text:
Siamese revolution of 1932
This article is written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (October 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Soldiers waiting for orders in the Royal Plaza, 24 June 1932
The Siamese revolution of 1932 or the Siamese coup d'état of 1932 (Thai: การปฏิวัติสยาม พ.ศ. 2475 or การเปลี่ยนแปลงการปกครองสยาม พ.ศ. 2475) was a crucial turning point in 20th-century Thai history. The revolution, in reality a coup d'état, was a nearly bloodless transition on 24 June 1932, which changed the system of government in Siam from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy; the "revolution" was brought about by a comparatively small group of military and civilians, who formed Siam's first political party, the Khana Ratsadon (Peoples' Party). It ended 150 years of absolutism under the Chakri Dynasty and almost 800 years of absolute rule of kings over Thai history, it was a product of global historical change as well as domestic social and political changes. It also resulted in the people of Siam being granted their first constitution.
1.1 Conventional perspectives
1.2 Alternative perspectives
2 Siam before 1932
3 Siam in 1932
4 Causes of the 1932 Siamese revolution
4.1.1 Effects of Rama VI's (King Vajiravudh) mismanagement
4.1.2 Rise of the Western-educated "commoner" elites
5 Khana Ratsadon
5.1 The "Promoters"
5.2 Four Tiger soldiers
6 24 June
6.1 Hours after
7 Royal reaction
8 New administration
10 Memorial
11.1 References
Conventional perspectives[edit]
History of Thailand
Peopling of Thailand
Initial states
Suvarnabhumi
Dvaravati
Supannabhum
Singhanavati
Ngoenyang
Hariphunchai
Raktamaritika
Tambralinga
Sultanate of Pattani
Kedah Sultanate
Malacca Sultanate
Sukhothai Kingdom
Ayutthaya Kingdom
Thonburi Kingdom
Rattanakosin Kingdom
Constitutional history
Thailand portal
See also: Rattanakosin Kingdom
Unlike other Southeast Asian states, Thailand was never formally colonised by colonial powers — though significant territory had been ceded under duress to Britain and France. Conventional perspectives attribute this to the efforts made by the monarchs of the Chakri Dynasty, particularly Rama IV and Rama V, to "modernise" the Siamese polity, and also to the relative cultural and ethnic homogeneity of the Thai nation. Rama IV (King Mongkut) opened Siam to European trade and began the process of modernisation, his son, Rama V (King Chulalongkorn), consolidated state control over Thai vassal states and created an absolute monarchy and a centralised state. The success of the Chakri monarchs ironically would sow the seeds of the 1932 revolution and the end of the absolute monarchy. "Modernisation" mandated from above had created by the early-20th century a class of Western-educated Thais (though not necessarily rooted in democratic values, with some leaning toward authoritarianism) in the commoner and lower nobility classes. They were influenced by the ideals of the French and Russian revolutions and staffed the middle and lower ranks of the nascent Siamese bureaucracy;[1] this new faction would eventually form the People's Party, the nucleus of the 1932 revolution.
Alternative perspectives[edit]
Recent scholarship offers alternative perspectives to modern Thai history that challenge conventional views of the 1932 Siamese revolution. Thongchai Winichakul's hypothesis on the emergence of the "geo-body" of Siam is widely accepted by scholars in Thai and Southeast Asian studies. Thongchai argues that the traditional Hindu-Buddhist paradigms of culture, space, governance, and power were challenged by a significantly different civilisation arising mainly from Latin Christianity tempered by the Humanism of the Enlightenment; the East became increasingly described as "barbaric", "ignorant", or "inferior". The mission to "civilise" the "barbaric Asiatics" became the raison d'être for colonialism and imperialism; the siwilai ('civilise') programme in 19th century Siam was part of a strategy the Chakri monarchy adopted to justify their country's continued existence as a legitimate independent state to fend off colonial intervention. Other components involved the spatial and political reorganisation of the Siamese polity along Western lines to strengthen the state and gain recognition from the Western powers. Thongchai argues that the tactics adopted by the Siamese state were similar to those adopted by Western colonial powers in administering their colonies. Space and power were essentially redefined by the Siamese state. Autonomous and semi-autonomous mueangs were brought under the direct control of the state by the beginning of the 20th century. Cartography was employed to define national borders, replacing the vague frontiers of the Mandala kingdoms. People were assigned to ethnic groups. To promote the new Western-inspired definitions of siwilai, the educated Siamese of the 19th century, mainly the aristocracy, began writing ethnographies and creating their own versions of the "other" to strengthen the identity of the Siamese nation by emphasising its superiority in contrast to the barbarity of upland tribal peoples such as the Lue and the Lahu.[2]
These new perspectives created a politically dominant Siamese aristocracy that became increasingly powerful from the "modernisation/self-colonisation" process it initiated and directed; this seems to contradict conventional perspectives, which are based on the assumption that the Chakri absolute monarchy by the early-1930s was a relatively passive actor due to the political weakness of Rama VI (King Vajiravudh) and Rama VII (King Prajadhipok) and crises such as the Great Depression. No longer in control of events and political developments in Siam, they were swept aside by adherents of democracy and nationalism.[3][4] Revisionists[who?] counter by noting that the weaknesses of an individual monarch does not necessarily mean that the resolve and power of the traditional landed aristocracy or the so-called Sakdina aristocracy in maintaining its preeminence through upholding the political prerogatives of the absolute monarchy was in any way lessened. In their view, attributing the outbreak of the 1932 revolution largely to the beliefs and ambitions of the Western-educated promoters of the People's Party obscures the role played by the Siamese monarchy and aristocracy.[5][6]
Siam before 1932[edit]
King Prajadhipok wearing khrui and chang kben, armed with krabi
Since 1782 the Kingdom of Siam had been ruled by the Chakri Dynasty, founded by King Buddha Yodfa Chulaloke, who declared the Rattanakosin Kingdom with himself as the King "Rama" (or Rama I); the capital city, Bangkok (built on Rattanakosin Island), was also founded by King Rama I.[7] For over a century, the kings of Siam were able to protect the nation from neighbours (such as Burma) and other foreign nations, escaping colonialism from European powers such as Britain and France. In 1932 Siam, together with China and Japan, were the only independent countries remaining in East Asia.[8]
King Chulalongkorn (Rama V) came to the throne in 1868, eager to modernise and reform his medieval kingdom, and he introduced many new reforms and inventions to his country, he openly welcomed Europeans as well as European thought on many matters, chiefly law, politics, philosophy, commercialism, education, and medicine. He reformed the administration as well as the military system.[9][10] At the same time he successfully maintained the country's fragile independence, perched as it was between aggressive colonialists: the British Raj (Burma) and French Indochina (Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia); the king, who understood the importance of foreign education, not only sent his many sons to European schools and academies, but also sent thousands of commoners and scholarship students, reasoning that the kingdom's survival rested on modernisation.[9]
He was succeeded on the throne by his son, King Vajiravudh (Rama VI) (1910–1925), a Sandhurst and Oxford graduate. Vajiravudh continued most of his father's efforts in modernising the infrastructure and other institutions, including appointing able commoners to the government; the founding of Vajiravudh College (a school founded on the model of an English public school) and Chulalongkorn University (Siam's first), were part of his educational reforms. He also encouraged European fashion and the adoption of surnames,[11] his reforms stoked anger in many quarters, especially from older, reactionary members of the aristocracy and nobility, whose influence was slowly being eroded. The speed of his constitutional reforms also resulted in dissatisfaction from an entirely different faction: progressives and radicals.[12]
In 1912, a palace revolt, plotted by young military officers, tried unsuccessfully to overthrow and replace the king,[13] their goal was to change the system of government, overthrowing the ancien régime and replace it with a modern, Westernised constitutional system, and perhaps to replace Rama VI with a prince more sympathetic to their beliefs.[10]:155 The revolt failed and the participants were imprisoned. In reaction, Vajiravudh largely abandoned his attempts at constitutional reform and continued with his absolutist rule, with the minor exception of appointing some able commoners to his privy council and government.[8]
In 1914, Vajiravudh promulgated a new martial law act that, with minor amendments, remained in force for over a century.[14]
King Vajiravudh died in 1925, and was succeeded by his younger brother, King Prajadhipok (Rama VII).[13]
Siam in 1932[edit]
Prince Paribatra Sukhumbandhu, the Interior Minister and a brother to the king
Prince Prajadhipok Sakdidej, the Prince of Sukhothai, was the youngest son of King Chulalongkorn (the 33rd son and the 76th child of 77),[15] he was educated at Eton and the Woolwich Academy. King Prajadhipok inherited a country in crisis, his brother King Vajiravudh had left the state on the verge of bankruptcy, often using the treasury to hide the deficits of the privy purse, and the fact that the state and the people were forced to subsidise the many princes and their lavish lifestyles.[9]
After his coronation, the new king quickly created the Supreme Council of State (which became the main organ of state), to try to solve the many problems facing the nation; the council was composed of experienced senior princes who had held ministerial positions in previous administrations. They were quick to replace the commoners appointed by Vajiravudh in the civil service and military with many of their own;[12][13] the council was dominated by the Minister of the Interior, German-educated Prince Paribatra Sukhumbandhu, Prince of Nakhon Sawan, who was Prajadhipok's older half brother. Due to the complicated succession law of the Chakri Dynasty, he was also heir to the throne.[12] Prajadhipok turned out to be a sympathetic monarch, he immediately ordered a cut in palace expenditure and travelled extensively around the country to learn of his subjects' lives. He made himself more accessible and visible to the ever-growing Bangkok elite and middle class by carrying out many civic duties. By this time, students sent to study abroad had started to return. Faced with lack of opportunity, the entrenchment of the princes, and the comparative backwardness of the country, most became disillusioned with the status quo.[9]
By 1930, the events of the world were too much for the kingdom to bear, as the Wall Street Crash and the economic meltdown that came with it finally reached Siam; the king proposed the levying of general income taxes and property taxes to help alleviate the sufferings of the poor. These were roundly rejected by the council, who feared their fortunes would be reduced. Instead, they cut civil service payrolls and reduced the military budget, angering most of the country's educated elite;[16] the officer corps was especially disgruntled, and in 1931 Phra Ong Chao (lower class of prince) Boworadet, a minor member of the royal family and Minister of Defence, resigned.[17] Prince Boworadet was not a member of the supreme council, and it was suspected that disagreement with the council over budget cuts led to his resignation;[16] the king, who openly confessed his own lack of financial knowledge, stating he was just a simple soldier, tried with little success to battle the senior princes over the issue.[16]
Meanwhile, the king put his efforts into the drafting of a constitution (which for the first time was to introduce democracy to Siam), with the help of two princes and an American foreign policy advisor, Raymond Bartlett Stevens.[18] Despite being advised that his people were not yet ready for democracy, the king was undeterred and was determined to implement a constitution before his dynasty's 150th anniversary in 1932;[19] the document was rejected by the princes in the supreme council.[19]
On 6 April 1932, when the Chakri Dynasty celebrated its 150th anniversary of rule over Siam, the king opened a bridge across the Chao Phraya River; the celebration was somewhat muted due to fears stemming from an alleged prophecy dating back to the days of King Rama I, which predicted the end of the dynasty on its 150th anniversary.[17] At the end of April, Prajadhipok left Bangkok for his summer holidays, leaving Prince Paribatra in charge as regent; the king went to the beach resort town of Hua Hin in Prachuap Khiri Khan Province to his summer villa, Klai Kangwon (วังไกลกังวล: translated as 'far from worries').[20]
Causes of the 1932 Siamese revolution[edit]
Thai political history was little researched by Western Southeast Asian scholars in the 1950s and 1960s. Thailand, as the only nominally "native" Southeast Asian polity to escape colonial conquest, was deemed to be relatively more stable as compared with other newly independent states in Southeast Asia,[21] it was perceived to have retained enough continuity from its "traditions", such as the institution of the monarchy, to have escaped from the chaos and troubles caused by decolonisation and to resist the encroachment of revolutionary communism.[21] By implication, this line of argument suggests the 1932 revolution was nothing more than a coup that simply replaced the absolute monarchy and its aristocracy with a commoner elite class made up of Western-educated generals and civilian bureaucrats and essentially that there was little that was revolutionary about this event. David K. Wyatt, for instance, described the period of Thai history from 1910-1941 as "essentially the political working out of the social consequences of the reforms of Chulalongkorn's reign";[22] the 1932 revolution was generally characterised as the inevitable outcome of "natural consequences of forces set in motion by Rama IV and Rama V".[23]
Effects of Rama VI's (King Vajiravudh) mismanagement[edit]
Rama VI was the first Chakri monarch to have been educated overseas (in Great Britain) and he basically sought to legitimise absolutism through the promotion of Thai nationalism, using a secular, Western approach,[24] he was determined to maintain the absolute monarchy and carried out many unpopular policies and decisions that lowered the prestige and influence of the Chakri Dynasty.[25] Vajiravudh was blamed for the rapid deterioration of the Siamese government's fiscal health, his lavish spending on his court, his inability to control the corruption of his inner circle, and his creation of the Wild Tiger Corps to promote modern-style Siamese nationalism were widely deemed as wasteful and unproductive.[12] By 1920, fiscal mismanagement under Rama VI and the global economic downturn took the Siamese state budget into deficit.[26] In 1925, even the most senior princes decided to demand large cuts in expenditures, especially the royal household;[26] this represented a bold challenge to the authority of the absolute monarch and reflected the severity of the fiscal malaise in Siam.[26]
His creation of the paramilitary Wild Tiger Corps alienated many regular military officers, who resented the privileges granted to the corps while their own political and economic interests were being neglected.[27] Rama VI also caused resentment among the aristocracy, as he surrounded himself with commoner courtiers instead of high-ranking life peers;[27] the critique was thus that Rama VI was not a competent absolute monarch, and that he squandered the massive political capital he inherited from his father, Rama V. This set the stage for the 1932 revolution, in which a group of disgruntled military officers and bureaucrats seized power.
