Talk:Ahom people

message: According to this article: , the Ahoms still exist. I think this is worth mentioning in this article. 
:::Bora said that the Assam Assembly has adopted a resolution supporting the demand for ST status to the tea tribes and five other ethnic groups - Tai Ahoms, Koch Rajbongshis, Chutias, Motoks and Morans.
Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 07:40, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ahoms still exist?

message: Ahom economic system
The Ahom kingdom was based on the Paik system, a type of corvee labor that is neither feudal nor Asiatic. The Ahoms introduced wet rice cultivation in upper Assam that was largely a marshy and thinly populated land. With a superior technology of rice cultivation, as well as reclamation of land using dykes, embankments and irrigation systems, the Ahoms established the initial state structures. The first coins were introduced by Suklenmung in the 16th century, though the system of personal service under the Paik system persisted. In the 17th century when the Ahom kingdom expanded to include erstwhile Koch and Mughal areas, it came into contact with their revenue systems and adapted accordingly.
Ahom administration
Swargadeo and Patra Mantris'''
The Ahom kingdom was ruled by a king, called Swargadeo (Ahom language: Chao-Pha), who had to be a descendant of the first king Sukaphaa. Succession was generally by primogeniture but occasionally the great Gohains (Dangarias) could elect another descendant of Sukaphaa from a different line or even depose an enthroned one.
Dangarias: Sukaphaa had two great Gohains to aid him in administration: Burhagohain and the Borgohain. In the 1280s, they were given independent territories, they were veritable sovereigns in their given territories. They were given total command over the paiks that they controlled. These positions were generally filled from specific families. Princes who were eligible for the position of Swargadeo were not considered for these positions and vice versa. In the 16th century Suhungmung added a third Gohain, Borpatrogohain.
Royal officers: Pratap Singha added two offices, Borbarua and Borphukan, that were directly under the king. The Borbarua, who acted as the military as well as the judicial head, was in command of the region east of Kaliabor not under the command of the Dangarias. He could use only a section of the paiks at his command for his personal use (as opposed to the Dangariyas), the rest rendering service to the Ahom state. The Borphukan was in military and civil command over the region west of Kaliabor, and acted as the Swargadeo's viceroy in the west.
Patra Mantris: The five positions constituted the patra mantris (council of ministers). From the time of Supimphaa (1492-1497), one of the patra mantris was made the Rajmantri (prime minister, also Borpatro; Ahom language: Shenglung) who enjoyed additional powers and the service of a thousand additional paiks from the Jakaichuk village.
Other officials
The Borbarua and the Borphukan had military and judicial responsibilities, and they were aided by two separate councils (sora) of Phukans. The Borphukan's sora sat at Guwahati and the Borbarua's sora at the capital. Superintending officers were called Baruas. Among the officers the highest in rank were the Phukans. Six of the formed the council of the Borbarua, but each had also his separate duties. The Naubaicha Phukan, who had an allotment of thousand men managed the royal boats, the Bhitarula Phukan, the Na Phukan, the Dihingia Phukan, the Deka Phukan and the Neog Phukan formed the council of Phukan. The Borphukan also had a similar council of six subordinate Phukans whom he was bound to consult in all matters of importance, this council included Pani Phukan, who commanded six thousand paiks, Deka Phukan who commanded four thousand paiks, the Dihingia Phukan, Nek Phukan and two Chutiya Phukans.
The Baruas of whom there were twenty or more included Bhandari Barua or treasurer; the Duliya Barua, who was in charge of the royal palanquins; the Chaudang Barua who superintended executions; Khanikar Barua was the chief artificer; Sonadar Barua was the mint master and chief jeweler; the Bez Barua was the physician to the Royal family, Hati Barua, Ghora Barua, etc. Other official included twelve Rajkhowas, and a number of Katakis, Kakatis and Dolais. The Rajkhowas were governors of given territories and commanders of three thousand paiks. They were arbitrator who settled local disputes and supervised public works. The Katakis were envoys who dealt with foreign countries and hill tribes. The Kakatis were writers of official documents, and the Dolais expounded astrology and determined auspicious time and dates for any important event and undertaking.
Governors
Forward governors, who were military commanders, ruled and administered forward territories. The Sadiya Khowa Gohain and the Marangi khowa Gohain are examples of these positions. Sadiya Khowa Gohain was based in Sadiya and whose appointment dates from the overthrow of Chutiya kingdom in 1523. The Marangi Khowa Gohain governed the Naga tribes west of the Dhansiri river. The Solal Gohain administered a great part of Nagaon and a portion of Chariduar after the headquarters of the Borphukan was transferred to Gauhati. The Kajali Mukhia Gohain administered Kajalimukh. The Raja of Saring and Raja of Tipam administered the tracts round Joypur on the right bank of the Buri Dihing river. The last two mentioned were usually the relatives of the King himself, the Saring Raja being the heir apparent and the Tipam Raja the next in order of succession.
Paik officials
The Ahom kingdom was dependent on the Paik system, a form of corvee labor. Every common subject was a paik, and four paiks formed a got. At any time of the year, one of the paiks in the got rendered direct service to the king, as the others in his got tended to his fields. The Paik system was administered by the Paik officials: Bora was in charge of 20 paiks, a Saikia of 100 and a Hazarika of 1000.
Land survey
Gadadhar Singha became acquainted with the land measurement system of Mughals during the time he was hiding in Kamrup, before he succeeded to the throne. As soon as the wars with Mughals were over he issued orders for the introduction of a similar system throughout his dominions. Surveyors were imported from Koch Behar and Bengal for the work. It was commenced in Sibsagar and was pushed on vigorously, but it was not completed until after his death. Nowgaon was next surveyed; and the settlement which followed was supervised by Rudra Singha himself. According to historians, the method of survey included measuring the four sides of each field with a nal, or bamboo pole of 12 feet (3.7 m) length and calculating the area, the unit was the "pura" or 144 square feet (13.4 m2) and 14,400 Sq.ft. is one "Bigha". A similar land measurement system is still being followed in modern Assam.
Classes of people
Subinphaa, the third Ahom king, dilineated the Satgharia Ahom ("Ahom of the seven houses") aristocracy: the royal family, the Burhagohain and the Borgohain families, and four priestly lineages—the Deodhai, the Mohan, the Bailung and the Chiring. This set was expanded later. The king could belong to only the first family whereas the Burhagohain and the Borgohain only to the second and the third families. Most of the Borphukans belonged to the Chutiya ethnic group, whereas the Borbaruas belonged to the Moran, Kachari, Chiring and Khamti groups. Later on Naga, Mising and Nara oracles became a part of the Bailung group. The extended nobility consisted of the landed aristocracy and the spiritual class that did not pay any form of tax.
The apaikan chamua was the gentry that were freed from the khels and paid only money-tax. The paikan chamua consisted of artisans, the literati and skilled people that did non-manual work and rendered service as tax. The kanri paik rendered manual labor. The lowest were the licchous, bandi-beti and other serfs and bondsmen. There was some degree of movement between the classes. Momai Tamuli Borbarua rose from a bondsman through the ranks to become the first Borbarua under Prataap Singha.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atinsinghal (talk • contribs) 14:32, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahoms By ATIN SINGHAL 

