involved in this page. As you see the controversy was not raised by me in the first place. As already stated earliest attempt at writing a History of Mysore should undoubtedly go to Lt. Col Mark Wilks (1760-1831). His work, “Historical Sketches of the South of India, in an attempt to trace the History of Mysore; from the origin of the Hindoo Government of the state, to the extinction of the Mohammedan Dynasty in 1799” was first published in 1810 ( second and third Volumes were published in 181&). It appears as though Mr. Wilks has carefully avoided giving his work the title of history! Yet no Historical work relating to Mysore can pretend not to owe its deep acknowledgement to Wilks’ great classical work.

But any uninitiated may well ask the question : who is this Mark Wilks and how did he come about writing his book may be lurking to be asked.

Mr.Wilks was born in Isle of Man and left for India/ Chennaipatna (yes, Madras/ Chennai was known thus at that time) to take up the post of a Cadet in 1783 and was with Col .Stuart through out the war with Tipu at Sriranagapatna in 1792 and later returned to Mysore after the fall of Tipu in 1799. He served as the Resident of Mysore from 1803-1808. Wilks other great contribution was the construction of the Residency at Mysore. He designed and began its construction during his tenure. It is the oldest extant heritage edifice in Mysore- now popularly known as Government House. The Banquet Hall was hailed as the largest room in south India at that time and was designed by the maverick Architect Thomas Flot de Havilland. There is yet another gift to Mysore by Wilks in bringing to India and Mysore his much famed nephew Sir Mark Cubbon, who served as the Commissioner of Mysore for 25 long years and laid the solid foundation to the creation of Modern Mysore. Unfortunately both uncle and nephew did not leave any of their invaluable historical Papers for posterity. To complete the story Mark Wilks was Governor of St. Helena during the incarceration of Napoleon Bonaparte as a state prisoner. It appears there is some unknown Historical bond between Bonaparte and Mysore thro’ Tipu (He was a member of Jacobin Club, He invited Bonaparte to invade India to oust British and he had lot of French mercenaries serving in his army), Duke of Wellington (Arthur Wellesley- he defeated Tipu after Mysore War IV in 1799 and defeated Bonaparte at Waterloo in 1815 and the Wellington Lodge at Mysore was constructed by him ) and Wilks ( He served as Governor of St. Helena when Napoleon was incarcerated after Waterloo!)

Thus Wilks was witness to history as it unfolded during those tumultuous years of Mysore History. He knew intimately many of the characters who were part of the epic theater of war and peace as it unfolded. He is the only one who has written few lines about the legendary Rani Lakshamanni based on his personal acquaintance with her.

During his tenure he set up a Historical Commission of sorts under Diwan Poorniah and his assistant Butche Row (son of Diwan Khande Row – a known Royalist of Immadi Krishna Raja Wodeyar and has to pay a heavy price as Hyder Ali later starved him to death for this impudence) . The best informed natives of the State who were known to possess family manuscripts and historical pieces were assembled for this purpose and a Historical Memoir was prepared and this became a major source for the book.

After the death of Khasa Chamaraja Wodeyar in 1796, The Royal family members were transferred to a miserable hovel and the Royal Palace was plundered and everything valuable and useful were transferred to Tipu’s Stores and quite accidentally among them were two old Kadatam’s ( palm leaf manuscript). Tipu’s attention was drawn to them two years later and he ordered them to be translated to Persian (this may well add gist to the recent public spat on Tipu’s court language being Persian and he being anti Kannada as elucidated by Ex. Education Minster Shanakara Murthy’s.) (Ironically I had written a feature article on the very same subject in Taranaga Magazine way back in 1993 itself and received quite a lot of hate mail !). These were found among Lt. Col. Mackenzie’s collection later and Wilks was fortunate to have received the book and much valuable historical information from him.