Rise of the Western-educated "commoner" elites[edit]
Western education became popular in the reign of Rama V.[28] Although this was still largely limited to the Siamese nobility and the wealthy, new avenues of social mobility were now available to commoners and members of the lower nobility;[27] the best example of these commoner beneficiaries is Pibul Songkram who was from a peasant background. Many of the brightest Siamese students, both commoners and the nobility, were sent abroad to study in Europe; these include Pridi Banomyong, who was of Sino-Thai descent, and Prayoon Pamornmontri, the half-German son of a junior Thai official at the Siamese legation in Berlin and later a page to the crown prince who would become Rama VI.[29] They were to become prominent members of the "promoters"; these Western-educated commoner elites were exposed not just to the latest scientific and technical knowledge in Europe, but also to the ideals of Western democracy, nationalism, and communism.[30]
During the reign of Rama VII (King Prajadhipok), however, high-ranking Chakri princes had regained dominance of the government and only four of the twelve ministries were administered by commoners or members of the lower nobility;[31] the royal government was struggling with the fiscal malaise created by Rama VI's administration, and the situation was made much worse by the onset of the Great Depression.[32] Subsequent governmental measures to lay off many low-ranking bureaucrats and soldiers and reduce the pay of those still in government service caused great resentment among the commoner elites, who were those most greatly affected, particularly as the high aristocracy continue to enjoy considerable wealth and privileges accorded to them by the absolute monarchical system;[31] the resulting unhappiness at the status quo due to the awareness of the ideals of Western democracy, nationalism, and communism, coupled with the mismanagement by the absolute monarchy and the deteriorating economic conditions caused by the Great Depression, triggered the 1932 revolution. The onus of the outbreak of the 1932 revolution from this perspective thus lies with the disgruntled commoner elites. who wanted radical change and were generally unwilling to compromise with the monarchy and the aristocracy, in particular with Rama VII, who was supposedly in favour of a constitutional monarchy.
More recent scholarship does not disagree with the macro-causes raised by conventional interpretations, but it tends to delve more into the power struggles between various factions in the labyrinthine world of Siamese politics,[6] they argue that conventional perspectives overemphasise the role of abstract political and social forces, and essentially assume the Western experience of revolution as the model by which all socio-political upheavals are judged and thus ignores the specific historical circumstances in Thailand in 1932. They fail to consider that the 1932 revolution took place in an era when most of the population was kept out of politics and that the political sphere was the domain of military and bureaucratic elites.[6][33] For example, Benjamin Batson's influential 1984 study of the end of the absolute monarchy in Siam and Judith Stowe's 1991 study both emphasise the actions of prominent individuals such as Pridi Banomyong and Pibul Songkram and their political intrigues. A more recent and controversial study by Paul Handley suggests that the root cause of the 1932 revolution was the steadfast refusal of the Chakri monarchs (both Rama VI and VII) and aristocracy to share power with the new "commoner" elites,[34] he argues that the insistence of both Chakri monarchs that protecting the powers of the absolute monarchy was equivalent to protecting the sacred royal prerogatives of the Chakri dharmaraja kingship forced the "commoner" elites and some high-ranking nobility to support or acquiesce in the Promoters' bid to seize power through military force in 1932.
Khana Ratsadon[edit]
Main article: Khana Ratsadon
The "Promoters"[edit]
"Promoter" and one of the founders of the Khana Ratsadon, Pridi Panomyong, leader of civilian faction
In February 1927, in a hotel on the Rue du Sommerard in Paris, France, a small group of seven military and civilian students assembled to debate the founding of a party to try to bring change to Siam.[35] Intent on not wanting to repeat the failure of the 1912 plot, they laid out a clear and coherent plan to change Siam; this group included two young students: one a soldier and an artilleryman Plaek Khittasangkha, the other a law student and radical Pridi Panomyong.[36][37] The group called themselves the "Promoters" (ผู้ก่อการ), hoping to return home to try to promote change; the Promoters realised, ironically, as the king's advisors had done, that the Siamese people were not yet ready for democracy, and most were illiterate peasants with little concern for affairs in Bangkok.[35] In Bangkok itself, the new and emerging middle class was dependent on the patronage of the aristocracy for jobs and positions; as a result, they realised that a "mass revolution" was not possible and only a military-led coup d'état was possible. For this purpose a vanguard party was formed and it was named the Khana Ratsadon (คณะราษฎร) (or the People's Party).
"Promoter" and one of the founders of the Khana Ratsadon, Luang Phibulsonggram, leader of the young army faction
When the Promoters eventually returned to Siam by the end of the 1920s, they quietly expanded their lists of contacts and party membership. Pridi became a teacher at Chulalongkorn University, where he gathered the support of about fifty like-minded men (mostly civilians and civil servants) who also wanted to see the end of absolute monarchy,[38] it was the job of the others, such as Plaek, who had by then received his title Luang Phibulsonggram, to try to gather supporters within the army.[38] A young naval captain, Luang Sinthusongkhramchai, was doing the same for the navy;[35] the numbers of the party increased, and by the end of 1931 it reached 102 members, separated into two branches, the civilian and the military.
Four Tiger soldiers[edit]
Prayoon Pamornmontri, one of the seven Promoters, himself an army officer, and former Royal Page of King Vajiravudh, took it upon himself to try to recruit for the party influential and powerful members who also wanted to see the end of absolute monarchy and power of the princes.[35] One officer he had a connection with was the Deputy Inspector of Artillery, Colonel Phraya Phahol Pholpayuhasena. An affable man and popular within the army, he immediately joined the party and gave it his support;[35] the second senior officer was Colonel Phraya Songsuradet. Considered one of the best minds of his generation, he was the Director of Education at the Military Academy. Both had studied abroad and were eager for change.[35] Songsuradet instantly became the party's tactician, advising it should first secure Bangkok militarily and eventually the country would follow, he also advised the Promoters to be more secretive to avoid official and police detection.[39] Eventually, he approached his friend Colonel Phraya Ritthiakhaney, commander of the Bangkok Artillery, who shared his concerns about the princes' domination over the army and eventually he, too, joined the party. Finally, they were joined by Phra Phrasasphithayayut, another discontented officer.[20] Forming what was known within the party as the "Four Musketeers" (4 ทหารเสือ, Four Tiger Soldiers), the most senior members of the party they eventually became its leaders.
(L to R): Phraya Songsuradet. Phraya Phaholpholphayuhasena, Phraya Ritthiakhaney and Phra Phrasasphithayayut, the Four Musketeers or the Four Tiger Soldiers
24 June[edit]
Soldiers assembled in front of the Throne Hall, 24 June 1932
Despite their precautions and preparation, word of the plan's existence eventually leaked to the police. On the evening of 23 June 1932, the director general of the Police made a call to Prince Paribatra, asking for his authorisation to arrest and imprison all involved in the plot;[20] the prince, recognising many names on the list that included many influential and powerful individuals, decided to delay the order for the next day, a delay that would be crucial for the plotters.[40]
Troops on the street during the revolution.
On that same evening, one of Luang Sinthu's supporters in the navy commandeered a gunboat from its dock on the Chao Phraya River, and by morning was aiming its guns directly at Prince Paribatra's palace in Bangkok.[40] Luang Sinthu himself mobilised 500 armed sailors ready to take the Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall, at the centre of the capital and part of Dusit Palace. Following them was Prayoon, who later that night took command of a cadre of young officers to seize the post and telegram offices around the capital –one of the officers was Khuang Abhaiwongse. All communications between the princes and senior members of the administration were thus disabled.[40] All their houses were also under surveillance and guarded by both civilian and military party members.[40]
Tanks outside Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall.