message: Primarily a linguistic study, compares and contrasts Ahom with Shan and Siamese practices. 
* 
--Pawyilee (talk) 13:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional reference 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Ahom people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150415013609/http://thetaiahom.asia/ to http://thetaiahom.asia/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100507021451/http://taiahominternational.org/ to http://www.taiahominternational.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I want to improve the section, by including - Ahom Sabha, Institute of Tai Study etc. Anyone has more information kindly Improve.Sairg (talk) 08:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Revivalism

message: The Ahoms have not been participating with the general Tai Folk religious activities (outside Assam) for the last 800 years.  We should be careful here.  Because if the Tai folk religion among the Ahoms is a part of the revivalism effort, it should be called out explicitly and not just stated implicitly.  Therefore, I am removing the link in the Infobox.  Chaipau (talk) 09:25, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The Tai folk religion is not a revivalism matter, as you should know that the Tai folk religion is not a single religion but it is the sum of all the animism practiced by Tai people across the Globe. And it's funny to hear that Ahoms were not practicing Folk Religion for 800 years, As you should know that before Suhungmung era all Ahoms were followers of Tai folk religion and after many people adopted to Hindu Eka sarana, the priest class were not adopted. The priest class Mohung,Changboon,Moplong are following Tai folk religion for the last 800 years. It's neither an Alien substance nor a revivalism matter, as the priests are the continuous follower. Sairg (talk) 10:40, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  To be clear, the Ahom religion has not remained static for 800 years.  It has had limited contact with the original (in fact it the the strongest Tai group among others).  It lost contact with Mong Mao very early, but maintained contact with the Naras, but began dominating them soon enough.  Furthermore, it acquired local features, like Deoghars.  The Ahoms originally did not have the concept of temples, but they acquired it in Assam from the Tibeto-Burmese people.  The Phura-Tara-Along it acquired from Buddhist influence, and we don't know yet how and when it acquired them.  So, really, Tai folk religion is not the right definition of the Ahom religious practices.  Chaipau (talk) 14:41, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing link to Tai Folk Religion 

