Talk:Assamese people

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Assamese people article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the region of South Asia (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence, realise) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

India: Assam High‑importance

	India portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Assam (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Ethnic groups Top‑importance

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

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Assamese Model.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:07, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

History

I am removing a digressive discussion on Kamrup's territorial history. It is best discussed (already discussed) in Kamrup region. There is also a confusion between ancient Kamarupa and medieval Kamrup region. After 1681 Kamrup has been a part of Assam (Ahom kingdom and later). In any case, these details are not relevant here, which is about the Assamese people. I am removing this part of the section. @Fylindfotberserk:, comments? Chaipau (talk) 18:49, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaipau: OK, but I was thinking whether → "The first usage of the English word "Assamese" is noted in colonial times; based on same principle as Sinhalese, Nepalese and Canarese, derived from the Anglicised word "Assam"[43][44] with the suffix -ese, meaning "of Assam."[45]" should be kept since it is about the etymology of the term during British era. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:09, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: yes. Maybe we could change the wordings slightly: Assamese is an English word meaning "of Assam" and then cite Grierson? Everyone has been basically quoting Grierson (1903) from page 393. The etymological origin of the suffix -ese in English is the Latin -ensis, as given in Wiktionary. So "Assamese people" means "people of Assam". The only problem here is that not all "people of Assam" are Assamese people. So we should expand the sentence above to Assamese is an English word meaning "of Assam"—though not all people of Assam are Assamese people. What do you say? Chaipau (talk) 03:06, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are some further nuances here. The Assamese identity is older than colonialism, as pointed out by Udayan Misra here; and even though the word "Assamese" was coined by the English during colonial times. Furthermore, the name "Assam" itself is of native origin and older. Chaipau (talk) 03:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaipau: I'm OK with → Assamese is an English word meaning "of Assam"—though not all people of Assam are Assamese people and also an explanation on how the "Assamese identity is older than colonialism" citing Udayan Misra. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:46, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: I have parked the about sentence in the "Definition" section. Shall move it back when appropriate. Also, the "Demographic changes" section could become a part of the history section in the future. Chaipau (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaipau: That's fine. I agree that the "Demographic changes" section can be included in the history section in the future. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:16, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recent additions

@Chaipau: Hi, regarding the recent additions [1]. I believe it is not reliable since according to the 2011 census reports that majority are Assamese speakers. Secondly, they categorise a separate group called 'Muslims', which may very well include Assamese Muslims. Also they didn't mention other tribal population and significant pops like Hindi speakers. What do you say? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: I agree. Such speculative estimates are political rhetoric and meant to trigger voter realignments. It may be that 2021 census will show that the Assamese do not constitute more than 50% of the people in Assam, but we do not have the numbers yet. This should not be included. We should only rely on census data. Chaipau (talk) 19:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaipau: Thanks for the removal. It was a politically influenced piece for sure. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:25, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics changes

@Chaipau: I believe a section like Assamese people#Demographic changes is out of scope for an article about an ethno-linguistic group. Things like that should be covered and expanded in the state article itself, which we have under the topic "Social issues". I mean, we do not have sections about migrations of other ethnic groups in articles like Punjabis when in Punjab, people have been migrating from Bihar and eastern Uttar Pradesh. It has changed the demographics quite much, a lot more Hindi speakers as of now than in previous years. Same can be said about the Marathi people article where we can add migrations by way more ethnicities in Maharashtra. Secondly, if we keep it, a section like that should be added to all 'indigenous' ethnic group articles who do not identify as Assamese people, but may have been affected by such migrations, making it a tedious job. What do you say? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:33, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: I agree with you strongly. I feel that relevant parts of this section could go to National Register of Citizens for Assam, Assam Movement and other such articles. Some of it could go to a separate section at the bottom of People of Assam. Chaipau (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The last paragraph deals only with Muslims, so belongs to Islam in Assam. Chaipau (talk) 19:59, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will move it to a new page on Migration to Assam. We decided, while discussing Citizenship Amendment Act that a page on history of migration into India was necessary. But nobody had the energy to work on it. This will give us a chance to do so. Pinging Ms. Sarah Welch for her information. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:45, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3: Could you please point me to the specific discussion where this decision was taken? I ask because Migration to Assam is too general, and it is covered in People of Assam#Peopling of Assam (a little more expansion is in the works). But the article does not focus with the specific topic here, which is: Colonial and post-colonial migration of people from Bengal to Assam. So I would suggest naming the new article differently. Maybe Migration from Bengal to Assam? Pinging—Ms Sarah Welch, Fylindfotberserk. Chaipau (talk) 06:45, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Chaipau that these should be expanded in articles like National Register of Citizens for Assam, Assam Movement and People of Assam. THIS specific section can have some of this. I believe a separate article like Migration to Assam would not be much different than the section People of Assam#Peopling of Assam, which can be expanded. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:25, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Energy and time, Kautilya3. He, others and I discussed this in different threads in the context of Assam Accord etc. Fylindfotberserk suggestions are good. Yet, a few summary sentences in the main article on Assam and this one, with links to more comprehensive other articles or new dedicated article would make sense. The ethno-linguistic nature of Assamese people (and similarly Kashmiri people) in light of actual or potential migration and exodus has been one of the issues over the last 70 years (see Baruah, Bharadwaj). Post-partition, in East Pakistan (Bangladesh) and West Pakistan, there have been the systematic push from the Islamic nationalists to erase a historic South Asian script for their own political goals/fears and adopt a non-South Asian script/language (Hindi and Urdu sound similar, share a lot of words, but one uses Indic and other Arabic script). This has had its impact on the regional ethno-linguistic identities, and fears thereof. Assamese people are an admixture of the native Assamese ethno-linguistic group and the (Bangladeshi) Bengali ethnolinguistic group, with the latter becoming a majority in many parts due in part to migration (see Weiner). Overall, all this and more is best summarized in a dedicated article. Care should be taken to include and rely on peer reviewed scholarly articles published in 1980s as well as the more recent dedicated scholarship on this. Avoid newspapers and avoid paid-advocacy-groups/paid-news/envelop-journalists on either side. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:44, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Talk:Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 is quite chaotic, but see the section on Vote banks in the Archive 3 where this came up. Ms Sarah Welch might remember some more.