At about 04:00 on the morning of 24 June, Phraya Phahol and Songsuradet were already carrying out their part of the plan. Phraya Phahol and some supporters gathered near the Throne Hall waiting for the signal,[41] while Phraya Songsuradet went with a couple of the conspirators to the barracks of the First Cavalry Regiment of the Royal Guards, where most of the armoured vehicles in Bangkok were kept. On arrival, Phraya Songsuradet reprimanded the officer in charge of the barracks for sleeping while there was a Chinese uprising taking place elsewhere in the city—all the while opening the gates of the barracks and mobilising all the troops; the ruse worked, and through all the confusion and panic, Phraya Prasan was able to arrest the commander of the regiment and put him into custody. Luang Phibul was ordered to guard him;[41] the armoured vehicles, including some tanks, were commandeered and all were ordered to head toward the Throne Hall. Phraya Ritthi, after hearing of the success of Phraya Songsuradet, went to the barracks of the First Infantry Regiment. After successfully mobilising the infantry, he too headed towards the Throne Hall.[41] Having been told weeks before that a military exercise was happening, other troops in the vicinity of Bangkok joined the plotters, thus unknowingly participating in a revolution.[41] Other units loyal to the monarch decided to take a passive role by shutting themselves in their barracks.[42]
By the time the infantry and cavalry arrived in the Royal Plaza in front of the Throne Hall at about 06:00, there was already a throng watching the assembled military.[41] Confusion gripped the plaza, many not completely sure if the Chinese uprising was real, or if the military were only at the square to exercise. Phraya Phahol climbed onto one of the tanks and read the Khana Ratsadon Manifesto, a declaration proclaiming the end of the absolute monarchy and the establishment of a new constitutional state in Siam; the Promoters cheered, followed by the military, probably more out of deference than full comprehension of what has actually happened.[43]
In truth, Phraya Phahol was bluffing; the success of the revolution still depended on events elsewhere in Bangkok. Phraya Prasan was sent to the house of Prince Paribatra, and to other high-ranking members of the government and princes.[43] Prince Paribatra was apparently in his pajamas when he was arrested.[44] None, except the commander of the First Army Corps, offered any resistance, he put up a fight and was slightly wounded, but was eventually taken into custody, becoming the revolution's only casualty. All in all, about 40 officials were arrested and detained in the Throne Hall. One exception was the Minister of Commerce and Communications, Prince Purachatra Jayakara, Prince of Kamphaeng Phet, who escaped in a detached railway engine to warn the king in Hua Hin.[42] By 08:00 the operation was over and the Promoters had won the day.[43]
Hours after[edit]
Most of the military and civil administrations offered little resistance. Accustomed to taking orders and with all lines of communication shut down, they were unable to act; the next stage of the revolution was left to the civilian side of the party. Pridi, its leader, with the help of his supporters, blanketed the capital in the Khana Ratsadon's propaganda leaflets, pamphlets and radio broadcasts, all supporting the revolution;[43] the text of manifesto of the Khana Ratsadon (written by Pridi) criticised the monarch in harsh terms:
All the People,
When this king succeeded his elder brother, people at first had hoped that he would govern protectively. But… the king maintains his power above the law as before, he appoints court relatives and toadies without merit or knowledge to important positions without listening to the voice of the people. He allows officials to use the power of their office dis-honestly… he elevates those of royal blood to have special rights more than the people, he governs without principle. The country's affairs are left to the mercy of fate, as can be seen from the depression of the economy and hardships… the government of the king has treated the people as slaves… it can be seen that from the taxes that are squeezed from the people, the king carries off many millions for personal use… The People's Party has no wish to snatch the throne. Hence it invites this king to retain the position, but he must be under the law of the constitution for the governing the country, and cannot do anything independently without the approval of the assembly of the people's representatives… If the king replies with a refusal or does not reply within the time set… it will be regarded as treason to the nation, and it will be necessary for the country to have a republican form of government.[45]
The tone of the manifesto differed greatly from that of the telegram sent to the king signed by the three full colonels and musketeers: Phraya Pahol, Phraya Songsuradet, and Phraya Ritthi; the telegram stated, using royal language (Rachasap: ราชาศัพท์), that if the king did not wish to remain as a monarch under a constitution, the party was willing to replace him with another royal prince.[46] Despite the language, the telegram assured the monarch in strong terms that if any member of the Khana Ratsadon was hurt, the princes in custody would suffer.[46]
Royal reaction[edit]
Siamrat Newspaper, headline reads: "A change of government for Siamese King to be under law"
Even before the arrival of the Musketeers' telegram the king was aware of something going on in Bangkok, he was playing a game of golf at the summer villa's course with the queen, two princely ministers, and some courtiers, when an urgent message arrived (reportedly at the eighth hole). Later, Prince Purachatra arrived to report to the king what had been going on in the capital.[46]
The king and the princes discussed many options, which included fleeing the country, staging a counter-coup or full surrender.[46] However, by the time the actual telegram arrived from the Khana Ratsadon, the king had already decided, he quickly replied he was willing to remain on the throne as a constitutional monarch and that he had always favoured granting the people a constitution.[47] The king, later, wrote of his decision of refusing to fight, "I could not sit on a throne besmirched by blood."[48] One point which the king did not concede was when the party sent a gunboat to carry him to Bangkok, he refused and, instead, travelled back to the capital by royal train, stating that he was not a captive of the Khana Ratsadon.[47]
Meanwhile, the Promoters forced the princes to sign a document proclaiming their commitment to peace and to avoidance of any bloodshed.[47] In Bangkok, the coup elicited almost no response from the populace, and the day-to-day life of the people returned to normal even before the end of the day; the rest of the country was also similarly disaffected,[47] prompting The Times in London to report that the revolution merely was "a simple re-adjustment".[49]
New administration[edit]
The granting of Siam's 'permanent' constitution on 10 December 1932 at the Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall
By the evening of the 24th the Promoters were confident enough to call a senior ministerial meeting. In the meeting Pridi tried to persuade senior civil servants to support the Khana Ratsadon, asking them for support and telling them to remain united, lest the semblance of confusion lead to foreign intervention.[50] Pridi asked the foreign ministry to dispatch to all foreign missions a document stating that the party was committed to protecting foreign lives and business and to fulfilling Siam's treaty obligations.[50]
King Prajadhipok returned to Bangkok on 26 June, his first immediate action was to give a royal audience to the Promoters. As the members entered the room the king rose and greeted them by saying: "I rise in honour of the Khana Ratsadon", it was an extremely significant gesture, as in Siamese culture the king always remains seated when their subjects offer homage, not the reverse.[49] This led to Pridi apologising to the monarch for defaming him in the manifesto; subsequently, all known copies were pulled from circulation; the king responded to this act by affixing his royal seal on a document exonerating all members of the Khana Ratsadon for the coup.[49]
The Khana Ratsadon then released all their hostages with the exception of Prince Paribatra, whom they considered too powerful, they asked him to leave the country instead. He later left for Java, never to return and died in Bandung in 1944. Other princes went into voluntary exile in other Southeast Asian countries, and some others in Europe.[49][51]
In the immediate aftermath of the revolution, Prajadhipok and the Khana Ratsadon immediately set about granting the Siamese people their first constitution; the temporary charter was signed on 27 June 1932 at 17:00. It was a draft document written by Pridi in advance;[52] the constitution began by announcing that: "the highest power in the land belongs to all people."[53] The constitution basically stripped the king of all of his ancient powers such as his power of veto, power of pardon, and the right to even confirm his own successor and heir; the constitution removed the monarchy's powers, without actually abolishing the office itself.[54] The constitution created a People's Committee (คณะกรรมการราษฎร, the executive) and an Assembly of People's Representatives (รัฐสภาผู้แทนราษฎร) made up of 70 appointed Members.
"Democracy" for Siam was, however, to be given to the people in installments, three to be precise. First, assembly members were to be appointed by no other than the Four Musketeers (the military), they would exercise power on behalf of the people, and their first session was to last six months.[54] Second, a period when the mostly ignorant populace would learn about democracy and elections; the assembly would then be changed to be composed of half appointed members (again by the Musketeers) and the other half through indirect representation; these candidates must, of course, have been examined by the Khana Ratsadon before any election. Third, and finally, the charter stated that full democratic representation in the assembly could only be achieved at the end of ten years or when more than half of the populace had gone through primary education, whichever was achieved first.[54]
The first session of the People's Assembly convened in the Ananta Samakhom Throne Hall on 28 June 1932;[55] the charter however did not last long. By the end of the year a new more moderate permanent constitution[56] would be signed, on 10 December; this constitution eventually gave back to monarch many powers it had lost in the previous charter, the monarchy was once again held "sacred and inviolable". The Assembly of People's Representatives was expanded to include 156 members, 78 elected and 78 appointed; the democratic restrictions were removed and the government scheduled Siam's first election in October 1933.[57]
The revolution was a product of many events, including for the most part what the Khana Ratsadon considered misrule under Prajadhipok and the princes. Others included the dire economic situation the country faced in the 1930s and the rapid social development at the time.
Despite his lofty ideals and Western education, Pridi's version of democracy faced the same dilemma that Prajadhipok's version did: the notion simply that the country, especially the rural populace were not yet ready for it.[54] Within days, the Khana Ratsadon had turned Siam into a one-party state with communistic sounding institutions such as the "People's Assembly" and the position of "President of the People's Committee".[58] However, Khana Ratsadon showed their bipartisanship when they recommended the appointment of lawyer and Privy Councillor Phraya Manopakorn Nititada as the first President of the People's Committee and in effect the first Prime Minister of Siam, more probably out of pragmatism and shrewdness rather than any honourable intention.[55] However, infighting within the government and the actions of the conservative prime minister would eventually lead to another coup d'état only one year later, in June 1933, resulting in the appointment of Phraya Phahol as Siam's second prime minister.
The revolution was a huge blow to Prajadhipok and the monarchy, for it stripped him of all of his ancient powers and privileges. Despite the cordial words, the king lived in constant fear and felt the next time a confrontation between him and the party occurred, he and his queen both might be killed. In late 1932, the king wrote to his nephew Prince Chula Chakrabongse about his decision to return to Bangkok: "...we were all quite aware that we were probably going to our death."[48] The many unsettled constitutional roles of the crown and the dissatisfaction of Phraya Phahol's seizure of power culminated in October 1933 in a counter-coup, the Boworadet Rebellion staged by royalist factions; the royalists were led by Prince Boworadet and the many others who had permanently lost their influence and positions because of the seizure of power by the Khana Ratsadon. The rebellion was a failure, and although there is no evidence whatsoever that Prajadhipok was involved, his neutrality and indecisiveness during the brief conflict led to the loss of his credibility and prestige. Three years after the revolution, King Prajadhipok abdicated the throne and left Siam never to return, he died in England in 1941, during World War II.[59] He was replaced as king by his nine-year-old nephew Prince Ananda Mahidol (King Rama VIII), who at that time was attending school in Lausanne, Switzerland.
Not only did Prajadhipok fail where the Khana Ratsadon succeeded, they accomplished it because of the military. Without the support of the army faction, the coup would never have happened and the system of absolute monarchy might have lasted years longer. Despite the great socio-economic changes in Bangkok, rural Thais were still uneducated and almost completely uninterested in what went on in the nation's capital.[citation needed] The revolution gave the military a sense of power which it would exercise 16 more times through the end of the 20th century, toppling civilian governments whenever they saw fit. Even today the Thai military is viewed with some suspicion.
Memorial[edit]
A memorial plaque honoring the 1932 Revolution was reported missing on 14 April 2017, it was thought to be stolen on 5 April. It was replaced with another plaque with text praising the Chakri Dynasty; as of 2019[update], no one has taken responsibility for the theft.[60]
The 1932 Revolution brass plaque, about 30 centimeters across, was embedded in the asphalt of the Royal Plaza, less than 10 meters from the equestrian statue depicting King Rama V; the site is where the revolt took place on 24 June 1932. Here, a declaration condemning absolute monarchy was read. Press reports noted that ultraroyalist groups had threatened to remove the plaque in the months preceding its theft.[60]
^ Kesboonchoo Mead (2004), pp. 67–92
^ Thongchai (2000), p. 534
^ Landon (1939), pp. 20–26
^ Van Praagh (1996), pp. 38–41
^ Handley (2006)
^ a b c Stowe (1991)
^ Baker & Phongpaichit (2005), p. 27
^ a b Stowe (1991), p. 7
^ a b c d Stowe (1991), p. 3
^ a b Kesboonchoo Mead (2004), pp. 38–66
^ Vella, Walter Francis; Vella, Dorothy B (1974). Chaiyo!: King Vajiravudh and the development of Thai nationalism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. pp. 126–175.
^ a b c Baker & Phongpaichit (2005), p. 112
^ Pakorn Nilprapunt (2 April 2012) [1914]. "Martial Law, B.E. 2457 (1914) unofficial translation" (PDF). Thailand Law Forum. Office of the Council of State (Thailand). Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 May 2014. Retrieved 30 May 2014. Reference to Thai legislation in any jurisdiction shall be to the Thai version only. This translation has been made so as to establish correct understanding about this Act to the foreigners.
^ Soravij: Siamese Royalty. The Descendants of King Rama V of Siam. Retrieved on 14 March 2009
^ a b c Stowe (1991), p. 2
^ "The Last Chance for Political Reform" (PDF). Modern Thai politics. Department of Government, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 October 2011. Retrieved 14 March 2009.