message: @Mr.Chaipau Do you think all the sources are confused or you are confuse??? --Namdang123 (talk) 11:01, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: please show the sources here.  Chaipau (talk) 15:25, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  @Mr.Chaipau Check all sources ------------------------
* Define in A PHD THESIS submitted to Gauhati university for the DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN PHILOSOPHY IN THE FACULTY OF ARTS by SHRUTASHWINEE GOGOI
*  Page-30
*  Page-39
*  Page-6
*  Page-121
*  Page-24
*  Page-152
*  Page-44 Namdang123 (talk) 03:01, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: @Mr.Chaipau I think the discussion is over right?? --Namdang123 (talk) 06:35, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No, what you have given is a smattering of search results, on the words "Mao" and "Tai-Ahom".  And you are linking the Mao to the Mao river, not a people.  In the mix, you have included the Tai Yue people.  Nitin Gogoi talks of the Mao-Shan people.  We know that the name "Ahom" originates in "Siam/Shan" formation---so Ahom is another term for "Shan".  You may describe all the subtleties of the relationships of these different names in a different section within the article, but this confused hotch-potch does not deserve to be in the first sentence of the article.  This article is about the people who came in with Sukaphaa and who mixed with the local people.  Furthermore, it is known that he added to his group during his journey to Assam.  So, not all who reached Assam were from Mung Mao.  All these subtle points can be addressed in its own section.  Chaipau (talk) 08:44, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: @Chaipau I think you have to study something more about Tai people to become a perfect contributor , Check this points-
* First you should know about Ban-Mong system of Tai people: The people live near Mao river are known as Tai-Mao or Mao-Shan , The region near Mao River is know as Mong Mao currently under China and Burma, So, Mao Shan,Tai-Mao , Mong Mao denotes same group of people live near Mao River. Hope you understand. --Namdang123 (talk) 10:11, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

text: Where are the references?  Even if there are references, you would do well to discuss it within the article, not claim it in the first sentence.  There are no single account of the Ahoms beyond the Patkai hills.  And the Sukapha is said to have spent at least 13 years wandering about and collecting people.  So not all who entered into Assam were from Mong Mao.  This claim, that the Tai Ahom today are all from Mong Mao is a lie.  There are Barahi people in the current Ahom peoples. Chaipau (talk) 02:06, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahom is the Mao branch of Tai-Yue as mentioned in almost all the sources given 

message: Since JoshuaProject is considered unreliable, aren't we suppose to remove the population figures? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:13, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not touching it now because it falls in the same ball park as the other sources in the citation.  Do you have other sources? Chaipau (talk) 16:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmm.. perhaps you are right. But infobox is quite conspicuous you know. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:47, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am OK with putting in other reliable source, of course.  Do you have any other source in mind? Chaipau (talk) 16:53, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I found one , which mentions a population of 2 million, but the article also says these are claims by tribal leaders. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:01, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, it is yet another ball park number.  Still, this number seems more accurate than Joshua's - though we will have to somehow emphasize these are all estimates. I think we should keep the other estimates as well, even as we delete Joshua's.  Chaipau (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Point is, the 2 million estimate is from Assam only. What might be the total I wonder. Joshua put a total of 1.3 million. If we remove Joshua from the total figures, we have to keep that parm empty, keeping the 2 million number next to Assam only. Secondly, what purpose do the "religious communities" links (4th and 5th reference) serve I wonder. These links do not specify anything related to Ahom as far as I can see. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 04:41, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joshua Project numbers 

message: "beef" is clearly mentioned in Gogoi (2011)   Please do not keep deleting it as you have done here.  Chaipau (talk) 06:37, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: didn't I give citations? Jonardondishant (talk) 10:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

