Talk:Muziris

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Untitled

[edit]

News Paper Reports--

http://www.hinduonnet.com/2004/03/23/stories/2004032303340500.htm

http://www.hindu.com/2007/04/01/stories/2007040106021000.htm

http://www.hindu.com/lf/2004/03/28/stories/2004032800050200.htm

http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/iron-man-s-country.html

http://nasrani.net/2007/04/08/news-analysis-on-follow-up-on-muziris-pattanam-excavations-iv-muziris-heritage-project/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4970452.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.202.250.83 (talk) 06:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Totally weak article, basically copypasted from Periplus_of_the_Erythraean_Sea, doesn't make any sense if you aren't already familiar with the subject —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heatsketch (talk • contribs) 01:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The statements

[edit]

This statement, ;;Muziris, known as Vanchi to locals is not correct. I am not sure from where the BBC got this information. I am a local and so I am correcting the errors in their statements. Vanchi is the name of erstwhile Travancore state of South western India. Kochi (old name Cochin) was between Travancore, and Muziris. It is believed that because of a great flood in the fourteenth century, Muziris was destroyed and centre of commerce was moved to other areas Neduvelilmathew (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

[edit]

Muziris is also known as Pattanam. So it is suggested that this article may be deleted or be merged with the article Pattanam which contains more reliable sources.Neduvelilmathew (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Muziris in World Heritage List

[edit]

Muziris deserves a place in the UNESCO World Heritage List. Many of the items in the list are much less old and hardly as unique as Muziris. The excavations have to gather momentum and unearth more to make it eligible at an early date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.68.82.133 (talk) 11:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed

[edit]

I have added citation needed tags to a couple of blockquotes as it is not clear which translation they were taken from. References and footnotes also need separating. Can anyone please help? Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 12:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please add

[edit]

Another probable location is the inland port of Musiri located on the Kaveri River[1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Konguboy (talk • contribs) 08:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.tamilartsacademy.com/books/roman%20karur/preface.html

Periyar

[edit]

Why using Periyar River ("Big-river River"). Ever we use "Bahr-al Nile River"?

Rameez P. P. 11:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Proper District

[edit]

Is Muziris in Thrissur District or Ernakulam District? There have been news report that some people have fabricated the evidence to show that Muziris is in Ernakulam District. Please rectify that.

124.124.211.93 (talk) 10:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pattanam is located in Chittatukara panchayat, Vadakkekara revenue division, Paravur taluk, Ernakulam district, Kerala. Ref: Kerala Council for Historical Research (KCHR) reports. Pattanam is believed to be part of Muziris.Neduvelilmathew (talk) 11:47, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Muziris may be in Malabar or Tulu Nadu. Infact, it was probably Ponnani, Tirur, Calicut, Koyilandy (Quilandy) or Mangalore. It was the christian missionaries who created the false story of the St. Thomas apostle's travel to Kodungallor, Kerala, India in 52 CE. They tried to develop the false story of Muziris for spreading christianity in India. By creating this myth, they could argue that India was the craddle of Christianity in Asia and Christianity reached Kerala long before the arrival of Hinduism in the state. The muslims created the myth of the Cheraman Perumal's conversion to Islam; that too happenend in Kodungalloor. Infact the age of Cheraman Kings were 900-1200 CE. The prophet Muhammad's era was 570- 632 CE. Then how can Cheraman Perumal go to Muhammad PBUH?. Anyway, these myths tried to establish Kodungalloor as the cultural capital of Kerala. But if we look into the cultural activities and and folk arts of entire Kerala, we can see that the three cultural hot spots of Kerala are North Malabar, South Malabar and Central Travancore. Kodungalloor is not the part of any of these areas. Kodungalloor might not be the capital of Cheras. Instead, it would be Ponnani or Tirur. The historians have to rewrite the true history of Kerala and especially that of Chera Kingdom. The Kerala Cheras had nothing to do with the history of Tamilnadu, as the culture of Kerala and Tamilnadu are very different.Anoop.m (talk) 07:31, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pliny the Elder's Natural History

[edit]

The first English traslation of Pliny the Elder's Natural History by Philemon Holland (1601) is here [1]. There is not a single mention of the term "Tamil" in it. Book 6, Chapter XX111 describes Muziris and says that the king that reigned there was named Celebothras.