^ a b c Stowe (1991), p. 15
^ a b Van Praagh (1996), pp. 16–21
^ Steinberg (1971), p. 313
^ Batson (1984), p. 136
^ Kesboonchoo Mead (2004)
^ a b c Handley (2006), p. 37
^ a b c Kesboonchoo Mead (2004), pp. 126–153
^ Stowe (1991), pp. 9–11
^ a b Landon (1939), pp. 20–27
^ Batson (1984), pp. 187–235
^ Batson (1984)
^ Handley (2006), pp. 35–43
^ a b c d e f Stowe (1991), p. 12
^ Baker & Phongpaichit (2005), p. 116
^ Stowe (1991), p. 11
^ a b Stowe (1991), p. 13
^ a b c d Stowe (1991), p. 16
^ a b c d e Stowe (1991), p. 17
^ a b Chakrabongse (1957), p. 160
^ Chakrabongse (1957), p. 159
^ Pridi (2000), Part II Chapter 7
^ a b Ruiz, Todd (14 April 2017). "1932 Democratic Revolution Plaque Removed". Khaosod English. Retrieved 27 March 2019.
Baker, Christopher; Phongpaichit, Pasuk (2005). A History of Thailand. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-81615-7.
Batson, Benjamin A. (1984). The End of Absolute Monarchy in Siam. Singapore: Oxford University Press.
Chakrabongse, HRH Chula, Prince of Thailand (1957). Twain Have Met: An Eastern Prince Came West. United Kingdom: G.T. Foulis & Co.
Coast, John (1953). Some Aspects of Siamese Politics. New York: Institute of Pacific Relations.
Handley, Paul M. (2006). The King Never Smiles: A Biography of Thailand's Bhumibol Adulyadej. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Kesboonchoo Mead, Kullada (2004). The Rise and Decline of Thai Absolutism. United Kingdom: Routledge Curzon. ISBN 0-415-29725-7.
Keyes, Charles. (1987). Thailand: Buddhist Kingdom as Modern Nation-State. Boulder: Westview Press.
Kobkua, Suwannathat-Pian (1995). Thailand's Durable Premier: Phibun through Three Decades 1932–1957. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.
Kruger, Rayne (1964). The Devil's Discus. Great Britain: Cassel & Company Ltd.
Landon, Kenneth Perry (1939). Thailand in Transition: A brief survey of Cultural Trends in the five years since the Revolution of 1932. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.
Moerman, Michel (1965). "Ethnic identification in a complex civilisation: who are the Lue?". The American Anthropologist. New Series. 67 (5). doi:10.1525/aa.1965.67.5.02a00070.
Pridi, Banomyong (2000). A History of Thailand. Translated and introduced by Christopher Baker and Pasuk Phongpaichit. Thailand: Silkworm books. ISBN 974-7551-35-7.
Reynolds, Craig J. (1994). Thai Radical Discourse: The Real Face of Thai Feudalism Today. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Cornell Southeast Asia Program.
Reynolds, Craig J. (2006). "Feudalism as a Trope for the Past". Seditious Histories: Contesting Thai and Southeast Asian Pasts. Seattle: University of Washington Press. ISBN 9789971693350.
Steinberg, D. J., ed. (1971). In Search of Southeast Asia. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.
Stowe, Judith (1991). Siam Becomes Thailand: A Story of Intrigue. United Kingdom: C. Hurst & Co. ISBN 0-8248-1394-4.
Thongchai, Winichakul, ed. (c. 1994). Siam Mapped: a history of the geo-body of a nation. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Thongchai, Winichakul (2000). "The Quest for 'Siwilai': a Geographical Discourse of Civilizational Thinking in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries Siam". The Journal of Asian Studies. 59 (3): 528–549. doi:10.1017/s0021911800014327. JSTOR 2658942.
Van Praagh, David (1996). Thailand's Struggle for Democracy: The Life and Times of M. R. Seni Pramoj. New York: Holmes & Meier.
Vella, Walter F. (1978). Chaiyo!: King Vajiravudh and the development of Thai Nationalism. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.
Wyatt, David K. (2003). Thailand: A Short History. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Thai Revolution of 1932
Undermining the 1932 Revolution
Rattanakosin Period (1782–1932)
Monarchs Individuals Key events
Chakri dynasty
Phra Buddha Yodfa Chulaloke (Rama I)
Phra Buddha Loetla Nabhalai (Rama II)
Nangklao (Rama III)
Mongkut (Rama IV)
Chulalongkorn (Rama V)
Vajiravudh (Rama VI)
Prajadhipok (Rama VII)
Viceroys
Maha Sura Singhanat
Maha Itsarasunthon
Maha Senanurak
Maha Sakdi Polsep
Pinklao
Bowon Wichaichan
Deputy Viceroy
Anurak Devesh
Crown Prince
Maha Vajirunhis
Maha Vajiravudh
Hereditary Prince
Chakrabongse Bhuvanath
Asdang Dejavudh
Vajirananavarorasa
Bhanurangsi Savangwongse
Devawongse Varoprakarn
Damrong Rajanubhab
Narisara Nuwattiwong
Kashemsri Subhayok
Jayanta Mongkol
Paribatra Sukhumbandhu
Kitiyakara Voralaksana
Chirapravati Voradej
Abhakara Kiartivongse
Purachatra Jayakara
Yugala Dighambara
Wongsa Dhiraj Snid
Rangsit Prayurasakdi
Mahidol Adulyadej
Supreme Council of State of Siam
Thao Thep Krasattri and Thao Si Sunthon
Sunthorn Phu
Bodindecha
Prayurawongse
Si Suriyawongse
Thipakorawong
Khana Ratsadon
Ang Eng
Dan Beach Bradley
Jean-Baptiste Pallegoix
Anna Leonowens
John Bowring
Gustave Rolin-Jaequemyns
Auguste Pavie
Thonburi Kingdom (1768–1782)
Foundation of Bangkok
Tây Sơn–Siam War
Nine Armies War
Ta Din Dang campaign
Tavoy expedition
Invasion of Thalang
Crawfurd Mission
Cambodian rebellion (1811–1812)
Lao rebellion (1826–1828)
Burney Treaty
Siamese–Vietnamese War (1831–1834)
Bowring Treaty
Front Palace crisis
Haw wars
Franco-Siamese War
Paknam incident
Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909
Palace Revolt of 1912
Siamese Expeditionary Forces
1924 Palace Law of Succession
History of Thailand (1932–1973)
History of Thailand (1932–73)
Office holders Individuals and institutions Key events
The Monarchy
Ananda Mahidol (Rama VIII)
Bhumibol Adulyadej (Rama IX)
Regents of Thailand
Rama VII
The Prince of Nakhon Sawan
The Prince Narisara Nuwattiwong
Rama VIII
The Prince Anuvatana
Prince Aditya Dibabha
Chao Phraya Yomarath (Pan Sukhum)
Chao Phraya Bijayendra Yodhin (General Um Indrayodhin)
Luang Praditmanutham (Dr. Pridi Banomyong)
Rama IX
Phra Suthamawinichay
Phraya Nolarajasuwach (Thongdi Nolarajasuwach)
Sa-nguan Chuthatemi
The Prince of Chainat
Phraya Manovaratsevi (Plod Vichear na Songkhla)
The Prince Adireksorn Udomsakdi
The Prince Bidyalabh Bridhyakon
Luang Adulyadejchrat (Bhat Phuengphrakhun)
Queen Sirikit
Princess Srisangwan
Prime Ministers of Thailand
Phraya Manopakorn Nititada (Kon Hutasingha)
General Phraya Phahonphonphayuhasena (Phot Phahonyothin)
Field Marshal Plaek Phibunsongkhram
Major Khuang Aphaiwong
Thawi Bunyaket
Seni Pramoj
Pridi Banomyong
Rear Admiral Thawan Thamrongnawasawat
Pote Sarasin
Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn
Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat
Field Marshal Phin Choonhavan
General Phao Sriyanond
Lieutenant-General Kat Katsongkhram
Marshal of the Air Force Fuen Ronnaphagrad Ritthakhanee
Direk Jayanama
Luang Wichitwathakan
Free Thai Movement
Coup Group
Communist Party of Thailand
Southeast Asia Treaty Organization
Constitutions of Thailand
Siamese coup d'état of 1933
Boworadet Rebellion
Rebellion of the Sergeants
Songsuradet Rebellion
Franco-Thai War
Japanese invasion of Thailand
Thai cultural restoration
Army General Staff Plot
Palace Rebellion
Manhattan Rebellion
Silent Coup (Thailand)
1957 Thai coup d'état
Communist insurgency in Thailand
14 October 1973 Uprising
⯇ Rattanakosin Kingdom (1782–1932) • History of Thailand (1973–2001) ⯈
Coups, Rebellions, revolts and revolution in Thailand
Rebellions, revolts,
and revolution
Palace Revolt (1912)
1932 Revolution
Boworadet rebellion (October 1933)
Rebellion of the Sergeants (1935)
Songsuradet rebellion (1939)
Palace Rebellion (1949)
Manhattan Rebellion (June 1951)
1964 Rebellion
Coups and
June 1933 coup
1947 coup
Army General Staff plot (1948)
Silent Coup (November 1951)
March 1977 coup attempt
October 1977 coup
1981 coup attempt
Popular revolts
Peace Rebellion (1952)
1973 popular uprising
Black May (1992)
Protests and crises
Thammasat University massacre (1976)
2005–06 political crisis
2010 political protests
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siamese_revolution_of_1932&oldid=904241433"
Military coups in Thailand
1932 in Siam
Political history of Thailand
Rebellions in Thailand
20th-century revolutions
1930s coups d'état and coup attempts
Wars involving the Rattanakosin Kingdom
1930s in Thailand
Wikipedia articles with style issues from October 2013
All articles with style issues
Articles containing Thai-language text
Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from May 2014
The history of Thailand from 1932 to 1973 was dominated by military dictatorships which were in power for much of the period. The main personalities of the period were the dictator Luang Phibunsongkhram, who allied the country with Japan during the Second World War, the civilian politician Pridi Phanomyong, who founded Thammasat University and was prime minister after the war. A succession of military dictators followed Pridi's ouster—Phibun again, Sarit Thanarat Thanom Kittikachorn—under whom traditional, authoritarian rule was combined with increasing modernisation and Westernisation under the influence of the US; the end of the period was marked by Thanom's resignation, following a massacre of pro-democracy protesters led by Thammasat students. The military came to power in the bloodless Siamese revolution of 1932, which transformed the government of Siam from an absolute to a constitutional monarchy. King Prajadhipok accepted this change but abdicated due to his strained relations with the government.
Upon his abdication, King Prajadhipok issued a brief statement criticising the regime. His statement included the following phrases—often quoted by critics of the slow pace of Siam's political development: The new regime of 1932 was led by a group of colonels headed by Phraya Phahol Pholphayuhasena and Phraya Songsuradej. In December they produced a constitution—Siam's first—which included a national assembly, half appointed and half indirectly elected; the people were promised that full democratic elections would be held once half the population had completed primary education—which was expected to be sometime in the 1940s. A prime minister and cabinet were appointed and a facade of constitutional rule was maintained. Once the new government had been established and the constitution put into effect, conflict began to erupt among the members of the new ruling coalition. There were four major factions competing for power: the older conservative civilian faction led by Phraya Manopakorn Nititada.
The first serious conflict arose in 1933 when Pridi was given the task of drafting a new economic plan for the nation. His radical programme called for the nationalisation of large tracts of farmland as well as rapid government-directed industrialisation, it called for the growth of higher education so that entry into the bureaucracy would not be dominated by royalty and the aristocracy. However, the plan was condemned by most of the government factions as being communist; because of its attack on private property, the members of the conservative clique were the ones most alarmed by Pridi's plan. They urged the Mano government to adopt policies that would reverse the course of the "revolution". However, when Phraya Mano attempted to do this and Phraya Phahol launched a second coup that toppled the Mano government. Phraya Pahon was made the new prime minister, his new government excluded all of the royalists. A royalist reaction came in late 1933 when Prince Bovoradej, a grandson of Mongkut and one-time minister of defence, led an armed revolt against the government.