text: @Chaipau TAI-AHOM RELIGION AND CUSTOMS, p70 Jonardondishant (talk) 10:03, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is that citation in the text?  I have read it now and it says after the Ahoms have converted to Hinduism, they have given up beef.  Yes, you can say that and that only, not more.  But not all Ahoms are Hindus and many who have become Hindus are now have started practicing the Ahom religion again.  This too has been recorded in the literature.  So you cannot just delete something that has been cited and which has not been contradicted. Chaipau (talk) 13:19, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: currently there is new trend of revivalism, but it was not on favour before few decades, so it is relatively new thing, All Ahoms expect some priestly class had converted to Hinduism and had given up beef, buffalo and sometimes even pork Jonardondishant (talk) 04:03, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: But not all Ahoms are Hindus. And Ahoms have been Hindus for a very short period now. Chaipau (talk) 12:14, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't claim it to be, All Ahoms expect some priestly class had converted to Hiduism, presently there is again a new trend of revivalism and what do you mean by short period, from early 17 century Jonardondishant (talk) 12:35, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

text: @Chaipau Historically Ahoms had also eaten up horses and elephants during the time of misery's. Should it be added to as their cusine . 'Ahom' as a defined ethnicity is a new thing, so do this revivalism which whole agenda is to get ST and carve out a another state. Ahoms had been hindus since the 17th century and pre-dominantly since 18th century, either Saktas or Vaisnav, where beef is taboo. Logically a man wouldn't hurt his religious beliefs for his appetite. Also a small number, who resisted this change does not cover the whole community. Jonardondishant (talk) 18:50, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  could you please provide the reference for your claim that "Ahoms had also eaten up horses and elephants during the time of misery's"?  Depending on the citation, we may include it.  Chaipau (talk) 19:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I said during "misery's", during wars and famines. My objective was why once previously eaten food has been included here. Overall no one is refuisng to believe that before the total Hinduization they had eaten beef. Jonardondishant (talk) 02:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beef 

message: the photo is of good quality, but we should not use this particular one because it was uploaded by a sockmaster - .  Chaipau (talk) 14:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Chaipau All of them are not wearing a formal cloth. A better picture should be considered Jonardondishant (talk) 14:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Does not matter.  These "dress codes" are very recent.  Chaipau (talk) 14:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

text: I have replaced the image.  Chaipau (talk) 15:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Chaipau A secular picture should be added in the top, better to move it down to the culture/religion section. Jonardondishant (talk) 16:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, get one.  Chaipau (talk) 16:53, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Also, Me-Dam-Me-Phi is celebrated by all Ahoms without reference to any religion, and also attended sometimes by non-Ahoms.  It is secular enough.  Chaipau (talk) 16:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this is not a recent thing, me-dam-me-phi is a religious thing which also made offerings to ahom gods Jonardondishant (talk) 01:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is an example of Tai-Ahoms in general celebrating Me-Dam-Me-Phi .  Here is a news item from the Assam Tribune stating it is the Ahom community that celebrated the festival .  It says: "  It mentions the Ahom community.  Please do not keep reverting the image. Chaipau (talk) 12:13, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

text: I think the current picture is okay, it is not very well centered but it is better than no picture at all. What is the problem with the pictures of the sockmaster? That it is under copyright? If so, it should be handled on Wikimedia, and not through reverts here. --Glennznl (talk) 12:31, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The sockmaster image copyright is uncertain.  It has a watermark that says "Shutterbug NE".  We should indeed follow this up at commons.  Nevertheless, we should not use sock-master or sock puppet material because in general they are not reliable sources. Chaipau (talk) 12:40, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. --Glennznl (talk) 14:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: please note that removing the Me-Dam-Me-Phi is POV pushing.  Even if it is a religious image, Wikipedia should not take a position on whether this is legitimate or not, but it is OK to point out that its popularity has risen in part due to Ahom revivalism.  Please do not remove this image. Chaipau (talk) 15:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Your discussion ending here does not mean the end of the discussion. I don't see a religious bias, so without further explaining of your arguments, I don't see any reason to remove the picture. --Glennznl (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Me-Dam-Me-Phi 

message: What's your problem with the image I recently added? It's not even took by someone else, I took the picture by myself and it was good for this Wikipedia page but you also add your images which are very old and are of bad quality. Look at the image I added recently, it was so much better and suitable for this Wikipedia page. You're the admin but that doesn't mean that you will only allow to add your pictures. I am very disappointed. Please revert my image back! Orang srang17 (talk) 13:05, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: For the records, the image has been deleted in commons:  (Commons:Licensing: promo/press photo). Chaipau (talk) 14:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo reverted 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Did the Ahom people have a traditional religion called Phra Lung (which was a combination of Buddhism, Taoism, and indigenous beliefs)? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion