Talk:Ashta Pradhan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
	This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup.
More information about this article... Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale by the India project. Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale by the Indian history project.

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 June 2006. The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn.

An entry from Ashta Pradhan appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 22 June 2006.

++Lar: t/c 12:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ImpuMozhi's copyedit

This has improved the layout and readability of the article but also removed important info. such as alternate spelling of Asta Pradhad. I believe a partial rv is in order. Any suggestions? --Gurubrahma 05:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I am glad that the deletion proposal failed. The proposal has stimulated those who (unlike me) know somethign of the subject to expand the article. If there is more information that can be provided without affecting the balance of the article and it is correct, by all measn put it back. Peterkingiron 23:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

ok,

Unless I'm mis-reading it, the new addition to the DYK is factually inaccurate. It says DYK..."that Ashta Pradhan, a council formed by Shivaji in 1674 to help him in administration, was one of the first instances of ministerial delegation in India? " - But, Akbar had government Ministers way back in 1570, Humayun have what were de facto ministers too, and so did the successive Mughal rulers. Do you mean India, as in "Hindu", in which case you may well be right (I wouldn't really know), but Inidan, as in, "Rulers in India" is not entirely true... - Irishpunktom\^talk 14:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean the concept of nine advisors that were in Akbar's (and even Vikramaditya's (100 BCE) ) government? I think that's quite different from a ministerial delegation. deeptrivia (talk) 14:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

No, the nine Jewals were different. Humayun brought to the Mughal empire a Persian model of Government, which included what were effectively ministries. Humayuns Post-Persian rule was brief, and it was Akbar who essentially ruled with it. It included a Primie Minister, and A minister in charge of Finances. It included a minister in charge of waterways, and the Akbar-nama alludes to others. Atkah Khan, whose stabbing encouraged Akbar to rid himself of Anga and her son, was effeectively the Prime Minister. --Irishpunktom\^talk 15:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that any sweeping assertion of "first ever ministerial delegation" needs at least a reputable citation. Why are the amatyas of the Mauryan empire not to be regarded as ministers, even if "advisors" are not to be counted as "ministers"? Besides, no ruler above the village-level strongman can micro-manage a kingdom by himself; most "advisors" would typically handle atleast some matters independently, so lets not cut too fine a point of it. In fact, The Ashtapradhan council was completely dominated by the ruler and lasted as a functional body for only something like one decade. ImpuMozhi 15:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)