This kadatam is known as “maisUru dhoregaLA pUrvAbhyudya vivara” written around 1714 containing the chronicles of the Mysore Royalty. It is understood Chikka Deva Raja Wodeyar (1673-1704) had directed an extensive collection of Historical material and inscriptions then extant and had added them to the Palace Library known as Sarawswthi Bhanadar. The above memoir probably was written after his death and presented to his son. It is interesting to note that it was Chikka Devaraja wodeyar who did extensive classification of the Arasu (Urs) families and recognized 13 families as pure blood and another 18 families a of inferior group. Wodeyars were to marry only from among the 13 pure blood groups!

It was this memoir which helped Wilks reconstruct the origin of the Wodeyar’s rule and the list of early Rulers. It is from here the original story of Yaduraya (vijaya) ostensibly coming from Dwaraka and slaying Maranayaka and becoming the progenitor of the Wodeyar Dynsaty originated. Surprisingly even the origin of the Town /Fort of Mysore is buried in obscurity, According to this version Yaduraya became a Wodeyar (According to Wilks it meant the title holder was Lord of 33 villages and it is believed most of the 33 villages mentioned here are extant!) and ruled from a fort called Hadana. This was traced by B.Lewis Rice (author of Mysore Gazetteer) to a Village near Nanjangud ! But later during the reign of Krishna Raja Wodeyar III another manuscript known as Muddaraja Urs MSS identifies this as Hadadana near the foothills of Chamundi Hill. It was only during the reign of Hiriya Bettada Chamaraja Wodeayr III ( 1513-1553) the fort of mahisUru nagara (1524) was built. But the intrinsic association of Mahabaladri hill ( ancient name of Chamundi Hill – there is a temple of Mahabala even today ), Dodda kere, Someshwara Temple and kODi bhairava temple with the descriptive story of Vijaya and Krishna’s sojourn to Mysore in 1399 and the establishment of the Dynasty proves the existence of some kind of habitat around this place from ancient times.

Even Wilks book fails to list the number of generations which intervened between Yaduraya and Hiriya Chamarajarasa Wodeyar II (1478-1513) (Also konown as Arberal –meaning six fingered). Nevertheless even B.Lewis Rice adopts story given by Wilks as the origin of the Royal Family of Mysore. Subsequent unearthing of Literary works like Govind Vaidya’s Kanthirava Narasaraja Vijayam (1648) and Chikka Devaraja Vamshavali (1680) have confirmed some of these facts. It was only much later during the reign of Krishna Raja Wodeyar III manuscript Kannada known as shrImann maharAjara vaMshAvaLi (Annals of the Mysore Royal Family) was prepared which gives complete details of all the Rulers from 1399, their conquests, Number of Wives, Children etc. This was published in book form by the H.H. Krishna Raja Wadiyar IV in two Volumes in the year 1916 and 1922 respectively. It even traces the eleven forbears of Yaduraya and another 63 from Atri Muni. Among the Indian Royal Families we have what is known as Surya Vamshi (Solar race) and Chandra Vamshi (Lunar Race). Wodeyars claim they belong to Lunar Race. There are quite a few Indian Royal Families who belong to this race. Prominent among them are the Royal families of Kutch, Gondal, Rajkot, Kotda Sangani (all Jadeja’s) – all spread around Dwaraka in Gujarat and Jaisalmer in Rajasthan. All claim to belong to Athreyasa gotra and Asvalayana sutra and Rk sakha. It is common Knowledge all Hindu’s claim to belong to some Gotra and this has been handed to us from generation to generation and if you ask for any proof no one can vouch for it! There are two interesting stories worth narrating here. Tipu after 1996 was preparing to anoint himself as padshah and to lend some Royal sheen and legitimacy the iconoclast in him arranged for marriage with a Princess. He chose the Princess of Kutch – again hailing from lunar race!! In recent times Late Yuvaraja of Mysore; H.H. Narasimha Raja Wadiyar (1888-1940) was impressed by the Young Thakur Saheb Shri Pradyumna Sinhji Himatsinhji of Kotda Sangani, during his administrative training in Mysore. So Yuvaraja arranged the handsome Thakur’s marriage with his daughter Rani Vijaya Devi. But much to the constraint of the Yuvaraja it was realized quite late that the Thakur also belonged to the same Lunar Race!! So the young Princess was given away in adoption to her uncle to enable them to solemnize the wedding!!