He mobilised various provincial garrisons and marched on Bangkok, capturing the Don Muang Aerodrome along the way. The prince accused the government of disrespecting the king and promoting communism, he demanded that the government leaders resign, he had hoped that some of the garrisons in the Bangkok area would join the revolt, but they remained loyal to the government. Meanwhile, the navy left for its bases in the south. After heavy fighting in the northern outskirts of Bangkok, the royalists were defeated and Prince Bovoradej left for exile in French Indochina. One effect of the repression of the insurrection was the diminution of the king's prestige. After the revolt started, King Prajadhipok declared in a telegram that he regretted the strife and civil disturbances, it is not clear whether he was motivated by a fear of being captured by rebels, a fear of being viewed as a supporter of the rebels, or a wish to avoid further choices between Phahol and Bovoradej. Either way, the fact remains that at the height of the conflict, the royal couple took refuge at Songkhla.
The king's withdrawal from the scene of the fighting was interpreted by the victorious party as a sign that he had failed in his duty. By refusing to give his full support to the legitimate government, his credibility was undermined. A few months in 1934, King Prajadhipok, whose relations with the new government had been deteriorating for some time, went abroad to receive medical treatment. While abroad, he carried on a correspondence with the government that discussed the terms under which he would continue to serve as a constitutional monarch, he requested the continuation of some traditional royal prerogatives. The government, would not agree. In his abdication speech, Prajadhipok accused the government of having no regard for democratic principles, employing methods of administration incompatible with individual freedom and the principles of justice, ruling in an autocratic manner and not letting the people have a real voice in Siam's affairs. In 1934, the Press Act came into effect, forbidding the publication of any material deemed to be detrimental to the public order or to undermine morals.
The law has been enforced to the present day. Reaction to the abdication was muted. Everybody was afraid of; the government refrained from challenging any assertions in the king's abdication statement for fear of arousing further controversy. Opponents of the government kept quiet after the
Kingdom of Setul Mambang Segara
Setul the Kingdom of Setul Mambang Segara was a traditional Malay kingdom founded in the northern coast of Malay Peninsular. The state was established in 1808 in wake of the partition between the rulers in the Royal House of Kedah; the partition witnessed the territory being seceded to the cadet branch of the royal family. The sovereignty of the kingdom ended in 1916, following the dissolution by the Siamese government, her borders was inherited to her successive province, the present-day Satun, Thailand. Setul derived its name from Buah Setul, a local name for Cottonfruit native to the area, while its honorific title - Mambang Segara is a Malay variant of the Sea Deity tied from the ancient Malay mysticism due to its location off the western seaboard of the Malay Peninsular; the state was colloquially referred to Setoi, a Kedahan Malay cognate of the territory. In the Thai language, the state was known as Satun, the Thai pronunciation was adopted to the present-day name of the province. Once located in the heartland of Kedah Kingdom, Setul rise to prominence following the death of Abdullah Mukarram Shah, the 20th Sultan of Kedah in 1797.
The demise of the monarch resulted the crowning of Ahmad Tajuddin Halim Shah II as the new Sultan. The election was endorsed and recognised by the Rattanakosin Kingdom of Siam, who perceived Kedah as their vassal; the appointment however erupted into a severe secession crisis in the Royal House after it was contested by the crown prince, Tunku Bisnu. Aiding to reconcile the two rivalling parties, the Siamese appointed Tunku Bisnu as the ruler of Setul, signifying the birth of Kedah into two separate realms. Tunku Bisnu spends most of his reign in Kedah over Setul, with local affairs was administrated by his aide, Dato' Wan Abdullah. Nonetheless, as recorded by Syair Sultan Maulana, it was narrated that Tunku Bisnu was a capable ruler that led the Kedahan troops during the war against Konbaung Dynasty forces in Salang. By 1833, the royal courts of Kedah entered another crisis between Sultan Ahmad Tajuddin Syah II and Tunku Embun, the crown price; the crisis was predominantly derived from the sultan's refusal to appoint the crown prince to be the King of Kayang and Setul.
This resulted Tunku Embun to request military assistance from the Governor of Ligor to overthrow the Kedahan government, falsely claiming that the Sultan has allied with the British. The armed conflict was known locally as Perang Musuh Berbisik. During the War of 1833, the geographical location provided in Setul was used for the advantage by the Kedahan militia led by Dato Wan Mad Ali, to launch an attack against the Siamese in Terang, Ayer Kelubi dan Pulau Panjang. Following the fall of Kedah, Dato Wan Mad Ali was forced to move to Langkawi along with an exodus of 100 Malay families from Setul; the coup d'état led by Tunku Yaakob was proven to be successful, as the sultan was forced to retreat in the British-backed Penang and exiled in Malacca. Nonetheless, Tunku Yaakob's request to be appointed as the Sultan of Kedah was refused, he and his son, Tunku Sulaiwan were brutally executed by the order of the Siamese King after he was found guilty of spreading malicious news of the previous sultan.
Following the victory, the Siamese formed a border reformation that divide Kedah into 4 separate territories and appointing Tunku Muhammad Akib, the prince of Tunku Bisnu as the new King of Setul. The border reformation was parallel to the Partition of Pattani made by the Siamese earlier in 1809, the earlier partition witnessed the birth of Malay state of Pattani into 7 separate kingdoms; the partition was ratified by 1843, when Zainal Rashid, the Sultan of Kedah bought a royal entourage to the Siamese government in Bangkok. The royal entourage consist of the ruler of Kubang Pasu, they pledged their loyalty to the Siamese crown, together with a Bunga Mas as a sign of tributary from each of the respective territories. Signifying the birth of the state into four separate dominion. Despite the fact that Kedah was partitioned into 4 distinct kingdoms, all of the states maintained a close economic and kinship ties. Several exemplification can be witnessed during this era, the royal marriage between Tunku Jahara, the member of Kubang Pasu Royalty with Tunku Ahmad the prince of Kedah.
Tunku Ismail seceded to the throne of Setul in 1876 after the death of Tunku Muhammad Akib. The king was alleged to be an incompetent leader for the administration of the state. Internal strife in the Royal House of Setul caused a relative of Tunku Ismail, Tunku Muhammad to established a kingdom in Langu, north of Setul in 1882. Both of the territories managed to be reunified afterwards after a consolidation by the Siamese government. There were several infrastructure developments can be witnessed during the reign of Tunku Ismail, including the construction of several roads, the town hall and managing the rivers in Setul. Tunku Ismail ordered the construction of a brick prison, enlarging the court, improving the telegram network and introducing the postal service, his rule witnessed a closer relationship with the Siamese, with the kingdom sends 260 individuals to subdue the Chinese rebellion of Phuket in 1878 together with the troops from Kedah and Perlis. He was awarded the Order of the White Elephant for his active role in aiding the Siamese during the revolt.
Tunku Abdul Rahman replaced Tunku Ismail
The peopling of Thailand refers to the process by which the ethnic groups that comprise the population of present-day Thailand came to inhabit the region. The Tai migration from the northern mountains into Thailand and Laos was a slow process, with the Tai remaining near the mountainous area in the region, where they were able to use their specialized agricultural knowledge relating to the use of mountain water for rice production; the earliest Tai settlements in Thailand were in the river valleys in the northern reaches of the country. The Tai settled the central plains of Thailand and displaced and inter-bred with the pre-existing Austroasiatic population; the languages and culture of the Tai came to dominate the regions of both modern-day Laos and Thailand. In more recent times, many of the Tai tribes of Laos migrated west across the border, establishing communities in Thailand; the Laotian Tai ethnic groups referred to as the Lao, are clustered in the Isan region of Thailand. Comparative linguistic research seems to indicate that the Tai people were a proto-Tai–Kadai-speaking culture of southern China, like the Malayo-Polynesians, they may have been of Austronesian descent.
Prior to living in mainland China, the Tai are thought to have migrated from a homeland on the island of Taiwan, where they spoke a dialect of proto-Austronesian or one of its descendant languages. Unlike the Malayo-Polynesian group who sailed south to the Philippines and other parts of maritime Southeast Asia, the ancestors of the modern Tai-Kadai people sailed west to mainland China and traveled along the Pearl River, where their language changed from other Austronesian languages under the influence of Sino-Tibetan and Hmong–Mien language infusion; the coming of the Han Chinese to this part of southern China may have prompted the Tai to migrate once again. This time they went over the mountains of southern China into Southeast Asia through the mountains of Burma and Laos to the north of present day Thailand; the Tai ethnic groups are believed to have begun migrating south from China to Southeast Asia during the first millennium CE. While this theory of the origin of the Tai predominates, there is insufficient archaeological evidence to prove it, linguistic evidence alone is not conclusive.
In support of the theory, however, it is believed the O1 Y-DNA haplogroup is associated with both the Austronesian people and the Tai. Over the centuries, the Tai intermarried and absorbed many of the other populations who co-inhabited and/or politically occupied the region populations of Mon–Khmer and Chinese descent; this fusion of ethnicity has led to considerable genetic diversity in the modern Thai people, has resulted in a Tai population that differs in culture and apparel from the Tai ethnic groups who remained in China. Many of the individual Tai ethnic groups have assumed a common Thai identity and have adopted Thai cultural norms. There are presently more than 30 distinct Tai ethnic groups in Thailand, contributing nearly 85 percent of the nation's population; the genetic stratification of the ethnic clades of the Tai ethnicity is an ongoing topic of debate among linguists and other social scientists. The history of Chinese immigration to Thailand dates back many centuries, the specific Chinese ethnic groups which made their way to Thailand are numerous, although there is a greater concentration of Chinese from the southern provinces due to their geographic proximity to Thailand.
The Chinese are part of the greater Sino-Tibetan ethnicity which includes the Tibeto-Burmans. The Chinese immigrants were able to merge into the predominant Tai culture, have contributed to the economy and infrastructure of Thailand over the years; every king of the Chakri Dynasty, which rules Thailand, is part Chinese on his mother's side. Of note, the Khek River in Thailand derives its name from the Thai word Khek, the Thai name for the Hakka people of China who settled along its banks in Phitsanulok Province. Chinese traders in Thailand from Fujian and Guangdong Provinces, began arriving in Ayutthaya by at least the 13th century. Ayutthaya was under constant Burmese threat from the 16th century, the Qianlong Emperor of the Qing Empire was alarmed by Burmese military might. From 1766-1769, the Qianlong Emperor sent his armies four times to subdue the Burmese, but all four invasions failed. Ayutthaya fell to the Burmese in 1767. During the Ayutthaya period, many Chinese traders and soldiers inter-married with local Tai, infusing Chinese culture into the population early in its history.
In the late-18th century, King Taksin of Thonburi, himself half-Chinese encouraged Chinese immigration and trade. Settlers came from Chaozhou prefecture in large numbers. By 1825, the population of Chinese in Thailand had reached 230,000, it grew due to a constant stream of Chinese immigrants to the country throughout the 19th century. Early Chinese immigration consisted entirely of Chinese men, who, of necessity, married Thai women; the children of such intermarriages were called meaning ` children of Chinese' in Thai. The Chinese population in Thailand had risen to 792,000 by 1910. By 1932 12.2 percent of the population was ethnic Chinese. The corruption of the Qing dynasty and the massive population increase in China, combined with high taxes, caused many families to leave for Thailand in search of work and a better life; those who came before the First World War came overland or by sailboats called sampams, while after World War II most arrived by steam ship. The earlier tradition of Chinese-Thai intermarriage declined once larg
Lavo Kingdom
The Kingdom of Lavo was a political entity on the left bank of the Chao Phraya River in the Upper Chao Phraya valley from the end of Dvaravati civilization, around the 7th century, until 1388. The original center of Lavo civilization was Lavo, but the capital shifted southward to Ayutthaya around the 11th century, whereupon the state became the Ayutthaya Kingdom according to recent historical analysis; the area of Dvaravati was first inhabited by Mon people who had arrived and appeared centuries earlier. The foundations of Buddhism in central Southeast Asia were laid between the 6th and 9th centuries when a Theravada Buddhist culture linked to the Mon people developed in central and northeastern Thailand. Theravadans believe. Unlike Mahayana Buddhists, who admit the texts of numerous Buddhas and Bodhisattvas into canon, Theravadans venerate only the Buddha Gautama, the founder of the religion; the Mon Buddhist kingdoms that rose in what are now parts of Laos and Central Plain of Thailand were collectively called Dvaravati.