I don't think "peopling" and "immigration" can be equated. We use "peopling" for the migration that happened in the remote past and the "migration" for the influx after the society has more or less formed. I would limit the "immigration" term to colonial and post-colonial times. And the scale of it is quite mind-blowing. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kautilya3: thanks for the link and I agree with you that the focus should be on colonial and post-colonial migrations particularly. But the focus should not just be on colonial and post-colonial migration, but the migrations specifically from Bengal. Most of the nuances, details and politics are related to the migrations from Bengal; not from, say, Nepal etc. I agree with Ms Sarah Welch too that Assamese identity is complex, and that some of the Muslims from Bengal have been accepted as Na Asamiya (New Assamese). Furthermore, the Clause 6 of the Assam Accord will create a legal definition of Assamese people. These migrations that have an impact on the identity and legal definitions of the Assamese people could be part of this article, with a "main article" link pointing to the (what I propose as) Migrations from Bengal to Assam (note Migrations).

The migration is massive. The migrants have overwhelmed the local population in Tripura. They are about to do so in Assam as well.

Chaipau (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reopening talk about the section again. @Chaipau and Kautilya3: ? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:14, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: yes I agree. I am coming around to Kautilya3's opinion that demeographics should focus on colonial and post-colonial period. Chaipau (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, "demographics" applies to a region, state or other kind of geographical entity, but not to a collective of people such as an ethnolinguistic group. An ethnolinguistic group can be strongly affected by demographic developments in the area they live in, but that's not an intrinsic property of the ethnolinguistic group. We can of course mention here that for people self-identifying as ethnic Assamese, demographic changes are perceived as a major issue, but the main exposition of the problem should be in other articles, such as People of Assam (even if that article currently mostly focuses on the "Peopling of Assam"). –Austronesier (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk, Austronesier, and Kautilya3: maybe could we name the new article Demography of Assam? Here are some issues IMHO.

The early immigrations are probably best addressed in an anthropological sense. There has been significant mixing and crossing over in ethnolinguistic groups in the pre-colonial times. (Tibeto-Burman → Indo-Aryan; Austroasiatic → Tibeto-Burman; Austroasiatic → Indo-Aryan; Tibeto-Burman → Ahom etc.) I think People of Assam is a good place to handle this.
Demography makes sense only in the colonial and post-colonial times, when we can cite some numbers. And here too, some numbers are at best just estimates. In this period too there has been some crossing/uncrossing over (Bengali-Muslim → Assamese Muslim → Miya; Tibeto-Burman → Assamese → Tibeto-Burman etc.) and identity politics has been a major player.

I think what everyone needs is an article on immigration and identity politics in the colonial/post-colonial period.

(On a side-note—identity politics and tug-of-war is currently playing out currently in the ethnolinguistic articles—Chutia kingdom, Chutia people, Ahom kingdom, Ahom people, Kachari kingdom, Koch people, Boro people etc. We need some additional editors to put these and similar articles in their watchlist!)

Chaipau (talk) 16:47, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaipau: I'd agree to that. All these things about demography and politics that are not exactly relevant in these articles can be moved there. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 16:58, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: done! Now you will have to do your magic on Demography of Assam. I shall be be able to devote very little time to it at the beginning. Chaipau (talk) 23:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Faces of Chutia, Kachari and Ahom men, 1900.jpg

Is the use of an image from over 100 years ago and a dubious source (racially prejudiced, intentional or otherwise) appropriate for an article on a current population? I am not so sure. Neidzwiedz (talk) 10:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think it is necessary either. Kinda adverse IMO, feed people with certain POV. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]