Krishna Raja Wodeyar III also got paintings of the Annals of Royal family in the form of a Family Tree and copper plates. These can be seen at Jayachamarajendra Art Gallery Housed in Jagan Mohan Palace, Mysore. There are many more paintings of contemporary personalities in his court and also family tree of his many wives and their children.

It is interesting note that a revised edited version of Wilks book was published by Sir Murray Hammick under a slightly altered title “Historical Sketches of the South Indian History – From the earliest times to the last Muhammadan Dynasty” in 1930. This book records the genealogy as recorded in the Annals.

After extensive research of over 40 years, Mr. C.Hayavadana Rao authored what Mr. H.D. Sharma author of “The Real Tipu” (1991) calls as an encyclopedic work. This is in three volumes. “History of Mysore” was published in 1946, running over 2835 pages! Even this work concludes the life of early Rulers from Yaduraya (1399-1423) to Bettada Chamaraja/Devaraja Wodeyar (1576-1578) in a single chapter of mere 11 pages. Only major contribution being his assertion that the last named was in fact Devaraja not Chamaraja thus creating confusion among readers as Chamaraja Wadiyar (1881-1894) is described by many authors as either Chamaraja Wadiyar IX or X.

Yet, all the three books- Wilks , Rao and Annals end with the fall of Tipu and only Annanls-2 goes beyond and is an exclusive on Krishna Raja Wodeyar III. (I have spelled the name as Wodeyar up to KRW III and later as Wadiyar as the later successors have spelt and signed accordingly) This is for this reason I started with H.H. Jaya Chamaraja Wadiyar and later did pen sketches of Krishna Raja Wadiyar IV and Chamaraja Wadiyar X, Yuvaraja and his daughter etc as nothing much in print was available on them. So if I am not following some of the rules of Wiki and do not ascribe sources, then I can only say I have done my own home work!! Take the case of the story on Curse on Wodeyar’s story. Most of Mysoreans have grown with this curse story but hardly anything is available in print. So much so Wilks and Rao’s book do not even mention about it and Annals does not go the whole hog ! Only recently Sashi Sivramkrisna's Curse of Talakaad does some original work on the subject . All the same even his book does not deal with all aspects as my story does. So it appears everything about Wodeyar’s, Mysore and the Curse are all mired in obscurity and have been handed down thro’ traditional oral sources by and large.

The Karnataka Hoysala Empire reign over much part of Karnataka ended with Veera Ballala III around 1343. They also claimed to belong to Yadava clan. Vijaya Nagar Empire was founded by Hakka (Harihara) around 1336. Interestingly Yadavas of Devagiri’s reign also ended around 1334. It is this confluence of historical events which has made some post Independent historians as DK states doubt the veracity of the origin of Wodeyars. History cannot be written with mere conjecture and suspicion and no practical purpose will be served by such quibble.

I will stop my recrudescence with this. I hope I have made my point albeit with much dudgeon. I may not pass all the rigors of wiki and its rules and request the likes of you to edit it as they deem fit. If it does not pass muster so be it!! Rajachandra 19:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

DK Repy Sir, I appreciate your going into such details on the writings of Wilks, Hayvadana Rao etc. I also am impressed by your personal knowledge of the subject. But unfortunately, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which only accepts data from published sources. That many of the family chronicles/manuscripts of the royal family was gutted in a fire is not important to wikipedia. Wikipedia also does not accept word-to-mouth information, even if it comes from the Royal family itself, as that fails WP:OR.