The legendary first king of Lavo, Phraya Kalavarnadit, a Mon ruler, was said to have established the city around 450 CE as one of the Dvaravati city-states. Kalavarnadit established a new era called the Chulasakaraj, the era used by the Siamese and the Burmese until the 19th century. Kalavarnadit used the name "Lavo" as the name of the kingdom, which came from the Hindu name "Lavapura", meaning "city of Lava", in reference to the ancient South Asian city of Lavapuri; the only native language found during early Lavo times is the Mon language. However, there is debate; some historians point out that Lavo was composed of mixed Mon and Lawa people, with the Mons forming the ruling class. It is hypothesized that the migration of Tai peoples into Chao Phraya valley occurred during the time of the Lavo kingdom. Theravada Buddhism remained a major belief in Lavo although Hinduism and Mahayana Buddhism from the Khmer Empire wielded considerable influence. Around the late 7th century, Lavo expanded to the north.
In the Northern Thai Chronicles, including the Cāmadevivaṃsa, the first ruler of the Mon kingdom of Hariphunchai, was said to be a daughter of a Lavo king. Few records are found concerning the nature of the Lavo kingdom. Most of what we know about Lavo is from archaeological evidence. Tang dynasty chronicles record. In his diary, the monk Xuanzang referred to Dvaravati-Lavo as Tou-lo-po-ti, which seems to echo the name Dvaravati, as a state between Chenla and the Pagan Kingdom. By the Song dynasty, Lavo was known as Luówō. Isanavarman I of the Chenla Kingdom expanded Khmer influence to the Chao Phraya valley through his campaigns around the 7th century. Dvaravati cities that fell under Khmer hegemony became Lavo, while the Western cities were spared from Khmer hegemony and formed Suvarnabhumi. Lavo was the center. Around the 10th century, the city-states of Dvaravati merged into two mandalas – the Lavo and Suvarnabhumi. According to a legend in the Northern Chronicles, in 903, a king of Tambralinga invaded and took Lavo and installed a Malay prince to the Lavo throne.
The Malay prince was married to a Khmer princess. The son of the couple contested for the Khmer throne and became Suryavarman I, thus bringing Lavo under Khmer domination through personal union. Suryavarman I expanded into Isan, constructing many temples. Modern Thai historians think the Tai peoples originated in northern Vietnam and Guangxi province in China; the origin of the Tai peoples were living in northern Southeast Asia by the 8th century. Five linguistic groups emerged: the northern Tai in China; the Tai people had emigrated in the area what is now Thailand around 11th century, the land was inhabited by Mon and Khmer speaking peoples, who had arrived earlier. Tai peoples lived in the river valleys of mainland Southeast Asia. Assorted ethnic and linguistic group lived in the hills; the Tai village consisted of nuclear families working as subsistence rice farmers, living in small houses elevated above the ground. Households bonded together for protection from external attacks and to share the burden of communal repairs and maintenance.
Within the village, a council of elders was created to help settle problems, organise festivals and rites and manage the village. Village would combine to form a group of villages governed by a Chao; when Tai people settled in Central Plain of Thailand, the Cambodian ruler saw Tai people as barbarian, who came from China, named them as Siem in Khmer language. The Tai lords adopted both Mon alphabet and Khmer alphabet, which the Tai developed into their own writing systems as Tai Tham alphabet, for the Thai Yuan people in the north, Khom-Thai alphabet, for the Siamese Tai in the lower region; the Siamese called themselves as Tai or Thai and called Lavo as "Lopburi" in Tai dialect language. Settled in the rural fringes of the Khmer Empire and in upper Laos, the Tai peoples, united by their lords, were becoming a formidable threat to the Khmer Empire. Despite i
The Malacca Sultanate was a Malay sultanate centred in the modern-day state of Malacca, Malaysia. Conventional historical thesis marks c. 1400 as the founding year of the sultanate by a Malay Raja of Singapura, Parameswara known as Iskandar Shah. At the height of the sultanate's power in the 15th century, its capital grew into one of the most important entrepots of its time, with territory covering much of the Malay Peninsula, the Riau Islands and a significant portion of the northern coast of Sumatra in present-day Indonesia; as a bustling international trading port, Malacca emerged as a centre for Islamic learning and dissemination, encouraged the development of the Malay language and arts. It heralded the golden age of Malay sultanates in the archipelago, in which Classical Malay became the lingua franca of the Maritime Southeast Asia and Jawi script became the primary medium for cultural and intellectual exchange, it is through these intellectual and cultural developments, the Malaccan era witnessed the enculturation of a Malay identity, the Malayisation of the region and the subsequent formation of an Alam Melayu.
In the year of 1511, the capital of Malacca fell to the Portuguese Empire, forcing the last Sultan, Mahmud Shah, to retreat to the further reaches of his empire, where his progeny established new ruling dynasties and Perak. The political and cultural legacy of the sultanate remains to this day. For centuries, Malacca has been held up as an exemplar of Malay-Muslim civilisation, it established systems of trade and governance that persisted well into the 19th century, introduced concepts such as daulat – a distinctly Malay notion of sovereignty – that continues to shape contemporary understanding of Malay kingship. The fall of Malacca benefited Brunei when its ports became a new entrepôt as the kingdom emerged as a new Muslim empire in the Malay Archipelago, attracting many Muslim traders who fled from the Portuguese occupation after the ruler of Brunei's conversion to Islam; the series of raids launched by the Chola Empire in the 11th century had weakened the once glorious empire of Srivijaya.
By the end of the 13th century, the fragmented Srivijaya caught the attention of the expansionist Javanese King, Kertanegara of Singhasari. In 1275, he decreed the Pamalayu expedition to overrun Sumatra. By 1288, Singhasari naval expeditionary forces sacked Jambi and Palembang and brought Malayu Dharmasraya—the successor state of Srivijaya, to its knees. In 1293 Singhasari was succeeded by Majapahit ruling the region. According to the Malay Annals, a prince from Palembang named Seri Teri Buana who claimed to be a descendant of Alexander the Great, stayed in the island of Bintan for several years before he set sail and landed on Temasek in 1299; the Orang Laut, famous for their loyal services to Srivijaya made him king of a new kingdom called Singapura. In the 14th century, Singapura developed concurrently with the Pax Mongolica era and rose from a small trading outpost into a centre of international trade with strong ties with the Yuan Dynasty. In an effort to revive the fortune of Malayu in Sumatra, in the 1370s, a Malay ruler of Palembang sent an envoy to the court of the first emperor of the newly established Ming dynasty.
He invited China to resume the tributary system. Learning this diplomatic maneuver King Hayam Wuruk of Majapahit sent an envoy to Nanking, convinced the emperor that Malayu was their vassal, was not an independent country. Subsequently, in 1377—a few years after the death of Gajah Mada, Majapahit sent a punitive naval attack against a rebellion in Palembang, which caused the complete destruction of Srivijaya and caused the diaspora of the Srivijayan princes and nobles. Rebellions against the Javanese rule ensued and attempts were made by the fleeing Malay princes to revive the empire, which left the area of southern Sumatra in chaos and desolation. By the second half of 14th century, Kingdom of Singapura grew wealthy. However, its success alarmed two regional powers at that time, Ayuthaya from the north and Majapahit from the south; as a result, the kingdom's fortified capital was attacked by at least two major foreign invasions before it was sacked by Majapahit in 1398. The fifth and last king, Parameswara fled to the west coast of the Malay Peninsula.
Parameswara fled north to Muar, Ujong Tanah and Biawak Busuk before reaching a fishing village at the mouth of Bertam river. The village belonged to the sea-sakai or orang laut which were left alone by Majapahit forces that not only sacked Singapura but Langkasuka and Pasai; as a result, the village became a safe haven and in the 1370s it began to receive a growing number of refugees running away from Mahapahit's attacks. By the time Parameswara reached Malacca in the early 1400s, the place had a cosmopolitan feel with Buddhists from the north, Hindus from Palembang and Muslims from Pasai. Legend has it that Parameswara saw a mouse deer outwit his hunting dog into the water when he was resting under the Malacca tree, he thought this bode well, remarking,'this place is excellent the mouse deer is formidable. Tradition holds that he named the settlement after the tree he was leaning against while witnessing the portentous event. Today, the mouse deer is part of modern Malacca's coat of arms; the name "Malacca" itself was derived from the fruit-bearing Melaka tree scientifically termed as Phyllanthus emblica.
Another account of the naming origin of Malacca elaborates that
History of Thailand since 2001
The history of Thailand since 2001 has been dominated by the politics surrounding the rise and fall from power of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and the subsequent conflicts between his supporters and opponents. Thaksin and his Thai Rak Thai Party came to power in 2001 and became popular among the electorate rural voters. Opponents, criticized his authoritarian style and accused him of corruption. Thaksin was deposed in a coup d'état in 2006, Thailand has since been embroiled in continuing rounds of political crisis involving elections won by Thaksin's supporters, massive anti-government protests by multiple factions, removals of prime ministers and disbanding of political parties by the judiciary, two military coups. Thaksin was prime minister from 2001 to 2006, when he was ousted by a coup following protests by the anti-Thaksin People's Alliance for Democracy. However, his supporters were brought back to power in a new election following the enactment of new constitution in 2007.
The PAD protested against the government through most of 2008, the ruling party was dissolved by the Constitutional Court. The opposition Democrat Party, led by Abhisit Vejjajiva, formed a government, but faced protests by the opposing Red Shirt movement led by the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship; this led to a violent military crackdown in May 2010. Another Thaksin-aligned party won the election in 2011, installing his sister Yingluck Shinawatra as prime minister. Renewed anti-government protests began in November 2013, continued until the military again staged a coup in May 2014. Coup leader Prayut Chan-o-cha took power as prime minister, oversaw systemic suppression of political freedom before allowing elections, which are expected in 2019; the conflicts have divided popular opinion in Thailand. In exile, Thaksin still commands strong support among the rural population of the North and Northeast, who benefited from his policies and form the majority of the electorate, they are joined after the 2006 coup, by liberal academics and activists, who oppose his opponents' pushes to achieve a non-elected government.
On the other hand, Thaksin's opponents consist of much of Bangkok's urban middle class and the Southern population and academics, as well as members of the "old elite" who wielded political influence before Thaksin came to power. They claim that Thaksin abused his power and undermined democratic processes and institutional checks and balances, monopolizing power and using populist policies to secure his political standing. While Thaksin's opponents claim that elections which resulted in victories for his allies were not democratic because of such interference, his supporters have accused the courts, which brought down multiple Thaksin-aligned governments, of engaging in judicial activism; these events took place. The King, who had reigned for 70 years, died in October 2016 after several years of deteriorating health during which he appeared less and less in public. Bhumibol had long been regarded as a uniting figure and guiding moral authority for the country, commanded a great amount of respect, unlike his successor Maha Vajiralongkorn.
