Is it that you consider all the three "dvija" castes as your ancestors in some contexts whereas you segregate brahmins alone in some other contexts? If so according to your own premises your ancestors should have consisted of poor kshatriyas, poor vaisyas, etc., also. Otherwise the logic of such a grouping could be that you want to maintain a distinct segregation of the Sudras as against the three other castes. Anyway, it is not consistent.I refer generally to our ancestors and not to brahmins. Particularly here I have referred to the other castes only. They were not naive as you said.
I don't know what you are trying to drive at. Some immediate doubts which come to my mind are:-I do not understand what you require here. Any way please visit the Madras University Library's manuscripts section and ask for some of the palm leaf manuscripts( from many budles of them) containing the "தனிப்பாடல்கள்". These kavithais give one necessary insight into the kind of licentious life that was led by the kings, generals, chieftains and the other rich people(all of them NBs) in those times begone. The fact that these were written mostly by poor poets ( a few of them brahmins) for rewards, speaks volumes for the comparative levels of prosperity. I give you just one example. Being a vulgar kavithai I am only giving you the gist. It is a சிலேடை in which the poet has used his splendid abilities with the language to allude the sexual act to the act of climbing up a palmirah tree. And what more he speaks in that kavithai about the glory of his mentor, a local chieftain (குறுநில மன்னன்) Venkatesu Retta Bhoopathy. There are volumes and volumes of such poetry available in Tamil. If this is not proof what else is? May be you, like some other members here, may be satisfied only if I give the reference of a European authored "Paper" published in a European or American Journal.
1. Do you consider that brahmins all over India, i.e., bharatavarsha, did such petty poets' job or something similar, in order to eke out a living?
2. Since you are talking about bundles and bundles of such தனிப்பாடல்கள் in respect of Tamil speaking area, can you give any assessment as to which historical period these belong to, how many poets are there in the collection, and are they all such paeans (whether சிலேடை or not, that is not relevant to the point) of kings and other rulers?
3. If, as you seem to infer, the brahmins were mostly doing such petty jobs, how can we conclude that the brahmins did justice to the responsibility entrusted to them by the "society" (according to you) of studying, teaching, researching and writing sutras and bhashyas on the higher truths of life? How can the statement, " So Brahmins were assigned that particular role because they were willing to sacrifice everything else to acquire that particular knowledge" hold good because this example of yours shows that the brahmins were after royal favour and had to do an entirely different job, than the one entrusted to them?
Once again you are bringing in an incident of the last century to prove the state of affairs over all these past centuries when it suits you. If this is to be admitted then my contention about Ezhavas is far more tenable since (1) it is not an isolated instance and (2) it has at least two centuries of history to back it.Numerical and economic power"s use has been in vogue since time immemorial. Whether it is a democracy or not money power was always sought after. You may be aware of the Travancore Maharaja"s Diwan asking for the financial help of Mammen Mappillai" father when the treasury was almost empty and the consequences that followed when the request was refused. That is what is money power and the arrogance of numerical superiority's derivative in display simultaneously.
Secondly, what did Mammen Mappillai's father or his Christian people do or what did the other people of Travancore do to him/them? What the Maharaja did was on account of the monarchical power enshrined in him by historical reasons, not because the majority community wanted him to do something. If you can prove that any of the native kings were elected/ selected by people, please do so. I have not heard that Anizham Thirunal Marthanda Varma was brought in as king of Travancore by general consensus but I have learnt that he did so by his own volition and good luck favouring him, particularly in the form of his Dalavai Ramayyan, a brahmin.