You are right, Indian history in general is drenched in legends, hypothesis and historical guesswork. But we can only go with what sources we have. I know that Rice mentions a Gujarat origin and I have quoted him to. I am yet to come across a historian who says without any doubts that the founders "did indeed" come from Gujarat. Those who claim a Gujarat origin say "supposed to have come from Gujarat" - because nobody is sure. This is all the more reason to quote their difference of opinion, so that wikipedia rises above the level of a common blog site. Coming to Wilks, I have sourced from the book "Ancient India: Collected Essays on the Literary and Political History of ...." by Krishnaswami Ayiangar.- page 275-276, where the author says that "according to Wilks, the founders were fugitives from the Vijayanagara court, and this seems very likely" and I have cited Aiyangar too. He even mentions the possibility of a Hoysala or Kakatiya connection, but like Wilks, resigns to the Vijayanagara connection. In wikipedia, we cannot push the views of one school and leave out another. I hope you understand. last but not the least, wikipedia allows only summary style articles. Going into details of which manuscript burned down, who was responsible and what information was lost is not acceptable. Information that is available and well published and discussed by multiple authors (to pass WP:UNDUE) is only acceptable. thanksDineshkannambadi 03:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Haider Ali - Tipu Sultan

Position of Tipu/Haider Ali in the kingdom. I have assured him that no where have I called them Kings of Mysore. On the contrary, I have used to term De facto rulers.Dineshkannambadi 22:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Again if one reads para 13 of the sequence of discussion, it is evident my remark was against particular phrase in the relevant article only. It is immaterial if one calls father and son as Nawabs, kings or by any name. it is a indubitable fact of history that they ruled the state one way or the other. But by the yardstick the Dalvoy brothers Devarajayya and Karachuri Nanajarajayya also ruled the kingdom for a fairly long time. After the death Dodda Krishna Raja wodeyar the brothers were the virtual monorchs of all they surveyed and they even deposed the anointed successor of Dodda KRW and imposed a minor in immadi KRW as the king and later even made him a son in law. It was only the long drawn war to conquer Tirucharapalli which became the waterloo of Karachuri. In fact Nandiraja (As Karachuri was known) was the one who helped Hyder grow in the army and when Khande Rao tried to annihilate Hyder, he went back to his mentor for help. Besides Nadiraja was a great devout and composer too. But you do not find their account being given equal importance when one speaks of Mysore History. Rajachandra 19:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply Sir, the fact that Nanjarajayya was a soldier of merit, famous writer is already noted in my article (or in my subarticle pertaining to literature). I have even mentioned that the Dalavoy brothers had considerable clout in the Kingdom. But of the various books I referred to, only Kamath and Pranesh mention them, both authors as know are local to Karnataka. None of the other writers even mention them. There is a reason for this - In the world scheme of things and in fitting Mysore Kingdom's history into the world perspective, the Dalavoy brothers are simply not famous enough, or they would have been mentioned. You may claim that they were as successful in war as Haider and Tipu or that Nanjarajayya mentored Tipu, but this has to come from published sources, be popular. When scholars all over the world talk of the "political" history of Mysore Kingdom, even Chikkadevaraja Wodeyar is not mentioned. Only Tipu and Haider are described. But ofcourse when the cultural history of the kingdom is discussed (which invariably is done by Karnataka scholars), they naturally go into details of the Hindu kings, their musical abilities, their court poets and musicians. I have tried to maintain a balance between the political history and the cultural history. Also, Wikipedia does not entertain personal sentiments about the character of any individual/personality in the article. It only accepts world view. Because two authors I referred to mentioned Tipu's bigoted religious ways, I promptly mentioned it in the article. If you can provide published information about the military successes of Nanjarajayya, we can defnitely include a few lines regarding the issue. thanksDineshkannambadi 03:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Krishnaraja Wodeyar III

Article on Krishnaraja Wodeyar III. Firstly with the contents and secondly with the existence of multiple articles in that Kings name, neither of which I wrote, but simply linked to.Dineshkannambadi 22:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Where are the multiple articles? Please link them here. Thanks. Sarvagnya 10:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

No I have not written an exclusive article on KRW III. I have written about him in the Curse story and sritattvanidhi link. Though for too long i intended to write an article, i thought it is difficult to do justice to this multifaceted personality. Long ago i had goaded the Editor of Taranga Magazine Sri. Santosha Kumar Gulvady to write a tribute to him on the occasion of his 200th birth anniversary. He obliged me with cover story, but again it fell on deaf ears as post independent historians and government are not concerned.