The uncertainties surrounding the impending royal succession compounded the political instability. Many anti-Thaksin groups claimed to be loyal to Bhumibol, accusing their opponents of bearing republican sentiments. Prosecutions under the lèse-majesté law increased after 2006, in what has been criticized as politicization of the law at the expense of human rights. Meanwhile, the long-standing separatist movement in the deep South has worsened since 2004, with 7,000 having been killed in the conflict. Economically, the country made its recovery from the 1997 Asian financial crisis and became an upper-middle income economy in 2011, though it was affected by the Great Recession and GDP growth has slowed from the early 2000s; the multiple political crises and coups had little impact on the Thai economy individually, the country recovered from major disasters including the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and widespread flooding in 2011. However, inequality remains high, contributing to the urban–rural divide and fuelling further social and political conflict.
The future of the country remains unclear as the 2017 constitution, drafted under junta, paved the way for further military intervention in politics, amidst concerns regarding the return to democratic rule and the changing role of the monarchy under a new reign. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai Party came to power through a general election in 2001, where it won a near-majority in the House of Representatives; as prime minister, Thaksin launched a platform of policies, popularly dubbed "Thaksinomics", which focused on promoting domestic consumption and providing capital to the rural populace. By delivering on electoral promises, including populist policies such as the One Tambon One Product project and the 30-baht universal healthcare scheme, his government enjoyed high approval as the economy recovered from the effects of the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Thaksin became the first democratically elected prime minister to complete a four-year term in office, Thai Rak Thai won a landslide victory in the 2005 general election.
However, Thaksin's rule was marked by controversy. He had adopted an authoritarian "CEO-style" approach in governing, centralising power and increasing intervention in the bureaucracy's operations. While the 1997 constitution had provided for greater government stability, Thaksin used his influence to neutralise the independent bodies d
Kingdom of Thonburi was a Siamese kingdom after the downfall of the Ayutthaya Kingdom by the Konbaung Burmese invader. The kingdom was founded by King Taksin the Great; the kingdom of Thonburi existed from 1767 to 1782. In 1782, King Rama I founded the Rattanakosin Kingdom and relocated the capital to Bangkok on the other side of the Chao Phraya River, thus bringing the Thonburi kingdom to an end; the city of Thonburi remained an independent town and province until it was merged into Bangkok in 1971. In 1767, after dominating southeast Asia for 400 years, the Ayutthaya kingdom was destroyed; the royal palace and the city were burnt to the ground. The territory was occupied by the Burmese army and local leaders declared themselves overlords including the lords of Sakwangburi, Pimai and Nakhon Si Thammarat. Chao Tak, a nobleman of Chinese descent and a capable military leader, proceeded to make himself a lord by right of conquest, beginning with the legendary sack of Chanthaburi. Based at Chanthaburi, Chao Tak raised troops and resources, sent a fleet up the Chao Phraya to take the fort of Thonburi.
In the same year, Chao Tak was able to retake Ayutthaya from the Burmese only seven months after the fall of the city. Upon Siamese independence, Hsinbyushin of Burma ordered the ruler of Tavoy to invade Siam; the Burmese armies arrived through Sai Yok and laid siege on the Bang Kung camp – the camp for Taksin's Chinese troops – in modern Samut Songkhram Province. Taksin hurriedly sent one of his generals Boonma to command the fleet to Bang Kung to relieve the siege. Siamese armies defeated them. Ayutthaya, the centre of Siamese authority for hundreds of years, was so devastated that it could not be used as a government centre. Tak founded the new city of Thonburi Sri Mahasamut on the west bank of Chao Phraya river; the construction took place for about a year and Tak crowned himself in late 1768 as King Sanpet but he was known to people as King Taksin – a combination of his title and personal name. Taksin crowned himself as a King of Ayutthaya to signify the continuation to ancient glories. There were still local warlords competing for Siam.
Taksin marched first in 1768 to Pitsanulok to subjugate the Lord of Pitsanulok who ruled over Upper Chao Phraya Basin. Taksin had to retreat; the war weakened Pitsanulok and it was in turn subjugated by the Lord of Sakwangburi. The same year Taksin sent Thong Duang and Boonma to tame the Prince Theppipit – the ruler of Phimai to the north of Nakhon Ratchasima on the Khorat Plateau; the prince was defeated by Thonburi armies. Theppipit fled to Vientiene but was captured and executed. In 1769, Taksin sent Phraya Chakri south to subjugate the Lord of Nakorn Si Thammarat; the lord fled to Pattani but was returned to Taksin, who reinstalled him back as the ruler of Nakorn Si Thammarat under Taksin's governance. Prince Ang Non the Uparaja of Cambodia fled to Thonburi in 1769 after his conflicts with King Narairaja for Siamese supports. Taksin took this opportunity to request tributary from Cambodia, which Narairaja refused. Taksin sent Phraya Abhay Ronnarit and Phraya Anuchit Racha to subjugate Cambodia, taking Siemreap and Battambang.
But Taksin's absence from the capital shook the political stability and the two generals decided to retreat to Thonburi. By this time, the only rival to Thonburi authority was the Sakwangburi lordship led by the powerful monk Chao Phra Faang. Chao Phra Faang's domain encompassed the northernmost territories bordering Lanna to Nakhon Sawan to the south as the result of annexation of Pitsanulok lordship in 1768. In 1770, Chao Phra Faang sent. Taksin decided to invade Sakwangburi beforehand; the royal fleet took Pitsanulok with ease. Taksin divided the armies into the east one led by Boonma and the west one led by Phraya Pichai to be joined at Sakwangburi. Sakwangburi fell after three days and Chao Phra Faang went lost. Taksin stayed at Pitsanulok to oversee the levy of northern population, he appointed Boonma to Chao Phraya Surasi as the governor of Pitsanulok and all northern cities and Phraya Abhay Ronnarit to Chao Phraya Chakri the chancellor. In 1771, Taksin decided to finish off the Cambodian campaign by assigning Chao Phraya Chakri command of land forces with Prince Ang Non and Taksin himself went by fleet.
The Siamese drove Narairaja out of the throne. Ang Non was installed as Reamraja and Narairaja became the Uparaja with the Cambodian court paying tribute to Thonburi. Taksin had consolidated the old Siamese kingdom with new base at Thonburi. However, the Burmese were still ready to wage massive wars to bring the Siamese down again. From their base at Chiang Mai, they invaded Sawankhalok in 1770 but the Siamese were able to repel; this realised Taksin the importance of Lanna as the base of resources for the Burmese to attack northern territories. If Lanna was brought under Siamese control the Burmese threats would by annihilated. At the time Lanna, centred on Chiang Mai, was ruled by a Burmese general Paw Myunguaun, he was the general who led the invasion of Sawankhalok in 1770 but was countered by Chao Phraya Surasi's armies from Pitsanulok. In the same year, the Siamese pioneered a little invasion of Chiang Mai and failed to gain any fruitful results. In 1772, Paw Thupla, another Burmese general, in wars in Laos, headed west and attack Pichai and Uttaradit.
The armies of Pitsanulok once again repelled the Burmese invasions. They came again in 1773 and this time Phraya Pichai made his legendary
History of Thailand [videos]
The Thai people, who originally lived in southwestern China, migrated into mainland Southeast Asia over a period of many centuries. The word Siam may have originated from Pali or Sanskrit श्याम or Mon ရာမည (rhmañña …
A Buddha from Wat Kukkut, Lamphun
The Khmer temple of Wat Phra Prang Sam Yod, Lopburi.
Thailand [videos]
Thailand, officially the Kingdom of Thailand and formerly known as Siam, is a country at the center of the Southeast Asian Indochinese peninsula composed of 76 provinces. At 513,120 km2 and over 68 million people, Thailand is the …
Painting by Johannes Vingboons of Ayutthaya, c. 1665
King Chulalongkorn with Tsar Nicholas II in Saint Petersburg, during his first Grand Tour in 1897
Coronation of King Bhumibol Adulyadej.
United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, Red Shirts, protest in 2010
Absolute monarchy [videos]
Absolute monarchy is a form of monarchy in which the monarch holds supreme authority and where that authority is not restricted by any written laws, legislature, or customs. These are often hereditary monarchies. In contrast, in constitutional monarchies, the head of state's authority derives from …
Louis XIV of France
Image: Hassanal Bolkiah
Image: Qaboos Bin Said Al Said
Image: Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani cropped
Khana Ratsadon [videos]
Khana Ratsadon was a Siamese group of military and civil officers, and later a political party, which staged a bloodless coup against King Prajadhipok and transformed the country's absolute monarchy to constitutional …
A school notebook published in 1934, with illustrations of the six principles on its cover, displayed at Thai Parliament Museum, Bangkok.
(L to R): Phraya Songsuradet. Phraya Phahonphonphayuhasena, Phraya Ritthiakhaney and Phra Phrasasphithayayut, the Four Musketeers or the Four Tiger Soldiers
Khana Ratsadon (army faction)
Khana Ratsadon (navy faction)
Rattanakosin Kingdom (1782–1932) [videos]
The Rattanakosin Kingdom is the fourth and present traditional centre of power in the history of Thailand. It was founded in 1782 with the establishment of Bangkok as the capital city. The period ended with the Siamese …
Chao Phraya Chakri, later Phutthayotfa Chulalok or Rama I.
Wat Phra Kaew seen from the Outer Court of Grand Palace.
The Temple of the Emerald Buddha, one of the king's many construction projects.
Hanuman on his chariot, a mural scene from the Ramakien in Wat Phra Kaew.
Suphan Buri Province [videos]
Suphan Buri is one of the central provinces of Thailand. Neighbouring provinces are Uthai Thani, Chai Nat, Sing Buri, Ang Thong, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya, Nakhon Pathom and Kanchanaburi. — Etymology — The word suphan …
Suphan Buri Railway Station
Khum Khun Chang traditional Thai house
Don Chedi monument
Gate City Pillar Shrine
Srivijaya [videos]
Srivijaya, was a dominant thalassocratic Indonesian city-state based on the island of Sumatra, Indonesia, which influenced much of Southeast Asia. Srivijaya was an important centre for the expansion of Buddhism from the 8th to the 12th …
Talang Tuwo inscription, discovered in Bukit Seguntang area, tell the establishment of sacred Śrīksetra park.
Floating houses in Musi River bank near Palembang in 1917. Srivijayan capital was probably formed from a collection of floating houses like this.
By late 8th century, the political capital was shifted to Central Java, when the Sailendras rose to become the Maharaja of Srivijaya.
The Kedukan Bukit inscription displayed in the National Museum of Indonesia.
Pattani Kingdom [videos]
Pattani or the Sultanate of Patani was a Malay sultanate in the historical Patani Region. It covered approximately the area of the modern Thai provinces of Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat and much of the northern part of modern Malaysia. The 6–7th century Hindu state of Pan Pan may or may not …
The Hikayat Patani.
Patani 1837
Bunga mas, the tribute sent every three years to the Siamese ruler in Bangkok as symbol of friendship by the ruler of Patani. The sending of the Bunga mas began in the 14th century.
Malacca Sultanate [videos]
The Malacca Sultanate was a Malay sultanate centred in the modern-day state of Malacca, Malaysia. Conventional historical thesis marks c. 1400 as the founding year of the sultanate by a Malay Raja of Singapura …
A memorial rock for the disembarkation point of Admiral Zheng He in 1405.
The replica of Malacca Sultanate's palace which was built from information and data obtained from the Malay Annals. This historical document had references to the construction and the architecture of palaces during the era of Sultan Mansur Shah, who ruled from 1458 to 1477.
A bronze relief of Hang Tuah, a legendary Malay hero. Exhibited at the National History Museum, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
The surviving gate of the A Famosa in Malacca.
Sukhothai Kingdom [videos]
The Kingdom of Sukhothai was an early kingdom in the area around the city Sukhothai, in north central Thailand. The Kingdom existed from 1238 until 1438. The old capital, now 12 km outside Sukhothai in Tambon Mueang Kao, is in ruins and has been designated …
Wat Si Sawai, Sukhothai Historical Park
Seated Buddha in "Maravijaya", second half of century (Sukhothai). The Walters Art Museum.