Another English translation is here [2]. Google books search reported: No results found in this book for "Tamil". Page 135 mentions Muziris and Celebothras [3].

Therefore, misinterpretation of "Pliny the Elder's Natural History" is added in this article. Jossyys (talk) 02:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Periplus of the Erythraean Sea

[edit]

53. Beyond Calliena there are other market-towns of this region; Semylla, Mandagora, Pala patma, Meligara, Byzantium, Togarum and Aurannohoas. Then there are the islands called Sesecrienae and that of the Aegidii, and that of the Caenitae, opposite the place called Chersonesus (and in these places there are pirates) and after this the White Island. Then come Naura and Tyndis, the first markets of Damirica [=Limyrike], and then Muziris and Nelcynda, which are now of leading importance.

54. Tyndis is of the Kingdom of Cerobothra; it is a village in plain sight by the sea. Muziris, of the same Kingdom, abounds in ships sent there with cargoes from Arabia, and by the Greeks; it is located on a river, distant from Tyndis by river and sea five hundred stadia, and up the river from the shore twenty stadia. Nelcynda is distant from Muziris by river and sea about five hundred stadia, and is of another Kingdom, the Pandian. This place also is situated on a river, about one hundred and twenty stadia from the sea.

The above paragraphs show that Muziris was in the Kingdom of Cerobothra.

Some more explanation is here. The word Kerala is first recorded as Keralaputra in a 3rd-century BCE rock inscription (Rock Edict 2) left by the Maurya emperor Ashoka (274–237 BCE). The Land of Keralaputra was one of the four independent kingdoms in southern India during Ashoka's time, the others being Chola, Pandya, and Satiyaputra. Scholars hold that Keralaputra is an alternate name of the Cheras, the first powerful dynasty based in Kerala. (Reliable references are there in the article Kerala).

Therefore, Muziris was in the Kingdom of Cerobothra / Keralaputra, that is Chera Kingdom. Jossyys (talk) 02:18, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding historical, native name

[edit]

Musiri (Tamil, முசிறி) to the first line as it its original historical name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Konguboy (talk • contribs) 08:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just completed a Guild of Copy Editors copy edit

[edit]

Although I have indeed completed this work, I'd like to mention three a couple of things here on the Talk page in the hope that one of you editors who worked on the article might pick up on them to improve the article even more.

1- All entries in the Reference section need to be checked for proper formatting, as I’ve seen several inconsistencies, such as surnames not placed before first names and lack of italicization on titles of publications.

2- In the Disappearance of Muziris section, par. 1, I think that perhaps citation #38 in the Reference section could be the missing citation needed for a study titled "In Search of Muziris” but is not provided. I found the URL for that citation is https://www.thehindu.com/features/magazine/In-search-of-Muziris/article12060882.ece . But to go there to check, it will be necessary to use the Wiki Library unless you have a paid subscription to The Hindu, as it seems that publication requires payment to go to archived articles older than 6 months back. Please note: there is an invisible comment below the above section of the edited article, saying: "<><>Check ref. 25 to see if this is where Gurukkal and Whittaker are cited.<><>” and I think that request also pertains to what I said about par. 1.

3- This is merely a suggestion rather than a problem, but I found a wonderful quotation at https://www.keralatourism.org/muziris/history/name related to the etymology of the name of Muziris that would add a lot if incorporated in the Etymology section:

"There is a kaleidoscopic variety to the word 'Muziris' that lends it an ever-changing dimension of beauty, and mesmerizes the modern history-enthusiast. More significantly, the different names give a peek into the varied perspectives that our ancestors, native and foreign, adopted to look at the same land and the riches it offered."