Below is part of a small note i wrote to a news paper some time back (which was ignored) and will give a glimpse about his genius :

The first magic knight's tour is credited to Mr. William Beverley, an Englishmen in 1847. He was a scene painter and designer of theatrical effects. It was published in Philosophical Magazine in March 1848. Mr. Carl Wenzelides is credited with the Second Magic Night’s tour. It appeared in the February-March number of the Schachzeitung 1849, under the heading ‘Der Rösselsprung in höchster Kunstvollendung’ {The Knight's Tour in its Highest Perfection}. Mr. Carl Wenzelides was an invalid, confined for many years to his couch, who found a welcome relief to the tedium of his life in the composition of chess problems and knight's tours.

Maharaja is credited with Third Magic Kinigt’s Tour. This is part of Kautuka Nidhi which is the last and ninth part of the encyclopedic work known as “Sri Tatava Nidhi” by Mummadi. However it is very difficult to exactly place with certainty when this magnum opus “Sri Tattava Nidhi” was written. An original copy of this colossal work is available in the Oriental Research Institute, University of Mysore, Mysore. Another copy is in the possession of the scion of the Royal Family of Mysore, Sri Srikanta Datta Narsimharaja Wadiyar. In recent times the Oriental Research Institute has published three volumes (Saktinidhi, Vishnunidhi, and Sivanidhi).

Sri Tattava Nidhi is in nine parts, each called a nidhi ("treasure"). The nine sections are 1)shakti nidhi, 2) viShnu nidhi, 3) shiva nidhi, 4) brahma nidhi, 5) graha nidhi, 6) vaiShNava nidhi, 7) shaiva nidhi, 8)Agama nidhi & 9) kautuka nidhi.

A part of Kautuka Nidhi dealing with Yoga is already published by a Sanskrit scholar and hatha yoga student named Norman Sjoman. He has written a book titled: The Yoga Tradition of the Mysore Palace (Year of Publication : 1996,ISBN : 8170173892).The book presents the first English translation of a part of Koutuka nidhi/Sritattvanidhi , which includes instructions for and illustrations of 122 postures—making it by far the most elaborate text on asanas in existence before the twentieth century.

Thus the work could have been written anytime between 1830 to 1868 and hence it may have evolved much before the first magic knight's tour by William Beverley (1847). The fact that all the three night’s tours are dated around few years of each other also suggest it may have been taken out of India by many of Mummdi’s European admirers.

These tours were preserved in a manuscript by Pandit Harikrishna Sharma Jyotishacharya, written in 1871, which was printed in Devanagari script by Venkateshwar Steam Press, Bombay in 1900, and is reproduced, with English commentary, in a book on Indian Chess by S. R. Iyer (NAG Publishers, Delhi 1982). A silk handkerchief bearing this tour was exhibited at the Margate Easter Chess Congress, 1938. The present whereabouts of the silk (or silks?) is unknown.

May be if some of you do not come in my way and my shortcomings to comply with rules, i will add significantly to this section when ever i find time Rajachandra 19:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I believe as long you are contributing through reliable sources, it should not matter. Please go ahead. We can discuss it, if required, as the article development progresses. It would also be a good idea, if you can develop the entire section in your user subpage and then incorporate it into the article. But again, that's just an option. Please feel free to edit whichever way is comfortable for you. Thanks - KNM ^Talk 04:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. If Rajachandra has sufficient "published" and "verifyable" information on KRW III or any other king from the dynasty, the article may even be considered for a "Featured article" status and be well worth it.thanksDineshkannambadi 22:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Arjun wodeyar

A mystery entry has been made under Arjun Wodeyar as the present scion of the family. I have deleted this entry as this is totally unfounded. Neither Jaya Chmaraja Wodeyar or his son Srikanta Datta Narsimha Raja wodeyar have any nephew, cousin or relative by this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajachandra (talk • contribs) 21:30, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Some vandal has made an entry on the so called Arjun Wodeyar again. It is again deleted. It is absurd as no such scion of Wodeyar Dynasty is alive or dead.

Also the entry on Curse on wodeyar was totally deleted . It has been restored. If any one has any objections on this article. kindly post your reasons here.