Wat Saphan Hin, Sukhothai Historical Park
Phra Achana, Wat Si Chum, Sukhothai Historical Park
Thonburi Kingdom [videos]
Kingdom of Thonburi was a Siamese kingdom after the downfall of the Ayutthaya Kingdom by the Konbaung Burmese invader. The kingdom was founded by King Taksin the Great, who relocated the capital to Thonburi. The kingdom of Thonburi existed from 1767 to 1782. In 1782, King Rama I …
Taksin's coronation at Thonburi (Bangkok) 28-December–1768
Battle of Bangkeo in Ratchaburi
Wat Arun, Thonburi
Phra Racha Wang Derm, the former royal palace of King Taksin, now used as the Royal Thai Navy's HQ, view form Phra Prang of Wat Arun, Thonburi, Bangkok.
History of Thailand since 2001 [videos]
The history of Thailand since 2001 has been dominated by the politics surrounding the rise and fall from power of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and the subsequent conflicts between his supporters and opponents. Thaksin and his Thai Rak Thai Party came to power in 2001 and became very …
Thaksin in 2005
Supporters gathered to greet soldiers as tanks rolled into Bangkok.
Smoke rising throughout central Bangkok as fires were set amid the May 2010 military crackdown
Demonstrations at the Democracy Monument, during the early stages of the protest in November
History of Bangkok [videos]
The history of the city of Bangkok, in Thailand, dates at least to the early–15th century, when it was under the rule of Ayutthaya. Due to its strategic location near the mouth of the Chao Phraya River, the town gradually increased in importance, and after the fall of Ayutthaya King Taksin …
Sanam Luang in front of the Grand Palace complex. Since the city's foundation, the field has been used for various royal functions
Image: View of the city of Bangkok 1822
Image: Bangkok looking up river or canal LCCN2004707840
Image: Sketch of the town of Bangkok by a native
Military history of Thailand [videos]
The military history of Thailand encompasses a thousand years of armed struggle, from wars of independence from the powerful Khmer Empire, through to struggles with her regional rivals of Burma and Vietnam and periods of tense standoff and conflict with the colonial empires of Britain and France …
King Naresuan entered Hanthawadi (now Pegu), mural painting by Phraya Anusatchitrakon, Wat Suwandararam, Ayutthaya.
Siamese army unit, Laos, 1893
Thai soldiers boarding a USAF aircraft, during the Vietnam War.
Tha and US Marines plan to eliminate hostile forces firing on them during a mock mechanized raid, 2011-02-11
Mongkut [videos]
Mongkut, also known as King Rama IV, reigning title Phra Chom Klao Chao Yu Hua, was the fourth monarch of Siam under the House of Chakri, ruling from 1851 to 1868. — Outside Thailand, he is best known as the king in the 1951 musical and 1956 film The King …
From 1824 – 1851 Prince Mongkut spent his life as a monk.
View of Bangkok during Mongkut's lifetime, Grand Palace shown
King Mongkut wearing the royal regalia 1851
King Mongkut in western dress at the Grand Palace, as photographed by John Thomson
Chulalongkorn [videos]
Chulalongkorn, also known as King Rama V, reigning title Phra Chula Chom Klao Chao Yu Hua, was the fifth monarch of Siam under the House of Chakri. He was known to the Siamese of his time as Phra Phuttha Chao Luang. His reign …
King Mongkut with Prince Chulalongkorn, both in western style court uniforms
Young Prince Chulalongkorn
The young king in western dress.
Prince Devawongse Varopakarn (Foreign Minister), King Chulalongkorn and Prince Damrong Rajanubhab (Interior Minister). During his reign the king employed his brothers and sons in the government, ensuring royal monopoly on power and administration.
Humanism [videos]
Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence over acceptance of dogma or superstition. The meaning of the term humanism has …
An ideal society as conceived by Renaissance humanist Saint Thomas More in his book Utopia
Portrait of Petrarch painted in 1376
Coluccio Salutati, Chancellor of Florence and disciple of Petrarch (1331–1406)
Poggio Bracciolini (1380–1459), an early Renaissance humanist, book collector, and reformer of script, who served as papal secretary
Monarchy of Thailand [videos]
The monarchy of Thailand refers to the constitutional monarchy and monarch of the Kingdom of Thailand. The King of Thailand is the head of state and head of the ruling …
King Naresuan of Ayutthaya fought several wars against the Burmese to preserve Siamese independence.
Wat Phra Si Sanphet next to the king's palace was the most sacred temple in the kingdom of Ayutthaya.
King Prajadhipok signing the Constitution of Siam, 10 December 1932.
Ayutthaya Kingdom [videos]
The Ayutthaya Kingdom was a Siamese kingdom that existed from 1350 to 1767. Ayutthaya was friendly towards foreign traders, including the Chinese, Vietnamese, Portuguese, Indians, Japanese, Koreans, Persians, and …
Painting of Ayutthaya c.1665, painted by Johannes Vingboons, ordered by the Dutch East India Company, Amsterdam
Royal statue of King Naresuan at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya.
Three pagodas of Wat Phra Si Sanphet which house the remains of King Borommatrailokanat, King Borommarachathirat III and King Ramathibodi II
History of Thailand (1932–1973) [videos]
The history of Thailand from 1932 to 1973 was dominated by military dictatorships which were in power for much of the period. The main personalities of the period were the dictator Luang Phibunsongkhram, who allied the country with Japan during the Second World War, and the …
Plaek Pibulsonggram.
Phibun gave ultranationalism speech to the crowds at the Grand Palace in 1940.
King Bhumibol at his coronation at the Grand Palace
Chakri dynasty [videos]
The Chakri dynasty is the current ruling royal house of the Kingdom of Thailand, while the Head of the house is the monarch. The dynasty has ruled Thailand since the founding of the …
Photograph of Mahidol Adulyadej, Prince of Songkla and Mom Sangwan (later the Princess Mother).
The Chakri Mahaprasat, inside the Grand Palace in Bangkok, the dynastic seat and official residence of the dynasty.
Photograph of King Bhumibol, Queen Sirikit and their four children, taken in 1966.
Peopling of Thailand [videos]
The peopling of Thailand refers to the process by which the ethnic groups that comprise the population of present-day Thailand came to inhabit the region. — Gradual inland migration of Tai peoples from China — The Tai migration from the northern mountains into Thailand and Laos was a slow …
Tai-Dong people of Guizhou, China, in traditional dresses, similar to the existing tribe in northern provinces of Thailand
Loloish Akha tribe wearing traditional dress
Women in traditional Hmong dress
Singhanavati [videos]
The Singhanavati Kingdom was based along the Kok River, in the Chiang Rai Basin in northern Thailand. The ancient Lanna society of northern Thailand is considered more progressive than many other societies in other regions of the same period because the Lanna …
The Golden Triangle in Amphoe Chiangsaen
Kok River in Amphoe Mae Ai, Chiang Mai
La Loubere's record 1693
Tambralinga [videos]
Tambralinga was an ancient kingdom located on the Malay Peninsula that at one time came under the influence of Srivijaya. The name had been forgotten until scholars recognized Tambralinga as Nagara Sri Dharmaraja. Early records are scarce but its duration is estimated to range …
An artist's impression of the Tang dynasty Buddhist monk Yijing (义净, 635~713)
Chedi Phrae Boromadhatu
Northern Gate
History of Isan [videos]
The history of Isan has been determined by its geography, situated as it is on the Korat Plateau between Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand. — The national government claimed that the name "Isan" was derived from Sanskrit Īśāna, a name of Shiva they claimed referred to …
Phanom Rung in Buriram.
Ban Chiang pottery in the Museum für Indische Kunst, Berlin-Dahlem
Figure in northeast corner of victory monument in Yasothon facing Bangkok
Constitution of Thailand [videos]
The Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand provides the basis for the rule of law in Thailand. — History — The Rattanakosin Kingdom and the four traditionally counted preceding kingdoms, collectively called …
The original copy of the 1932 constitution of Siam, the first constitution of Thailand, displayed at the Thai Parliament Museum, Bangkok. Each constitution was made in three copies handwritten on traditional folding books, kept at the Parliament Secretariat, the Cabinet Secretariat, and the King's Secretariat, respectively.
The initial pages of the 1952 constitution of Thailand, to which King Bhumibol Adulyadej affixed his signature and his regnal seal, accompanied by the three seals of the realm on the above.
Prehistoric Thailand [videos]
Prehistoric Thailand may be traced back as far as 1,000,000 years ago from the fossils and stone tools found in northern and western Thailand. At an archaeological site in Lampang, northern Thailand Homo erectus fossils, Lampang Man, dating back 1,000,000 – 500,000 years, have been discovered …
View of the Khwae Noi River.
Ban Chaing. Prehistory
Dvaravati [videos]
The Dvaravati period lasted from around the 6th to the 11th century in what is now Thailand. Dvaravati refers to a culture, an art style, and a disparate conglomerate of principalities. Archaeological research over the past two …
Image: Mon Wheel
Image: British Museum Asia 3 (cropped)
Langkasuka [videos]
Langkasuka was an ancient Malay kingdom located in the Malay Peninsula. The name is Sanskrit in origin; it is thought to be a combination of langkha for "resplendent land" -sukkha for "bliss". The kingdom, along with Old Kedah, is probably among the earliest kingdoms founded on …
A suggestion of the reach of the kingdom of Langkasuka. Most scholars consider Langkasuka to be located on the East coast of the Malay peninsula, but some argued for a kingdom that extended from the East to the West coast. Ligor refers to Nakhon Si Thammarat and Kataha is Kedah.
Details from a Chinese painting showing an emissary from Langkasuka with description of the kingdom. Song Dynasty copy of a Liang Dynasty painting dated to 526-539.
Kingdom of Setul Mambang Segara [videos]
Setul, officially the Kingdom of Setul Mambang Segara was a traditional Malay kingdom founded in the northern coast of Malay Peninsular. The state was established in 1808 in wake of the partition …
The Kuden Mansion, historically the official residence of Tunku Baharuddin, it has since converted as the Satun National Museum.
Image: Kedah Satun Nobility
Lan Na [videos]
The Lan Na or Lanna Kingdom, also …
Central Chedi at Wat Doi Suthep, Chiang Mai
Extent of Lan Na's zone of influence (mid-blue), c. 1540.
Economy of Thailand [videos]
Thailand is a newly industrialized country. Its economy is heavily export-dependent, with exports accounting for more than two-thirds of its gross domestic product. In 2017, according to the IMF, Thailand had a GDP of 15.450 trillion baht, the 8th largest economy of Asia …
Bangkok, commercial hub of Thailand
Image: Rice farmers Mae Wang Chiang Mai Province
Lavo Kingdom [videos]
The Kingdom of Lavo was a political entity on the left bank of the Chao Phraya River in the Upper Chao Phraya valley from the end of Dvaravati civilization, around the 7th century, until 1388. The original center of Lavo civilization was Lavo, but the capital shifted …
Prang Sam Yot, showing considerable Khmer influences on the architecture
Hariphunchai [videos]
Hariphunchai or Haribhunjaya was a Mon kingdom in the north of present Thailand in the centuries before the Thais moved into the area. Its capital was at Lamphun, which at the time was also called Hariphunchai. In 1292 the city was besieged …
A Hariphunchai statue of the Buddha Shakyamuni from the 12th-13th century CE
Pan Pan (kingdom) [videos]
Pan Pan or Panpan is a lost small Hindu Kingdom believed to have existed around the 3rd to 7th Century CE. It is believed to have been located on the east coast of the Malay peninsula, with opinion varying from somewhere in Kelantan or Terengganu, Malaysia to the vicinity of Surat Thani, Thailand …
Approximate location of Pan Pan.