Although there's a lot more in this source besides the above quote, I think this is the most usable part of the original, because adding much more would probably weight the Wikipedia article down too much with etymology. Augnablik (talk) 17:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)Augnablik (talk) 17:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC) (edited 22:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC))[reply]

That quote from the Kerala tourism web site reads like pure WP:PUFFERY and should not be included anywhere on Wikipedia. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:41, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, on second thought you're right, Jonesy95. Now I can't imagine why I suggested it ... must have been a very late-night addition. I have just removed it from my earlier note. Thank you for the catch. Augnablik (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored, with strike-through tags, the third suggestion, along with some of your intro, treated similarly. If you completely remove text from your original post, then Jonesey's reply makes little sense. Dhtwiki (talk) 22:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sheepishly speaking as the cause of this recent little Talk page drama, I hope it has the happy ending of attracting someone to make the remaining reference fixes as the final touches on an article of real interest to several different readerships. Augnablik (talk) 00:31, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reference numbering errors introduced during copy edit – please fix

[edit]

Augnablik, it appears that your edits caused some references to turn into numbered, unlinked superscripted numbers. It appears that you tried to restore some text from the history after deleting it, and this caused problems. In this edit, you removed the section containing the phrase "Muziris was identified with the region", and in these edits, you restored that text, but without the original references. Please use the page history to restore those references in their original form. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:57, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

😕 Oh, my. I'm as surprised as sorry. Will get on this before doing any more drive editing. Augnablik (talk) 17:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonesey95, I may be doing this scrub work incorrectly but I've tried for several hours to work toward fixing the damaged references in the current version of the article with its original version as it was the day I began working on it, and I've run into difficulties. Here's what I've done so far:
1- In a Word document, I copied screenshots of the text sghowin the problematic references in the current version of the article.
2- Under those screenshots, I copied the corresponding references with their ref numbers.
3- Next to each of the copied references, I wrote the ref number of the corresponding references in the current version of the article.
4- If I couldn't find a corresponding reference in the current version of the article, I wrote X in place of a number.
As it turned out that there are many Xs, I'm not sure what to do. I could use your guidance, as I see you're a really experienced Guild member. I'd like to share the page I'm talking about with you. Are you on Discord, or can I send the page via e-mail through Wikipedia to you? Augnablik (talk) 11:21, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You should not have to use Word at all. First, find a sentence with superscripted numbers after it. Go to View history, open the older version that contains the actual references, click Edit source, and copy all of the missing refs from the end of one of the sentences. Close that version without saving. Then open the current version, go to the end of the same sentence, and use paste to replace the superscripted numbers with the references that you copied. Save that change. Repeat for each batch of superscripted numbers. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little concerned about stability of ref numbers if I just copied the missing ones directly from the original version of the article into the current one. It seems to me that we couldn't be certain that the ref numbers in the original article remained correct in the current article.
That's why I made the Word document. I found about half of the references in the original version of the article were also in the current one. The other half weren't in the current version at all. I've checked all this several times.
Of course I don't want to make this any more complicated than it needs to be, but I just want to be sure we're on target here. Looking forward to your reply. Augnablik (talk) 18:49, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ref numbers are dynamic and will change any time a new reference is inserted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:44, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I'm concerned about. Augnablik (talk) 11:47, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no concern. That's how articles work. For example, if there are two refs, [1] and [2], and I insert a new reference between them, [1] will remain the same, [2] will be the new reference, and the original [2] will change to [3]. That's how Wikipedia works, and it's how a draft of a printed journal article would work. Please restore the references that you accidentally deleted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the concept of how renumbering works, @Jonesey95, and I'm happy to correct any mistakes I might make as a Wiki editor ... but I just don't yet feel confident trying to carry out this procedure. Will proceed, though. Augnablik (talk) 13:17, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happily, Wikipedia preserves each edit, so we can always return to the last working version if necessary. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:10, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to get some happy news right about now.! Augnablik (talk) 15:17, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, @Jonesey95, I've made my best shot at following your directions. I used a much earlier version of the article to get the necessary references. Please note:
— In the lead, the number of references is the same as in the current version; but most of the other edits in the Location and Trade sections did not. I have the sense that this actually is correct, though.
— I purposely used only one reference from the 11 following the first sentence of the Location section because this was really citation overkill, which I should have dealt with in my original editing.
For both our sakes, I hope this takes care of the issues. I really don't understand how this happened. Augnablik (talk) 15:49, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]