Rajachandra (talk) 09:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

This absurd claim of Arjun Wodeyar must be from an insane or vagabond interloper! People like this are responsible for Wikipedia being doubted as a reference source. I wish someone fro wiki will devise means to stop such free editing access to all and sundry.

Just a wodeyar surname will not make one a scion of the Royal family. There are quite a many in North Karnataka region who use this surname. Even when Late Maharaja Jaya Chamaraja wadiyar was the Governor of Mysore, he had appointed one Mr. S.S.Wodeyar as the Vice Chancellor of Karnatak University. Few years ago there was an M.P known as Channiah Odeyar.

I hope this will be the last, we see of this Arjun. If this person has any decency let him open a separate wiki entry under Arjun Wodeyar and adduce all evidence which makes him hallucinate as a member of Mysore Royal family . Rajachandra (talk) 09:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Will some one tell me how and to whom should one report about this fraud Arjun Wodeyar who is creating havoc here by repeatedly posting some garbage by making some astounding claims ? I challenge him to show the web link to Deccan Herald where he claims he was anointed as the heir apparent !

Otherwise one may have to report to cyber crime authorities in this regard.

Rajachandra (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Needs a lot of work

Feels like this is written to aggrandize some folks. 24.125.38.175 (talk) 04:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC) R.E.D.

revenue payments

How much did the Wodyers have to pay the British annually? Info should be included here 72.76.242.76 (talk) 02:24, 21 August 2012 (UTC) R.E.D.

Wodeyar or Wadiyar?

Can anyone clean uo the confusion between the two spellings? And change the title accordingly?!Super48paul (talk) 08:49, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Wallace McDonald (talk) 03:50, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm a new contributor and not sure how to explain what I've done on the "talk" page. I went through the entire article and tried to straighten out the English, especially in the account of the "curse." I'm not an authority on Indian history and therefore can't criticize the facts presented. I changed all the references to "Wodeyar" to "Wadiyar," since that was the form used at the beginning of the account. Somebody may want to reverse this.

There's one point I don't see mentioned on this page. The story of the curse says Tirumala had a disease, but that Srirangaraya died. Are they the same? I didn't know what to think, so I made no change at this point.

Yes, Historically the viceroy of Vijayanagar empire at Srirangapatna was Tirumala. But some works use the name Sriranga-raya. Raya / Rayulu etc was a honorific surname appended to the names and one who is in charge of srirangapatna is alternatively known as Sriranaga Raya in some works.

Rajachandra (talk) 09:36, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Recommend usage of better picture

HI there. I recommend the usage of a better picture of the incumbent monarch under this page. Having been a graphics designer the picture is visually offloading and a clearer, professional photo would be appropriate. Thank you. --Hari147 (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

The “Herder” descent of the Wadiyars

@HinduKshatrana:

You have introduced a highly contested piece of information about the descent of the Wodeyars with this edit here [1], without any discussion. This edit has been reverted by multiple editors due to it being a poor source.[2] UPSC PREP BOOKS are NOT a Reliable source.

If you read the Wadiyar_dynasty#History section of the article, you’ll know that their origins are not clear and most reputed historians dismiss their ‘Yaduvanshi’ origin claim.

If you still want to claim they are of herder descent, kindly provide a peer reviewed published source written by a historian as an argument in the history section, do not keep vandalising the page and introducing low quality content from poor sources in the introduction.

It’s very evident from that you’re a member of one of the Yadava subcastes and are POV pushing. Cyberanthropologist (talk) 13:29, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

History vs Mythology

in the section - British rule, there is a statement, “ The next king, Nalvadi Krishna Raja Wadiyar, earned great fame as a saintly King-Rajarishi, and his kingdom was hailed as Ramarajya by Mahatma Gandhi as an ideal kingdom comparable to the one ruled by the ‘’’historical hero’’’ Lord Rama.”

Is it factually correct to call Rama a historical character? It should be changed to a Mythological character. ponnambalam^{well known as santhosh janardhanan | talk me} 01:17, 17 April 2022 (UTC)